Randy Kuhl's office announced that the Roseland Bowl, a bowling alley in Canandaigua, will receive a $2.5 million loan guarantee from the US Department of Agriculture. The loan was part of the USDA rural development program, and allowed the bowling alley to restructure debt to save interest costs.
Even though he's professed his belief that this isn't the time for campaigning, Randy Kuhl still feels the occasional need to throw some red meat to the restless, ravenous base. The latest portion came in the form of a press release decrying tax increases in "Democrat Budget". The question I have for Rep. Kuhl and his supporters is how he reconciles the red meat with the milk. It just isn't kosher.
Using taxes to inflame the base is the first page of the Republican playbook, especially in a state with a tax burden like New York's. Kuhl makes a number of claims in his press release, most of which are based on projections five years in the future. Of course, those projections assume that Congress does nothing to tweak the budget or the tax code, so they're probably exaggerated. Nevertheless, Kuhl's fundamental claim is true: taxes are going to go up in the next few years.
I don't think this is news to anyone, since we're waging a trillion-dollar war. If you don't like taxes, you're not going to enjoy the next few years, because we're going to have to pay for what we purchased in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since Rep. Kuhl doesn't like taxes, you'd guess that he'd be working to cut spending. Of course, you'd be wrong.
Randy Kuhl is the only New York member of the House Agriculture Committee. In that role, he's been quoted frequently in news articles about issues important to farmers. Last week, Kuhl, who loudly denounced the Iraq supplemental because it was full of pork, noted that dairy farmers are in a pickle because funding for the Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC) didn't get included in that bill:
I am really very concerned that, unless these farmers get some immediate relief, they may not be able to survive. [...] We've got to figure out what else we can do very quickly.
The MILC compensates farmers when the price of milk falls below a certain amount. When Wal-Mart comes to town and puts the local hardware store out of business, there's no WILC (Wal-Mart Income Loss Contract) to save the day, and there's no expectation that Congress will compensate for the "family hardware store". But the "family farm" is sacred to Congress, and billions are spent every year to create artificial markets for agricultural products like milk.
Kuhl is also at the forefront of adding new provisions to the latest agriculture bill. Rochesterturning linked to this account of the wrangling over the new farm bill. The piece notes that Randy Kuhl has allied himself with a group of other Republicans in support of H R 1600, the "Eat Healthy America Act". It has a number of provisions (something for everyone), but, most notably, it extends farm subsidies for crops that aren't currently subsidized.
Kuhl's support of both of these bills is probably good representation of his constituents. There are a lot of dairy farmers in the 29th, and the 29th also includes crops that would be covered by H R 1600. But his support of these bills, which use taxpayer money to fund false markets for agricultural goods, flies in the face of his recent rant against higher taxes. If taxes are going to rise to an intolerable level, why is John R Kuhl Jr. co-sponsoring more government handouts?
I know a lot of smart, fiscally conservative Republicans who don't buy what politicians like Kuhl are selling. They want to see the rhetoric about taxes backed up with action. Kuhl hasn't done that, but he's certainly able to use anti-tax talk to whip up his base. My question is when (or if) his rhetoric will cease to pass the sniff test with more than a few, smarter constituents in the restless base.
Over 150 union members faced off against Randy Kuhl outside the Steuben Library in Corning yesterday. The confrontation was sparked by Kuhl's vote against H R 800, the Employee Free Choice Act. Union members at the action said Kuhl had promised to vote for the measure and changed his mind because of his allegiance to the Bush administration. Kuhl says that he decided to vote against it after "looking deeper" into the issue.
Kuhl had been a co-sponsor of the bill during the 109th Congress, but he withdrew his co-sponsorship less than a week after the 2006 election. Unions that had supported Kuhl during his 2004 run endorsed his opponent, Eric Massa, in the 2006 contest.