Talk:Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Prominent past and current board members[edit]

The political affiliations of all listed representatives and former representatives should be listed. The political affiliations of all listed past and current board members who are not well known should also be listed. Dagme (talk) 00:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV[edit]

This entry seems to have been written almost entirely from the web site of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget or primary sources affiliated with them. As such, it contains no criticism of the Committee that I could find.

While they are non-partisan, they take positions on the budget and entitlement spending which are controversial, because many WP:RSs disagree with them, and as such the positions of the critics should be represented. After a quick search, I would offer the following as a starting point:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/opinion/krugman-hawks-and-hypocrites.html
Hawks and Hypocrites
Paul Krugman
New York Times
NOV. 11, 2012
...the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget ... even as it rails against deficits, the white paper argues against raising tax rates and even suggests cutting them.
Mr. Bowles, like others in the deficit-scold community, has indulged in scare tactics, warning of an imminent fiscal crisis that keeps not coming. Meanwhile, the report he co-wrote was supposed to be focused on deficit reduction — yet, true to form, it called for lower rather than higher tax rates, and as a “guiding principle” no less.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Committee_for_a_Responsible_Federal_Budget
Sourcewatch
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
Since 1981, CRFB has kept up a steady drum beat of seminars, reports, blue ribbon commissions, and the like, all focusing on the nation's debt crisis and the need to reform "entitlements" such as Social Security and Medicare, which are better described as earned benefit programs that American workers pay into with each paycheck.
In the 1990s, CRFB formed a "Cost Containment Coalition" that objected to the Clinton Health Care reform proposals and any new taxes to pay for health care. CRFB's opposition was portrayed as a tough, principled stand, but years later, documents were revealed that showed the Tobacco Institute, a now defunct industry lobbying group, funding the coalition

There may be a debate over whether Sourcewatch is a WP:RS, but many of their linked sources are definitely WP:RS. --Nbauman (talk) 17:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above, and the article should be flagged and substantially shortened, and include a discussion on criticism. CRFB also was involved in lobbying for tobacco companies in the 1990s, which they attempt to hide. Gunshippolitico (talk) 17:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a Krugman article that says specifically that the purpose of the Peterson foundations is to cut social programs:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/where-do-trumps-bad-ideas-come-from/
Where Do Trump’s Bad Ideas Come From?
Paul Krugman
New York Times
May 7, 2016 9:15 am
...claims that America is facing a debt crisis have been all over the political landscape for years, in defiance of both the actual debt service numbers and the verdict of the market, which wants to lend us money for almost nothing. Paul Ryan loved to talk about a “looming debt crisis“, requiring that we move immediately to privatize Medicare and, uh, cut taxes on the rich. Various heads of the Peterson hydra, like Fix the Debt, convinced much of the political elite that debt is the number one problem facing America.
So it’s not really surprising that Trump, who doesn’t know much about policy, would pick up on all this buzz, and not get the memo that it’s all really about finding excuses to slash social programs.
--Nbauman (talk) 16:16, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-social-security-gop-20161209-story.html
The GOP unveils a 'permanent save' for Social Security — with massive benefit cuts
Michael Hiltzik
Los Angeles Times
December 9, 2016
the GOP has the knives out for Social Security too.
The latest reminder comes from Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Tex., chairman of the Ways and Means Social Security subcommittee. Johnson on Thursday uncorked what he termed a “plan to permanently save Social Security.”
Followers of GOP habits won’t be surprised to learn that it achieves this goal entirely through benefit cuts, without a dime of new revenues such as higher payroll taxes on the wealthy. In fact, Johnson’s plan reduces the resources coming into the program by eliminating a key tax --another way that he absolves richer Americans of paying their fair share, while increasing the burdens of retirement for almost everyone else.
Predictably, this plan has already been hailed by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a billionaire’s front group that likes to portray itself as a neutral budget watchdog. (The foundation of hedge fund billionaire Peter G. Peterson, whose hostility to Social Security is well-documented,
--Nbauman (talk) 06:59, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, agree that this article does not present a neutral point of view, but is instead overly favorable to the CRFB.--SeanStreiff (talk) 13:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Committee_for_a_Responsible_Federal_Budget&oldid=1194132701"