News Releases

Mick Mulvaney Issues Statement On DC “Deal”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Representative Mulvaney released the following statement on the “debt deal:” “I did not support the “deal” the House voted on last night to temporarily fund the government and raise the debt ceiling. I opposed it for a few reasons. First, the debate over funding the government was…

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Representative Mulvaney released the following statement on the “debt deal:”

“I did not support the “deal” the House voted on last night to temporarily fund the government and raise the debt ceiling. I opposed it for a few reasons.

First, the debate over funding the government was about fairness. It was about giving our families the same treatment under Obamacare that the President has given to large corporations and his political friends. Insurance companies in Harry Reid’s home state are getting special treatment; so are bars and restaurants in Nancy Pelosi’s district. Members of Congress and their staffs will receive benefits that no other citizens will receive. That’s simply not right. And that’s what we were fighting against. Last night’s “deal” did absolutely nothing to fix that.

Secondly, the agreement did nothing to address our nation’s addiction to spending. We have now raised the debt ceiling over $1 trillion dollars this year, without a penny of future savings. This “deal” does one thing: it allows lawmakers to postpone making the tough choices to get our fiscal house in order.

Finally, the “deal” is full of pork. A dam project in Kentucky got extra money; and the state of Colorado got money to help with its flooding. Those may be worth discussing, but that will never happen now, as they were crammed into this “deal” in order to help it pass. So much for the “clean” bill that my Democrat colleagues said they wanted so badly.

I’m hopeful the President and Senate Democrats will join House Republicans in discussing the real issues our country is facing starting with equal treatment under Obamacare and our national debt. But we don’t need “deals” as much as we need solutions. And this agreement provided none.”


(Editor’s Note: The above communication is a news release from an elected official and does not necessarily reflect the editorial position of To submit your letter, news release, email blast, media advisory or issues statement for publication, click here).

Related posts


New Center To Help Victims of Abuse, Domestic Violence And Sexual Assault Opens In Colleton County

More News

SCDP Issues Statement On Ramon Schwartz

More News

Jeff Duncan: Senate Correct To Cancel Recess



Frank Pytel October 17, 2013 at 2:37 pm

Clean bill. Yeah. “You have to pass it to know what’s in it”. Typical DC BS. 2014 you fracking tards.

CorruptionInColumbia October 17, 2013 at 2:42 pm

How did Joe Wilson vote on this? I saw a list in The State this morning but his name was not on it as yea or nay. Did he just sit it out?

Frank Pytel October 17, 2013 at 2:54 pm Reply
CorruptionInColumbia October 18, 2013 at 8:49 am

Thank You, Frank! While I haven’t been Joe’s number one fan in quite a while, he did good here. He deserves credit for doing the right thing, same as Mick.

Frank Pytel October 18, 2013 at 9:30 am

Tru Dat

M326 October 17, 2013 at 7:22 pm

heard he was too drunk to make the vote.

Smirks October 17, 2013 at 2:47 pm

First, the debate over funding the government was about fairness. It was about giving our families the same treatment under Obamacare that the President has given to large corporations and his political friends.

Been over this before, these are apples and oranges, Mick. Individual mandate is a far cheaper penalty, especially in the first year (2014), than the employer mandate. Not only that, but individuals that don’t get health insurance from the employer mandate will receive help from the exchanges via subsidization.

Even sadder, you wouldn’t have pleased most of the Tea Party base, who wants to see a full defunding or repeal. You’d still have gotten flak for coming up short.

Secondly, the agreement did nothing to address our nation’s addiction to spending.

I seeeeeeeeeem to remember a certain party saying “We’ll continue to fully fund everything in government, even the stuff we don’t like, we’re just asking not to fund Obamacare.” If I remember correctly, it was your party, because for some reason I don’t think Harry Reid said that.

So, you’re complaining that your shutdown and your near-miss with the debt ceiling, which you made almost entirely about Obamacare, didn’t focus enough on spending cuts? Yeah, OK boss.

Finally, the “deal” is full of pork. A dam project in Kentucky got extra money; and the state of Colorado got money to help with its flooding.

That’s what you get when you rush legislation, bro. Government was shut down and it was the last day to pass something to raise the debt ceiling. What did you expect, lengthy debates about every rider on the bill?

The funny thing is, Ted Cruz could’ve gotten you that. The Senate has to give a unanimous vote to end discussion on a bill early, ONE vote would have thrown a wrench into that. Tell me, why didn’t he do it?

Here’s an idea, work on a CR long before anything that would necessitate an expedited package, and this time, make REASONABLE demands. Crazy idea, I know, but I have a feeling it will yield significantly better results.

Frank Pytel October 17, 2013 at 2:48 pm

First, I skipped your post. When you begin to spew, it always shows the ‘see more’ link. I don’t want to see more.

The Colonel October 17, 2013 at 3:03 pm

Funny how fairness has a price attached to it. If corporations get an out you and I should have one too. Apples and oranges are both fruits Smirks, fair is fair. If this was such a great deal why are so many “big donors” getting outs

Jan October 17, 2013 at 3:30 pm

What part of the ACA that affects you personally do you want to delay the implementation of for a year, and why?

The Colonel October 17, 2013 at 5:13 pm

All of the reporting requirements and data mining rights written into the ACA affect you whether you’re covered by the ACA or not. The IRS will have access to your health coverage plan information so they can decide if you meet the individual mandate. We are already having issued reported with fraud and misuse of data and the plan has only been in effect for 18 days.

Jan October 17, 2013 at 5:26 pm

Colonel, the IRS already has access to my health coverage information, and yours too. The plans must meet certain requirements to be deductible for tax purposes. That is all they IRS will be looking for here. Why do I care if the IRS knows what my insurance covers? The terms of a health insurance policy are not private. Anyone can find out what a particular policy from a particular insurer covers. If I tell you I have BC/BS you can find out what my policy covers.
By issues of fraud, I assume you mean crooks claiming they are from the Government. The Government has nothing to do with that. They could have claimed they were from the bank or the IRS. This act will not result in increased incidences of fraud.
No offense, these arguments are very weak.

The Colonel October 17, 2013 at 5:39 pm

Jan, until now, the IRS only had information regarding the corporate cost of your health care. That is no longer the case.

ACORN is back acting as “navigators” for Obamacare. But wait there’s more:

Don’t try to tell me anything about government run health care insurance, I lived it for almost 10 years as a Medicare manager here in Columbia. You have no idea just how much fraud, waste and abuse goes on. Now we have the added problem of multiple governmental agencies being able to access you medical records as part of the ACA’s mandates.

? October 17, 2013 at 6:01 pm

“ACORN is back acting as “navigators” for Obamacare.”

That news floors me. This particular strain of leech sniffs out government dollars with incredible deftness.

It’s amazing they are even still around after being exposed and drummed off the government payroll once before.

The Colonel October 18, 2013 at 7:00 am

Now Jan we find that the “gubamint’s” own Obamacare network servers are providing false and misleading data as well as doubling up on enrollments: Can you say Train Wreck?

Now we’ve also learned that the “gubamint” has pirated software for their website – maybe if they’d have paid for it it would work properly…

Vanguard16 October 17, 2013 at 4:00 pm

A $95 penalty for the individual vs $2,000 per employee for a corporation. Git it??

Git R Done October 17, 2013 at 4:54 pm

A family of four and the #’s start to go up, not to mention that after just one year they go up dramatically for said family.

Also, in the scheme of things, companies don’t get out of paying much than 6K/year for employees on average…so $2k is a walk in the park for them compared to the ability to pay for individuals.

For people that supposedly carry the banner of the little guy to ignore the legal disparity between individuals and corporations in this case is hypocritical in the least…but more likely a case of just being disingenuous.

The Colonel October 17, 2013 at 5:08 pm

Don’t explain it – they’re ideologues favoring program over practicality.

? October 17, 2013 at 11:34 pm

Actually, the $95 dollar thing is close to total MSM/Obama spin bullshit.

The way the law reads:

“The fee in 2014 is 1% of your yearly income or $95 per person for the
year, whichever is higher. The fee increases every year. In 2016 it is
2.5% of income or $695 per person, whichever is higher.
In 2014 the fee for uninsured children is $47.50 per child. The most a family would have to pay in 2014 is $285.”

So presumably if we read it to the letter, a single individual making $50K will have to pay a $500 fee/penalty the first year.

Now, it’s awkwardly worded, but based on their example I’m going to assume that a “family” is defined as having kids.

Notice they cap 2014 @ $285 but don’t tell you what is going to happen after that.

We know by 2016(they don’t specify 2015 by the website) our sign person is now up to $1250 in penalties, but what are they going to do about family’s?

So the odds of anyone paying only a $95 fine in the first year of Obamacare implementation are pretty close to zero if they elect not to or can’t afford to buy it.

It’s quite more expensive than $95 for most people.

CorruptionInColumbia October 18, 2013 at 8:46 am

Thank You for being one of the (apparently) few who actually gets this and can see that is not some great thing for us.

Bill October 17, 2013 at 4:14 pm

I’ll tell you what Colonel. I respect the military, so I will stand up for your rights. If you will give up your all your Government Health Care, (DOD, VA, whatever) and refuse to buy Health Insurance for you and your family, I will pay your government fine when you incur it.

There, your taken rights are restored.

The Colonel October 17, 2013 at 4:41 pm

Bill, when I return home in about 5 months, I’ll do just that – I’ll start paying out of my pocket just like I did before my unit was mobilized – I’m a reservist. I pay out of pocket for my medical coverage on average 3 years out of 4. The 4th year, it seems I’m in some third world armpit playing Army.

I don’t need or want you to pay for diddly – nor do I want to pay diddly for you or anyone else.

As I’ve explained a number of times, the Military has a force management reason to pay for our health care – more soldiers are lost to injury or disease than wounded in battle. It just makes good strategic sense to cover service members and their families the way we do. We have a program called Medicare to cover the basic services needed by the indigent – had we simply expanded that program rather than building the most complex and poorly understood insurance scheme in history I might have supported it.

As it is there is so much government intrusion into my health care that is not covered by the ACA that I can’t support it.

Tom October 17, 2013 at 4:51 pm

So you are saying you would support a single payer system. I whole heartedly agree. It was the Republicans that prevented us from going in that direction. I personally think every American should be able to choose Medicare. It would make Medicare a much stronger program.

The Colonel October 17, 2013 at 5:07 pm

I wrote Medicare, I meant Medicaid. I do not favor government provided or managed insurance of any kind but see the necessity of providing for the indigent – thus I support Medicaid. I used to manage the old DME part of Medicare Part B for BCBS when the had the contract. It was a poorly run system fraught with fraud, waste and abuse that was not at all responsive to the needs of the covered.

Jan October 17, 2013 at 4:55 pm

I am confused, are you saying you do not have health insurance for 3 out of four years? What do you suppose would happen if you have a non-fatal heart attack during that time.

The Colonel October 17, 2013 at 5:02 pm

No, I buy insurance and pay out of pocket vice a corporate or government provided “group” plan. After I left active duty in the early ’90s, I had catastrophic health care insurance and directly paid for doctor’s care out of pocket. With a wife and children, that won’t cut it. I’ve had corporate provided coverage and used Tricare but prefer to do my own thing now. I do have VA coverage but use it only for a service related eye issue and a bi-annual physical, mostly to save having to get one from a Reserves contracted doctor

Torch October 19, 2013 at 9:53 pm

Reservist? Hmmmmmmmmmm So you get time off with pay for your reserve time. A government subsidy. Are you paying taxes as if you were living in SC while not in the States? Are you eligible for VA disability?

The Colonel October 20, 2013 at 8:11 am

Actually, I take leave or “leave without pay” for my “reserve time”. I’ll be lucky to still have a job when I get home time the rules protecting my job only apply if my business still exists. No VA disability. I pay taxes on my normal job but deployed Reservists do get a tax exemption (up to SGM pay, I make more than a SGM makes so some of my income will be taxed)

SamAdams2010 October 17, 2013 at 3:12 pm

The destruction of the dollar is intentional and the Teabaggers are the largest part of that destruction. The destruction of reserve status of US currency is being done to cause Capital to move elsewhere around the world. Americans have no understanding
that they are being undermined by forces that want its currency to lose reserve status and to move Capital to its shores. The conservative
media likes to say “low information voters” but, it isn’t that at all. Americans
now have no basic understanding so as to have the “baseline” intelligence needed
to form good decisions. Before the intentional destruction of our dollar was the
intentional destruction of our Education system. This latest debt ceiling debacle only reinforces the non-USA investor’s fear that investment in the USA is more risky than the promised return reflects.

Frank Pytel October 17, 2013 at 3:16 pm

Another Snarks.

tomstickler October 17, 2013 at 3:40 pm

Not only was Mulvaney signatory to the letter demanding defunding of the PPACA as a condition of approving the budget to avoid shutdown. He was also signatory to another letter advocating “fixing Social Security” as part of the fiscal discussions.

The only fix needed by Social Security is eliminating the cap on FICA taxes.

Bill October 17, 2013 at 3:47 pm

Typical Teapublican BS. I don’t know exactly who is paying the Teapublicans to fight the Affordable Care Act, but someone is paying a lot. Their arguments make no sense at all. We all know full well these people are not fighting this hard to defend the rights of people who can afford insurance but choose not to buy it so that the rest of us can help pay for their care when they go the emergency room. So who are they really fighting for?
No one with insurance will be affected by the mandate. 100% of the wealthy in this country will be unaffected by the mandate. The poor are not subject to the mandate. This whole fairness argument is total BS. Who is really pulling the strings here and why?

vicupstate October 17, 2013 at 9:19 pm

Ed and David Koch are the one paying the Tea tab.

CorruptionInColumbia October 17, 2013 at 9:33 pm

You are so totally full of shit. If you believe these lies such as “No one with insurance will be affected by the mandate”, you are totally beyond hope.

? October 17, 2013 at 11:37 pm

Wait till their doctors tell them 3 years from now it will a 6 month wait to get that mole on their back checked out.

The reality of rationed care coupled with doctor loss(because now going to school for 8 years to be a government mules isn’t as appealing) shortages are going to be a good example why central planning fails.

CorruptionInColumbia October 18, 2013 at 8:41 am

I know people who are already losing their company-paid or sanctioned health insurance because of this shit. Ask part-time workers at Petsmart how this is “not affecting” their insurance. I haven’t confirmed it yet, but I also understand that UPS employees are already taking a hit because of this.

You are absolutely correct about waiting to get that mole checked out, ?. Damn idiot Kool-aid drinkers have their heads so far up Obama’s ass, they will be praising him even when they and their families are incarcerated in the death camps.

Tom October 17, 2013 at 3:59 pm

Dump Mulvaney!!!!!

Vanguard16 October 17, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Ole Mick is going to be a one and done!!

nitrat October 17, 2013 at 4:40 pm

I hope so. I heard Barney Frank on Rachel Maddow last week signing his praises about cutting the military and heard Mick on CNBC this week talking about his bud Barney.
If only his constituents watched anything but Fox…but, I think those people around Shaw AFB are paying attention.

Joseph Kony October 18, 2013 at 9:04 am

Hey FITS. Nice job covering up the Mulvaney blunder in his original press release.

IVEBEENHACKED October 20, 2013 at 2:09 am

Bunch of teabagging idiots we need to put them out of a job next election


Leave a Comment