A Letter From a Grandpa:
Guess you heard that 68% of the youth vote went to Obama.
My granddaughter called this morning to tell me she was
one of them . I replied with this e-mail:
Dear Granddaughter,
The election of Obama comes down to this. Your grandmother and I, your
mother, and other productive, wage-earning tax payers will have their
taxes increased and that means less income left over. Less income
means we will have to cut back on basic purchases, gifts and handouts.
That includes firing the lady who cleans our house twice a month.
She just lost her job. We can't afford her anymore.
So. What is the economic effect of Obama's election on you personally?
Over the years, your grandmother and I have given you thousands of dollars
in food, housing, cash, clothing, gifts, etc.
By your vote, you have chosen another family over ours for help. So in the
future, if you need assistance with your rent, money for gas, tires for your
car, someone to bring you lunch, etc. .. call 202-456-1111 . That's the
telephone number for the Office of the President of the United States.
I'm sure Mr. Obama will be happy to send a check from his personal
or business accounts, as we have, or leave cash in an envelope taped
to his front door for you, as we have .
It's like this . Those who vote for the President of the United States
should consider what thimpact of an election will be on the nation as a
whole and not just be concerned with what they can get for themselves
(welfare, stimulus checks, etc.). What Obama voters don't seem to realize
is that the government's money comes from taxes collected from tax paying
families. Raising taxes on productive people means they will haveless money
to spend on their families. Congratulations on your choice.
For future reference, you might attempt to add up all you've received
from us, your mom, Mike's parents and others and compare it to what
you expect to get over the next four years from Mr. Obama. To
congratulate Mr. Obama and to make sure you're on the list for
handouts, write to: The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington , DC 20500 Love you Honey, but call the number listed above
when you need help.
Love as always
Granddad
Growing old ain't for sissies!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Windows LiveT: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. Check it out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Windows LiveT: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. Check it out.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Now think about this,Statistics
Subject: FW: Statistics
Doctors
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. Is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians Per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171
Statistics courtesy of U.S. D ept of Health and Human Services.
Now think about this:
Guns
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. 80,000,000. (Yes, that's 80
million)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths Per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths Per gun owner is .000188.
Statistics courtesy of FBI
So, statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than
gun owners.
Remember, 'Guns don't kill people, doctors do.
Fact: not everyone has a gun, but almost everyone has at least one doctor..
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat.
We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!
Out of concern for the public at large, I withheld the statistics on lawyers
for fear the shock would cause People to panic and seek medical attention
____________________________________
Doctors
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. Is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians Per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171
Statistics courtesy of U.S. D ept of Health and Human Services.
Now think about this:
Guns
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. 80,000,000. (Yes, that's 80
million)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths Per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths Per gun owner is .000188.
Statistics courtesy of FBI
So, statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than
gun owners.
Remember, 'Guns don't kill people, doctors do.
Fact: not everyone has a gun, but almost everyone has at least one doctor..
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat.
We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!
Out of concern for the public at large, I withheld the statistics on lawyers
for fear the shock would cause People to panic and seek medical attention
____________________________________
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Stimulus Mousetrap
Stimulus Mousetrap
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, February 19, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Environment: The controversy over the Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse goes on. It's not in the stimulus bill per se, but protecting its habitat is. And protecting critters' habitats has hurt the economy, cost lives and lost jobs.
The Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse is an endangered rodent. About an inch tall, it has a life span of up to a year. It's found in the marshes around San Francisco Bay, including some in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's district.
The $30 million said to be in the stimulus bill for it is actually the total amount the California Coastal Conservancy, a state agency, listed for various projects on its wish list. That list was submitted to various federal agencies for "shovel-ready" projects.
There are five ongoing wetlands restoration projects on the list. Steve Ritchie, a Coastal Commission staff member who helped draw up the list, says the projects would benefit dozens of species, including salmon, egrets and, yes, the mouse that roared. Those projects, he says, mean "at least 100 new jobs."
But are they really jobs or "make-work" projects? Jobs are what you get up and go to every day, year after year. Once these wetlands are "restored" or the stimulus money is spent, what happens then? How does restored mouse habitat boost GDP?
In the name of saving wetlands and other critter habitats, much harm to people has been done. It was the Army Corps of Engineers, ironically, that had a "shovel-ready" project to build floodgates to keep water from the Gulf of Mexico from pouring into Lake Pontchartrain on the north side of New Orleans.
Save Our Wetlands, the environmental group that successfully sued in 1977, claimed the floodgates proposed by the corps would spoil wetlands. We ask: Was the damage to the city of New Orleans, its people, and the nation's economy by Katrina worth it?
Four trapped firefighters, fighting a blaze in Washington State, burned to death July 10, 2001 as permission to draw water from the nearby Chewuch River was withheld for nine hours by officials fearful that protected salmon and trout might get scooped up.
Protection of critter habitat has prevented the clearing of brush that has fueled devastating fires in California, Australia and elsewhere, destroying jobs and lives while producing, ironically, crispy critters. In the name of animal protection, we've blocked construction of everything from highways to hospitals.
If you want to protect critter habitat, do it in the regular budget process where the pluses and minuses can and should be debated. Don't sneak it into a stimulus bill.
Email To Friend
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, February 19, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Environment: The controversy over the Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse goes on. It's not in the stimulus bill per se, but protecting its habitat is. And protecting critters' habitats has hurt the economy, cost lives and lost jobs.
The Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse is an endangered rodent. About an inch tall, it has a life span of up to a year. It's found in the marshes around San Francisco Bay, including some in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's district.
The $30 million said to be in the stimulus bill for it is actually the total amount the California Coastal Conservancy, a state agency, listed for various projects on its wish list. That list was submitted to various federal agencies for "shovel-ready" projects.
There are five ongoing wetlands restoration projects on the list. Steve Ritchie, a Coastal Commission staff member who helped draw up the list, says the projects would benefit dozens of species, including salmon, egrets and, yes, the mouse that roared. Those projects, he says, mean "at least 100 new jobs."
But are they really jobs or "make-work" projects? Jobs are what you get up and go to every day, year after year. Once these wetlands are "restored" or the stimulus money is spent, what happens then? How does restored mouse habitat boost GDP?
In the name of saving wetlands and other critter habitats, much harm to people has been done. It was the Army Corps of Engineers, ironically, that had a "shovel-ready" project to build floodgates to keep water from the Gulf of Mexico from pouring into Lake Pontchartrain on the north side of New Orleans.
Save Our Wetlands, the environmental group that successfully sued in 1977, claimed the floodgates proposed by the corps would spoil wetlands. We ask: Was the damage to the city of New Orleans, its people, and the nation's economy by Katrina worth it?
Four trapped firefighters, fighting a blaze in Washington State, burned to death July 10, 2001 as permission to draw water from the nearby Chewuch River was withheld for nine hours by officials fearful that protected salmon and trout might get scooped up.
Protection of critter habitat has prevented the clearing of brush that has fueled devastating fires in California, Australia and elsewhere, destroying jobs and lives while producing, ironically, crispy critters. In the name of animal protection, we've blocked construction of everything from highways to hospitals.
If you want to protect critter habitat, do it in the regular budget process where the pluses and minuses can and should be debated. Don't sneak it into a stimulus bill.
Email To Friend
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Trading Away Missile Defense
NEVER EVER TRUST A DEMOCRAT SEEKING OFFICE TO BE FOR YOUR INTERESTS, TO BE CLOSE TO HONEST WITH HIS OWN PARTY, TO GIVE YOU A STRAIGHT ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION, OR COME CLOSE TO HIS PROMISES. HE WILL LIE AND SWEAR TO IT, CHEAT (IT NEVER HAPPENED). AND STEAL YOUR RIGHTS YOUR FREEDOMS YOUR D R E A M S. DAVE ANDERSON
Trading Away Missile Defense
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, February 17, 2009 4:20 PM PT
National Security: The proposed missile defense system for Europe may be used as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Russia. Is Ronald Reagan's "We win, they lose" now "
When President Reagan began the Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983, the only ones who took it seriously were the Soviets.
Their global ambitions depended on an America inhibited and even intimidated by the threat of nuclear war. They still do. Just ask Georgia.
When Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev met Reagan in Reykjavik, Iceland, in October 1986, he hoped Reagan would be willing to trade SDI away in exchange for arms-control agreements and vague promises of making nice with America.
But America held all the cards and didn't fold.
Reagan refused to negotiate SDI away. He opposed the proposed nuclear freeze and put Pershing missiles in Europe to counter the Soviet SS-20 threat. He put America's security in the hands of American technology, not the goodwill of its enemies. That policy may soon be reversed.
William Burns, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, spent two days in Moscow last week "to listen to the Russians and explore any new avenues that might be available," department spokesman Gordon Duguid said.
Burns says the "United States is quite open to the possibility of new forms of cooperation" with Moscow on missile defense, Iran and "the whole range of security issues with Russia."
Regarding Iran, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last week: "If we are able to see a change in behavior on the part of the Iranians with respect to what we believe to be their pursuit of nuclear weapons, you know, then we will reconsider where we stand."
Certainly Iran's recent satellite launch is not evidence of change but rather evidence that we should deploy ground-based interceptors in Poland and tracking radar in the Czech Republic, pronto.
Iran's satellite launch was its first, and a nation that can put a satellite in orbit is not far from being able to put a nuclear warhead anywhere on this planet.
Do we really need the permission or cooperation of the Russians to shoot it down? We may find out when Clinton meets her Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in Geneva next month.
Obama's waffling on the issue is legend. In a post-election phone call, Obama had called Polish President Lech Kaczynski. In a Polish press statement about the call, Kaczynski is reported to have been told by Obama "that the missile defense project would continue."
The Obama transition team then almost immediately issued a rebuttal echoing his stated opposition to missile defense: "President-elect Obama made no commitment on it."
His position is as it was throughout the campaign — that he supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable."
No one, of course, wants to deploy an unworkable system. But missile defense has already proved to be eminently workable and successful.
According to the Missile Defense Agency, since 2001 there have been 37 successful hit-to-kill intercepts out of 47 attempts, an 80% success rate.
Hoping to exploit his ambivalence, within hours of the election of Barack Obama, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced that Moscow would deploy SS-26 Iskander missiles in the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad situated between our NATO allies Poland and Lithuania. Medvedev wants U.S. missile defense to go away, particularly in Europe.
Medvedev said in an interview with the French newspaper Le Figaro published last Thursday that "we are ready to abandon this decision to deploy the missiles in Kaliningrad if the new American administration, after analyzing the real usefulness of a system to respond to 'rogue states,' decides to abandon its anti-missile system."
It was Reagan's adherence to SDI that eventually doomed the Soviet Union in a race it could not win and helped end the Cold War.
He didn't give it away, and neither should we. No foreign power should have a veto on whether or how we defend ourselves.
Trading Away Missile Defense
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, February 17, 2009 4:20 PM PT
National Security: The proposed missile defense system for Europe may be used as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Russia. Is Ronald Reagan's "We win, they lose" now "
When President Reagan began the Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983, the only ones who took it seriously were the Soviets.
Their global ambitions depended on an America inhibited and even intimidated by the threat of nuclear war. They still do. Just ask Georgia.
When Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev met Reagan in Reykjavik, Iceland, in October 1986, he hoped Reagan would be willing to trade SDI away in exchange for arms-control agreements and vague promises of making nice with America.
But America held all the cards and didn't fold.
Reagan refused to negotiate SDI away. He opposed the proposed nuclear freeze and put Pershing missiles in Europe to counter the Soviet SS-20 threat. He put America's security in the hands of American technology, not the goodwill of its enemies. That policy may soon be reversed.
William Burns, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, spent two days in Moscow last week "to listen to the Russians and explore any new avenues that might be available," department spokesman Gordon Duguid said.
Burns says the "United States is quite open to the possibility of new forms of cooperation" with Moscow on missile defense, Iran and "the whole range of security issues with Russia."
Regarding Iran, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last week: "If we are able to see a change in behavior on the part of the Iranians with respect to what we believe to be their pursuit of nuclear weapons, you know, then we will reconsider where we stand."
Certainly Iran's recent satellite launch is not evidence of change but rather evidence that we should deploy ground-based interceptors in Poland and tracking radar in the Czech Republic, pronto.
Iran's satellite launch was its first, and a nation that can put a satellite in orbit is not far from being able to put a nuclear warhead anywhere on this planet.
Do we really need the permission or cooperation of the Russians to shoot it down? We may find out when Clinton meets her Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in Geneva next month.
Obama's waffling on the issue is legend. In a post-election phone call, Obama had called Polish President Lech Kaczynski. In a Polish press statement about the call, Kaczynski is reported to have been told by Obama "that the missile defense project would continue."
The Obama transition team then almost immediately issued a rebuttal echoing his stated opposition to missile defense: "President-elect Obama made no commitment on it."
His position is as it was throughout the campaign — that he supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable."
No one, of course, wants to deploy an unworkable system. But missile defense has already proved to be eminently workable and successful.
According to the Missile Defense Agency, since 2001 there have been 37 successful hit-to-kill intercepts out of 47 attempts, an 80% success rate.
Hoping to exploit his ambivalence, within hours of the election of Barack Obama, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev announced that Moscow would deploy SS-26 Iskander missiles in the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad situated between our NATO allies Poland and Lithuania. Medvedev wants U.S. missile defense to go away, particularly in Europe.
Medvedev said in an interview with the French newspaper Le Figaro published last Thursday that "we are ready to abandon this decision to deploy the missiles in Kaliningrad if the new American administration, after analyzing the real usefulness of a system to respond to 'rogue states,' decides to abandon its anti-missile system."
It was Reagan's adherence to SDI that eventually doomed the Soviet Union in a race it could not win and helped end the Cold War.
He didn't give it away, and neither should we. No foreign power should have a veto on whether or how we defend ourselves.
Escape From D.C.
Escape From D.C.
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, February 17, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Federal Spending: That President Obama waited until Tuesday to sign the $787 billion stimulus bill during a trip to Denver speaks volumes. He wanted to highlight the bill's green provisions, not its "stimulus."
It's strange that so few mainstream media outlets have pointed out the obvious: The bill Congress hurried to pass late last week without anyone having read the entire 1,434 pages will in fact not stimulate much of anything.
It is a spending bill, pure and simple. Every dollar the government spends must either be borrowed, taken through taxation or printed. Any way you look at it, every dollar comes from the pockets of the people it will be spent on.
The bill adds $10,000 to each American's debt. No matter how you view it, that's a $10,000 hike in future taxes, not counting interest. We've been lectured often that Americans have become greedy and overly indebted. So how does adding still more debt help? Unless there's an explosion of economic activity directly due to this bill, Americans' standard of living will decline — count on it.
The very word "stimulus" hides a key fact: In essence, we've made a collective decision to let government spend our money for us. We'll see soon whether the 535 wise men and women of Congress do a better job than the rest of us would.
We're inclined, after looking at the earmarks, pork and outright waste in the bill, to come down on the side of skepticism.
Early on, we supported the idea of a stimulus package, thinking it might actually lift the economy. The bill we got won't do that. What pains us now is that this has been portrayed as an ideological debate. But, as Obama earlier said, this is an issue of pragmatism — of what works, and what doesn't.
So what works? History shows repeatedly that big-spending programs that enlarge the size of government do little if anything to boost the economy. But permanent tax cuts do work — spectacularly, at times. Sadly, this bill lacks permanent, stimulative tax cuts.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had this to say: "In the longer run, the legislation would result in a slight decrease in gross domestic product compared with CBO's baseline economic forecast." Get that? The economy, under this plan, will be smaller than it would have been, while adding $1.7 trillion to our deficits.
Obama said there was "no disagreement" over the need for stimulus. In response, more than 200 economists, including several Nobel Prize winners, took out a newspaper ad saying: "With all due respect, Mr. President . . . we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance."
Just as with global warming, it's a non-consensus consensus.
We're not saying all this because we don't want Obama to succeed. Quite the opposite, we say it because we do want him to succeed, as we would any president. But bad policies are bad policies.
And this bill has much that can be called bad — from $300 million for electric carts, a favor to North Dakota Democratic Sen. Byron Dorgan, in whose state the carts will be made, to $8 billion for high-speed rail, a tidbit that boosts Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's dream of a Las Vegas-Los Angeles rail link.
That explains why Obama traveled to Denver on Tuesday for what even the Associated Press called "an unusual ceremony" to sign the legislation into law: He wanted to escape the heated discussion about the bill's bogus stimulus provisions, and focus instead on its more-popular but no-less-bogus green energy elements.
We can't blame him. Voters are angry and feel they've been taken.
In the coming weeks, we hope to look at the some of the bill's less-stimulating provisions, how much they cost and how they got put in. Who knows? It might come in handy during the 2010 elections.
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, February 17, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Federal Spending: That President Obama waited until Tuesday to sign the $787 billion stimulus bill during a trip to Denver speaks volumes. He wanted to highlight the bill's green provisions, not its "stimulus."
It's strange that so few mainstream media outlets have pointed out the obvious: The bill Congress hurried to pass late last week without anyone having read the entire 1,434 pages will in fact not stimulate much of anything.
It is a spending bill, pure and simple. Every dollar the government spends must either be borrowed, taken through taxation or printed. Any way you look at it, every dollar comes from the pockets of the people it will be spent on.
The bill adds $10,000 to each American's debt. No matter how you view it, that's a $10,000 hike in future taxes, not counting interest. We've been lectured often that Americans have become greedy and overly indebted. So how does adding still more debt help? Unless there's an explosion of economic activity directly due to this bill, Americans' standard of living will decline — count on it.
The very word "stimulus" hides a key fact: In essence, we've made a collective decision to let government spend our money for us. We'll see soon whether the 535 wise men and women of Congress do a better job than the rest of us would.
We're inclined, after looking at the earmarks, pork and outright waste in the bill, to come down on the side of skepticism.
Early on, we supported the idea of a stimulus package, thinking it might actually lift the economy. The bill we got won't do that. What pains us now is that this has been portrayed as an ideological debate. But, as Obama earlier said, this is an issue of pragmatism — of what works, and what doesn't.
So what works? History shows repeatedly that big-spending programs that enlarge the size of government do little if anything to boost the economy. But permanent tax cuts do work — spectacularly, at times. Sadly, this bill lacks permanent, stimulative tax cuts.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had this to say: "In the longer run, the legislation would result in a slight decrease in gross domestic product compared with CBO's baseline economic forecast." Get that? The economy, under this plan, will be smaller than it would have been, while adding $1.7 trillion to our deficits.
Obama said there was "no disagreement" over the need for stimulus. In response, more than 200 economists, including several Nobel Prize winners, took out a newspaper ad saying: "With all due respect, Mr. President . . . we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance."
Just as with global warming, it's a non-consensus consensus.
We're not saying all this because we don't want Obama to succeed. Quite the opposite, we say it because we do want him to succeed, as we would any president. But bad policies are bad policies.
And this bill has much that can be called bad — from $300 million for electric carts, a favor to North Dakota Democratic Sen. Byron Dorgan, in whose state the carts will be made, to $8 billion for high-speed rail, a tidbit that boosts Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's dream of a Las Vegas-Los Angeles rail link.
That explains why Obama traveled to Denver on Tuesday for what even the Associated Press called "an unusual ceremony" to sign the legislation into law: He wanted to escape the heated discussion about the bill's bogus stimulus provisions, and focus instead on its more-popular but no-less-bogus green energy elements.
We can't blame him. Voters are angry and feel they've been taken.
In the coming weeks, we hope to look at the some of the bill's less-stimulating provisions, how much they cost and how they got put in. Who knows? It might come in handy during the 2010 elections.
A THOUGHT ABOUT THE STIMULUS BILL
Dear Friend,
Today in Denver, Colorado President Obama will sign the trillion dollar Pelosi\Reid\Obama spending bill that you and I worked so hard to stop.
While losing this battle is disappointing, I am more optimistic than ever that we can succeed in protecting the American Dream.Here’s why.
1. You showed the politicians and media that literally hundreds-of-thousands of Americans from all walks of life are willing to fight to protect our economic freedoms.
---As of today 465,000 Americans have signed the NoStimulus.com petition.I’ll never forget our website crashing within seconds of our appearing on FOX.
---You shut down the telephone lines at the Capitol.I saw Senators in the days before the vote and they had that “hunted” look in their eyes.
2.You proved our side can compete and win on the “new media” front.For consecutive days, you made NoStimulus.com and Americans for Prosperity the leading search on Google and then Yahoo.
Thousands of Americans have gone to YouTube.com to view Americans for Prosperity’s videos detailing your grassroots energy.We can match and defeat our opponents on this front.
3.The other side has problems too.With every political wind at his back, President Obama came within 1 vote in the Senate of losing this first battle.Already, their next Bank Bailout is being panned (with good reason).3 of President Obama’s Cabinet nominees have had to withdraw.According to public polls, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid have some of the lowest approval ratings in American history.
By the way, today when the President says this is a carefully drawn, fiscally responsible bill consider what is in the final legislation:
Billions in outright pork and wasteful spending:
$300 million for buying cars for federal bureaucrats;$3.7 billion for something called “green research” on military bases;$50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts; $2 billion for “neighborhood stabilization” to radical groups like ACORN;$1.3 billion for Amtrak; $10 million for"urban canals"(I'm not making this up); etc.
The Road to Government Run Health Care
$1.1 billion for “comparative effectiveness research” that will establish a federal government board to begin rationing health care by having bureaucrats deciding which medical treatments will be appropriate for which Americans.(Page 52 of final conference report)
Overturning the Historic Welfare Reform of 1996
$264 billion for direct welfare payments while overturning the historic welfare reform of 1996.The Pelos\Reid\Obama bill will reward states with federal welfare funds based on the number of people they put on their welfare rolls – a perverse incentive that will in effect give states “bonuses” for adding more people to welfare rolls AND work requirements are ignored in this legislation.
$53.6 billion for a "state stabilization fund" otherwise known as a slush fund
This massive infusion of our tax dollars is designed to alleviate the need for genuine budget reform and cutting at the state level.
So, when you hear folks saying this Pelosi\Reid\Obama "stimulus" bill was a "compromise" that cut waste to the bone while focusing only on "shovel ready" priorities, call them on it!
Thank you for joining our NoStimulus.com petition effort.You made the nation stand up and take notice at a crucial time.As a result of our effort, we can look to future public policy battles with a renewed sense of confidence.If we could come within 1 vote of winning in the Senate on this first and toughest battle,just think what we can do in the contests that lie ahead.
As Ronald Reagan liked to say, “You ain’t seen nothing yet!”
Sincerely,
Tim Phillips
President, Americans for Prosperity
.
Today in Denver, Colorado President Obama will sign the trillion dollar Pelosi\Reid\Obama spending bill that you and I worked so hard to stop.
While losing this battle is disappointing, I am more optimistic than ever that we can succeed in protecting the American Dream.Here’s why.
1. You showed the politicians and media that literally hundreds-of-thousands of Americans from all walks of life are willing to fight to protect our economic freedoms.
---As of today 465,000 Americans have signed the NoStimulus.com petition.I’ll never forget our website crashing within seconds of our appearing on FOX.
---You shut down the telephone lines at the Capitol.I saw Senators in the days before the vote and they had that “hunted” look in their eyes.
2.You proved our side can compete and win on the “new media” front.For consecutive days, you made NoStimulus.com and Americans for Prosperity the leading search on Google and then Yahoo.
Thousands of Americans have gone to YouTube.com to view Americans for Prosperity’s videos detailing your grassroots energy.We can match and defeat our opponents on this front.
3.The other side has problems too.With every political wind at his back, President Obama came within 1 vote in the Senate of losing this first battle.Already, their next Bank Bailout is being panned (with good reason).3 of President Obama’s Cabinet nominees have had to withdraw.According to public polls, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid have some of the lowest approval ratings in American history.
By the way, today when the President says this is a carefully drawn, fiscally responsible bill consider what is in the final legislation:
Billions in outright pork and wasteful spending:
$300 million for buying cars for federal bureaucrats;$3.7 billion for something called “green research” on military bases;$50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts; $2 billion for “neighborhood stabilization” to radical groups like ACORN;$1.3 billion for Amtrak; $10 million for"urban canals"(I'm not making this up); etc.
The Road to Government Run Health Care
$1.1 billion for “comparative effectiveness research” that will establish a federal government board to begin rationing health care by having bureaucrats deciding which medical treatments will be appropriate for which Americans.(Page 52 of final conference report)
Overturning the Historic Welfare Reform of 1996
$264 billion for direct welfare payments while overturning the historic welfare reform of 1996.The Pelos\Reid\Obama bill will reward states with federal welfare funds based on the number of people they put on their welfare rolls – a perverse incentive that will in effect give states “bonuses” for adding more people to welfare rolls AND work requirements are ignored in this legislation.
$53.6 billion for a "state stabilization fund" otherwise known as a slush fund
This massive infusion of our tax dollars is designed to alleviate the need for genuine budget reform and cutting at the state level.
So, when you hear folks saying this Pelosi\Reid\Obama "stimulus" bill was a "compromise" that cut waste to the bone while focusing only on "shovel ready" priorities, call them on it!
Thank you for joining our NoStimulus.com petition effort.You made the nation stand up and take notice at a crucial time.As a result of our effort, we can look to future public policy battles with a renewed sense of confidence.If we could come within 1 vote of winning in the Senate on this first and toughest battle,just think what we can do in the contests that lie ahead.
As Ronald Reagan liked to say, “You ain’t seen nothing yet!”
Sincerely,
Tim Phillips
President, Americans for Prosperity
.
COVERT ACTIONS DIFFERENT APPROACH
Israel engaged in covert war inside Iran:
Israel is involved in a covert war of sabotage inside Iran to try to delay Tehran's alleged attempts to develop a nuclear weapon, a British newspaper said on Tuesday, quoting a former CIA agent and intelligence experts.
An intelligence source in the Middle East told Reuters last year Israel planned to target Iranian nuclear scientists with letter bombs and poisoned packages and had set off explosions in Iran. Analysts offered similar accounts and said such tactics would be credible, but no confirmation has been available.
Some analysts caution that reports of such a "dirty war" may form part of a psychological warfare campaign to unsettle Iran.
The intelligence source told Reuters that Israeli agents were working with Western governments and firms doing business with Tehran, whose Islamist leadership is a sworn enemy of Israel but denies accusations its nuclear program has a military purpose.
Israel's government, widely assumed to be the only nuclear power in the Middle East, declines all comment on such reports.
"Israel has launched a covert war against Iran as an alternative to direct military strikes against Tehran's nuclear program," Britain's Daily Telegraph said on Tuesday. "It is using hitmen, sabotage, front companies and double agents to disrupt the regime's illicit weapons project, the experts say."
Quoting intelligence experts and an unnamed former CIA agent, the newspaper said Israel's "decapitation" strategy had targeted members of Iran's atomic program, hoping to set back the country's nuclear ambitions without resorting to war.
"SABOTAGE GOING ON"
Meir Javendafar, an Iran expert at Meepas, a Middle East analysis group, told Reuters there were also reports Iran was being sold faulty equipment for its nuclear program, and that there were attempts to disrupt the electricity supply to Natanz, a uranium enrichment facility in central Iran.
"I think there is sabotage going on. It's a logical move and it makes sense in the game that is part of the overall struggle to disrupt Iran's nuclear ambitions," he said.
As evidence of Israel's reported strategy, Iran watchers have pointed to events such as the death of Ardeshire Hassanpour, a nuclear scientist at the Isfahan uranium plant who died at home from apparent gas poisoning in 2007.
The former CIA agent told the Telegraph: "Disruption is designed to slow progress on the program, done in such a way they don't realize what's happening. The goal is delay, delay, delay until you can come up with some other solution.
"It's a good policy, short of taking them out militarily, which probably carries unacceptable risks."
Asked about the newspaper report, Mark Regev, a spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, told Reuters: "It is not our practice to comment publicly about these sorts of allegations, not in this situation, not in any situation."
New U.S. President Barack Obama has taken a more diplomatic line with Tehran, quietening former Bush administration talk of a possible military strike against Iranian nuclear assets.
Israeli leaders have been careful not to rule out their military options, though analysts question how far a new Israeli government, still to be formed after last week's parliamentary election, will be prepared to act without Washington's backing.
Javendafar said there were indications several states were attempting to infiltrate Iran to disrupt nuclear development but also suggested much of the reported clandestine activity was more part of a psychological war than an actual one of sabotage.
"Numerous intelligence agencies are trying their best to do this. Not just Israel, but the Americans and many European spy agencies," he said. "If it's true, then it's putting pressure on the Iranian program technically.
"Even if there's no truth to it, it's part of what is a massive psychological war against Iran's nuclear program ... It's ... much more affordable than sabotaging equipment."
(Editing by Janet McBride)
Israel is involved in a covert war of sabotage inside Iran to try to delay Tehran's alleged attempts to develop a nuclear weapon, a British newspaper said on Tuesday, quoting a former CIA agent and intelligence experts.
An intelligence source in the Middle East told Reuters last year Israel planned to target Iranian nuclear scientists with letter bombs and poisoned packages and had set off explosions in Iran. Analysts offered similar accounts and said such tactics would be credible, but no confirmation has been available.
Some analysts caution that reports of such a "dirty war" may form part of a psychological warfare campaign to unsettle Iran.
The intelligence source told Reuters that Israeli agents were working with Western governments and firms doing business with Tehran, whose Islamist leadership is a sworn enemy of Israel but denies accusations its nuclear program has a military purpose.
Israel's government, widely assumed to be the only nuclear power in the Middle East, declines all comment on such reports.
"Israel has launched a covert war against Iran as an alternative to direct military strikes against Tehran's nuclear program," Britain's Daily Telegraph said on Tuesday. "It is using hitmen, sabotage, front companies and double agents to disrupt the regime's illicit weapons project, the experts say."
Quoting intelligence experts and an unnamed former CIA agent, the newspaper said Israel's "decapitation" strategy had targeted members of Iran's atomic program, hoping to set back the country's nuclear ambitions without resorting to war.
"SABOTAGE GOING ON"
Meir Javendafar, an Iran expert at Meepas, a Middle East analysis group, told Reuters there were also reports Iran was being sold faulty equipment for its nuclear program, and that there were attempts to disrupt the electricity supply to Natanz, a uranium enrichment facility in central Iran.
"I think there is sabotage going on. It's a logical move and it makes sense in the game that is part of the overall struggle to disrupt Iran's nuclear ambitions," he said.
As evidence of Israel's reported strategy, Iran watchers have pointed to events such as the death of Ardeshire Hassanpour, a nuclear scientist at the Isfahan uranium plant who died at home from apparent gas poisoning in 2007.
The former CIA agent told the Telegraph: "Disruption is designed to slow progress on the program, done in such a way they don't realize what's happening. The goal is delay, delay, delay until you can come up with some other solution.
"It's a good policy, short of taking them out militarily, which probably carries unacceptable risks."
Asked about the newspaper report, Mark Regev, a spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, told Reuters: "It is not our practice to comment publicly about these sorts of allegations, not in this situation, not in any situation."
New U.S. President Barack Obama has taken a more diplomatic line with Tehran, quietening former Bush administration talk of a possible military strike against Iranian nuclear assets.
Israeli leaders have been careful not to rule out their military options, though analysts question how far a new Israeli government, still to be formed after last week's parliamentary election, will be prepared to act without Washington's backing.
Javendafar said there were indications several states were attempting to infiltrate Iran to disrupt nuclear development but also suggested much of the reported clandestine activity was more part of a psychological war than an actual one of sabotage.
"Numerous intelligence agencies are trying their best to do this. Not just Israel, but the Americans and many European spy agencies," he said. "If it's true, then it's putting pressure on the Iranian program technically.
"Even if there's no truth to it, it's part of what is a massive psychological war against Iran's nuclear program ... It's ... much more affordable than sabotaging equipment."
(Editing by Janet McBride)
Final Stimulus Bill Totals 1,071 Pages,
WHEN YOU READ THIS REMEMBER THE PROMISES THAT WERE MADE IN REGARDS HEALTHCARE, AND THE STIMULUS PACKAGE AND COMPARE WHAT YOU SEE TO WHAT YOU GOT. THIS BILL ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS ANYONE TO LOOK AT YOUR RECORDS, BELEIVE NOT WHAT IS SAID BY THE TALKING HEADS BUT READ AND NOTE WHAT IS UNDERLINED.
POLISI, AT THE END AND I QUOTE '“On the steps of the Capitol — one week and one day
---------------------------------------------------
before Congress acted the first time — the president inspired the nation with a
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
message of hope that we would take the country in a ‘New Direction,’” she
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
said. “He said that we will ‘harness the sun, and the wind, and soil to fuel our
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cars and run our factories.’” UNQUOTE DID YOU HEAR ALLAH SPEAK???
----------------------------
CNSNews.com
Final Stimulus Bill Totals 1,071 Pages, Includes Money for Lunch, Preschool, and ‘Summer Jobs for Youth’
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
By Matt Cover
The 1,071-page bill was published late Thursday evening.
The House of Representatives passed the bill Friday afternoon, seemingly contradicting Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) pledge to allow the public 48 hours
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to view the bill before Congress voted on it.
---------------------------------------------
House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said after the bill passed on a party-line vote Friday: “This vote isn’t about a Democrat or Republican win, it’s about a fundamental difference in how we create jobs and grow the economy. Every Republican
----------------
in the House voted against this bill today for one simple reason--we believe that
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress can do better and we had a plan to achieve that goal.”
--------------------------------------------------------------
“176 Republicans and 7 Democrats believe Congress can do better,” said Cantor.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the bill’s provisions include:
-- $176 million for “deferred maintenance” at the Agricultural Research Service.
-- $2.5 billion to provide high-speed Internet to rural Americans.
-- $100 million for the Free School Lunch Program.
-- $50 million in undefined “Aquaculture” assistance.
-- $1 billion for the 2010 census, which reportedly will have more direct White House oversight than it has in the past.
-- $650 million for digital television boxes, of which $90 million is set aside to pay for installing the boxes in people’s homes.
-- $225 million for programs aimed at combating domestic violence, including battered women’s shelters.
-- $40 million to combat drug trafficking along the nation’s southern border.
-- $400 million to NASA for “Science.” (“Science” is not defined in the bill and it does not state what NASA may spend the money on specifically.)
-- $400 million to NASA for “Exploration,” another undefined expenditure.
-- $25 million for the Army Corps of Engineers to conduct “investigations.”
-- $1 billion in unidentified water reclamation projects.
-- $2 billion for the manufacture of advanced batteries.
-- $3.4 billion for “Fossil Energy Research and Development,” which is not specifically defined in the bill.
-- $1.6 billion to the Department of Energy for undefined “Science.”
-- $500 million for green energy “pilot or demonstration projects” that the secretary of Energy deems could have commercial value.
-- $4.5 billion to convert all buildings owned by the federal government into “High Performance Green Buildings,” although a high performance building has not been defined.
-- $300 million to purchase green cars and trucks for the federal government’s vehicle fleet.
-- $1 billion for baggage-screening equipment for the Transportation Security Administration.
-- $100 million in “Homeless Assistance” at homeless shelters around the country.
-- $25 million for repairs at the Smithsonian Institution
-- $1.2 billion for “summer employment for youth,” whom Congress defines as someone up to 24 years old.
-- $50 million to assist high school dropouts enrolled in “alternative schools.”
-- $2.1 billion for Head Start and Early Head Start, the federal-state preschool partnerships.
-- $290 million for information technology upgrades at the U.S. State Department.
-- $1.3 billion for Amtrak.
-- $6.6 billion in Pell Grants for low-income students’ college tuition.
-- $50 million for repairs to the nation’s monuments and cemeteries.
-- $90 million for “passport and training functions” at the State Department.
-- $300 million to help carry out the national immunization plan of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
-- $500 million for repairs at the headquarters of the National Institutes of Health.
-- $400 million to conduct a study of the effectiveness of different health care treatments and procedures.
-- $4.7 billion in broadband Internet development grants, including $10 million to fund an inspector general tasked with tracking how well the money is spent.
-- $50 million for watershed rehabilitation.
-- $8 billion for a high-speed railway (including a proposed Los Angeles to Las Vegas MagLev rail line).
-- $140 million for volcano monitoring systems.
-- $125 million for rural communities to combat drug crimes.
After Friday’s vote, Speaker Pelosi said: "Working together under our new president, we were able to pass legislation today that is transformational for what it will do for our economy.”
THERE WAS NO WORKING TOGETHER IN THE HOUSE, THE LADY (USING THE TERM LOOSELY) IS FULL OF IT UP TO HER EYE BALLS.
“On the steps of the Capitol — one week and one day before Congress acted the first time — the president inspired the nation with a message of hope that we would take the country in a ‘New Direction,’” she said. “He said that we will ‘harness the sun, and the wind, and soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.’”
POLISI, AT THE END AND I QUOTE '“On the steps of the Capitol — one week and one day
---------------------------------------------------
before Congress acted the first time — the president inspired the nation with a
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
message of hope that we would take the country in a ‘New Direction,’” she
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
said. “He said that we will ‘harness the sun, and the wind, and soil to fuel our
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cars and run our factories.’” UNQUOTE DID YOU HEAR ALLAH SPEAK???
----------------------------
CNSNews.com
Final Stimulus Bill Totals 1,071 Pages, Includes Money for Lunch, Preschool, and ‘Summer Jobs for Youth’
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
By Matt Cover
The 1,071-page bill was published late Thursday evening.
The House of Representatives passed the bill Friday afternoon, seemingly contradicting Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) pledge to allow the public 48 hours
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to view the bill before Congress voted on it.
---------------------------------------------
House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said after the bill passed on a party-line vote Friday: “This vote isn’t about a Democrat or Republican win, it’s about a fundamental difference in how we create jobs and grow the economy. Every Republican
----------------
in the House voted against this bill today for one simple reason--we believe that
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress can do better and we had a plan to achieve that goal.”
--------------------------------------------------------------
“176 Republicans and 7 Democrats believe Congress can do better,” said Cantor.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the bill’s provisions include:
-- $176 million for “deferred maintenance” at the Agricultural Research Service.
-- $2.5 billion to provide high-speed Internet to rural Americans.
-- $100 million for the Free School Lunch Program.
-- $50 million in undefined “Aquaculture” assistance.
-- $1 billion for the 2010 census, which reportedly will have more direct White House oversight than it has in the past.
-- $650 million for digital television boxes, of which $90 million is set aside to pay for installing the boxes in people’s homes.
-- $225 million for programs aimed at combating domestic violence, including battered women’s shelters.
-- $40 million to combat drug trafficking along the nation’s southern border.
-- $400 million to NASA for “Science.” (“Science” is not defined in the bill and it does not state what NASA may spend the money on specifically.)
-- $400 million to NASA for “Exploration,” another undefined expenditure.
-- $25 million for the Army Corps of Engineers to conduct “investigations.”
-- $1 billion in unidentified water reclamation projects.
-- $2 billion for the manufacture of advanced batteries.
-- $3.4 billion for “Fossil Energy Research and Development,” which is not specifically defined in the bill.
-- $1.6 billion to the Department of Energy for undefined “Science.”
-- $500 million for green energy “pilot or demonstration projects” that the secretary of Energy deems could have commercial value.
-- $4.5 billion to convert all buildings owned by the federal government into “High Performance Green Buildings,” although a high performance building has not been defined.
-- $300 million to purchase green cars and trucks for the federal government’s vehicle fleet.
-- $1 billion for baggage-screening equipment for the Transportation Security Administration.
-- $100 million in “Homeless Assistance” at homeless shelters around the country.
-- $25 million for repairs at the Smithsonian Institution
-- $1.2 billion for “summer employment for youth,” whom Congress defines as someone up to 24 years old.
-- $50 million to assist high school dropouts enrolled in “alternative schools.”
-- $2.1 billion for Head Start and Early Head Start, the federal-state preschool partnerships.
-- $290 million for information technology upgrades at the U.S. State Department.
-- $1.3 billion for Amtrak.
-- $6.6 billion in Pell Grants for low-income students’ college tuition.
-- $50 million for repairs to the nation’s monuments and cemeteries.
-- $90 million for “passport and training functions” at the State Department.
-- $300 million to help carry out the national immunization plan of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
-- $500 million for repairs at the headquarters of the National Institutes of Health.
-- $400 million to conduct a study of the effectiveness of different health care treatments and procedures.
-- $4.7 billion in broadband Internet development grants, including $10 million to fund an inspector general tasked with tracking how well the money is spent.
-- $50 million for watershed rehabilitation.
-- $8 billion for a high-speed railway (including a proposed Los Angeles to Las Vegas MagLev rail line).
-- $140 million for volcano monitoring systems.
-- $125 million for rural communities to combat drug crimes.
After Friday’s vote, Speaker Pelosi said: "Working together under our new president, we were able to pass legislation today that is transformational for what it will do for our economy.”
THERE WAS NO WORKING TOGETHER IN THE HOUSE, THE LADY (USING THE TERM LOOSELY) IS FULL OF IT UP TO HER EYE BALLS.
“On the steps of the Capitol — one week and one day before Congress acted the first time — the president inspired the nation with a message of hope that we would take the country in a ‘New Direction,’” she said. “He said that we will ‘harness the sun, and the wind, and soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.’”
Entering your medical records??
SOME MORE OF THE SECRECY USED BY THE DEMOCRATES TO HIDE THEIR FULL INTENT. BE AWARE OF THE CLANDESTINED EFFORTS BY THESE DOGS OF THE NIGHT TO STRIP YOU AND ME OF OUR PERSONAL AND PRIVATE RIGHTS. DAVE ANDERSON
CNSNews.com
Stimulus Law Does Not Require All Americans to Enter Their Medical Records into National System, Dems Say
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
By Josiah Ryan, Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) – Two top House Democrats told CNSNews.com on Friday that a section in the $787-billion economic stimulus bill that requires the creation of “electronic health records for each person in the United States by 2014” does not mean that the medical records of every American must be included in the new national infrastructure.
In the bill, which passed both chambers of Congress on Friday and which President Obama is scheduled to sign Tuesday, $3 billion is allocated for a “National Coordinator for Health Information Technology” to create and meet the objectives of a strategic plan to build a national infrastructure of “electronic health records for each person in the United States by 2014.”
House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and House Health Subcommittee Chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) both told CNSNews.com on Friday that they do not think the law mandates that every American’s health care records must be entered into the national system.
“You mean that everyone has to be in the database?” Pallone said when CNSNews.com asked him if the provision was mandatory. “I don’t think so.”
“My understanding of what we are talking about is that this is information that you use with your own doctor for your own purposes,” said Pallone. “I don’t think there is any requirement you be in some national database either totally, either collectively or with individual data that you might want to provide.”
When asked whether there was a provision in the bill that allowed Americans to keep their records out of the program, Waxman said, "Yes."
“We tried to be very careful about individual privacy and we have a lot of protections written into the bill,” said Waxman.
However, Waxman's office did not provide CNSNews.com with the provision in the bill that would allow individuals to exempt themselves from the program. A source close to Waxman said that the bill’s description of the program as a “strategic plan” with “goals” and “specific objectives” means that its implementation will not be mandatory.
According to the language of the bill, it is the duty of the “National Coordinator for Health Information Technology” to ensure that federal health information technology programs are “meeting the objectives of the strategic plan” to, among other things, provide for “the electronic exchange and use of health information and the enterprise integration of such information” -- and the “utilization of an electronic health record for each person in the Unites States by 2014.”
According to a summary of the stimulus posted on the House Committee on Appropriations Web site, the package includes a total of $19 billion to “update and computerize our healthcare system to cut red tape, prevent medical mistakes, and help reduce healthcare costs by billions of dollars each year.”
The electronic health records, or "EHRs," according to the bill, will include clinical health information, medical history, and demographics, including race, ethnicity, primary language, and gender information.
Sources on Capitol Hill told CNSNews.com that both Waxman and Pallone were instrumental in ensuring the health information technology programs were included in the stimulus package.
Meanwhile, members of the Senate told CNSNews.com that they were unaware of these health-care provisions included in the 1,071-page legislation.
“I have not looked at those particular provisions as much as I have on the general effectiveness [of the stimulus],” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told CNSNews.com on Friday. “I don’t know frankly enough about that provision to give you an informed comment.” McCain is a member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
“I don’t know,” Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) told CNSNews.com, when asked abpit the provision. “I haven’t thought about it.”
CNSNews.com
Stimulus Law Does Not Require All Americans to Enter Their Medical Records into National System, Dems Say
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
By Josiah Ryan, Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) – Two top House Democrats told CNSNews.com on Friday that a section in the $787-billion economic stimulus bill that requires the creation of “electronic health records for each person in the United States by 2014” does not mean that the medical records of every American must be included in the new national infrastructure.
In the bill, which passed both chambers of Congress on Friday and which President Obama is scheduled to sign Tuesday, $3 billion is allocated for a “National Coordinator for Health Information Technology” to create and meet the objectives of a strategic plan to build a national infrastructure of “electronic health records for each person in the United States by 2014.”
House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and House Health Subcommittee Chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) both told CNSNews.com on Friday that they do not think the law mandates that every American’s health care records must be entered into the national system.
“You mean that everyone has to be in the database?” Pallone said when CNSNews.com asked him if the provision was mandatory. “I don’t think so.”
“My understanding of what we are talking about is that this is information that you use with your own doctor for your own purposes,” said Pallone. “I don’t think there is any requirement you be in some national database either totally, either collectively or with individual data that you might want to provide.”
When asked whether there was a provision in the bill that allowed Americans to keep their records out of the program, Waxman said, "Yes."
“We tried to be very careful about individual privacy and we have a lot of protections written into the bill,” said Waxman.
However, Waxman's office did not provide CNSNews.com with the provision in the bill that would allow individuals to exempt themselves from the program. A source close to Waxman said that the bill’s description of the program as a “strategic plan” with “goals” and “specific objectives” means that its implementation will not be mandatory.
According to the language of the bill, it is the duty of the “National Coordinator for Health Information Technology” to ensure that federal health information technology programs are “meeting the objectives of the strategic plan” to, among other things, provide for “the electronic exchange and use of health information and the enterprise integration of such information” -- and the “utilization of an electronic health record for each person in the Unites States by 2014.”
According to a summary of the stimulus posted on the House Committee on Appropriations Web site, the package includes a total of $19 billion to “update and computerize our healthcare system to cut red tape, prevent medical mistakes, and help reduce healthcare costs by billions of dollars each year.”
The electronic health records, or "EHRs," according to the bill, will include clinical health information, medical history, and demographics, including race, ethnicity, primary language, and gender information.
Sources on Capitol Hill told CNSNews.com that both Waxman and Pallone were instrumental in ensuring the health information technology programs were included in the stimulus package.
Meanwhile, members of the Senate told CNSNews.com that they were unaware of these health-care provisions included in the 1,071-page legislation.
“I have not looked at those particular provisions as much as I have on the general effectiveness [of the stimulus],” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told CNSNews.com on Friday. “I don’t know frankly enough about that provision to give you an informed comment.” McCain is a member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
“I don’t know,” Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) told CNSNews.com, when asked abpit the provision. “I haven’t thought about it.”
11% of Mortgages 'in Trouble’
Than 2 Million U.S. Homes Went into Foreclosure in 2008; 11% of Mortgages 'in Trouble’
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
By Matt Cover
David Axelrod, left, and Valerie Jarrett, right, senior advisers to President Barack Obama, not pictured, disembark Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2009 (AP photo)(CNSNews.com) – Eleven percent of the nation’s home mortgages were delinquent by at least one payment, already in foreclosure or entering foreclosure in the third quarter of 2008, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association.
The MBA’s National Delinquency Survey, which tracks mortgages nationwide, found that 7 percent of mortgages were at least one month behind, and approximately 3 percent of the nation’s mortgages are currently in foreclosure.
Foreclosure “starts,” or mortgages that had entered into foreclosure process, stood at 1 percent for the third quarter.
According to the Federal Reserve’s “Flow of Funds” report, the total value of all home mortgages in the U.S. was $11.2 trillion through the third quarter of 2008, which ended in September.
Those figures, combined with the recessionary economy, paint a bleak picture for the nation’s homeowners; as falling home prices, employment uncertainty, and tight credit markets constrict their range of options.
Normally, most delinquencies are resolved by refinancing-lowering interest rates and therefore monthly payments--or by selling the home. However, a dismal housing market and a tightening credit market have caused these options to all but evaporate.
The poor housing market makes selling a home untenable for some mortgage holders, because they may not be able to sell for enough to repay their outstanding balance.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner announced on Feb. 10 that the government would supply $50 billion to prevent avoidable foreclosures, with details to be announced Wednesday.
Geithner said the government would focus on reducing monthly mortgage payments for some borrowers, but offered no specifics.
Obama senior adviser David Axelrod, speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” said the plan the president would announce is aimed at homeowners who are "right on the edge" of foreclosure, but also did not give details.
There are several plans already underway, which may be expanded.
The largest plan, offered by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) -- known as “Hope for Homeowners”-- allows lenders to refinance borrowers into an FHA-insured fixed rate mortgage, if the lender writes down the existing mortgage balance and pays an up-front insurance premium. Borrowers participating in the plan must share any future appreciation of the home’s value with the federal government.
This plan has faced hurdles as banks and mortgage services have balked at writing down a mortgage’s principal, which would reduce the value of the mortgage itself.
Another plan, run by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and used during that agency’s conservatorship of IndyMac last year, lets individual borrowers and lenders re-work a mortgage themselves, but commits the government to share in 50 percent of the losses, should the borrower re-default.
Any plan would face a daunting task, given the massive numbers of mortgages in foreclosure and the staggering value of the mortgage market itself.
According to the MBA’s report, its delinquency and foreclosure numbers are likely smaller than market reality because some banks, notably JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup, have halted all foreclosures; while other banks stop keeping track of how far behind borrowers are while they work with those borrowers on modifying their mortgages.
In fact, according to MBA, every state except Alaska had an increase in mortgages that were more than 90 days past due but were not in foreclosure. Normally, a mortgage that is more than 90 days past due is foreclosed on.
MBA estimated that a total of 2.2 million homes went into foreclosure in 2008, a number the group expects will grow in 2009 as unemployment continues to rise and the housing market continues to fall.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
By Matt Cover
David Axelrod, left, and Valerie Jarrett, right, senior advisers to President Barack Obama, not pictured, disembark Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2009 (AP photo)(CNSNews.com) – Eleven percent of the nation’s home mortgages were delinquent by at least one payment, already in foreclosure or entering foreclosure in the third quarter of 2008, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association.
The MBA’s National Delinquency Survey, which tracks mortgages nationwide, found that 7 percent of mortgages were at least one month behind, and approximately 3 percent of the nation’s mortgages are currently in foreclosure.
Foreclosure “starts,” or mortgages that had entered into foreclosure process, stood at 1 percent for the third quarter.
According to the Federal Reserve’s “Flow of Funds” report, the total value of all home mortgages in the U.S. was $11.2 trillion through the third quarter of 2008, which ended in September.
Those figures, combined with the recessionary economy, paint a bleak picture for the nation’s homeowners; as falling home prices, employment uncertainty, and tight credit markets constrict their range of options.
Normally, most delinquencies are resolved by refinancing-lowering interest rates and therefore monthly payments--or by selling the home. However, a dismal housing market and a tightening credit market have caused these options to all but evaporate.
The poor housing market makes selling a home untenable for some mortgage holders, because they may not be able to sell for enough to repay their outstanding balance.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner announced on Feb. 10 that the government would supply $50 billion to prevent avoidable foreclosures, with details to be announced Wednesday.
Geithner said the government would focus on reducing monthly mortgage payments for some borrowers, but offered no specifics.
Obama senior adviser David Axelrod, speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” said the plan the president would announce is aimed at homeowners who are "right on the edge" of foreclosure, but also did not give details.
There are several plans already underway, which may be expanded.
The largest plan, offered by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) -- known as “Hope for Homeowners”-- allows lenders to refinance borrowers into an FHA-insured fixed rate mortgage, if the lender writes down the existing mortgage balance and pays an up-front insurance premium. Borrowers participating in the plan must share any future appreciation of the home’s value with the federal government.
This plan has faced hurdles as banks and mortgage services have balked at writing down a mortgage’s principal, which would reduce the value of the mortgage itself.
Another plan, run by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and used during that agency’s conservatorship of IndyMac last year, lets individual borrowers and lenders re-work a mortgage themselves, but commits the government to share in 50 percent of the losses, should the borrower re-default.
Any plan would face a daunting task, given the massive numbers of mortgages in foreclosure and the staggering value of the mortgage market itself.
According to the MBA’s report, its delinquency and foreclosure numbers are likely smaller than market reality because some banks, notably JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup, have halted all foreclosures; while other banks stop keeping track of how far behind borrowers are while they work with those borrowers on modifying their mortgages.
In fact, according to MBA, every state except Alaska had an increase in mortgages that were more than 90 days past due but were not in foreclosure. Normally, a mortgage that is more than 90 days past due is foreclosed on.
MBA estimated that a total of 2.2 million homes went into foreclosure in 2008, a number the group expects will grow in 2009 as unemployment continues to rise and the housing market continues to fall.
Monday, February 16, 2009
He's off to a great start....
Why ain't I surprised?
He's off to a great start....
Subject: great first week!
"...Obama's approval rating plunges 15 points from the stratospheric 83% to 68% after the first week in office according to recent Gallup Polls..." (CNN)
- First day in office, Obama scowls and reprimands his VP (Biden) in front of cameras over a little joke about swearing in a second time... (Way to undress your running mate and now second in command on day one!)
- Already preparing a nation for broken promises. Quoted saying "I want to be realistic here -- not everything that we talked about during the campaign are we going to be able to do on the pace that we had hoped." Ummm, why weren't you realistic while you were making promises in order to get elected? It was only four months ago when you promised this....was it that different then?
- Obama vowed to immediately start clearing out troops from Iraq (I suppose that was a campaign promise, so no surprise there...)
- Obama, on Thursday, issued an order to shut down Guantanamo Bay without any plan in place to move al-Qaida prisoners or a legal plan for doing so.
- Within in 72 hours of office, he's failed to initiate tax cuts for 95% of working Americans as promised during his campaign only 3 months ago.
- After bashing Bush for our Trillion dollar deficit created over 8-full years, he's managed to Initiate a bill to double that amount in 1 week. (i.e. "stimulus plan" - LOL) - (includes budget for handing out condoms to our kids and also ...does it get any better? LOL)
- Obama creates ugly scene in the press room because he didn't like the question asked by a reporter. (After being asked about placing a ban on lobbyists in his administration... [with irritation in his voice])
He said; "..See this is what happens? I can't end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I'm going to get grilled every time I come down here."
(HELLO!!!!! That is what the press does at press conferences, they grill you Mr. Prez...lighten up, you're the "leader of the free world" - Get used to it! LOL
- President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush administration's ban on giving federal money to perform abortions abroad...
- Obama vows to push the "Anti-hate Crimes" bill previously vetoed by Bush.
- Obama ordered the closure of any remaining secret CIA "black site" prisons abroad and barred CIA interrogators form using harsh techniques already banned for military questioners.
- Obama lifted a ban on federal funding for stem cell research... (Here comes cloning and more killing of human life for the sake of science....)
- And on the fifth day, from the Honorable Patrick Fitzgerald office, subpoenas were served to nearly all of Obama's senior staff - that didn't take long...
- Quote. "...Finally, Obama made his first really dumb political move when he picked a fight with Rush Limbaugh, telling GOP senators that they shouldn't listen to the talk show host and get on board with his stimulus package. (Quote: "...Obama broke the first rule of political gunslinging: never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel -- or in the case of Rush Limbaugh, someone with 23 million daily listeners and 3 hours every day with which to make you look like an idiot...")
And unless someone is NOT a tax cheat or NOT criminally-minded, with NO unethical, illegal or immoral acts in their past or in the dossier, they need not apply for a cabinet post or other high-level (or low-level) government position. (We wonder what Caroline Kennedy did not do...)
Only 207 more weeks to go! Can't wait to see what the following weeks may bring!
He's off to a great start....
Subject: great first week!
"...Obama's approval rating plunges 15 points from the stratospheric 83% to 68% after the first week in office according to recent Gallup Polls..." (CNN)
- First day in office, Obama scowls and reprimands his VP (Biden) in front of cameras over a little joke about swearing in a second time... (Way to undress your running mate and now second in command on day one!)
- Already preparing a nation for broken promises. Quoted saying "I want to be realistic here -- not everything that we talked about during the campaign are we going to be able to do on the pace that we had hoped." Ummm, why weren't you realistic while you were making promises in order to get elected? It was only four months ago when you promised this....was it that different then?
- Obama vowed to immediately start clearing out troops from Iraq (I suppose that was a campaign promise, so no surprise there...)
- Obama, on Thursday, issued an order to shut down Guantanamo Bay without any plan in place to move al-Qaida prisoners or a legal plan for doing so.
- Within in 72 hours of office, he's failed to initiate tax cuts for 95% of working Americans as promised during his campaign only 3 months ago.
- After bashing Bush for our Trillion dollar deficit created over 8-full years, he's managed to Initiate a bill to double that amount in 1 week. (i.e. "stimulus plan" - LOL) - (includes budget for handing out condoms to our kids and also ...does it get any better? LOL)
- Obama creates ugly scene in the press room because he didn't like the question asked by a reporter. (After being asked about placing a ban on lobbyists in his administration... [with irritation in his voice])
He said; "..See this is what happens? I can't end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I'm going to get grilled every time I come down here."
(HELLO!!!!! That is what the press does at press conferences, they grill you Mr. Prez...lighten up, you're the "leader of the free world" - Get used to it! LOL
- President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush administration's ban on giving federal money to perform abortions abroad...
- Obama vows to push the "Anti-hate Crimes" bill previously vetoed by Bush.
- Obama ordered the closure of any remaining secret CIA "black site" prisons abroad and barred CIA interrogators form using harsh techniques already banned for military questioners.
- Obama lifted a ban on federal funding for stem cell research... (Here comes cloning and more killing of human life for the sake of science....)
- And on the fifth day, from the Honorable Patrick Fitzgerald office, subpoenas were served to nearly all of Obama's senior staff - that didn't take long...
- Quote. "...Finally, Obama made his first really dumb political move when he picked a fight with Rush Limbaugh, telling GOP senators that they shouldn't listen to the talk show host and get on board with his stimulus package. (Quote: "...Obama broke the first rule of political gunslinging: never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel -- or in the case of Rush Limbaugh, someone with 23 million daily listeners and 3 hours every day with which to make you look like an idiot...")
And unless someone is NOT a tax cheat or NOT criminally-minded, with NO unethical, illegal or immoral acts in their past or in the dossier, they need not apply for a cabinet post or other high-level (or low-level) government position. (We wonder what Caroline Kennedy did not do...)
Only 207 more weeks to go! Can't wait to see what the following weeks may bring!
Know Thy Enemy,,,,,,Re: Fw: H.R-45
Subject: Know Thy Enemy,,,,,,Re: Fw: H.R-45 - Bad News
>
> Congressional Research Service Summary
> The following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service, a
> well-respected nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress. GovTrack did
> not write and has no control over these summaries.
>
> One day into the 111th session of Congress was all it took for Illinois
> Democrat and former Black Panther, ***Bobby Rush***, to take a run on a
> new measure of gun control. Problem is, quite a few don’t like the
> language—in particular, the part about “anyone wishing to purchase, own or
> possess a ‘qualifying firearm’ would have to be licensed by the state or
> the federal government in a licensing program managed by the Attorney
> General.”
>
> “I might be a gun rights advocate,” says Larry Pratt, the Executive
> Director of the Gun Owners of America, “but anyone with any sense, or any
> respect for the Constitution at all, has to bristle at proposed
> legislation that wants to place our Bill of Rights in the hands of one
> man.”
>
> Pratt is available for interviews to comment on this political move, and
> the foreshadowing he fears it may represent in a President Obama/Speaker
> Pelosi Washington tag team.
>
> With an eye on the bill’s details that require redundant personal
> identification, a release of personal health records to the Attorney
> General and other unnecessary, intrusive measures, Pratt and other gun
> rights proponents find it a harsh pill to swallow, and a disturbing
> political double standard that shows a government more preoccupied with
> its own citizens than foreign enemies.
>
> “What I find frighteningly ironic,” adds Pratt, “is the bill’s mandate
> requiring gun owners apply for a federal firearms I.D. card. Isn’t this
> the Party that, together with the ACLU, had a tirade over the proposal of
> a post-9/11 national I.D. card?”
>
> In 1969, Rush himself served six months in prison for an illegal weapons
> conviction. Currently, the bill has no cosponsors, has not been scheduled
> for a committee hearing and, if it were to get as far, would likely have a
> difficult time passing in the Senate. Nonetheless, with a heavily
> left-leaning D.C. right now, folks like Pratt are taking nothing for
> granted. (Special Guests)
>
>
> More:
>
> 1/6/2009--Introduced.
> Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - Amends the
> Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing
> a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this
> Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not
> been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and
> renewal requirements.
> Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the
> recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and
> the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms
> transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney
> General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.
> Prohibits: (1) transferring a firearm to any person other than a licensee,
> unless the transfer is processed through a licensed dealer in accordance
> with national instant criminal background check system requirements, with
> exceptions; (2) a licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply
> with reporting and record keeping requirements of this Act; (3) failing to
> report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72
> hours; (4) failing to report to the Attorney General an address change
> within 60 days; or (5) keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm
> and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the
> risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the
> firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury.
> Prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions
> covered by this Act.
> Directs the Attorney General to: (1) establish and maintain a firearm
> injury information clearinghouse; (2) conduct continuing studies and
> investigations of firearm-related deaths and injuries; and (3) collect and
> maintain current production and sales figures of each licensed
> manufacturer.
> Authorizes the Attorney General to certify state firearm licensing or
> record of sale systems.
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.234 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1950 - Release Date: 02/11/09
18:11:00
>
> Congressional Research Service Summary
> The following summary was written by the Congressional Research Service, a
> well-respected nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress. GovTrack did
> not write and has no control over these summaries.
>
> One day into the 111th session of Congress was all it took for Illinois
> Democrat and former Black Panther, ***Bobby Rush***, to take a run on a
> new measure of gun control. Problem is, quite a few don’t like the
> language—in particular, the part about “anyone wishing to purchase, own or
> possess a ‘qualifying firearm’ would have to be licensed by the state or
> the federal government in a licensing program managed by the Attorney
> General.”
>
> “I might be a gun rights advocate,” says Larry Pratt, the Executive
> Director of the Gun Owners of America, “but anyone with any sense, or any
> respect for the Constitution at all, has to bristle at proposed
> legislation that wants to place our Bill of Rights in the hands of one
> man.”
>
> Pratt is available for interviews to comment on this political move, and
> the foreshadowing he fears it may represent in a President Obama/Speaker
> Pelosi Washington tag team.
>
> With an eye on the bill’s details that require redundant personal
> identification, a release of personal health records to the Attorney
> General and other unnecessary, intrusive measures, Pratt and other gun
> rights proponents find it a harsh pill to swallow, and a disturbing
> political double standard that shows a government more preoccupied with
> its own citizens than foreign enemies.
>
> “What I find frighteningly ironic,” adds Pratt, “is the bill’s mandate
> requiring gun owners apply for a federal firearms I.D. card. Isn’t this
> the Party that, together with the ACLU, had a tirade over the proposal of
> a post-9/11 national I.D. card?”
>
> In 1969, Rush himself served six months in prison for an illegal weapons
> conviction. Currently, the bill has no cosponsors, has not been scheduled
> for a committee hearing and, if it were to get as far, would likely have a
> difficult time passing in the Senate. Nonetheless, with a heavily
> left-leaning D.C. right now, folks like Pratt are taking nothing for
> granted. (Special Guests)
>
>
> More:
>
> 1/6/2009--Introduced.
> Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - Amends the
> Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing
> a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this
> Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not
> been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and
> renewal requirements.
> Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the
> recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and
> the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms
> transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney
> General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.
> Prohibits: (1) transferring a firearm to any person other than a licensee,
> unless the transfer is processed through a licensed dealer in accordance
> with national instant criminal background check system requirements, with
> exceptions; (2) a licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply
> with reporting and record keeping requirements of this Act; (3) failing to
> report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72
> hours; (4) failing to report to the Attorney General an address change
> within 60 days; or (5) keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm
> and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the
> risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the
> firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury.
> Prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions
> covered by this Act.
> Directs the Attorney General to: (1) establish and maintain a firearm
> injury information clearinghouse; (2) conduct continuing studies and
> investigations of firearm-related deaths and injuries; and (3) collect and
> maintain current production and sales figures of each licensed
> manufacturer.
> Authorizes the Attorney General to certify state firearm licensing or
> record of sale systems.
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.234 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1950 - Release Date: 02/11/09
18:11:00
Mending Fences
Mending Fences
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, February 13, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Homeland Security: Remember the border fence? The one being built is not the fence authorized by Congress, and its effectiveness is in doubt. As Mexico implodes, a proper fence is infrastructure we really need.
The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required the construction of 700 miles of new border fence along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. "The secretary of Homeland Security shall provide for at least two layers of reinforced fencing, the installation of additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras and sensors," the act said.
It was to be modeled on the success of the barriers in the San Diego sector of the border with Mexico. But instead of this two-layer secure fence, what has been built consists of flimsy pedestrian fencing or vehicle fencing consisting of posts people can slither through.
Illegal aliens have used cutting torches on the vehicle barrier posts that are called a "fence."
These vehicle barrier posts are settling into the ground, and gaps between the posts are widening. In one spot, average-size illegal aliens would be able to wedge themselves through the gaps.
Significant stretches of fencing have been built, but according to a report by the Government Accountability Office sent to congressional committees on Jan. 29, little of it is double-layer fencing. "As of Oct. 31, 2008, CBP (Customs and Border Protection) reported that approximately 32 miles of secondary fence existed along the southwest border," the report said.
One problem is an amendment to a 2007 omnibus spending bill that lifted the two-layer fence requirement and gave the homeland security secretary discretion in the location and type of fence built.
In other words, DHS could put up a chain-link or picket fence if it wanted. This was done to placate land owners worried about fences carving up their property and appease environmentalists worried about hampering the migration of endangered critters.
Funds were even diverted to building a virtual fence using technology that didn't work too well.
As Mexico descends into chaos, more will be needed to protect us from drug lords and cross-border violence. A failed state to our south without a secure border is an invitation to disaster.
As senator, Barack Obama voted for the two-tiered fence. But his DHS secretary, former border state Gov. Janet Napolitano, reportedly once said: "You show me a 50-foot fence and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder at the border."
The two-tier fence in San Diego runs 14 miles along the border with Tijuana, Mexico. The first layer is a high steel fence, with an inner anti-climb fence and a no-man's land in between.
It's been amazingly effective. According to a 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service, illegal alien apprehensions in the San Diego sector dropped from 202,000 in 1992 to 9,000 in 2004.
That's the fence that Congress intended in 2006, and that's the fence we need to build. It would be stimulus money well spent. Build it and they won't come.
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, February 13, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Homeland Security: Remember the border fence? The one being built is not the fence authorized by Congress, and its effectiveness is in doubt. As Mexico implodes, a proper fence is infrastructure we really need.
The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required the construction of 700 miles of new border fence along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. "The secretary of Homeland Security shall provide for at least two layers of reinforced fencing, the installation of additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras and sensors," the act said.
It was to be modeled on the success of the barriers in the San Diego sector of the border with Mexico. But instead of this two-layer secure fence, what has been built consists of flimsy pedestrian fencing or vehicle fencing consisting of posts people can slither through.
Illegal aliens have used cutting torches on the vehicle barrier posts that are called a "fence."
These vehicle barrier posts are settling into the ground, and gaps between the posts are widening. In one spot, average-size illegal aliens would be able to wedge themselves through the gaps.
Significant stretches of fencing have been built, but according to a report by the Government Accountability Office sent to congressional committees on Jan. 29, little of it is double-layer fencing. "As of Oct. 31, 2008, CBP (Customs and Border Protection) reported that approximately 32 miles of secondary fence existed along the southwest border," the report said.
One problem is an amendment to a 2007 omnibus spending bill that lifted the two-layer fence requirement and gave the homeland security secretary discretion in the location and type of fence built.
In other words, DHS could put up a chain-link or picket fence if it wanted. This was done to placate land owners worried about fences carving up their property and appease environmentalists worried about hampering the migration of endangered critters.
Funds were even diverted to building a virtual fence using technology that didn't work too well.
As Mexico descends into chaos, more will be needed to protect us from drug lords and cross-border violence. A failed state to our south without a secure border is an invitation to disaster.
As senator, Barack Obama voted for the two-tiered fence. But his DHS secretary, former border state Gov. Janet Napolitano, reportedly once said: "You show me a 50-foot fence and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder at the border."
The two-tier fence in San Diego runs 14 miles along the border with Tijuana, Mexico. The first layer is a high steel fence, with an inner anti-climb fence and a no-man's land in between.
It's been amazingly effective. According to a 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service, illegal alien apprehensions in the San Diego sector dropped from 202,000 in 1992 to 9,000 in 2004.
That's the fence that Congress intended in 2006, and that's the fence we need to build. It would be stimulus money well spent. Build it and they won't come.
No Way To Make Public Policy
No Way To Make Public Policy
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, February 13, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Stimulus: Say this for the $787 billion behemoth that Congress voted on on Friday — never in our history has a more important vote been cast on legislation with so little scrutiny. Couldn't they at least read the thing before voting on it?
The 1,434-page bill is, in a word, massive. It's full of details that deserve to be given a close look before anyone votes. As the old saying goes, the devil's in the details — and if you can't look at the details, you might just end up with the devil.
The bill that President Obama called "the largest change in domestic policy since the 1930s" was jammed down Congress' throat, breaking almost all the promises of bipartisanship and transparency along the way.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed to give members of Congress at least 48 hours to look at the historic legislation before them.
After all, the bill will spend the equivalent of nearly 9% of our GDP while adding $1.2 trillion to our national debt. Obama vows to "create or save" 3.5 million jobs at a cost of $263,000 per job.
Shouldn't it get even a little bit of scrutiny?
Apparently not. The bill went on line sometime early Friday morning, not too long before passing 246-183 with not a single Republican vote and seven Democrats voting against it.
So much for a "bipartisan" plan, another promise broken.
In the House at least, there wasn't even the pretense of bipartisanship. The Democrats drafted their bill with no input from the Republicans.
In the Senate, Democrats found three Republicans — Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine (pop. 1.3 million), and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania — to give them bipartisan cover and to provide a 60-vote filibuster-proof majority.
Even more obscene was the undue haste with which Congress voted on this bill as it was still coming together late last week. As House GOP leader John Boehner noted on the floor, "not one (House) member has read this bill."
That was by design. Pelosi was keen to leave town on a weeklong recess, and she didn't want to have to wait for a little thing like debate over the largest spending bill ever passed.
Nor is it a partisan issue. As Missouri Democrat Emanuel Cleaver said, "Regardless of party, we all cast our votes with one hand and crossed our fingers with the other."
Is this any way to pass a so-called stimulus package?
Even worse, as U.S. News and World Report has noted, lobbyists — not members of Congress — got the first shot at suggesting changes to the measure.
The newsweekly's Paul Bedard said "one key Democratic staffer" e-mailed him the following: "K Street (Washington's lobbyists' row) has the bill, or chunks of it already, and the congressional offices don't."
This was Thursday night, on the eve of the vote. And remember, Congress had voted to put the bill online for at least 48 hours before it took action. Not until Friday morning, however, did it hit the Web. All a lie.
Why the haste? Surely one reason is the bill is stuffed with pork and short of real stimulus. Its authors don't want the details out. They shouldn't be surprised, then, when voters bridle at what they've been saddled with.
Another reason seems to be that lawmakers had pressing business overseas during this week's recess, and really didn't want to stick around Washington.
In Pelosi's case, she and several other Democrats were due to leave Friday evening for an eight-day tour of Europe, including Rome. We wouldn't want to get in the way of her travel plans, would we?
In this month of celebrating the bicentennial of President Lincoln's birth, we can't help recalling his prayerful hope at Gettysburg — that "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
This bill pretty much inverts Lincoln's ringing words. In this sorry episode at least, it was "government of the lobbyists, by the lobbyists, for the lobbyists." In other words, real disgrace.
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, February 13, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Stimulus: Say this for the $787 billion behemoth that Congress voted on on Friday — never in our history has a more important vote been cast on legislation with so little scrutiny. Couldn't they at least read the thing before voting on it?
The 1,434-page bill is, in a word, massive. It's full of details that deserve to be given a close look before anyone votes. As the old saying goes, the devil's in the details — and if you can't look at the details, you might just end up with the devil.
The bill that President Obama called "the largest change in domestic policy since the 1930s" was jammed down Congress' throat, breaking almost all the promises of bipartisanship and transparency along the way.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vowed to give members of Congress at least 48 hours to look at the historic legislation before them.
After all, the bill will spend the equivalent of nearly 9% of our GDP while adding $1.2 trillion to our national debt. Obama vows to "create or save" 3.5 million jobs at a cost of $263,000 per job.
Shouldn't it get even a little bit of scrutiny?
Apparently not. The bill went on line sometime early Friday morning, not too long before passing 246-183 with not a single Republican vote and seven Democrats voting against it.
So much for a "bipartisan" plan, another promise broken.
In the House at least, there wasn't even the pretense of bipartisanship. The Democrats drafted their bill with no input from the Republicans.
In the Senate, Democrats found three Republicans — Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine (pop. 1.3 million), and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania — to give them bipartisan cover and to provide a 60-vote filibuster-proof majority.
Even more obscene was the undue haste with which Congress voted on this bill as it was still coming together late last week. As House GOP leader John Boehner noted on the floor, "not one (House) member has read this bill."
That was by design. Pelosi was keen to leave town on a weeklong recess, and she didn't want to have to wait for a little thing like debate over the largest spending bill ever passed.
Nor is it a partisan issue. As Missouri Democrat Emanuel Cleaver said, "Regardless of party, we all cast our votes with one hand and crossed our fingers with the other."
Is this any way to pass a so-called stimulus package?
Even worse, as U.S. News and World Report has noted, lobbyists — not members of Congress — got the first shot at suggesting changes to the measure.
The newsweekly's Paul Bedard said "one key Democratic staffer" e-mailed him the following: "K Street (Washington's lobbyists' row) has the bill, or chunks of it already, and the congressional offices don't."
This was Thursday night, on the eve of the vote. And remember, Congress had voted to put the bill online for at least 48 hours before it took action. Not until Friday morning, however, did it hit the Web. All a lie.
Why the haste? Surely one reason is the bill is stuffed with pork and short of real stimulus. Its authors don't want the details out. They shouldn't be surprised, then, when voters bridle at what they've been saddled with.
Another reason seems to be that lawmakers had pressing business overseas during this week's recess, and really didn't want to stick around Washington.
In Pelosi's case, she and several other Democrats were due to leave Friday evening for an eight-day tour of Europe, including Rome. We wouldn't want to get in the way of her travel plans, would we?
In this month of celebrating the bicentennial of President Lincoln's birth, we can't help recalling his prayerful hope at Gettysburg — that "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
This bill pretty much inverts Lincoln's ringing words. In this sorry episode at least, it was "government of the lobbyists, by the lobbyists, for the lobbyists." In other words, real disgrace.
Ethanol's Backers Get Gassed
Ethanol's Backers Get Gassed
BY INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Energy: A fortune was spent on ethanol development last year when gas prices were in the stratosphere. Now a lesson has been learned: Worshiping the false god of ethanol carries a high price.
A funny thing happened on the way to all the green profits that were supposed to be in the offing thanks to high prices at the gas pump.
As the New York Times reported this week, ethanol, "just recently a savior" as the Times headline put it, has been found sorely lacking in its much-touted miraculous powers to heal America's energy woes.
Corn ethanol plants "are shutting down virtually every week." An alternative energy trade group says at least 10 of the nation's 150 ethanol firms have closed some 24 plants in three months, with a dozen other companies in distress.
Little more than a year after the Democratic Congress passed legislation launching a massive national effort to convert farm crops and agricultural wastes into auto fuel, it's become clear that the production deadlines aimed at greenifying your local gas station can't and won't be met.
The many investors who were tripping all over themselves to finance biofuel plants last year are finding that going green can mean losing lots of green.
Congress had a grand plan: It would double corn ethanol use by 2015. And by 2022, 21 billion gallons of ethanol and biofuels would be made from formerly useless stuff, ranging from corn stubble to switchgrass to municipal waste.
But reality has hit like a ton of corn stalks. The inescapable facts are that corn prices remain at a market-set high, and converting the corn alternative cellulose into liquid fuel is prohibitively expensive.
And there are other problems. For one, corn ethanol gets worse mileage than gasoline. For another, ethanol's corrosiveness means it can't be shipped through regular pipelines like gasoline.
Faced with all this, investors betting on green seek a kind of biofuel breakthrough that would make it possible to surmount the current obstacles to converting organic waste and food to ethanol.
And the federal government has matched their wagers.
Last year, the Department of Energy agreed to spend tens of millions of dollars to see if a soil-based anaerobic bacterium classified as the "Q Microbe," discovered some years ago in the Massachusetts woods by a microbiologist at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, can turn feedstocks like corn stover, wheat straw and sorghum into ethanol.
Everything from food scraps, lumber waste, rice straw, yard trimmings, even dumped furniture and debris from construction sites can become the raw material of cellulosic ethanol, the DOE and the Department of Agriculture have said. The problem is, no one has yet used the process to make fuel that can compete with oil in either cost or quantity.
After all the pain of those high gas prices of the recent past, the American people would rather depend on what they know works: good old black gold. House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., this week conceded the political realities when he declared that "the ship has already sailed" in regard to drilling for new domestic oil.
Congress banned oil and natural gas exploration for 26 years over most of the Outer Continental Shelf, but it let the ban expire last fall amid a public outcry after oil prices peaked at $147 a barrel.
Will the Obama Administration now permit drilling? The new president seems to be putting in place a foot-dragging exercise on his campaign promise to provide drilling leases.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has announced fact-finding initiatives on drilling by the Minerals Management Service and the U.S. Geological Survey, as well as four regional meetings. Hand in hand with these moves are plans for wind, wave and tidal energy offshore programs to accompany the drilling.
The new administration, meanwhile, is getting aggressive on the environmentalist front, canceling 77 oil and gas leases near Utah national parks, letting California and perhaps 13 more states increase auto emission restrictions, and dropping a Bush Administration appeal of a court decision on mercury emissions.
Economic and national security alike demand less dependence on foreign oil.
But energy alternatives must work. Nuclear power, hydrogen and our own oil all look more hopeful than ethanol and magic microbes.
BY INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Energy: A fortune was spent on ethanol development last year when gas prices were in the stratosphere. Now a lesson has been learned: Worshiping the false god of ethanol carries a high price.
A funny thing happened on the way to all the green profits that were supposed to be in the offing thanks to high prices at the gas pump.
As the New York Times reported this week, ethanol, "just recently a savior" as the Times headline put it, has been found sorely lacking in its much-touted miraculous powers to heal America's energy woes.
Corn ethanol plants "are shutting down virtually every week." An alternative energy trade group says at least 10 of the nation's 150 ethanol firms have closed some 24 plants in three months, with a dozen other companies in distress.
Little more than a year after the Democratic Congress passed legislation launching a massive national effort to convert farm crops and agricultural wastes into auto fuel, it's become clear that the production deadlines aimed at greenifying your local gas station can't and won't be met.
The many investors who were tripping all over themselves to finance biofuel plants last year are finding that going green can mean losing lots of green.
Congress had a grand plan: It would double corn ethanol use by 2015. And by 2022, 21 billion gallons of ethanol and biofuels would be made from formerly useless stuff, ranging from corn stubble to switchgrass to municipal waste.
But reality has hit like a ton of corn stalks. The inescapable facts are that corn prices remain at a market-set high, and converting the corn alternative cellulose into liquid fuel is prohibitively expensive.
And there are other problems. For one, corn ethanol gets worse mileage than gasoline. For another, ethanol's corrosiveness means it can't be shipped through regular pipelines like gasoline.
Faced with all this, investors betting on green seek a kind of biofuel breakthrough that would make it possible to surmount the current obstacles to converting organic waste and food to ethanol.
And the federal government has matched their wagers.
Last year, the Department of Energy agreed to spend tens of millions of dollars to see if a soil-based anaerobic bacterium classified as the "Q Microbe," discovered some years ago in the Massachusetts woods by a microbiologist at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, can turn feedstocks like corn stover, wheat straw and sorghum into ethanol.
Everything from food scraps, lumber waste, rice straw, yard trimmings, even dumped furniture and debris from construction sites can become the raw material of cellulosic ethanol, the DOE and the Department of Agriculture have said. The problem is, no one has yet used the process to make fuel that can compete with oil in either cost or quantity.
After all the pain of those high gas prices of the recent past, the American people would rather depend on what they know works: good old black gold. House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., this week conceded the political realities when he declared that "the ship has already sailed" in regard to drilling for new domestic oil.
Congress banned oil and natural gas exploration for 26 years over most of the Outer Continental Shelf, but it let the ban expire last fall amid a public outcry after oil prices peaked at $147 a barrel.
Will the Obama Administration now permit drilling? The new president seems to be putting in place a foot-dragging exercise on his campaign promise to provide drilling leases.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has announced fact-finding initiatives on drilling by the Minerals Management Service and the U.S. Geological Survey, as well as four regional meetings. Hand in hand with these moves are plans for wind, wave and tidal energy offshore programs to accompany the drilling.
The new administration, meanwhile, is getting aggressive on the environmentalist front, canceling 77 oil and gas leases near Utah national parks, letting California and perhaps 13 more states increase auto emission restrictions, and dropping a Bush Administration appeal of a court decision on mercury emissions.
Economic and national security alike demand less dependence on foreign oil.
But energy alternatives must work. Nuclear power, hydrogen and our own oil all look more hopeful than ethanol and magic microbes.
ARE THESE PUKES INNOCENT??
THIS WAS SENT BY A READER AND WE WANT TO THANK JIM VERY MUCH FOR HIS CONTRIBUTION. THIS ARTICLE IS ALSO APPEARING IN ANOTHER BLOG, WE ENCOURAGE ALL TO READ AND COMMENT TO YOUR NON COMPLIANT SENATORS AND CONGRESSMEN. JIM HAS OPENED THE CRACK IN THE WALL OF PERPETUAL CORRUPTION, THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, CORRUPT FROM TOP (OBAMA) TO BOTTOM (NEW SENATOR BEGICH). CALL AND PUT THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE.
$34,000: the amount of federal taxes that Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner (D) failed to pay during his employment at the International Monetary Fund despite receiving extra compensation and explanatory brochures that described his tax liabilities.
$75,000: the amount of money that the head of the powerful tax-writing committee, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), was forced to report on his taxes after the discovery that he had not reported income from a Costa Rican rental property. His excuses for the failure started with blaming his wife, then his accountant and finally the fact that he didn't speak Spanish.
$93,000: the amount of petty cash each Congressional representative voted to give themselves in January 2009 during the height of an economic meltdown.
$133,900: the amount Fannie Mae "invested" in Chris Dodd (D-CT), head of the powerful Senate Banking Committee, presumably to repel oversight of the GSE prior to its meltdown. Said meltdown helped touch off the current economic crisis. In only a few years time, Fannie also "invested" over $105,000 in then-Senator Barack Obama.
$140,000: the amount of back taxes and interest that Cabinet nominee Tom Daschle (D) was forced to cough up after the vetting process revealed significant, unexplained tax liabilities.
$356,000: the approximate amount of income and deductions that Daschle (D) was forced to report on his amended 2005 and 2007 tax returns after being caught cheating on his taxes. This includes $255,256 for the use of a car service, $83,333 in unreported income, and $14,963 in charitable contributions.
$800,000: the amount of "sweetheart" mortgages Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) received from Countrywide Financial, the details for which he has refused to release details despite months of promises to do so. Countrywide was once the nation's largest mortgage lender and linked to Government-Sponsored Entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their meltdown precipitated the current financial crisis. Just days ago in Pennsylvania , Countrywide was forced to pay $150,000,000 in mortgage assistance following "a state investigation that concluded that Countrywide relaxed its underwriting standards to sell risky loans to consumers who did not understand them and could not afford them."
$1,000,000: the estimated amount of donations by Denise Rich, wife of fugitive Marc Rich, to Democrat interests and the William J. Clinton Foundationin an apparent quid pro quo deal that resulted in a pardon for Mr. Rich. The pardon was reviewed and blessed by Obama Attorney General and then Deputy AG Eric Holder, despite numerous requests by government officials to turn it down.
$12,000,000: the amount of TARP money provided to community bank OneUnited despite the fact that it did not qualify for funds, and was "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses." It turns out that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), a key contributor to the Fannie Mae meltdown, just happens to be married to one of the bank's ex-directors.
$23,500,000: The upper range of net worth Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-WV) accumulated in four years time according to The Washington Post through earmarks of "tens of millions of dollars to groups associated with his own business partners."
$2,000,000,000: ($2 billion) the approximate amount of money that House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) is earmarking related to his son's lobbying efforts. Craig Obey is "a top lobbyist for the nonprofit group" that would receive a roughly $2 billion component of the "Stimulus" package.
$3,700,000,000: ($3.7 billion) not to be outdone, this is the estimated value of various defense contracts awarded to a company controlled by the husband of Rep. Diane Feinstein (D-CA). Despite an obvious conflict-of-interest as "a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms ."
$4,190,000,000: ($4.19 billion) the amount of money in the so-called "Stimulus" package devoted to fraudulent voter registration ACORN group under the auspices of "Community Stabilization Activities". ACORN is currently the subject of a RICO suit in Ohio.
$1,646,000,000,000 ($1.646 trillion): the approximate amount of annual United States exports endangered by the "Stimulus" package, which provides a "Buy American" stricture. According to international trade experts, a "US-EU trade war looms", which could result in a worldwide economic depression reminiscent of that touched off by the protectionist Smoot-Hawley Act.
It's not just a culture of corruption. It's a culture of corruption and stupidity.
All of the aforementioned clowns are still in office, ruling like the royalty they've become.
$34,000: the amount of federal taxes that Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner (D) failed to pay during his employment at the International Monetary Fund despite receiving extra compensation and explanatory brochures that described his tax liabilities.
$75,000: the amount of money that the head of the powerful tax-writing committee, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), was forced to report on his taxes after the discovery that he had not reported income from a Costa Rican rental property. His excuses for the failure started with blaming his wife, then his accountant and finally the fact that he didn't speak Spanish.
$93,000: the amount of petty cash each Congressional representative voted to give themselves in January 2009 during the height of an economic meltdown.
$133,900: the amount Fannie Mae "invested" in Chris Dodd (D-CT), head of the powerful Senate Banking Committee, presumably to repel oversight of the GSE prior to its meltdown. Said meltdown helped touch off the current economic crisis. In only a few years time, Fannie also "invested" over $105,000 in then-Senator Barack Obama.
$140,000: the amount of back taxes and interest that Cabinet nominee Tom Daschle (D) was forced to cough up after the vetting process revealed significant, unexplained tax liabilities.
$356,000: the approximate amount of income and deductions that Daschle (D) was forced to report on his amended 2005 and 2007 tax returns after being caught cheating on his taxes. This includes $255,256 for the use of a car service, $83,333 in unreported income, and $14,963 in charitable contributions.
$800,000: the amount of "sweetheart" mortgages Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) received from Countrywide Financial, the details for which he has refused to release details despite months of promises to do so. Countrywide was once the nation's largest mortgage lender and linked to Government-Sponsored Entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their meltdown precipitated the current financial crisis. Just days ago in Pennsylvania , Countrywide was forced to pay $150,000,000 in mortgage assistance following "a state investigation that concluded that Countrywide relaxed its underwriting standards to sell risky loans to consumers who did not understand them and could not afford them."
$1,000,000: the estimated amount of donations by Denise Rich, wife of fugitive Marc Rich, to Democrat interests and the William J. Clinton Foundationin an apparent quid pro quo deal that resulted in a pardon for Mr. Rich. The pardon was reviewed and blessed by Obama Attorney General and then Deputy AG Eric Holder, despite numerous requests by government officials to turn it down.
$12,000,000: the amount of TARP money provided to community bank OneUnited despite the fact that it did not qualify for funds, and was "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses." It turns out that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), a key contributor to the Fannie Mae meltdown, just happens to be married to one of the bank's ex-directors.
$23,500,000: The upper range of net worth Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-WV) accumulated in four years time according to The Washington Post through earmarks of "tens of millions of dollars to groups associated with his own business partners."
$2,000,000,000: ($2 billion) the approximate amount of money that House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) is earmarking related to his son's lobbying efforts. Craig Obey is "a top lobbyist for the nonprofit group" that would receive a roughly $2 billion component of the "Stimulus" package.
$3,700,000,000: ($3.7 billion) not to be outdone, this is the estimated value of various defense contracts awarded to a company controlled by the husband of Rep. Diane Feinstein (D-CA). Despite an obvious conflict-of-interest as "a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms ."
$4,190,000,000: ($4.19 billion) the amount of money in the so-called "Stimulus" package devoted to fraudulent voter registration ACORN group under the auspices of "Community Stabilization Activities". ACORN is currently the subject of a RICO suit in Ohio.
$1,646,000,000,000 ($1.646 trillion): the approximate amount of annual United States exports endangered by the "Stimulus" package, which provides a "Buy American" stricture. According to international trade experts, a "US-EU trade war looms", which could result in a worldwide economic depression reminiscent of that touched off by the protectionist Smoot-Hawley Act.
It's not just a culture of corruption. It's a culture of corruption and stupidity.
All of the aforementioned clowns are still in office, ruling like the royalty they've become.
'Historic' Stimulus Is Egregious Waste
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Economic Recovery: Congress is confident it will send President Obama a stimulus bill to sign by Monday's holiday. Unless something unforeseen happens, what lawmakers will put on his desk is a $789 billion waste.
The old quip that no one should watch while laws or sausages get made is true — especially with this Congress. America's legislative body has moved away from creating anything of value and instead habitually turns out things that belong in a landfill.
None have ever been more dump-worthy than the spending bill being sold as economic stimulus.
Harvard economist Robert Barro calls the legislation "probably the worst bill that has been put forward since the 1930s."
"I mean it's wasting a tremendous amount of money," he said in an interview with the Atlantic. "I don't think it will expand the economy. . . . I think it's garbage."
Rep. Tom Cole, Republican from Oklahoma, was a bit more refined but no less biting in his commentary. Borrowing from Winston Churchill, he wryly observed from the House floor Thursday morning that "Never have so few spent so much so quickly to do so little."
Lest anyone think that Barro or Cole is guilty of overstating the situation, consider what's in this monster:
• It overflows with pork — $2 billion to ACORN, an anti-capitalist "community" group that's been accused of voter registration fraud; $30 million to restore wetlands and save the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse in the San Francisco Bay Area (a Nancy Pelosi project); another $1 billion for a Prevention and Wellness Fund for education programs on sexually transmitted diseases.
Tens of billions will be spent on high-speed rail lines, which will be of little practical use but of great political service, and projects to expand high-speed Internet access in rural areas.
There's so much special-interest spending in the bill, says House Republican Leader Rep. John Boehner's office, that the dollars left over for direct small-business tax relief amount to only "about one-third of 1% of the total bill," a mere $3 billion out of a $789 billion package. Yet small businesses do most of the hiring in this country.
• The bulk of the spending comes not right away when the economy needs a boost, but in future years. This is typical. Legislative attempts to rescue the economy have been late in the last eight recessions going back to October 1949, when Congress passed an anti-recession bill just as the country was emerging from a 12-month downturn.
• By releasing $800 billion in new welfare spending over the next decade and undermining current work requirements, it will largely undo the successful 1996 welfare reform. Once again, Washington will be paying bonuses to states that expand their welfare rolls. In what world is increasing dependency on government a stimulus for the private economy?
• States that have spent recklessly for years will get bailouts when they should instead suffer the consequences of their actions. The compromise bill includes $54 billion to hand out to state and local governments, a perverse reward for elected officials who can't control their spending.
What's missing from the legislation is just as significant as what's included.
There are no tax cuts to boost investment, just a trifling $13 in tax relief per week that will appear on paychecks in the spring.
There's no real effort to boost energy production.
There's no meaningful defense spending.
Tax cuts initiated at the White House gave life to struggling economies in the 1960s, 1980s and earlier in this decade.
Rather than take money out of the private sector and sift it through Washington, from where it is doled out through the political process, it's more effective to let Americans keep more of what they earn. Tax relief spurs the investment that fuels business expansion, drives productivity upward and feeds job creation.
Helping almost instantly would be an increase in domestic energy production. If Washington were to enact public policy that allowed for more oil drilling and additional natural gas output, the markets would quickly react by cutting prices even more.
Also absent from the package is the stimulative effect of defense spending. Funding the research, development and production of military ware at private companies creates jobs, advances technological innovation and strengthens the security that's necessary for continued economic growth and improvements to the quality of American life.
The entire mess will eventually cost not $789 billion but $3.27 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office calculated that figure by including $744 billion in debt service and $2.527 trillion in spending over the next 10 years if the bill's 20 most popular programs are permanently extended, which seems likely. There's nothing in the history of government programs that indicates that won't happen.
History, though, is the most ignored subject in Washington. Not just American history, but history abroad.
How else could lawmakers rush into this effort? Right in front of them is the lesson of Japan, which made a series of unsuccessful attempts to stimulate its stagnant economy. It spent $6.3 trillion on infrastructure in the 1990s and into this decade, and in doing so amassed the largest debt ever known in the developed world.
Yet all that spending failed to pull Japan from its slump.
But like their Japanese counterparts, American lawmakers soon will return to the trough, demanding more taxpayer cash because, well, they just haven't spent enough to revive growth.
However, as they do, lawmakers might find taxpayers in a foul mood.
Rasmussen reports that 67% of Americans, when polled about the stimulus, say they "have more confidence in their own judgment than they do in the average member of Congress," while 58% agree that "no matter how bad things are, Congress can always find a way to make them worse."
Proving that an economic downturn hasn't caused them to abandon their sense of humor — nor their insight — 44% said they believe a group chosen at random from the phone book "would do a better job addressing the nation's problems than the current Congress."
Obama should study those numbers and consider the "consent of the governed" before he puts his name on this bad bill delivered by Congress. It would be good for both the country and his presidency if he sent the bill back to lawmakers and told them to listen to what the country is saying.
Back To Top
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, February 12, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Economic Recovery: Congress is confident it will send President Obama a stimulus bill to sign by Monday's holiday. Unless something unforeseen happens, what lawmakers will put on his desk is a $789 billion waste.
The old quip that no one should watch while laws or sausages get made is true — especially with this Congress. America's legislative body has moved away from creating anything of value and instead habitually turns out things that belong in a landfill.
None have ever been more dump-worthy than the spending bill being sold as economic stimulus.
Harvard economist Robert Barro calls the legislation "probably the worst bill that has been put forward since the 1930s."
"I mean it's wasting a tremendous amount of money," he said in an interview with the Atlantic. "I don't think it will expand the economy. . . . I think it's garbage."
Rep. Tom Cole, Republican from Oklahoma, was a bit more refined but no less biting in his commentary. Borrowing from Winston Churchill, he wryly observed from the House floor Thursday morning that "Never have so few spent so much so quickly to do so little."
Lest anyone think that Barro or Cole is guilty of overstating the situation, consider what's in this monster:
• It overflows with pork — $2 billion to ACORN, an anti-capitalist "community" group that's been accused of voter registration fraud; $30 million to restore wetlands and save the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse in the San Francisco Bay Area (a Nancy Pelosi project); another $1 billion for a Prevention and Wellness Fund for education programs on sexually transmitted diseases.
Tens of billions will be spent on high-speed rail lines, which will be of little practical use but of great political service, and projects to expand high-speed Internet access in rural areas.
There's so much special-interest spending in the bill, says House Republican Leader Rep. John Boehner's office, that the dollars left over for direct small-business tax relief amount to only "about one-third of 1% of the total bill," a mere $3 billion out of a $789 billion package. Yet small businesses do most of the hiring in this country.
• The bulk of the spending comes not right away when the economy needs a boost, but in future years. This is typical. Legislative attempts to rescue the economy have been late in the last eight recessions going back to October 1949, when Congress passed an anti-recession bill just as the country was emerging from a 12-month downturn.
• By releasing $800 billion in new welfare spending over the next decade and undermining current work requirements, it will largely undo the successful 1996 welfare reform. Once again, Washington will be paying bonuses to states that expand their welfare rolls. In what world is increasing dependency on government a stimulus for the private economy?
• States that have spent recklessly for years will get bailouts when they should instead suffer the consequences of their actions. The compromise bill includes $54 billion to hand out to state and local governments, a perverse reward for elected officials who can't control their spending.
What's missing from the legislation is just as significant as what's included.
There are no tax cuts to boost investment, just a trifling $13 in tax relief per week that will appear on paychecks in the spring.
There's no real effort to boost energy production.
There's no meaningful defense spending.
Tax cuts initiated at the White House gave life to struggling economies in the 1960s, 1980s and earlier in this decade.
Rather than take money out of the private sector and sift it through Washington, from where it is doled out through the political process, it's more effective to let Americans keep more of what they earn. Tax relief spurs the investment that fuels business expansion, drives productivity upward and feeds job creation.
Helping almost instantly would be an increase in domestic energy production. If Washington were to enact public policy that allowed for more oil drilling and additional natural gas output, the markets would quickly react by cutting prices even more.
Also absent from the package is the stimulative effect of defense spending. Funding the research, development and production of military ware at private companies creates jobs, advances technological innovation and strengthens the security that's necessary for continued economic growth and improvements to the quality of American life.
The entire mess will eventually cost not $789 billion but $3.27 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office calculated that figure by including $744 billion in debt service and $2.527 trillion in spending over the next 10 years if the bill's 20 most popular programs are permanently extended, which seems likely. There's nothing in the history of government programs that indicates that won't happen.
History, though, is the most ignored subject in Washington. Not just American history, but history abroad.
How else could lawmakers rush into this effort? Right in front of them is the lesson of Japan, which made a series of unsuccessful attempts to stimulate its stagnant economy. It spent $6.3 trillion on infrastructure in the 1990s and into this decade, and in doing so amassed the largest debt ever known in the developed world.
Yet all that spending failed to pull Japan from its slump.
But like their Japanese counterparts, American lawmakers soon will return to the trough, demanding more taxpayer cash because, well, they just haven't spent enough to revive growth.
However, as they do, lawmakers might find taxpayers in a foul mood.
Rasmussen reports that 67% of Americans, when polled about the stimulus, say they "have more confidence in their own judgment than they do in the average member of Congress," while 58% agree that "no matter how bad things are, Congress can always find a way to make them worse."
Proving that an economic downturn hasn't caused them to abandon their sense of humor — nor their insight — 44% said they believe a group chosen at random from the phone book "would do a better job addressing the nation's problems than the current Congress."
Obama should study those numbers and consider the "consent of the governed" before he puts his name on this bad bill delivered by Congress. It would be good for both the country and his presidency if he sent the bill back to lawmakers and told them to listen to what the country is saying.
Back To Top
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)