Meet the ACORN Eleven
Earlier this week, the Senate voted to eliminate ACORN funding from two of its annual appropriations bills. Yet despite numerous reports of fraud and corruption, eleven Senators voted to defend this criminal enterprise. Meet the ACORN Eleven:
Daniel Akaka (D-HI)
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
Roland Burris (D-IL)
Robert Casey (D-PA)
Dick Durbin (D-IL)
Diane Feinstein (D-CA)
Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
If you've had enough of ACORN and want Congress to end all taxpayer funding for it, sign our national petition to end ACORN.
And if you want to make the ACORN Eleven famous, make a contribution so we can tell their voters what they've done.
ObamaCare heads to committee
Next week, the Senate Finance Committee will consider the latest version of ObamaCare. Click here for 11 reasons to oppose it.
Please contact the Senators who sit on the committee and urge them to oppose this bill.
DEMOCRATS
Baucus (MT)
Rockefeller (WV)
Conrad (ND)
Bingaman (NM)
Kerry (MA)
Lincoln (AR)
Wyden (OR)
Schumer (NY)
Stabenow (MI)
Cantwell (WA)
Nelson (FL)
Menendez (NJ)
Carper (DE)
REPUBLICANS
Grassley (IA)
Hatch (UT)
Snowe (ME)
Kyl (AZ)
Bunning (KY)
Crapo (ID)
Roberts (KS)
Ensign (NV)
Enzi (WY)
Cornyn (TX)
RINObamaCare petition tops 20,000
Our national petition calling on Republicans to hold firm against ObamaCare topped 20,000 signatures this week.
President Obama has been inviting select Republicans to the White House as part of his ongoing campaign to get them to cave. We must keep up the pressure.
Help SCF continue to this campaign.
Friday, September 18, 2009
The Heritage Foundation
The Morning Bell
FRIDAY, September 18, 2009
You Can Help Free Our Energy Today
With the nation’s unemployment rate creeping ever closer to 10%, it is not surprising that Americans continue to rank the economy as the most important issue facing the country right now. Recognizing the link between a troubled economy and energy prices, last year 1.4 million Americans signed the “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” petition demanding that the federal government enact policies that will lower our nation’s energy costs. And Congress responded by ending our nation’s quarter-century ban on oil and natural gas drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.
Recent Entries
Shameful Surrender: Today’s Missile Defense Decision
In the Green Room: Dr. Liam Fox, Member of Parliament
Video: Heritage’s Nina Owcharenko on the O’Reilly Factor
If Obamacare Wins, Workers Lose
Guest Blogger: Congressman Robert Latta (R-OH) On Constitution Day
But this was just the first step Americans needed to take to free our energy from the myriad of bureaucratic restriction the enviro-left has placed between consumers and cheap energy. Before the development of our natural resources can begin, the Department of Interior must approve a five-year leasing plan detailing how federal sale of oil and gas leases in the offshore waters will take place. The case for developing our own natural resources is strong. An estimated 19 billion barrels of oil–nearly 30 years of current imports from Saudi Arabia–as well as substantial natural gas reserves are estimated to lie beneath these restricted areas. According to a 2008 Center for Data Analysis study, increasing domestic oil production by 1 million barrels per day would generate 128,000 jobs. At 2 million barrels per day, that figures jump to 270,000.
Unfortunately the Obama administration is allowing their “Green Job” fantasies to get in the way of cold hard facts and real American jobs. At an Interior Department field hearing this April in Atlantic City, Secretary Ken Salazar claimed ocean winds along the East Coast can generate 1 million megawatts of power, roughly the equivalent of 3,000 medium-sized coal-fired power plants, or nearly five times the number of coal plants now in the United States, according to the Energy Department. This is pure fiction. In 2007 the United States produced 23.48 quadrillion Btus of power from coal. Wind produced .319 quadrillion Btus. Salazar wants the American people to believe we can increase our wind power production by 7,300%. That is unrealistic.
Despite all the rhetoric you hear about the rest of the world abandoning fossil fuels to avoid global warming, their actions show where their real priorities are. Brazil, whose beautiful beaches rival or even surpass anything in California or Florida, recently discovered a huge underwater oil field and it is moving quickly to begin drilling. In Asia, China and Japan were able to put aside centuries of mistrust to come to an agreement on how to drill and share oil in waters in between their countries. Germany plans to build 27 coal-fired plants by 2020. Italy plans to increase its reliance on coal from 14% today to 33% in just five years. In all of Europe, 40 new major coal power plants are set to be built in the next five years. In 2006 alone, China completed enough coal power plants to match all of Britain’s capacity. India plans to boost coal production by 50% by 2012 and quadruple it by 2030.
The rest of the world gets it: in order to compete in today’s global economy countries must maximize the energy potential of all their natural resources. The Obama administration would be forcing American businesses to compete with one hand tied behind our back if they favor costly, inefficient, and unproven renewable energy to the exclusion of all other U.S. resources.
But there is something you can do about it. Any regulatory framework created by the Obama Interior Department can be fought in court. And Federal law requires the Obama Administration to solicit comments from the American people and substantively respond to them before any regulation can attain the force of law. One factor that courts must consider when a regulation is challenged is how the government addressed citizen comments on the proposed regulation. Last year, 30,000 of you submitted a comment through StopEPA.com to the Environmental Protection Agency asking it to not move forward with carbon dioxide regulations. This year, people are voicing their support for offshore drilling by going to FreeOurEnergy.com and submitting a comment. You can too. Now is not the time to turn back.
Let the Obama Administration know that you support domestic oil exploration. Then forward today’s Morning Bell to five of your friends. Visit FreeOurEnergy.com to make your voices heard. The deadline is Monday, September 21st at midnight. So hurry!
FRIDAY, September 18, 2009
You Can Help Free Our Energy Today
With the nation’s unemployment rate creeping ever closer to 10%, it is not surprising that Americans continue to rank the economy as the most important issue facing the country right now. Recognizing the link between a troubled economy and energy prices, last year 1.4 million Americans signed the “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” petition demanding that the federal government enact policies that will lower our nation’s energy costs. And Congress responded by ending our nation’s quarter-century ban on oil and natural gas drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.
Recent Entries
Shameful Surrender: Today’s Missile Defense Decision
In the Green Room: Dr. Liam Fox, Member of Parliament
Video: Heritage’s Nina Owcharenko on the O’Reilly Factor
If Obamacare Wins, Workers Lose
Guest Blogger: Congressman Robert Latta (R-OH) On Constitution Day
But this was just the first step Americans needed to take to free our energy from the myriad of bureaucratic restriction the enviro-left has placed between consumers and cheap energy. Before the development of our natural resources can begin, the Department of Interior must approve a five-year leasing plan detailing how federal sale of oil and gas leases in the offshore waters will take place. The case for developing our own natural resources is strong. An estimated 19 billion barrels of oil–nearly 30 years of current imports from Saudi Arabia–as well as substantial natural gas reserves are estimated to lie beneath these restricted areas. According to a 2008 Center for Data Analysis study, increasing domestic oil production by 1 million barrels per day would generate 128,000 jobs. At 2 million barrels per day, that figures jump to 270,000.
Unfortunately the Obama administration is allowing their “Green Job” fantasies to get in the way of cold hard facts and real American jobs. At an Interior Department field hearing this April in Atlantic City, Secretary Ken Salazar claimed ocean winds along the East Coast can generate 1 million megawatts of power, roughly the equivalent of 3,000 medium-sized coal-fired power plants, or nearly five times the number of coal plants now in the United States, according to the Energy Department. This is pure fiction. In 2007 the United States produced 23.48 quadrillion Btus of power from coal. Wind produced .319 quadrillion Btus. Salazar wants the American people to believe we can increase our wind power production by 7,300%. That is unrealistic.
Despite all the rhetoric you hear about the rest of the world abandoning fossil fuels to avoid global warming, their actions show where their real priorities are. Brazil, whose beautiful beaches rival or even surpass anything in California or Florida, recently discovered a huge underwater oil field and it is moving quickly to begin drilling. In Asia, China and Japan were able to put aside centuries of mistrust to come to an agreement on how to drill and share oil in waters in between their countries. Germany plans to build 27 coal-fired plants by 2020. Italy plans to increase its reliance on coal from 14% today to 33% in just five years. In all of Europe, 40 new major coal power plants are set to be built in the next five years. In 2006 alone, China completed enough coal power plants to match all of Britain’s capacity. India plans to boost coal production by 50% by 2012 and quadruple it by 2030.
The rest of the world gets it: in order to compete in today’s global economy countries must maximize the energy potential of all their natural resources. The Obama administration would be forcing American businesses to compete with one hand tied behind our back if they favor costly, inefficient, and unproven renewable energy to the exclusion of all other U.S. resources.
But there is something you can do about it. Any regulatory framework created by the Obama Interior Department can be fought in court. And Federal law requires the Obama Administration to solicit comments from the American people and substantively respond to them before any regulation can attain the force of law. One factor that courts must consider when a regulation is challenged is how the government addressed citizen comments on the proposed regulation. Last year, 30,000 of you submitted a comment through StopEPA.com to the Environmental Protection Agency asking it to not move forward with carbon dioxide regulations. This year, people are voicing their support for offshore drilling by going to FreeOurEnergy.com and submitting a comment. You can too. Now is not the time to turn back.
Let the Obama Administration know that you support domestic oil exploration. Then forward today’s Morning Bell to five of your friends. Visit FreeOurEnergy.com to make your voices heard. The deadline is Monday, September 21st at midnight. So hurry!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Madame Speaker
Madame Speaker tried to turn on the tears today but all that botox and stretching probably closed the tear ducts.
This woman is the most hypocritical person to hold that position in years.
I don't beleive she would be unfeeling with her immediate family but I do beleive she is one of the most ugly minded individuals I've ever seen and heard all in the name of ideology.
That spectecal today was a lame attempt at drumming up emmotions for who knows what. As a matter of fact I think the pressure is getting to her. She knows next year alot of her pals are going to end up on the political rubbish heap and she knows that she will be sacificing a few in the name of ideology
No normal hard working American would want anything to happen to the President even if his policies are crap. We just buck up and vote his ignorant ass out of office plain and simple. Just like we will be doing next year with the shlubs in the House.
MGC
This woman is the most hypocritical person to hold that position in years.
I don't beleive she would be unfeeling with her immediate family but I do beleive she is one of the most ugly minded individuals I've ever seen and heard all in the name of ideology.
That spectecal today was a lame attempt at drumming up emmotions for who knows what. As a matter of fact I think the pressure is getting to her. She knows next year alot of her pals are going to end up on the political rubbish heap and she knows that she will be sacificing a few in the name of ideology
No normal hard working American would want anything to happen to the President even if his policies are crap. We just buck up and vote his ignorant ass out of office plain and simple. Just like we will be doing next year with the shlubs in the House.
MGC
My Heritage
September 17, 2009 | By Amanda Reinecker
Obama cuts missile defense
The Obama administration intends to cut key components of America's missile defense shield, it has been revealed. Plans to install missile interceptors in Poland and a tracking station in the Czech Republic have been called off, apparently in an effort to win concessions from Russia.
Nile Gardiner, director of The Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, explains in Britain's Telegraph what the deal means for America's national security and overseas alliances:
This is bad news for all who care about the US commitment to the transatlantic alliance and the defence of Europe as well as the United States. It represents the appalling appeasement of Russian aggression and a willingness to sacrifice American allies on the altar of political expediency. A deal with the Russians to cancel missile defence installations sends a clear message that even Washington can be intimidated by the Russian bear.
What signal does this send to Ukraine, Georgia and a host of other former Soviet satellites who look to America and NATO for protection from their powerful neighbour? The impending cancellation of Third Site is a shameful abandonment of America's friends in eastern and central Europe, and a slap in the face for those who actually believed a key agreement with Washington was worth the paper it was written on.
It's important that America and her allies deploy an effective defense against missiles from Iran and elsewhere, Heritage's Sally McNamara writes:
As President Obama looks to defend the United States against such rogue regimes, missile defense is a tried, tested and trusted protection strategy. The placing of missile defenses outside of the U.S. as well as on the Homeland reinforces America's long-held commitment to the NATO alliance. To make America and her allies deliberately vulnerable to ballistic missile or nuclear attack makes no sense. In an age where America's enemies have ballistic missile capabilities, the United States must have missile defense technologies.
Missile defenses have already demonstrated their value this year. In June, Heritage's Bruce Klingner argued that the deployment of a missile shield to Hawaii was "a proper and prudent response" to North Korean provocations. Such a defense is all the more important since "international diplomatic pressure has failed to deter Pyongyang."
In a recent analysis, Heritage experts debunk common myths about missile defense, including the claims that it doesn't work, that it's too expensive and that we don't need it.
Missile defenses have long been a key priority for The Heritage Foundation. Our experts laid the groundwork for President Reagan's initial Strategic Defense Initiative, and we worked with the Bush administration to ensure the program developed further.
Earlier this year, The Heritage Foundation released a full-length documentary on the importance of missile defenses. Watch a trailer of the film, 33 Minutes: Protecting America in the New Missile Age and sign up to host a screening in your home.
- Nathaniel Ward
Constitution Day
On this day in 1787, the Founders signed the United States Constitution. Today we remember that occasion as Constitution Day, and set the day aside to celebrate and reflect on the wisdom of those who crafted the document.
Obama cuts missile defense
The Obama administration intends to cut key components of America's missile defense shield, it has been revealed. Plans to install missile interceptors in Poland and a tracking station in the Czech Republic have been called off, apparently in an effort to win concessions from Russia.
Nile Gardiner, director of The Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, explains in Britain's Telegraph what the deal means for America's national security and overseas alliances:
This is bad news for all who care about the US commitment to the transatlantic alliance and the defence of Europe as well as the United States. It represents the appalling appeasement of Russian aggression and a willingness to sacrifice American allies on the altar of political expediency. A deal with the Russians to cancel missile defence installations sends a clear message that even Washington can be intimidated by the Russian bear.
What signal does this send to Ukraine, Georgia and a host of other former Soviet satellites who look to America and NATO for protection from their powerful neighbour? The impending cancellation of Third Site is a shameful abandonment of America's friends in eastern and central Europe, and a slap in the face for those who actually believed a key agreement with Washington was worth the paper it was written on.
It's important that America and her allies deploy an effective defense against missiles from Iran and elsewhere, Heritage's Sally McNamara writes:
As President Obama looks to defend the United States against such rogue regimes, missile defense is a tried, tested and trusted protection strategy. The placing of missile defenses outside of the U.S. as well as on the Homeland reinforces America's long-held commitment to the NATO alliance. To make America and her allies deliberately vulnerable to ballistic missile or nuclear attack makes no sense. In an age where America's enemies have ballistic missile capabilities, the United States must have missile defense technologies.
Missile defenses have already demonstrated their value this year. In June, Heritage's Bruce Klingner argued that the deployment of a missile shield to Hawaii was "a proper and prudent response" to North Korean provocations. Such a defense is all the more important since "international diplomatic pressure has failed to deter Pyongyang."
In a recent analysis, Heritage experts debunk common myths about missile defense, including the claims that it doesn't work, that it's too expensive and that we don't need it.
Missile defenses have long been a key priority for The Heritage Foundation. Our experts laid the groundwork for President Reagan's initial Strategic Defense Initiative, and we worked with the Bush administration to ensure the program developed further.
Earlier this year, The Heritage Foundation released a full-length documentary on the importance of missile defenses. Watch a trailer of the film, 33 Minutes: Protecting America in the New Missile Age and sign up to host a screening in your home.
- Nathaniel Ward
Constitution Day
On this day in 1787, the Founders signed the United States Constitution. Today we remember that occasion as Constitution Day, and set the day aside to celebrate and reflect on the wisdom of those who crafted the document.
The Morning Bell
The Morning Bell
THURSDAY, SEPT 17, 2009
Surrender and Betrayal Do Not Make Us Safer
Last month we reported that news outlets in Poland were saying that the Obama administration had made the decision to abandon our anti-missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. Today Czech Premier Jan Fischer confirmed those reports telling reporters that President Obama phoned him overnight to say that “his government is pulling out of plans to build a missile defense radar on Czech territory.”
Recent Entries
Flawed Baucus Bill is Not the Roadmap
Stimulus Is Destroying, Not Creating Jobs
More on Swine Flu and You
Why Unions Are Decertifying
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/09/16/congress-continues-to-deny-reality-of-medicaid/
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Obama administration is justifying its decision on their determination that Iran’s long-range missile program hasn’t progressed as rapidly as previously estimated. This despite the facts that:
On February 2nd, Iran successfully launched a satellite into orbit using a rocket with technology similar to that used in a long-range ballistic missile.
On May 20th, Iran test-fired a 1200-mile solid-fueled two-stage ballistic missile.
On July 15th, Germany’s foreign intelligence service, BND, announced that Iran will be able to produce and test a nuclear weapon within six months. BND also stated that it has “no doubt” that Iran’s missile program is aimed solely at the production of nuclear warheads.
On August 3rd, The Times of London reported that Western intelligence sources concluded that Iran has not only perfected the technology to build and detonate a nuclear weapon, could assemble a weapon in just six months, and could deliver the weapon on Iran’s Shebab-3 ballistic missile.
Just yesterday French President Nicolas Sarkozy said: “It is a certainty to all of our secret services. Iran is working today on a nuclear [weapons] program.”
The only country other than Iran that is happy with President Obama’s decision is Russia. State Duma foreign affairs committee head Konstantin Kosachev told the Associated Press: “The U.S. president’s decision is a well-thought (out) and systematic one. Now we can talk about restoration of (the) strategic partnership between Russia and the United States.” But, in fact, the missile defense capitulation is just one in a long line of Obama surrenders to Russia. Heritage fellow Ariel Cohen explains from Moscow:
All these concessions the Russians pocketed, smiled, and moved on to new demands: European security reconfiguration; additional global reserve currency which would weaken the dollar; and a strong push-back on sanctions against the Iranian nuclear program. …. While the Russians clearly like the better atmospherics, and somewhat toned down the shrill anti-American rhetoric, the Iranians and the Venezuelans, who also received Obama’s “stretched hand” and, in case of Hugo Chavez, a pat on the back, are refusing to play ball. They, like their friends in Moscow, are also pocketing concessions while continuing the mischief.
The decision to abandon the “third site” deployment of 10 missile interceptors in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic violates President Obama’s pledge to support missile defense that is “pragmatic and cost-effective.” Ground based missile defense is effective, affordable, and available now. According to the Congressional Budget Office, alternatives to the third site do not provide a comparable level of defense. The CBO concluded that the estimated $9-14 billion 20-year cost of the third site was half of the estimated costs of a sea-based alternative. Abandoning our best missile defense option in Europe only encourages Iran to speed up their ballistic missile program so that they can get their threat in place before a European missile defense system is available.
The Poles and the Czechs know what it means to live under the boot of Russian domination. The third-site issue is of huge symbolic importance to both nations, and if Moscow emerges the victor, with an effective veto over U.S. policy in Europe, it would represent a massive surrender of American strategic influence and a betrayal of two of its closest friends in the region.
Go to 33minutes.com for more on missile defense, the threat posed to us and our allies by nuclear weapons, and the action plan necessary to revive a strategic missile defense system that only America can develop, maintain, and employ for its own defense and the peace-loving world’s security.
QUICK HITS
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) joined the anti-czar criticism of the Obama administration yesterday, sending a letter to the White House asking Obama to detail the roles and responsibilities of all of the czars in his administration and to explain why he believes the use of czars is consistent with the Senate’s constitutional power to offer advice and consent on top-level executive branch officials.
Celebrate Constitution Day by reading former-Attorney General Ed Meese’s The Meaning Of The Constitution essay.
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) said Sen. Max Baucus’ (D-MT) health care won’t work for Nevada, explaining: “During this time of economic crisis, our state cannot afford to shoulder the second highest increase in Medicaid funding.”
According to Gallup, 56% of Americans do not believe President Obama’s claims that he can fund his health care plan through cost savings in Medicare and other parts of the existing health care system.
The Senate voted 52-45 yesterday to preserve millions of dollars in federal funding for road signs promoting President Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package.
THURSDAY, SEPT 17, 2009
Surrender and Betrayal Do Not Make Us Safer
Last month we reported that news outlets in Poland were saying that the Obama administration had made the decision to abandon our anti-missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. Today Czech Premier Jan Fischer confirmed those reports telling reporters that President Obama phoned him overnight to say that “his government is pulling out of plans to build a missile defense radar on Czech territory.”
Recent Entries
Flawed Baucus Bill is Not the Roadmap
Stimulus Is Destroying, Not Creating Jobs
More on Swine Flu and You
Why Unions Are Decertifying
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/09/16/congress-continues-to-deny-reality-of-medicaid/
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Obama administration is justifying its decision on their determination that Iran’s long-range missile program hasn’t progressed as rapidly as previously estimated. This despite the facts that:
On February 2nd, Iran successfully launched a satellite into orbit using a rocket with technology similar to that used in a long-range ballistic missile.
On May 20th, Iran test-fired a 1200-mile solid-fueled two-stage ballistic missile.
On July 15th, Germany’s foreign intelligence service, BND, announced that Iran will be able to produce and test a nuclear weapon within six months. BND also stated that it has “no doubt” that Iran’s missile program is aimed solely at the production of nuclear warheads.
On August 3rd, The Times of London reported that Western intelligence sources concluded that Iran has not only perfected the technology to build and detonate a nuclear weapon, could assemble a weapon in just six months, and could deliver the weapon on Iran’s Shebab-3 ballistic missile.
Just yesterday French President Nicolas Sarkozy said: “It is a certainty to all of our secret services. Iran is working today on a nuclear [weapons] program.”
The only country other than Iran that is happy with President Obama’s decision is Russia. State Duma foreign affairs committee head Konstantin Kosachev told the Associated Press: “The U.S. president’s decision is a well-thought (out) and systematic one. Now we can talk about restoration of (the) strategic partnership between Russia and the United States.” But, in fact, the missile defense capitulation is just one in a long line of Obama surrenders to Russia. Heritage fellow Ariel Cohen explains from Moscow:
All these concessions the Russians pocketed, smiled, and moved on to new demands: European security reconfiguration; additional global reserve currency which would weaken the dollar; and a strong push-back on sanctions against the Iranian nuclear program. …. While the Russians clearly like the better atmospherics, and somewhat toned down the shrill anti-American rhetoric, the Iranians and the Venezuelans, who also received Obama’s “stretched hand” and, in case of Hugo Chavez, a pat on the back, are refusing to play ball. They, like their friends in Moscow, are also pocketing concessions while continuing the mischief.
The decision to abandon the “third site” deployment of 10 missile interceptors in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic violates President Obama’s pledge to support missile defense that is “pragmatic and cost-effective.” Ground based missile defense is effective, affordable, and available now. According to the Congressional Budget Office, alternatives to the third site do not provide a comparable level of defense. The CBO concluded that the estimated $9-14 billion 20-year cost of the third site was half of the estimated costs of a sea-based alternative. Abandoning our best missile defense option in Europe only encourages Iran to speed up their ballistic missile program so that they can get their threat in place before a European missile defense system is available.
The Poles and the Czechs know what it means to live under the boot of Russian domination. The third-site issue is of huge symbolic importance to both nations, and if Moscow emerges the victor, with an effective veto over U.S. policy in Europe, it would represent a massive surrender of American strategic influence and a betrayal of two of its closest friends in the region.
Go to 33minutes.com for more on missile defense, the threat posed to us and our allies by nuclear weapons, and the action plan necessary to revive a strategic missile defense system that only America can develop, maintain, and employ for its own defense and the peace-loving world’s security.
QUICK HITS
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) joined the anti-czar criticism of the Obama administration yesterday, sending a letter to the White House asking Obama to detail the roles and responsibilities of all of the czars in his administration and to explain why he believes the use of czars is consistent with the Senate’s constitutional power to offer advice and consent on top-level executive branch officials.
Celebrate Constitution Day by reading former-Attorney General Ed Meese’s The Meaning Of The Constitution essay.
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) said Sen. Max Baucus’ (D-MT) health care won’t work for Nevada, explaining: “During this time of economic crisis, our state cannot afford to shoulder the second highest increase in Medicaid funding.”
According to Gallup, 56% of Americans do not believe President Obama’s claims that he can fund his health care plan through cost savings in Medicare and other parts of the existing health care system.
The Senate voted 52-45 yesterday to preserve millions of dollars in federal funding for road signs promoting President Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package.
REPUBLICAN LEADER OFFICE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 17, 2009 | PERMALINK
CONTACT: Michael Steel, Antonia Ferrier, Kevin Smith - (202) 225-4000
Boehner: House Passage of Defund ACORN Act “A Victory for American Taxpayer
Washington, DC - House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement after the House of Representatives voted 345-75 to pass the Defund ACORN Act:
“Today’s overwhelming bipartisan vote to stop all federal funding of ACORN is a victory for American taxpayers. Of course, it is only the beginning. We need to keep up the fight to end taxpayer funding for this troubled organization.
“House Republicans have worked tirelessly to sever ACORN’s ties to the federal government. Those efforts began to bear fruit late last week when the Census Bureau ended its relationship with ACORN under steady pressure from Republican lawmakers. Though today’s vote indicates that the writing’s on the wall for ACORN, President Obama must indicate whether he will join the Congress in taking decisive action to break all government ties with this corrupt organization.
“I’d like to applaud Oversight & Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA), Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), and Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) for the great work they and other House Republicans have done to hold ACORN accountable for its abuse of taxpayer dollars and the public trust.”
NOTE: Earlier this week, Leader Boehner introduced H.R. 3571, the Defund ACORN Act, which has now been adopted as part of H.R. 3221, the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009. An analysis of federal data by the Office of the Republican Leader staff determined that ACORN has received more than $53 million in direct funding from the federal government since 1994, and has likely received substantially more indirectly through states and localities that receive federal block grants. House Republicans have also sent a letter to President Obama asking him to use his authority to end all funding to and break all government ties with ACORN.
CONTACT: Michael Steel, Antonia Ferrier, Kevin Smith - (202) 225-4000
Boehner: House Passage of Defund ACORN Act “A Victory for American Taxpayer
Washington, DC - House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement after the House of Representatives voted 345-75 to pass the Defund ACORN Act:
“Today’s overwhelming bipartisan vote to stop all federal funding of ACORN is a victory for American taxpayers. Of course, it is only the beginning. We need to keep up the fight to end taxpayer funding for this troubled organization.
“House Republicans have worked tirelessly to sever ACORN’s ties to the federal government. Those efforts began to bear fruit late last week when the Census Bureau ended its relationship with ACORN under steady pressure from Republican lawmakers. Though today’s vote indicates that the writing’s on the wall for ACORN, President Obama must indicate whether he will join the Congress in taking decisive action to break all government ties with this corrupt organization.
“I’d like to applaud Oversight & Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA), Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), and Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) for the great work they and other House Republicans have done to hold ACORN accountable for its abuse of taxpayer dollars and the public trust.”
NOTE: Earlier this week, Leader Boehner introduced H.R. 3571, the Defund ACORN Act, which has now been adopted as part of H.R. 3221, the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009. An analysis of federal data by the Office of the Republican Leader staff determined that ACORN has received more than $53 million in direct funding from the federal government since 1994, and has likely received substantially more indirectly through states and localities that receive federal block grants. House Republicans have also sent a letter to President Obama asking him to use his authority to end all funding to and break all government ties with ACORN.
GOP LEADER ALERT 9-17-09
ACORN’S ENABLERS: HOUSE DEMOCRATS’ LENGTHY RECORD OF PROTECTING A TROUBLED ORGANIZATION
WILL DEMOCRATS SUPPORT HOUSE GOP’S DEFUND ACORN ACT?; MORE THAN $53 MILLION IN FEDERAL FUNDING HAS GONE TO ACORN SINCE 1994
September 17, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
While House Republicans have renewed their efforts to end federal funding for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) once and for all, a look back at just the past year reveals the countless opportunities Majority Democrats had to join Republicans in reining in ACORN. Instead, they rejected numerous attempts by House Republicans to cut off the flow of taxpayer dollars and bring much-needed transparency to an organization whose employees have recently been accused of serious crimes.
THE “POWERS THAT BE” SAID ‘NO’
Following testimony about ACORN at a subcommittee hearing on the 2008 election, Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) declared the accusations against ACORN a “pretty serious matter” and suggested that the committee examine them. Conyers later put a stop to the idea, saying that “[t]he powers that be decided against it.” Who exactly are the “powers that be”? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)? Other Democratic leaders? The Administration?
KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) offered an amendment to the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act (H.R 1728) during a Financial Services Committee markup to ban groups like ACORN from receiving housing counseling and legal assistance funds, and the amendment was accepted by voice vote. The next day, Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) said that he “made a mistake” by accepting Bachmann’s amendment and stated his intent to “correct” it. Frank offered his amendment to weaken Bachmann’s amendment on the House floor, and it passed by a vote of 245-176 on May 7, 2009.
Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) filed an amendment to the Democrats’ trillion-dollar “stimulus” – officially mis-named as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (H.R. 1) – with the Rules Committee to prohibit non-profit groups such as ACORN from receiving federal funds. However, the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee refused to make the amendment in order for consideration on the House floor on January 27, 2009.
Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) offered an amendment to the Financial Services Committee’s Budget Views and Estimates that would have instituted safeguards against and restrictions to groups such as ACORN receiving taxpayer dollars. It was defeated by a roll call vote of 27-37 in the Financial Services Committee on March 11, 2009.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) offered an amendment to the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act (H.R. 1728) to require ACORN and affiliated organizations to provide for more transparency and accountability with any funds received under this legislation. It was defeated by voice vote in the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee on May 6, 2009.
Rep. Steve King (R-IA) offered an amendment to the Enhancing Small Business Research and Innovation Act (H.R. 2965) to prohibit ACORN and its affiliate organizations from participating in a rural development and outreach program. It was defeated by a roll call vote of 4-7 in the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee on July 7, 2009.
Rep. King offered an amendment to the FY 2010 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act (H.R. 3288) to prohibit funds in the bill from being made available to ACORN or any of its affiliate organizations. It was defeated by a roll call vote of 2-7 in the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee on July 22, 2009.
Rep. King and Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) offered amendment to the FY 2010 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act (H.R. 3293) to prohibit funding in the bill from being made available to ACORN or any of its affiliate organizations. It was defeated by a roll call vote of 4-7 in the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee on July 23, 2009.
The Majority now has yet another opportunity to join House Republicans in severing all ties between the federal government and ACORN by supporting the Defund ACORN Act (H.R. 3571). Enough is enough. The American people are tired of seeing their tax dollars wasted on an organization accused of serious crimes and they want to defund ACORN once and for all. House Democrats have a choice to make: Will they side with American taxpayers, or will they continue to protect ACORN?
WILL DEMOCRATS SUPPORT HOUSE GOP’S DEFUND ACORN ACT?; MORE THAN $53 MILLION IN FEDERAL FUNDING HAS GONE TO ACORN SINCE 1994
September 17, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
While House Republicans have renewed their efforts to end federal funding for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) once and for all, a look back at just the past year reveals the countless opportunities Majority Democrats had to join Republicans in reining in ACORN. Instead, they rejected numerous attempts by House Republicans to cut off the flow of taxpayer dollars and bring much-needed transparency to an organization whose employees have recently been accused of serious crimes.
THE “POWERS THAT BE” SAID ‘NO’
Following testimony about ACORN at a subcommittee hearing on the 2008 election, Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) declared the accusations against ACORN a “pretty serious matter” and suggested that the committee examine them. Conyers later put a stop to the idea, saying that “[t]he powers that be decided against it.” Who exactly are the “powers that be”? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)? Other Democratic leaders? The Administration?
KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) offered an amendment to the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act (H.R 1728) during a Financial Services Committee markup to ban groups like ACORN from receiving housing counseling and legal assistance funds, and the amendment was accepted by voice vote. The next day, Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) said that he “made a mistake” by accepting Bachmann’s amendment and stated his intent to “correct” it. Frank offered his amendment to weaken Bachmann’s amendment on the House floor, and it passed by a vote of 245-176 on May 7, 2009.
Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) filed an amendment to the Democrats’ trillion-dollar “stimulus” – officially mis-named as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (H.R. 1) – with the Rules Committee to prohibit non-profit groups such as ACORN from receiving federal funds. However, the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee refused to make the amendment in order for consideration on the House floor on January 27, 2009.
Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) offered an amendment to the Financial Services Committee’s Budget Views and Estimates that would have instituted safeguards against and restrictions to groups such as ACORN receiving taxpayer dollars. It was defeated by a roll call vote of 27-37 in the Financial Services Committee on March 11, 2009.
Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) offered an amendment to the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act (H.R. 1728) to require ACORN and affiliated organizations to provide for more transparency and accountability with any funds received under this legislation. It was defeated by voice vote in the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee on May 6, 2009.
Rep. Steve King (R-IA) offered an amendment to the Enhancing Small Business Research and Innovation Act (H.R. 2965) to prohibit ACORN and its affiliate organizations from participating in a rural development and outreach program. It was defeated by a roll call vote of 4-7 in the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee on July 7, 2009.
Rep. King offered an amendment to the FY 2010 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act (H.R. 3288) to prohibit funds in the bill from being made available to ACORN or any of its affiliate organizations. It was defeated by a roll call vote of 2-7 in the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee on July 22, 2009.
Rep. King and Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) offered amendment to the FY 2010 Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act (H.R. 3293) to prohibit funding in the bill from being made available to ACORN or any of its affiliate organizations. It was defeated by a roll call vote of 4-7 in the Democratic-controlled Rules Committee on July 23, 2009.
The Majority now has yet another opportunity to join House Republicans in severing all ties between the federal government and ACORN by supporting the Defund ACORN Act (H.R. 3571). Enough is enough. The American people are tired of seeing their tax dollars wasted on an organization accused of serious crimes and they want to defund ACORN once and for all. House Democrats have a choice to make: Will they side with American taxpayers, or will they continue to protect ACORN?
Cap And Trade Calamities
Do We Want a Carbon Label Footprint on Everything We Buy?
Waxman-Markey proposes a new national tax of historic proportions
Related Links
Treasury Admits Cap and Trade is a Tax
New Vehicle Standards Mean High Priced and Unsafe Cars Americans Don’t Want
Heritage's Research on the Cap and Trade Global Warming Bill
If cap and trade passes, businesses could soon face “The Scarlet Letter” treatment. They may have to include a carbon label on their products that tells consumers how much carbon dioxide is used in the production process. Cap and trade would already raise production costs for businesses—forcing them to include a carbon label on their products is salt in the wound.
Section 274 of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill calls for an Environmental Protection Agency study “to determine the feasibility of establishing a national program for measuring, reporting, publicly disclosing, and labeling products or materials sold in the United States for their carbon content.” The purpose of the study would be to determine “whether a national product carbon disclosure program and labeling program would be effective in achieving the intended goals of achieving greenhouse gas reductions.”
That’s right. Next to your nutrition label or safety warning, you could see a carbon footprint telling you how much carbon dioxide businesses emitted to make that product. Sounds harmless. Silly, but harmless. But it may be more harmful than imagined—think of the additional costs this would place on businesses.
This could particularly hit smaller businesses the hardest and put those them at a competitive disadvantage with larger firms within the United States who can absorb the costs more easily. We can look to the food nutritional label and a study by the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University as an example. The Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) went into effect in 1994 and was the beginning of the nutritional facts label. The intent was to provide consumers with the information to make healthier choices and provide producers the incentive to make healthier products. These are certainly commendable goals but according to one study, “considering the relatively small magnitude of diet quality improvements from label use, it appears possible that even when consumers read labels, they do not always understand them.”
And these labels do not come without cost. The Food and Drug Administration estimated that the NLEA would cost industry $1.4 billion to $2.3 billion over a 20-year period. These increased costs led to an increased market share for large food distributors.
Christine Moorman, an author of the study said, “We expected that label information would allow firms to compete more honestly for consumers’ purchases, but instead we find an unintended loss of small firms in food categories.”
A carbon label would likely do the same but instead it affects every industry. Will consumers feel guilty about buying a product with a hefty carbon footprint? Will producers feel guilty enough to produce more carbon-friendly products?
The real question is: Does it make sense to increase the costs of products like orange juice when Al Gore lives in a 20-room, eight-bathroom carbon-spitting mansion? (According to a BusinessWeek article, “The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.”)
Bottom line—a carbon labeling program is more government micromanagement that spells higher prices for consumers.
Waxman-Markey proposes a new national tax of historic proportions
Related Links
Treasury Admits Cap and Trade is a Tax
New Vehicle Standards Mean High Priced and Unsafe Cars Americans Don’t Want
Heritage's Research on the Cap and Trade Global Warming Bill
If cap and trade passes, businesses could soon face “The Scarlet Letter” treatment. They may have to include a carbon label on their products that tells consumers how much carbon dioxide is used in the production process. Cap and trade would already raise production costs for businesses—forcing them to include a carbon label on their products is salt in the wound.
Section 274 of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill calls for an Environmental Protection Agency study “to determine the feasibility of establishing a national program for measuring, reporting, publicly disclosing, and labeling products or materials sold in the United States for their carbon content.” The purpose of the study would be to determine “whether a national product carbon disclosure program and labeling program would be effective in achieving the intended goals of achieving greenhouse gas reductions.”
That’s right. Next to your nutrition label or safety warning, you could see a carbon footprint telling you how much carbon dioxide businesses emitted to make that product. Sounds harmless. Silly, but harmless. But it may be more harmful than imagined—think of the additional costs this would place on businesses.
This could particularly hit smaller businesses the hardest and put those them at a competitive disadvantage with larger firms within the United States who can absorb the costs more easily. We can look to the food nutritional label and a study by the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University as an example. The Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) went into effect in 1994 and was the beginning of the nutritional facts label. The intent was to provide consumers with the information to make healthier choices and provide producers the incentive to make healthier products. These are certainly commendable goals but according to one study, “considering the relatively small magnitude of diet quality improvements from label use, it appears possible that even when consumers read labels, they do not always understand them.”
And these labels do not come without cost. The Food and Drug Administration estimated that the NLEA would cost industry $1.4 billion to $2.3 billion over a 20-year period. These increased costs led to an increased market share for large food distributors.
Christine Moorman, an author of the study said, “We expected that label information would allow firms to compete more honestly for consumers’ purchases, but instead we find an unintended loss of small firms in food categories.”
A carbon label would likely do the same but instead it affects every industry. Will consumers feel guilty about buying a product with a hefty carbon footprint? Will producers feel guilty enough to produce more carbon-friendly products?
The real question is: Does it make sense to increase the costs of products like orange juice when Al Gore lives in a 20-room, eight-bathroom carbon-spitting mansion? (According to a BusinessWeek article, “The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.”)
Bottom line—a carbon labeling program is more government micromanagement that spells higher prices for consumers.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Shining The Light Of Truth
I look at a fair number of news sites and blogs. The list below is just a few of them.
American Thinker
Hot Air
QandO
Red State
Bungalow Bill
Conservative Heritage Times
Freedom Eden
Musings of a Vast Right-Winger
RIGHTWINGSPARKLE
The Underground Conservative
WesternFront America
Not on one of those sites have I found in dozens and dozens of news articles and stories any hint of Raceism.Plenty of articles of how the Libs keep screaming that conservatives are cross burning, sheet wearing,beer drinking ( I prefer Captain Morgan when I do imbibe spirits ),gun fondling,bible thumping goose steppers.
Well that begs the question Where is the evidence? hhmmm.
Nope there is none.
Now if you have listened to the back and forth between Barbara Boxer and Harry Alford the President and CEO of the BCC,The ex-president Jimmie Carter, Maxine Waters and a slew of morons on MSNBC. Those are some of the real raceists that wonder the earth.
The above mentioned conservative sites are dedicated to one noble purpose and that is Shinning The Light Of Truth.
MGC
American Thinker
Hot Air
QandO
Red State
Bungalow Bill
Conservative Heritage Times
Freedom Eden
Musings of a Vast Right-Winger
RIGHTWINGSPARKLE
The Underground Conservative
WesternFront America
Not on one of those sites have I found in dozens and dozens of news articles and stories any hint of Raceism.Plenty of articles of how the Libs keep screaming that conservatives are cross burning, sheet wearing,beer drinking ( I prefer Captain Morgan when I do imbibe spirits ),gun fondling,bible thumping goose steppers.
Well that begs the question Where is the evidence? hhmmm.
Nope there is none.
Now if you have listened to the back and forth between Barbara Boxer and Harry Alford the President and CEO of the BCC,The ex-president Jimmie Carter, Maxine Waters and a slew of morons on MSNBC. Those are some of the real raceists that wonder the earth.
The above mentioned conservative sites are dedicated to one noble purpose and that is Shinning The Light Of Truth.
MGC
National Right To Work
Incoming AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka's Ugly History of Violence and Corruption
Today, Richard Trumka will become president of the nation’s largest union umbrella organization. Trumka has spent decades working his way up the ladder in the AFL-CIO, first as the top boss of the radical United Mine Workers (UMW) union and then as the AFL-CIO’s Secretary-Treasurer for the last decade.
Unbelievably, despite an extreme record of violence and corruption, Trumka is running unopposed for the position, suggesting that Big Labor is about to begin a new era of forced-unionism extremism.
A look at Trumka’s dark history reveals what Americans can expect from the new union boss in chief.
Take the murder of Eddie York, a nonunion contractor, who was shot in the back of the head and killed while leaving a worksite in 1993. Trumka and other UMW officials were charged in a $27 million wrongful death suit by Eddie York’s widow. After fighting the suit intensely for four years, UMW lawyers settled suddenly in 1997 -- just two days after the judge in the case ruled evidence in the criminal trial would be admitted.
Read more about Trumka's history of condoning union violence and corruption in the Foundation's eye-opening Fact Sheet.
Right to Work President Mark Mix Appears on Fox and Friends
National Right to Work president Mark Mix appeared on Fox and Friends earlier this week to discuss some disturbing details in the ObamaCare proposals. A careful analysis by Right to Work experts revealed the legislation is a Trojan Horse for forced unionization of the health care field.
Today, Richard Trumka will become president of the nation’s largest union umbrella organization. Trumka has spent decades working his way up the ladder in the AFL-CIO, first as the top boss of the radical United Mine Workers (UMW) union and then as the AFL-CIO’s Secretary-Treasurer for the last decade.
Unbelievably, despite an extreme record of violence and corruption, Trumka is running unopposed for the position, suggesting that Big Labor is about to begin a new era of forced-unionism extremism.
A look at Trumka’s dark history reveals what Americans can expect from the new union boss in chief.
Take the murder of Eddie York, a nonunion contractor, who was shot in the back of the head and killed while leaving a worksite in 1993. Trumka and other UMW officials were charged in a $27 million wrongful death suit by Eddie York’s widow. After fighting the suit intensely for four years, UMW lawyers settled suddenly in 1997 -- just two days after the judge in the case ruled evidence in the criminal trial would be admitted.
Read more about Trumka's history of condoning union violence and corruption in the Foundation's eye-opening Fact Sheet.
Right to Work President Mark Mix Appears on Fox and Friends
National Right to Work president Mark Mix appeared on Fox and Friends earlier this week to discuss some disturbing details in the ObamaCare proposals. A careful analysis by Right to Work experts revealed the legislation is a Trojan Horse for forced unionization of the health care field.
GOP LEADER ALERT 9-16-09
‘ENOUGH IS ENOUGH:’ HOUSE REPUBLICANS RENEW EFFORTS TO DEFUND ACORN, PROTECT TAXPAYER DOLLARS
HOW MUCH LONGER WILL DEMOCRATIC LEADERS PROTECT ACORN, WHICH HAS RECEIVED MORE THAN $53 MILLION IN FEDERAL FUNDING SINCE 1994?
September 16, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
After new evidence surfaced linking the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) to potentially criminal activity, House Republicans sprung into action yesterday, announcing a new series of steps to sever the troubled organization’s ties to the federal government, including:
Legislation introduced by House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) – H.R. 3571, the Defund ACORN Act – to stop federal funding of ACORN once and for all.
A letter to President Obama signed by roughly 130 House Republicans asking him to take action to publicly disclose and terminate all taxpayer funding of ACORN.
An effort led by House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Ways & Means Committee Ranking Member Dave Camp (R-MI) to urge the IRS to end any referrals to ACORN offices for tax preparation consultation. The Census Bureau took a similar step on Friday when it announced it would end its partnership with ACORN in conducting the 2010 Census under steady pressure from House Republicans, including Oversight & Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA), Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC), and Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA).
Leader Boehner talked about House Republicans’ renewed efforts to ensure no additional tax dollars are directed to ACORN in a newly released web video:
CLICK TO PLAY
Rank-and-file House Democrats have clearly begun to get the message: the New York Post has Rep. Michael McMahon’s (D-NY) office saying he is “supportive” of a measure to deny federal funding. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) says he would be “open” to such a move.
Democratic leaders, however, are still protecting ACORN: The Baltimore Sun reports that Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) “stopped short of supporting” a measure to defend ACORN, while Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) refused to comment.
Of course, there’s nothing unusual about the hedging and the silence and the inaction. In his Wall Street Journal column today, John Fund detailed the lengths to which Democratic leaders have gone to protect ACORN:
“Acorn’s allies in Congress have long stopped every move to rein it in. Rep. Steve King (R., Iowa), for example, has tried six times to get House floor votes restricting Acorn’s access to federal funds but has been blocked by Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s hand-picked Rules Committee members. Some Democrats have grumbled. Michigan’s John Conyers, chair of the Judiciary Committee, urged a hearing be held on Acorn abuses in March, but later told the Washington Times ‘the powers that be decided against it.’” (9/16/09)
As Leader Boehner said in his web video, “Enough is enough.” All told, ACORN has received $53 million in federal funding since 1994. The American people are tired of seeing Washington spend their hard-earned money with reckless abandon. Protecting taxpayer dollars sometimes requires making tough choices. This isn’t one of them.
Following is just some of the media coverage of House GOP efforts to stop all federal funding for ACORN:
“Republicans Try To Crush ACORN…Republican lawmakers are trying to crush this group that they’ve long considered suspect. Just today: House Minority Leader John Boehner introduced legislation, the Defund ACORN Act, to sever all ties between the federal government and the group. Boehner, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, and GOP Rep. Dave Camp wrote the Internal Revenue Service a letter, asking that agency to end its association with ACORN, which helps low- and middle-income Americans with their tax preparations. And GOP Rep. Lamar Smith, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, called for the FBI and Justice Department to investigate the group.” – MSNBC’s First Read, 9/15/09
“On Tuesday, the House Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, wrote to President Obama asking him to cut off all federal financing to Acorn and its affiliates. ‘It is evident that Acorn is incapable of using federal funds in a manner that is consistent with the law,’ Mr. Boehner wrote.” – The New York Times, 9/16/09
“GOP Seizes on ACORN Funding…Republican congressional leaders have launched an all-out campaign to choke off any federal dollars from going to ACORN, the scandal-plagued anti-poverty group. … After the Senate voted on Monday to bar any new federal money for ACORN — the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — from the Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other top Republicans began pressing President Barack Obama to use his executive authority to extend the ban to all federal agencies. … Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, called on the FBI and Justice Department to investigate the organization, claiming ‘voter registration fraud allegations have led ACORN to be subject to investigation in 15 states.’” – Politico, 9/16/09
HOW MUCH LONGER WILL DEMOCRATIC LEADERS PROTECT ACORN, WHICH HAS RECEIVED MORE THAN $53 MILLION IN FEDERAL FUNDING SINCE 1994?
September 16, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
After new evidence surfaced linking the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) to potentially criminal activity, House Republicans sprung into action yesterday, announcing a new series of steps to sever the troubled organization’s ties to the federal government, including:
Legislation introduced by House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) – H.R. 3571, the Defund ACORN Act – to stop federal funding of ACORN once and for all.
A letter to President Obama signed by roughly 130 House Republicans asking him to take action to publicly disclose and terminate all taxpayer funding of ACORN.
An effort led by House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Ways & Means Committee Ranking Member Dave Camp (R-MI) to urge the IRS to end any referrals to ACORN offices for tax preparation consultation. The Census Bureau took a similar step on Friday when it announced it would end its partnership with ACORN in conducting the 2010 Census under steady pressure from House Republicans, including Oversight & Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA), Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC), and Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA).
Leader Boehner talked about House Republicans’ renewed efforts to ensure no additional tax dollars are directed to ACORN in a newly released web video:
CLICK TO PLAY
Rank-and-file House Democrats have clearly begun to get the message: the New York Post has Rep. Michael McMahon’s (D-NY) office saying he is “supportive” of a measure to deny federal funding. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) says he would be “open” to such a move.
Democratic leaders, however, are still protecting ACORN: The Baltimore Sun reports that Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) “stopped short of supporting” a measure to defend ACORN, while Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) refused to comment.
Of course, there’s nothing unusual about the hedging and the silence and the inaction. In his Wall Street Journal column today, John Fund detailed the lengths to which Democratic leaders have gone to protect ACORN:
“Acorn’s allies in Congress have long stopped every move to rein it in. Rep. Steve King (R., Iowa), for example, has tried six times to get House floor votes restricting Acorn’s access to federal funds but has been blocked by Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s hand-picked Rules Committee members. Some Democrats have grumbled. Michigan’s John Conyers, chair of the Judiciary Committee, urged a hearing be held on Acorn abuses in March, but later told the Washington Times ‘the powers that be decided against it.’” (9/16/09)
As Leader Boehner said in his web video, “Enough is enough.” All told, ACORN has received $53 million in federal funding since 1994. The American people are tired of seeing Washington spend their hard-earned money with reckless abandon. Protecting taxpayer dollars sometimes requires making tough choices. This isn’t one of them.
Following is just some of the media coverage of House GOP efforts to stop all federal funding for ACORN:
“Republicans Try To Crush ACORN…Republican lawmakers are trying to crush this group that they’ve long considered suspect. Just today: House Minority Leader John Boehner introduced legislation, the Defund ACORN Act, to sever all ties between the federal government and the group. Boehner, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, and GOP Rep. Dave Camp wrote the Internal Revenue Service a letter, asking that agency to end its association with ACORN, which helps low- and middle-income Americans with their tax preparations. And GOP Rep. Lamar Smith, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, called for the FBI and Justice Department to investigate the group.” – MSNBC’s First Read, 9/15/09
“On Tuesday, the House Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, wrote to President Obama asking him to cut off all federal financing to Acorn and its affiliates. ‘It is evident that Acorn is incapable of using federal funds in a manner that is consistent with the law,’ Mr. Boehner wrote.” – The New York Times, 9/16/09
“GOP Seizes on ACORN Funding…Republican congressional leaders have launched an all-out campaign to choke off any federal dollars from going to ACORN, the scandal-plagued anti-poverty group. … After the Senate voted on Monday to bar any new federal money for ACORN — the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — from the Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and other top Republicans began pressing President Barack Obama to use his executive authority to extend the ban to all federal agencies. … Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, called on the FBI and Justice Department to investigate the organization, claiming ‘voter registration fraud allegations have led ACORN to be subject to investigation in 15 states.’” – Politico, 9/16/09
The Heritage Foundation
The Morning Bell
WEDNESDAY, SEPT 16, 2009
What The Poverty Advocacy Complex Costs You
This Monday the Senate voted 83 to 7 to strip funding for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) from this year’s housing and transportation appropriation bill. The move came after upstart website BigGovernment.com posted videos showing ACORN employees in multiple cities across the country conspiring to help under cover reporters avoid taxes for criminal enterprises.
Recent Entries
Metro Delivers Hundreds of Thousands to 9/12 Rally
But Where Will Americans Go When We Have Canadian Style Health Care?
An Invitation Befitting a President of the United States?
President Obama Doesn’t Want to Run the Auto Industry - But He Continues To Do It
Obama and the UN Human Rights Council: No Change Coming
Despite the swiftness with which the Senate acted, this is hardly the first time ACORN has been accused of illegality. Last fall when ACORN was investigated for vote fraud in a dozen states, the New York Times reported that an internal ACORN legal memo raised “questions about whether the web of relationships among its 174 affiliates may have led to violations of federal laws.”
The Times reporter who wrote that story, Stephanie Strom wanted to pursue the story further, but she was discouraged by her superiors at the Times and gave up after blistering phone conversation with then-candidate Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Strom revealed in an email: “I’m calling a halt to my efforts. I just had two unpleasant calls with the Obama campaign, wherein the spokesman was screaming and yelling and cursing me, calling me a rightwing nut and a conspiracy theorist and everything else.” Explaining why she wanted to pursue the story further in another email Strom wrote:
The real story to all this is how these myriad entities allow them to shuffle money around so much that no one really knows what’s getting spent on what — and for the charities like the housing orgs, that’s a problem. Charitable money cannot be spent on political activities. It’s a big no-no that can cost charitable organizations their exemptions.
That “web of relationships” between poverty advocacy groups like ACORN is the real story here that impacts the American people. ACORN is by far not the only suspect community organizer group. Just last summer federal investigators raided a city-chartered nonprofit agency accused of abusing a federally financed program that was created to clean up houses damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Teachers unions have contributed over $1.3 million to ACORN and its affiliates, since 2005. And the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has chipped in another $7.4 million. ACORN founder Wade Rathke even has a book out titled “Citizen Wealth” which “shows how to cut through government indifference and bureaucratic obstacles” to achieve “maximum eligible participation” in the “anti-poverty programs still out there.”
All of this community organizing for an expanded welfare state has real costs. Heritage Foundation Senior Research Fellow Robert Rector will release a new study this morning that crunches the numbers on what the poverty advocacy complex is costing Americans tax payers and the results are sobering:
Over the next decade (2009-2018), President Obama will spend $10.3 trillion on welfare programs. This includes cash, food, housing, medical care and targeted social services for poor and low income Americans. Of this spending $7.5 trillion will be federal spending and $2.8 trillion will be state government matching contributions to federal welfare programs.
President Obama will spend twice as much on welfare as Clinton did, after adjusting for inflation. Over the next decade welfare, spending will amount to around $300,000 for each person currently living in poverty, or, on average, $1.2 million for a poor family of four.
President Obama will spend more on welfare in a single year (FY2010) than Bush spent on the Iraq war during his entire presidency.
Total cost of the War on Poverty since its beginning in 1964 has been $15.9 trillion. By contrast the total cost of all other wars in our nation’s history has been $6.4 trillion.
If total welfare spending were divided equally among all poor persons, each would get, on average, $16,800 in welfare benefits.
That last point is key. Gallup has a new poll out today showing that on average, Americans believe 50 cents of every tax dollar that goes to the government in Washington, DC, today are wasted. The American people know that when the federal government funnels their money through groups like ACORN, that money ends up benefiting professional poverty advocates, not real Americans in need.
QUICK HITS
House Judiciary Committee ranking member Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) called on the FBI and the DoJ to open investigations into ACORN.
Also according to Gallup polling taken after President Obama’s speech, 38% say they would advise their member to vote for a bill, while 40% oppose.
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) said yesterday that she could not back Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus’ (D-MT) health care bill.
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) also said yesterday he would vote against the Baucus bill.
According to the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, the individual mandates in Obamacare will force middle-class families and young adults to bear the brunt of the costs of reform.
WEDNESDAY, SEPT 16, 2009
What The Poverty Advocacy Complex Costs You
This Monday the Senate voted 83 to 7 to strip funding for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) from this year’s housing and transportation appropriation bill. The move came after upstart website BigGovernment.com posted videos showing ACORN employees in multiple cities across the country conspiring to help under cover reporters avoid taxes for criminal enterprises.
Recent Entries
Metro Delivers Hundreds of Thousands to 9/12 Rally
But Where Will Americans Go When We Have Canadian Style Health Care?
An Invitation Befitting a President of the United States?
President Obama Doesn’t Want to Run the Auto Industry - But He Continues To Do It
Obama and the UN Human Rights Council: No Change Coming
Despite the swiftness with which the Senate acted, this is hardly the first time ACORN has been accused of illegality. Last fall when ACORN was investigated for vote fraud in a dozen states, the New York Times reported that an internal ACORN legal memo raised “questions about whether the web of relationships among its 174 affiliates may have led to violations of federal laws.”
The Times reporter who wrote that story, Stephanie Strom wanted to pursue the story further, but she was discouraged by her superiors at the Times and gave up after blistering phone conversation with then-candidate Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Strom revealed in an email: “I’m calling a halt to my efforts. I just had two unpleasant calls with the Obama campaign, wherein the spokesman was screaming and yelling and cursing me, calling me a rightwing nut and a conspiracy theorist and everything else.” Explaining why she wanted to pursue the story further in another email Strom wrote:
The real story to all this is how these myriad entities allow them to shuffle money around so much that no one really knows what’s getting spent on what — and for the charities like the housing orgs, that’s a problem. Charitable money cannot be spent on political activities. It’s a big no-no that can cost charitable organizations their exemptions.
That “web of relationships” between poverty advocacy groups like ACORN is the real story here that impacts the American people. ACORN is by far not the only suspect community organizer group. Just last summer federal investigators raided a city-chartered nonprofit agency accused of abusing a federally financed program that was created to clean up houses damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Teachers unions have contributed over $1.3 million to ACORN and its affiliates, since 2005. And the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has chipped in another $7.4 million. ACORN founder Wade Rathke even has a book out titled “Citizen Wealth” which “shows how to cut through government indifference and bureaucratic obstacles” to achieve “maximum eligible participation” in the “anti-poverty programs still out there.”
All of this community organizing for an expanded welfare state has real costs. Heritage Foundation Senior Research Fellow Robert Rector will release a new study this morning that crunches the numbers on what the poverty advocacy complex is costing Americans tax payers and the results are sobering:
Over the next decade (2009-2018), President Obama will spend $10.3 trillion on welfare programs. This includes cash, food, housing, medical care and targeted social services for poor and low income Americans. Of this spending $7.5 trillion will be federal spending and $2.8 trillion will be state government matching contributions to federal welfare programs.
President Obama will spend twice as much on welfare as Clinton did, after adjusting for inflation. Over the next decade welfare, spending will amount to around $300,000 for each person currently living in poverty, or, on average, $1.2 million for a poor family of four.
President Obama will spend more on welfare in a single year (FY2010) than Bush spent on the Iraq war during his entire presidency.
Total cost of the War on Poverty since its beginning in 1964 has been $15.9 trillion. By contrast the total cost of all other wars in our nation’s history has been $6.4 trillion.
If total welfare spending were divided equally among all poor persons, each would get, on average, $16,800 in welfare benefits.
That last point is key. Gallup has a new poll out today showing that on average, Americans believe 50 cents of every tax dollar that goes to the government in Washington, DC, today are wasted. The American people know that when the federal government funnels their money through groups like ACORN, that money ends up benefiting professional poverty advocates, not real Americans in need.
QUICK HITS
House Judiciary Committee ranking member Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) called on the FBI and the DoJ to open investigations into ACORN.
Also according to Gallup polling taken after President Obama’s speech, 38% say they would advise their member to vote for a bill, while 40% oppose.
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) said yesterday that she could not back Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus’ (D-MT) health care bill.
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) also said yesterday he would vote against the Baucus bill.
According to the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, the individual mandates in Obamacare will force middle-class families and young adults to bear the brunt of the costs of reform.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
GOP LEADER BLOG
Boehner: “Enough is Enough” – It’s Time to Defund ACORN Now
Posted by Kevin Boland on September 15th, 2009
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today announced he will introduce legislation – the Defund ACORN Act – to sever all ties between the federal government and ACORN. House Republicans are also sending a letter to President Obama asking him to take action to publicly disclose and terminate all taxpayer funding of ACORN. House Republican leaders, led by Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), also sent a separate letter to the IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, urging him to end any referrals by the IRS to ACORN offices for tax preparation consultation.
Leader Boehner also released the following video calling for an immediate end to all taxpayer funding of ACORN:
Leader Boehner stated today:
“At a meeting with every House Republican Member this morning, I urged everyone to seek out and expose taxpayer money going to ACORN in every agency and in every committee’s jurisdiction. There is no excuse – none – for any more of the American peoples’ hard-earned tax dollars to go to this corrupt gang. Rep. Cantor’s effort to highlight the IRS-ACORN link is a great place to start, along with Rep. Bachmann’s bill to zero out the money ACORN gets from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. We’re also sending a letter, which will be signed by as many of our Members as possible, to President Obama, urging him to eliminate all ACORN funding. I sent a similar letter to President Bush last year. I hope, given all the new revelations about ACORN’s nefarious practices, that we’ll get results this time.”
Boehner also praised the efforts of Reps. Darrell Issa (R-CA), Patrick McHenry (R-NC), and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) for the roles they played in forcing the U.S. Census Bureau to sever its ties with ACORN.
Enough is enough. The American people are tired of seeing their tax dollars wasted on an organization accused of serious crimes - and that’s why House Republicans are stepping up efforts to defund ACORN once and for all.
Permalink |
This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 15th, 2009 at 2:49 pm and is filed under ACORN. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Click Here to view this email in your browser
Click Here to be removed from this list
Posted by Kevin Boland on September 15th, 2009
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today announced he will introduce legislation – the Defund ACORN Act – to sever all ties between the federal government and ACORN. House Republicans are also sending a letter to President Obama asking him to take action to publicly disclose and terminate all taxpayer funding of ACORN. House Republican leaders, led by Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), also sent a separate letter to the IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, urging him to end any referrals by the IRS to ACORN offices for tax preparation consultation.
Leader Boehner also released the following video calling for an immediate end to all taxpayer funding of ACORN:
Leader Boehner stated today:
“At a meeting with every House Republican Member this morning, I urged everyone to seek out and expose taxpayer money going to ACORN in every agency and in every committee’s jurisdiction. There is no excuse – none – for any more of the American peoples’ hard-earned tax dollars to go to this corrupt gang. Rep. Cantor’s effort to highlight the IRS-ACORN link is a great place to start, along with Rep. Bachmann’s bill to zero out the money ACORN gets from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. We’re also sending a letter, which will be signed by as many of our Members as possible, to President Obama, urging him to eliminate all ACORN funding. I sent a similar letter to President Bush last year. I hope, given all the new revelations about ACORN’s nefarious practices, that we’ll get results this time.”
Boehner also praised the efforts of Reps. Darrell Issa (R-CA), Patrick McHenry (R-NC), and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) for the roles they played in forcing the U.S. Census Bureau to sever its ties with ACORN.
Enough is enough. The American people are tired of seeing their tax dollars wasted on an organization accused of serious crimes - and that’s why House Republicans are stepping up efforts to defund ACORN once and for all.
Permalink |
This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 15th, 2009 at 2:49 pm and is filed under ACORN. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Click Here to view this email in your browser
Click Here to be removed from this list
Cap And Trade Calamities
Who's Bright Idea Was This?
Waxman-Markey proposes a new national tax of historic proportions
Related Links
Honoring the Father of the Real Green Revolution
Wind Power: An Expensive and Inefficient Way to Reduce CO2
Heritage's Research on the Cap and Trade Global Warming Bill
In today’s Cap- and-Trade Calamity, we continue on with our critique of government-mandated energy efficiency standards. The newest target is national lighting efficiency standards – detailed in Section 211 of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill.
Waxman-Markey dictates specific efficiency standards and specifications for specific light bulbs (Sec. 211, g); Sets regulations for several kinds of “luminaires,” “outdoor luminaires,” “portable lighting,” “portable light fixtures,” “light fixtures,” “GU-24 base lamps,” “art worth light fixture,” LED light engines – most of which can be found walking through your home (Sec. 211).
The bill also grants the Secretary of Energy tremendous leeway to essentially micromanage the profitability of private enterprise by determining what standards are “technologically feasible and economically justified” (Sec. 211, g4A). It includes details as specific as whether “portable luminaries that have internal power supplies” must have “zero standby power when the luminaire is turned off” (Sec. 211, 71 (20) ii1Cvii).
Dani Doane, Director of Government Relations at The Heritage Foundation, details some of the unintended consequences of light bulb micromanagement. Dani’s story is just one example behind the larger energy efficiency message that has been stated several times, but is worth repeating. If consumers believe a product will save them money, they’ll buy it. They don’t need the government telling them to do so and businesses do not need the government prematurely rushing products that may not be safe or may not work well into the marketplace.
Lights and power supply aren’t the only items up for new mandates. New water regulations may not be very far away. Waxman-Markey also sets forth new regulations for “portable electric spas,” “bottle type water dispensers,” “commercial hot food holding cabinets,” and “warm air furnaces” (Sec. 212). It also sets water efficiency standards for “showerheads, faucets, water closets, and urinals” as well as “clothes washers and dishwashers” (Sec. 213, a). It will be like the episode of Seinfeld when Jerry and Kramer’s building installs new low-flow showerheads and they have to buy high-powered ones on the black market.
Heritage Senior Policy Analyst Ben Lieberman provides an example of effective energy efficiency in the pre-Waxman-Markey days, when the government mandated auto low-flush toilets: “These water-stingy models were mandated under the 1992 Energy Policy Act. After the provisions took effect in 1994, millions of Americans remodeling their bathrooms came in for an unpleasant surprise. Many of the new water-saving toilets cost more and performed worse than the ones they replaced. Homeowners complained that they had to flush more than once, which, in addition to being annoying, cut into the water conservation purpose behind the law. It took many years before the bugs were worked out of the new toilet models and there are plenty of unhappy flushers out there.”
On Thursday, we’ll talk about the government’s plan for a carbon labeling program.
Waxman-Markey proposes a new national tax of historic proportions
Related Links
Honoring the Father of the Real Green Revolution
Wind Power: An Expensive and Inefficient Way to Reduce CO2
Heritage's Research on the Cap and Trade Global Warming Bill
In today’s Cap- and-Trade Calamity, we continue on with our critique of government-mandated energy efficiency standards. The newest target is national lighting efficiency standards – detailed in Section 211 of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill.
Waxman-Markey dictates specific efficiency standards and specifications for specific light bulbs (Sec. 211, g); Sets regulations for several kinds of “luminaires,” “outdoor luminaires,” “portable lighting,” “portable light fixtures,” “light fixtures,” “GU-24 base lamps,” “art worth light fixture,” LED light engines – most of which can be found walking through your home (Sec. 211).
The bill also grants the Secretary of Energy tremendous leeway to essentially micromanage the profitability of private enterprise by determining what standards are “technologically feasible and economically justified” (Sec. 211, g4A). It includes details as specific as whether “portable luminaries that have internal power supplies” must have “zero standby power when the luminaire is turned off” (Sec. 211, 71 (20) ii1Cvii).
Dani Doane, Director of Government Relations at The Heritage Foundation, details some of the unintended consequences of light bulb micromanagement. Dani’s story is just one example behind the larger energy efficiency message that has been stated several times, but is worth repeating. If consumers believe a product will save them money, they’ll buy it. They don’t need the government telling them to do so and businesses do not need the government prematurely rushing products that may not be safe or may not work well into the marketplace.
Lights and power supply aren’t the only items up for new mandates. New water regulations may not be very far away. Waxman-Markey also sets forth new regulations for “portable electric spas,” “bottle type water dispensers,” “commercial hot food holding cabinets,” and “warm air furnaces” (Sec. 212). It also sets water efficiency standards for “showerheads, faucets, water closets, and urinals” as well as “clothes washers and dishwashers” (Sec. 213, a). It will be like the episode of Seinfeld when Jerry and Kramer’s building installs new low-flow showerheads and they have to buy high-powered ones on the black market.
Heritage Senior Policy Analyst Ben Lieberman provides an example of effective energy efficiency in the pre-Waxman-Markey days, when the government mandated auto low-flush toilets: “These water-stingy models were mandated under the 1992 Energy Policy Act. After the provisions took effect in 1994, millions of Americans remodeling their bathrooms came in for an unpleasant surprise. Many of the new water-saving toilets cost more and performed worse than the ones they replaced. Homeowners complained that they had to flush more than once, which, in addition to being annoying, cut into the water conservation purpose behind the law. It took many years before the bugs were worked out of the new toilet models and there are plenty of unhappy flushers out there.”
On Thursday, we’ll talk about the government’s plan for a carbon labeling program.
The Heritage Foundation
The Morning Bell
TUESDAY, SEP 15, 2009
Media Watchdog Has No Bark
In the age of Obama, the media formerly known as mainstream can remind one of 19th century British literature. Pride and Prejudice sometimes, of course, but more often a favorite Sherlock Holmes story, Silver Blaze. In it, the famous sleuth has the following exchange with Inspector Gregory:
Recent Entries
9/12 Recap
Big Labor Wins, And Americans Lose … Again
Universal School Choice Prevails – For Sweden
Honoring the Father of the Real Green Revolution
Auto Bailout Funds Won’t Be Repaid. And That’s Not the Worst News
Gregory: “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”
Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”
Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”
Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”
The media, you see, used to have something called a “watchdog” role in this country, by which it was understood that they worked for society and protected it against those in power, preventing abuse. But as with the Sherlock Holmes case of the “dog that didn’t bark,” old traditional media such as the New York Times, network television, National Public Radio and PBS, are not doing much, if anything, to keep those in power in check. For that today, one has to rely on blogs and popular outlets such as FOX News. In fact, FOX News gets labeled as conservative for merely fulfilling this obligation.
The New York Times, for example, ran zero—that’s right, zero—stories on Van Jones, the Obama Administration “green jobs” Czar before he was forced to quit last weekend. It was left to investigative reporting by conservative bloggers, amplified by FOX News, to reveal that Jones had signed a petition accusing the Bush administration of allowing 9/11 to happen so they could have a pretext to wage war on Iraq. This was a man with real power and real budget authority. In fact his department’s budget nearly doubled the total annual budget for NASA. But not only did the New York Times or the networks never devote any resources to investigate, even after the revelations of his obvious instability came to light, the traditional media outlets sat on the story.
Much, much worse, has been the silence on ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, the community shakedown artists for whom President Obama worked with when he was a community organizer. ACORN also has real power—it was going to work with the Department of Commerce on the 2010 Census—and receives tens of millions of dollars annually in tax payer money.
It was left to a couple of 20-somethings working for the new BigGovernment.com site to break omerta on ACORN by releasing videos of ACORN employees conspiring to help avoid taxes for a criminal enterprise. Thanks to these new media types, last night, in an 83-7 vote, the Senate voted to strip all funding of ACORN from the transportation housing and urban development appropriations bill.
Why didn’t the old media report on Jones, or ACORN? Where was 60 Minutes, or 20/20? And where are all the old media on the tea party protestors? Why do they keep denigrating them, emphasizing how angry they are, or how they are unrepresentative of the public? When was the last time tens of thousands of people showed up on the steps of the Capitol, less than a year after an election, to speak up against out of control federal spending? Many across all sides of the spectrum are taking note. One of the left’s sharpest minds, Camille Paglia, observed in an article in Salon last week that:
Too many political analysts still think that network and cable TV chat shows are the central forums of national debate. But the truly transformative political energy is coming from talk radio and the Web—both of which Democrat-sponsored proposals have threatened to stifle, in defiance of freedom of speech guarantees in the Bill of Rights.
No wonder that, according to Pew Research this week, two thirds of Americans do not trust the media, the lowest ranking ever. And no wonder that Glenn Beck, the FOX commentator who went after the Jones story, gets 2.6 million viewers every day, while his closest competitor at the same time slot gets 600,000 on a good day.
The old media is busy keeping the administration accountable—the Bush Administration, that is. NPR this morning had another long piece on the investigations into Bush Attorney General John Ashcroft. Trouble is, the Bush administration is no longer in power.
In the case of the dog that didn’t bark, the pooch stayed silent because it was friendly with the man who committed the transgression. Today the left has all the power, controlling the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives, and the media in all the above-named outlets are acting like adoring supporters. Is that the reason this watchdog isn’t barking?
Democracy, Thomas Jefferson believed, could only survive if the populace was informed, and that, he believed, was the job of newspapers. Thank God, at least, for those media still doing their jobs.
TUESDAY, SEP 15, 2009
Media Watchdog Has No Bark
In the age of Obama, the media formerly known as mainstream can remind one of 19th century British literature. Pride and Prejudice sometimes, of course, but more often a favorite Sherlock Holmes story, Silver Blaze. In it, the famous sleuth has the following exchange with Inspector Gregory:
Recent Entries
9/12 Recap
Big Labor Wins, And Americans Lose … Again
Universal School Choice Prevails – For Sweden
Honoring the Father of the Real Green Revolution
Auto Bailout Funds Won’t Be Repaid. And That’s Not the Worst News
Gregory: “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”
Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”
Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”
Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”
The media, you see, used to have something called a “watchdog” role in this country, by which it was understood that they worked for society and protected it against those in power, preventing abuse. But as with the Sherlock Holmes case of the “dog that didn’t bark,” old traditional media such as the New York Times, network television, National Public Radio and PBS, are not doing much, if anything, to keep those in power in check. For that today, one has to rely on blogs and popular outlets such as FOX News. In fact, FOX News gets labeled as conservative for merely fulfilling this obligation.
The New York Times, for example, ran zero—that’s right, zero—stories on Van Jones, the Obama Administration “green jobs” Czar before he was forced to quit last weekend. It was left to investigative reporting by conservative bloggers, amplified by FOX News, to reveal that Jones had signed a petition accusing the Bush administration of allowing 9/11 to happen so they could have a pretext to wage war on Iraq. This was a man with real power and real budget authority. In fact his department’s budget nearly doubled the total annual budget for NASA. But not only did the New York Times or the networks never devote any resources to investigate, even after the revelations of his obvious instability came to light, the traditional media outlets sat on the story.
Much, much worse, has been the silence on ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, the community shakedown artists for whom President Obama worked with when he was a community organizer. ACORN also has real power—it was going to work with the Department of Commerce on the 2010 Census—and receives tens of millions of dollars annually in tax payer money.
It was left to a couple of 20-somethings working for the new BigGovernment.com site to break omerta on ACORN by releasing videos of ACORN employees conspiring to help avoid taxes for a criminal enterprise. Thanks to these new media types, last night, in an 83-7 vote, the Senate voted to strip all funding of ACORN from the transportation housing and urban development appropriations bill.
Why didn’t the old media report on Jones, or ACORN? Where was 60 Minutes, or 20/20? And where are all the old media on the tea party protestors? Why do they keep denigrating them, emphasizing how angry they are, or how they are unrepresentative of the public? When was the last time tens of thousands of people showed up on the steps of the Capitol, less than a year after an election, to speak up against out of control federal spending? Many across all sides of the spectrum are taking note. One of the left’s sharpest minds, Camille Paglia, observed in an article in Salon last week that:
Too many political analysts still think that network and cable TV chat shows are the central forums of national debate. But the truly transformative political energy is coming from talk radio and the Web—both of which Democrat-sponsored proposals have threatened to stifle, in defiance of freedom of speech guarantees in the Bill of Rights.
No wonder that, according to Pew Research this week, two thirds of Americans do not trust the media, the lowest ranking ever. And no wonder that Glenn Beck, the FOX commentator who went after the Jones story, gets 2.6 million viewers every day, while his closest competitor at the same time slot gets 600,000 on a good day.
The old media is busy keeping the administration accountable—the Bush Administration, that is. NPR this morning had another long piece on the investigations into Bush Attorney General John Ashcroft. Trouble is, the Bush administration is no longer in power.
In the case of the dog that didn’t bark, the pooch stayed silent because it was friendly with the man who committed the transgression. Today the left has all the power, controlling the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives, and the media in all the above-named outlets are acting like adoring supporters. Is that the reason this watchdog isn’t barking?
Democracy, Thomas Jefferson believed, could only survive if the populace was informed, and that, he believed, was the job of newspapers. Thank God, at least, for those media still doing their jobs.
GOP LEADER ALERT 9-15-09
Boehner, House GOP Move to Stop All Federal Funding of ACORN
WASHINGTON, DC - House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today is introducing legislation – the Defund ACORN Act – to sever all ties between the federal government and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). At the same time, House Republicans are also sending a letter to President Obama asking him to take action to end taxpayer funding of ACORN. Boehner issued the following statement:
“It is evident that ACORN is incapable of using federal funds in a manner that is consistent with the law. Immediate action is necessary to ensure that no additional tax dollars are directed to ACORN. Simply put, ACORN should not receive another penny of American taxpayers’ money.
“It is outrageous that ACORN continues to receive taxpayer dollars after repeated revelations of corruption and potentially criminal activity. House Republicans are responding and taking action to terminate all federal funding to ACORN and its affiliates. We’ve asked the President to end all federal funding of ACORN – and if the administration does not act, we have a bill to stop federal funding of ACORN once and for all.
“I support the Census Bureau’s decision to end its relationship with ACORN, and believe it is vital that all other federal agencies follow its example. All ties between the federal government and ACORN and its affiliates must be cut, whether those ties consist of partnerships or the awarding of federal funds, including federal funds distributed through state and local governments from federal block grants.
“This is a matter of common sense and respect for taxpayer dollars.”
NOTE: An analysis of federal data by the Office of the Republican Leader staff determined that ACORN has received more than $53 million in direct funding from the federal government since 1994, and has likely received substantially more indirectly through states and localities that receive federal block grants. Today House Republicans, led by led Boehner, are sending a letter to President Obama asking him to use his authority to end all funding to and break all government ties with ACORN. Boehner also sent a letter to President Bush, and a letter to then-Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Steven Preston, last year requesting that they block funding to ACORN.
WASHINGTON, DC - House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today is introducing legislation – the Defund ACORN Act – to sever all ties between the federal government and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). At the same time, House Republicans are also sending a letter to President Obama asking him to take action to end taxpayer funding of ACORN. Boehner issued the following statement:
“It is evident that ACORN is incapable of using federal funds in a manner that is consistent with the law. Immediate action is necessary to ensure that no additional tax dollars are directed to ACORN. Simply put, ACORN should not receive another penny of American taxpayers’ money.
“It is outrageous that ACORN continues to receive taxpayer dollars after repeated revelations of corruption and potentially criminal activity. House Republicans are responding and taking action to terminate all federal funding to ACORN and its affiliates. We’ve asked the President to end all federal funding of ACORN – and if the administration does not act, we have a bill to stop federal funding of ACORN once and for all.
“I support the Census Bureau’s decision to end its relationship with ACORN, and believe it is vital that all other federal agencies follow its example. All ties between the federal government and ACORN and its affiliates must be cut, whether those ties consist of partnerships or the awarding of federal funds, including federal funds distributed through state and local governments from federal block grants.
“This is a matter of common sense and respect for taxpayer dollars.”
NOTE: An analysis of federal data by the Office of the Republican Leader staff determined that ACORN has received more than $53 million in direct funding from the federal government since 1994, and has likely received substantially more indirectly through states and localities that receive federal block grants. Today House Republicans, led by led Boehner, are sending a letter to President Obama asking him to use his authority to end all funding to and break all government ties with ACORN. Boehner also sent a letter to President Bush, and a letter to then-Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Steven Preston, last year requesting that they block funding to ACORN.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Raceism Liberal Style
Today we are thinking about all those bigots that marched on Washington this past weekend. It was awsome.
Over the weekend and into Monday Liberal commentators must of ran out of ways to spin the 9/12er's. Or was it the crowd was to big to ingnore?
The state run media managed to ignore them just fine but something tweaked the libs. Tweaked them so bad they had to fall back on one of thier favorite cards -RACE BAITING-.
All those people had to be out in the streets of Washington because The Mesiah is you know.....BiRacial....Not that they could be protesting against Cap and Tax, Obamacare,or a dozen other things that the leftists are trying to overwhelm the system with. Nope they where out because The President of America is not a pasty white boy.
I am sick and tired of Liberals who just don't get it. You have used that crap so often that the only thing you manage to do is piss people off. You don't even make people huddle in corners in the fetal position over it anymore...well most people anyway.There's always some lib that will do that on instinct.
You may ask what this diatrab is all about. Well it is about the leftists that call millions of Americans Nazi,Racist,Right Wing nutjobs.something dark and sinister,whatever they can think of to try and get Americans to shrink away from issues that they the libs can't defend with logic so they switch to name calling.....What a bunch of Brainiacs.
MGC
Over the weekend and into Monday Liberal commentators must of ran out of ways to spin the 9/12er's. Or was it the crowd was to big to ingnore?
The state run media managed to ignore them just fine but something tweaked the libs. Tweaked them so bad they had to fall back on one of thier favorite cards -RACE BAITING-.
All those people had to be out in the streets of Washington because The Mesiah is you know.....BiRacial....Not that they could be protesting against Cap and Tax, Obamacare,or a dozen other things that the leftists are trying to overwhelm the system with. Nope they where out because The President of America is not a pasty white boy.
I am sick and tired of Liberals who just don't get it. You have used that crap so often that the only thing you manage to do is piss people off. You don't even make people huddle in corners in the fetal position over it anymore...well most people anyway.There's always some lib that will do that on instinct.
You may ask what this diatrab is all about. Well it is about the leftists that call millions of Americans Nazi,Racist,Right Wing nutjobs.something dark and sinister,whatever they can think of to try and get Americans to shrink away from issues that they the libs can't defend with logic so they switch to name calling.....What a bunch of Brainiacs.
MGC
The Heritage Foundation
The Morning Bell
MONDAY, SEP 14, 2009
Don’t Enable The Financial-Regulatory Complex
This Saturday, tens of thousands of Americans marched on Washington to protest the unprecedented amount of power being concentrated in Washington, DC under the Obama administration. And even the New York Times admits they have a point: “The government is the nation’s biggest lender, insurer, automaker and guarantor against risk for investors large and small. Between financial rescue missions and the economic stimulus program, government spending accounts for a bigger share of the nation’s economy — 26 percent — than at any time since World War II.”
Recent Entries
In the Green Room: Hon. John R. Bolton
A Better Agenda To Prevent Another 9/11
VIDEO: Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) On Obamacare, Illegal Immigrants, And Enforcement
Good Czar, Bad Czar: Cass Sunstein and the Future of OIRA
Cultural Intelligence for Winning the Peace
And on the Sunday New York Times op-ed page, George Mason University professor of economics Tyler Cowen writes:
For years now, many businesses and individuals in the United States have been relying on the power of government, rather than competition in the marketplace, to increase their wealth. This is politicization of the economy. It made the financial crisis much worse, and the trend is accelerating. … President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the birth of a military-industrial complex. Today we have a financial-regulatory complex, and it has meant a consolidation of power and privilege. We’ve created a class of politically protected “too big to fail” institutions, and the current proposals for regulatory reform further cement this notion.
President Barack Obama will be pitching those very financial regulatory reforms today from Federal Hall, where the founders once argued bitterly over how much the government should control the national economy. Unfortunately, the blueprint for financial regulatory reform issued by his administration is a detailed mixture of overreaching policy mistakes, missed chances for real reform, blanks that will be filled in later after studies, and a few good ideas.
The President and Congress should:
Avoid Making the Federal Reserve Serve as Systemic Risk Regulator: The Obama Administration proposes to put the Federal Reserve Board in charge of regulating systemic risk, but it is not clear how such regulation would work in practice or even if this method is the best way to approach the problem. Charging a single entity with reducing systemic risk is likely to raise false expectations. It is very doubtful that any systemic regulator will be able to successfully fill this role unless it has almost unlimited powers, and this type of open-ended power would be difficult to constrain and should be resisted.
Do Not Create a Consumer Financial Protection Agency: The administration proposes to consolidate existing consumer regulators into a new and very powerful Consumer Financial Protection Agency. This is the single biggest policy mistake in the Obama plan. The proposal assumes that consumers are unable to understand any financial products other than the most simple, basic versions even with detailed disclosures in advance of purchase. This basic contempt for the intelligence of consumers would extend to requiring them to refuse certain basic products before they would be allowed to purchase anything else.
Resist Giving the FDIC Resolution Authority for “Too Big to Fail” Financial Firms: Dealing with failing financial companies that could cause risk to the financial system is a valid concern, but the Administration’s approach seems more geared toward facilitating future bailouts and justifying additional intervention. Clearly, a receiver/conservator that can operate the least certain subsidiaries until they can be sold or orderly closed is necessary in order to maximize returns to debtors. But the Treasury plan assumes that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) should handle this role rather than allowing the courts to determine a receiver and then supervise it.
Instead of a Washington-centric top-down approach, the President and Congress should pursue a more modest approach. Rather than giving a government agency the ability to take over and operate large financial institutions, bankruptcy law ought to be modified to accommodate the special problems of resolving these firms and also allow the courts to appoint receivers with the specialized knowledge necessary to best deal with their failure. Instead of creating a regulatory scheme that results in the federal government financing 9 out of 10 new mortgages, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be eliminated. And rather than seeking to micro-manage “too big to fail” financial institutions, it would be better to require them to have more capital than is required for smaller financial institutions.
MONDAY, SEP 14, 2009
Don’t Enable The Financial-Regulatory Complex
This Saturday, tens of thousands of Americans marched on Washington to protest the unprecedented amount of power being concentrated in Washington, DC under the Obama administration. And even the New York Times admits they have a point: “The government is the nation’s biggest lender, insurer, automaker and guarantor against risk for investors large and small. Between financial rescue missions and the economic stimulus program, government spending accounts for a bigger share of the nation’s economy — 26 percent — than at any time since World War II.”
Recent Entries
In the Green Room: Hon. John R. Bolton
A Better Agenda To Prevent Another 9/11
VIDEO: Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) On Obamacare, Illegal Immigrants, And Enforcement
Good Czar, Bad Czar: Cass Sunstein and the Future of OIRA
Cultural Intelligence for Winning the Peace
And on the Sunday New York Times op-ed page, George Mason University professor of economics Tyler Cowen writes:
For years now, many businesses and individuals in the United States have been relying on the power of government, rather than competition in the marketplace, to increase their wealth. This is politicization of the economy. It made the financial crisis much worse, and the trend is accelerating. … President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the birth of a military-industrial complex. Today we have a financial-regulatory complex, and it has meant a consolidation of power and privilege. We’ve created a class of politically protected “too big to fail” institutions, and the current proposals for regulatory reform further cement this notion.
President Barack Obama will be pitching those very financial regulatory reforms today from Federal Hall, where the founders once argued bitterly over how much the government should control the national economy. Unfortunately, the blueprint for financial regulatory reform issued by his administration is a detailed mixture of overreaching policy mistakes, missed chances for real reform, blanks that will be filled in later after studies, and a few good ideas.
The President and Congress should:
Avoid Making the Federal Reserve Serve as Systemic Risk Regulator: The Obama Administration proposes to put the Federal Reserve Board in charge of regulating systemic risk, but it is not clear how such regulation would work in practice or even if this method is the best way to approach the problem. Charging a single entity with reducing systemic risk is likely to raise false expectations. It is very doubtful that any systemic regulator will be able to successfully fill this role unless it has almost unlimited powers, and this type of open-ended power would be difficult to constrain and should be resisted.
Do Not Create a Consumer Financial Protection Agency: The administration proposes to consolidate existing consumer regulators into a new and very powerful Consumer Financial Protection Agency. This is the single biggest policy mistake in the Obama plan. The proposal assumes that consumers are unable to understand any financial products other than the most simple, basic versions even with detailed disclosures in advance of purchase. This basic contempt for the intelligence of consumers would extend to requiring them to refuse certain basic products before they would be allowed to purchase anything else.
Resist Giving the FDIC Resolution Authority for “Too Big to Fail” Financial Firms: Dealing with failing financial companies that could cause risk to the financial system is a valid concern, but the Administration’s approach seems more geared toward facilitating future bailouts and justifying additional intervention. Clearly, a receiver/conservator that can operate the least certain subsidiaries until they can be sold or orderly closed is necessary in order to maximize returns to debtors. But the Treasury plan assumes that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) should handle this role rather than allowing the courts to determine a receiver and then supervise it.
Instead of a Washington-centric top-down approach, the President and Congress should pursue a more modest approach. Rather than giving a government agency the ability to take over and operate large financial institutions, bankruptcy law ought to be modified to accommodate the special problems of resolving these firms and also allow the courts to appoint receivers with the specialized knowledge necessary to best deal with their failure. Instead of creating a regulatory scheme that results in the federal government financing 9 out of 10 new mortgages, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be eliminated. And rather than seeking to micro-manage “too big to fail” financial institutions, it would be better to require them to have more capital than is required for smaller financial institutions.
GOP LEADER ALERT 9-14-09
REGIONAL ROUNDUP: OUTCRY GROWS OVER PRESIDENT’S “DISINGENUOUS” HEALTH CARE RHETORIC
COAST-TO-COAST, EDITORIALS SAY DEFICIT CLAIMS “DISTURBING,” “DIFFICULT TO SWALLOW,” DON’T HOLD UP “UNDER EVEN CASUAL SCRUTINY”
September 14, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
The President’s now-discredited pledge that Democrats’ costly government-takeover of the nation’s health care system would not add “one dime to our deficits” didn’t go over well with fiscal watchdogs, or the American people for that matter. Newspapers across America are also weighing in with editorials taking President Obama to task for being “at odds” with the facts by failing to come clean about just how fiscally reckless the Democrats’ health care plan is:
“President Obama talked forcefully about cutting waste and promised repeatedly that he would not add to the deficit. … He didn't say how that is possible, though. And the Congressional Budget Office has said that the Democrats' legislation would add $220 billion to the deficit over a decade. The president and Democratic leaders have argued that they don't have to count the $245 billion that it will cost to adjust Medicare reimbursement rates, but that is disingenuous. If the president wants to get the American people and skeptics in Congress to trust his plan, he can't play word games. Not adding a dime means not adding a dime.” – New Orleans Times-Picayune editorial, 9/13/09
“Unfortunately, the president's proposals are still short on specifics and his pledge to not ‘add a dime’ to the deficit doesn’t hold up under even casual scrutiny” – Indianapolis Star editorial, 9/13/09
“More disturbing was the president’s lack of specificity on how he hopes to pay for extending coverage to tens of millions of Americans -- while not adding a dime to the federal deficit. … We share the administration's belief that significant savings can be wrung from current budgets, but it is impossible to imagine them covering the lion's share of a $900 billion price tag.” – Cleveland Plain Dealer editorial, 9/13/09
“More troubling, the president insists that his health reform efforts would not add ‘a dime’ to the deficit. But the claim is at odds with the very credible Congressional Budget Office which projects it adding $220 billion over the coming decade.” – Richmond (IN) Palladium-Item editorial, 9/14/09
“The president insists that his plan won't expand the federal deficit, but that’s difficult to swallow. Nonpartisan number crunchers have estimated that under current proposals, the deficit would explode.” – Dallas Morning News editorial, 9/11/09
“Mr. Obama says he won’t add one dime to the deficit, but a lot of dimes remain unaccounted for. When politicians … don’t provide specifics – and when the amounts under discussion are in the hundreds of billions of dollars – you should get even more nervous. …Mr. Obama was vague about where the money would come from, and administration officials have since declined to provide specifics.” – Washington Post editorial, 9/13/09
“From the folks who brought us a $10 trillion deficit over the next decade, that’s hard to swallow. The White House has assured us the public option would be funded by premiums. So, it's hard to know what he means by savings or spending cuts.” – Investor’s Business Daily editorial, 9/11/09
“Mr. Obama continued to insist Wednesday that his approach will not result in higher deficits, vowing again to veto any bill which would have that effect. But the Congressional Budget Office says Mr. Obama’s plan will cost a fortune.” – Las Vegas Review Journal editorial, 9/11/09
The President’s talking points are falling on deaf ears because the American people are fed up with the endless spending and big government scheming going on in Washington. House Republicans are offering better solutions to make quality health care more affordable and accessible for every American. These common-sense reforms will fix what’s broken without breaking what works.
COAST-TO-COAST, EDITORIALS SAY DEFICIT CLAIMS “DISTURBING,” “DIFFICULT TO SWALLOW,” DON’T HOLD UP “UNDER EVEN CASUAL SCRUTINY”
September 14, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
The President’s now-discredited pledge that Democrats’ costly government-takeover of the nation’s health care system would not add “one dime to our deficits” didn’t go over well with fiscal watchdogs, or the American people for that matter. Newspapers across America are also weighing in with editorials taking President Obama to task for being “at odds” with the facts by failing to come clean about just how fiscally reckless the Democrats’ health care plan is:
“President Obama talked forcefully about cutting waste and promised repeatedly that he would not add to the deficit. … He didn't say how that is possible, though. And the Congressional Budget Office has said that the Democrats' legislation would add $220 billion to the deficit over a decade. The president and Democratic leaders have argued that they don't have to count the $245 billion that it will cost to adjust Medicare reimbursement rates, but that is disingenuous. If the president wants to get the American people and skeptics in Congress to trust his plan, he can't play word games. Not adding a dime means not adding a dime.” – New Orleans Times-Picayune editorial, 9/13/09
“Unfortunately, the president's proposals are still short on specifics and his pledge to not ‘add a dime’ to the deficit doesn’t hold up under even casual scrutiny” – Indianapolis Star editorial, 9/13/09
“More disturbing was the president’s lack of specificity on how he hopes to pay for extending coverage to tens of millions of Americans -- while not adding a dime to the federal deficit. … We share the administration's belief that significant savings can be wrung from current budgets, but it is impossible to imagine them covering the lion's share of a $900 billion price tag.” – Cleveland Plain Dealer editorial, 9/13/09
“More troubling, the president insists that his health reform efforts would not add ‘a dime’ to the deficit. But the claim is at odds with the very credible Congressional Budget Office which projects it adding $220 billion over the coming decade.” – Richmond (IN) Palladium-Item editorial, 9/14/09
“The president insists that his plan won't expand the federal deficit, but that’s difficult to swallow. Nonpartisan number crunchers have estimated that under current proposals, the deficit would explode.” – Dallas Morning News editorial, 9/11/09
“Mr. Obama says he won’t add one dime to the deficit, but a lot of dimes remain unaccounted for. When politicians … don’t provide specifics – and when the amounts under discussion are in the hundreds of billions of dollars – you should get even more nervous. …Mr. Obama was vague about where the money would come from, and administration officials have since declined to provide specifics.” – Washington Post editorial, 9/13/09
“From the folks who brought us a $10 trillion deficit over the next decade, that’s hard to swallow. The White House has assured us the public option would be funded by premiums. So, it's hard to know what he means by savings or spending cuts.” – Investor’s Business Daily editorial, 9/11/09
“Mr. Obama continued to insist Wednesday that his approach will not result in higher deficits, vowing again to veto any bill which would have that effect. But the Congressional Budget Office says Mr. Obama’s plan will cost a fortune.” – Las Vegas Review Journal editorial, 9/11/09
The President’s talking points are falling on deaf ears because the American people are fed up with the endless spending and big government scheming going on in Washington. House Republicans are offering better solutions to make quality health care more affordable and accessible for every American. These common-sense reforms will fix what’s broken without breaking what works.
GOP LEAER ALERT 9-14-09
DIMED OUT: AMERICAN PEOPLE SEE HIGHER DEFICITS UNDER DEMS’ GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE
PRESIDENT’S PLEDGE REJECTED AS INDEPENDENT VOICES QUESTION “IFFY MATH,” “VAGUE” RHETORIC, AND “ONLY-IN-WASHINGTON ACCOUNTING”
September 14, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
Just hours after President Obama restated his pledge that Democrats’ costly government-takeover of the nation’s health care system would not add “one dime to our deficits,” a new ABC News-Washington Post poll shows the American people still aren’t buying it – not even a little. And for good reason: it isn’t actually true. Now, with nearly two-thirds saying Democrats’ health care reform legislation will make the deficit worse, ABC declared that “voters are almost exactly where they were before the speech.”
House Republican Leader John Boehner commented on the new poll and the President’s boast on CBS’ “60 Minutes” that he would “own” health care legislation:
“The President may wish to ‘own’ this government-takeover of health care, but hard-working Americans know they’re the ones who are going to be paying for it in the form of higher taxes and runaway deficits. The fact that the President’s pledge hasn’t passed the American people’s smell test is just another indication of why it’s past time to scrap this misguided plan and get to work on common-sense, bipartisan health care reform legislation that our nation can afford.”
In its lead editorial Sunday, The Washington Post joined the chorus of independent voices who have debunked and dismantled the President’s so-called “dime standard:”
“Mr. Obama says he won’t add one dime to the deficit, but a lot of dimes remain unaccounted for. When politicians … don’t provide specifics – and when the amounts under discussion are in the hundreds of billions of dollars – you should get even more nervous. …Mr. Obama was vague about where the money would come from, and administration officials have since declined to provide specifics.” (9/13/09)
Well, here are some specifics: according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the House Democrats’ bill would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. And a recent study by the Lewin Group, commissioned by the non-partisan Peter G. Peterson Foundation, found that the measure would “add an estimated $1 trillion to the federal deficit” in its second 10-year period.
It’s no wonder, then, that the President’s talking points didn’t pass muster with a number of fiscal watchdogs and truth-seekers:
“Experts doubt Obama can pay for health plan with savings. … Despite President Barack Obama’s insistence that his $900 billion health care plan won’t increase already-huge federal budget deficits, experts say that it would — unless he raised more taxes than he’s suggesting he would. …[H]e offered few details for how those savings might be achieved, and he didn’t mention the key plan — backed by Democrats in the House of Representatives — to raise revenue by imposing higher income taxes…” (McClatchy, 9/10/09)
“FACT CHECK: Obama uses iffy math on deficit pledge. … President Barack Obama used only-in-Washington accounting Wednesday when he promised to overhaul the nation’s health care system without adding "one dime" to the deficit. By conventional arithmetic, Democratic plans would drive up the deficit by billions of dollars.” (AP, 9/10/09)
The American people know a raw deal when they see one, and it’s as clear as ever that the Democrats’ costly government takeover of health care is just that. Meanwhile, House Republicans are offering better solutions to make quality health care more affordable and accessible for every American. These common-sense reforms will fix what’s broken without breaking what works.
PRESIDENT’S PLEDGE REJECTED AS INDEPENDENT VOICES QUESTION “IFFY MATH,” “VAGUE” RHETORIC, AND “ONLY-IN-WASHINGTON ACCOUNTING”
September 14, 2009 | House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) | Permalink
Just hours after President Obama restated his pledge that Democrats’ costly government-takeover of the nation’s health care system would not add “one dime to our deficits,” a new ABC News-Washington Post poll shows the American people still aren’t buying it – not even a little. And for good reason: it isn’t actually true. Now, with nearly two-thirds saying Democrats’ health care reform legislation will make the deficit worse, ABC declared that “voters are almost exactly where they were before the speech.”
House Republican Leader John Boehner commented on the new poll and the President’s boast on CBS’ “60 Minutes” that he would “own” health care legislation:
“The President may wish to ‘own’ this government-takeover of health care, but hard-working Americans know they’re the ones who are going to be paying for it in the form of higher taxes and runaway deficits. The fact that the President’s pledge hasn’t passed the American people’s smell test is just another indication of why it’s past time to scrap this misguided plan and get to work on common-sense, bipartisan health care reform legislation that our nation can afford.”
In its lead editorial Sunday, The Washington Post joined the chorus of independent voices who have debunked and dismantled the President’s so-called “dime standard:”
“Mr. Obama says he won’t add one dime to the deficit, but a lot of dimes remain unaccounted for. When politicians … don’t provide specifics – and when the amounts under discussion are in the hundreds of billions of dollars – you should get even more nervous. …Mr. Obama was vague about where the money would come from, and administration officials have since declined to provide specifics.” (9/13/09)
Well, here are some specifics: according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the House Democrats’ bill would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. And a recent study by the Lewin Group, commissioned by the non-partisan Peter G. Peterson Foundation, found that the measure would “add an estimated $1 trillion to the federal deficit” in its second 10-year period.
It’s no wonder, then, that the President’s talking points didn’t pass muster with a number of fiscal watchdogs and truth-seekers:
“Experts doubt Obama can pay for health plan with savings. … Despite President Barack Obama’s insistence that his $900 billion health care plan won’t increase already-huge federal budget deficits, experts say that it would — unless he raised more taxes than he’s suggesting he would. …[H]e offered few details for how those savings might be achieved, and he didn’t mention the key plan — backed by Democrats in the House of Representatives — to raise revenue by imposing higher income taxes…” (McClatchy, 9/10/09)
“FACT CHECK: Obama uses iffy math on deficit pledge. … President Barack Obama used only-in-Washington accounting Wednesday when he promised to overhaul the nation’s health care system without adding "one dime" to the deficit. By conventional arithmetic, Democratic plans would drive up the deficit by billions of dollars.” (AP, 9/10/09)
The American people know a raw deal when they see one, and it’s as clear as ever that the Democrats’ costly government takeover of health care is just that. Meanwhile, House Republicans are offering better solutions to make quality health care more affordable and accessible for every American. These common-sense reforms will fix what’s broken without breaking what works.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
