NEW ORLEANS — A federal jury on today began weighing allegations that a government-issued trailer exposed a Hurricane Katrina victim to dangerous fumes, claims similiar to those rejected by a different jury several months ago.
Eight jurors heard two weeks of testimony in a lawsuit brought by New Orleans resident Lyndon Wright against FEMA trailer manufacturer, Forest River Inc. of Goshen, Ind., and trailer installer, Shaw Environmental Inc. of Baton Rouge.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, which provided tens of thousands of travel trailers to victims of the August 2005 storm, isn’t a defendant in the case. However, jurors can assign a percentage of fault to FEMA if they decide in Wright’s favor.
The case is the second of several “bellwether” trials designed to test the merits of and possibly resolve other claims over formaldehyde exposure in FEMA trailers.
In September, a jury rejected claims that a FEMA trailer made by Gulf Stream Coach Inc. was “unreasonably dangerous” in its construction.
Formaldehyde, a chemical commonly found in construction materials, can cause breathing problems and has been classified as a carcinogen. Government tests on hundreds of trailers in Louisiana and Mississippi found formaldehyde levels that were, on average, about five times what people are exposed to in most modern homes.
Wright, 39, lived in a FEMA trailer outside his mother’s storm-damaged home for 27 months. He claims elevated levels of formaldehyde in his trailer caused his breathing problems, left him coughing up blood and stoked his cancer fears.
Forest River attorney Ernie Gieger said Wright had a host of health problems before Katrina and didn’t spend much time in the trailer, since he worked long hours at two jobs after the storm.
“Whatever he suffers from today is not substantially associated with formaldehyde in that trailer,” Gieger said.
Wright’s lawyers asked jurors to award him $65,000 for future medical expenses, plus an unspecified amount of money for pain and suffering, mental anguish and emotional distress and “loss or impairment of life’s pleasures.”
Wright can’t recover any money from the federal government if the jury assigns any fault to FEMA.
Mississippi Business Journal
Monday, March 29, 2010
Democrats use threats to protect new Health Care Law.
Looks like the Dems bullying isn't reserved for their own members when it comes to passing and protecting the largest entitlement spending bill in history.
Byron York of the Washington Examiner reports:
Karl Denninger adds his two cents worth at the Market Ticker Analysis with his article:
Byron York of the Washington Examiner reports:
Democrats threaten companies hit hard by health care bill
Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has summoned some of the nation's top executives to Capitol Hill to defend their assessment that the new national health care reform law will cost their companies hundreds of millions of dollars in health insurance expenses. Waxman is also demanding that the executives give lawmakers internal company documents related to health care finances -- a move one committee Republican describes as "an attempt to intimidate and silence opponents of the Democrats' flawed health care reform legislation."
On Thursday and Friday, the companies -- so far, they include AT&T, Verizon, Caterpillar, Deere, Valero Energy, AK Steel and 3M -- said a tax provision in the new health care law will make it far more expensive to provide prescription drug coverage to their retired employees. Now, both retirees and current employees of those companies are wondering whether the new law could mean reduced or canceled benefits for them in the future.
The news is an embarrassment for Democrats. As President Obama and congressional leaders tout the purported benefits of the new health care law, some of the nation's biggest companies are saying it will mean higher costs and fewer benefits -- not exactly what Democrats want to hear in the days after their historic victory.
So Waxman has ordered the executives to explain themselves at an April 21 hearing before the Energy and Commerce Committee's investigative subcommittee. That subcommittee just happens to be chaired by Rep. Bart Stupak, the Michigan Democrat who held out his vote on health care reform until a few hours before final passage on March 21, giving the bill's opponents the unfounded hope that he might vote against it
The Washington Examiner
Karl Denninger adds his two cents worth at the Market Ticker Analysis with his article:
So The Government Doesn't Like ConsequencesRead the rest at Market Ticker Analysis
One of the "cute tricks" passed with Medicare Part "D" (by George W. Bush) was a "tax credit" for corporations who provided health care to retirees from their firms. This too was a distortion - an intentional one put into that bill to "buy off" some key Reps and Senators to insure passage of Medicare Part "D" (the biggest boondoggle and scam in the history of the Republic - until President Obama signed this piece of crap legislation.)
But this legislation repeals that little ditty in the Medicare Part "D" law.
Remember, the Democrat talking points were that this bill would "lower your costs" and "make health care more affordable." It was also called a "jobs bill" - that is, that this bill would create jobs.
Within hours corporations announced intent to recognize the repeal of this exemption - via 8Ks filed with the SEC. This was not a surprise - Caterpillar had warned the Administration, as had other firms, that the bill as written would increase their costs and that they would have to recognize those forward costs.
Securities laws require firms to disclose material changes when they are realized - which in this case means when the bill was signed into law, since they had already analyzed the bill and it's impact. Legally, these companies are obligated to file the 8Ks disclosing these charges.
The Administration and Democrats generally ignored these folks when they warned of this impact before the bill was passed, of course, claiming they were part of some "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy." Oh wait - that was Clinton. Ok, ok, so Pelosi said she had to pass this bill so we could know what was in it. (And no, that's not an exaggeration - she really did say that!)
Well, the corporations weren't lying, and now the 8Ks are flying. Caterpillar has announced an intent to take a $100 million non-cash charge, John Deer $150 million, and AT&T a whopping $1 billion.
Government's response?
Threats.
Mississippi leads nation in unemployment jump
In February, 27 states recorded over-the-month unemployment rate increases. And, Mississippi had the largest increase in the nation.
Seven states and the District of Columbia registered rate decreases and 16 states had no rate change, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports. Over the year, jobless rates increased in 46 states and the District of Columbia and declined in four states.
The national unemployment rate in February, 9.7 percent, remained unchanged from January, but was up from 8.2 percent a year earlier.
Mississippi Business Journal
Seven states and the District of Columbia registered rate decreases and 16 states had no rate change, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports. Over the year, jobless rates increased in 46 states and the District of Columbia and declined in four states.
The national unemployment rate in February, 9.7 percent, remained unchanged from January, but was up from 8.2 percent a year earlier.
Mississippi Business Journal
Bill Bonner/Housing Market Recovery: On the Same Schedule as Godot
There are still millions of people living in houses they can’t really afford…and millions of others who are “underwater” and running out of air. That’s why the number of houses facing foreclosure rose in the last quarter of last year. And it’s why the inventory of unsold houses continues to rise.
Gradually, people are coming to see houses in a new light. Soon, they’ll see them as money-pits…as expensive follies…and as a pain in the neck. Instead of being proud to have a McMansion…they’ll be embarrassed…like having a car with tail fins in 1985…or wearing a mullet in 2010.
Not only that, it will also be seen as a big waste of money. As the Great Correction continues, unemployment will remain at high levels…savings will increase…and people will want to cut expenses. Among other things, they’ll want smaller, cheaper houses. They’ll want to dump their suburban castles and walk away from their country palaces.
Houses will be losers.
Daily Reckoning
Friday, March 26, 2010
‘Cap and Trade’ Loses Its Standing as Energy Policy of Choice
Less than a year ago, cap and trade was the policy of choice for tackling climate change.
Environmental groups and their foes in industry joined hands to embrace the approach, a market-driven system that sets a ceiling on global warming pollution while allowing companies to trade permits to meet it. President Obama praised it by name in his first budget, and the authors of the House climate and energy bill passed last June largely built their measure around it.
Today, the concept is in wide disrepute, with opponents effectively branding it “cap and tax,” and Tea Party followers using it as a symbol of much of what they say is wrong with Washington.
Mr. Obama dropped all mention of cap and trade from his current budget. And the sponsors of a Senate climate bill likely to be introduced in April, now that Congress is moving past health care, dare not speak its name.
"I don’t know what ‘cap and trade’ means,” Senator John F. Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said last fall in introducing his original climate change plan.
Mr. Kerry’s partner in promoting global warming legislation, Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, pronounced economywide cap and trade dead last month and has since been working with Mr. Kerry to try to patch together a bill that satisfies the diverse economic, regional and ideological interests of the Senate.
That plan, still being written, will include a cap on greenhouse gas emissions only for utilities, at least at first, with other industries phased in perhaps years later. It is also said to include a modest tax on gasoline, diesel fuel and aviation fuel, accompanied by new incentives for oil and gas drilling, nuclear power plant construction, carbon capture and storage, and renewable energy sources like wind and solar.
Why did cap and trade die? The short answer is that it was done in by the weak economy, the Wall Street meltdown, determined industry opposition and its own complexity.
The New York Times
Congressman Harper's Military Academy Day to be at Madison Central Saturday
U.S. Representative Gregg Harper will hold his annual Third Congressional District Military Academy Day at Madison Central High School on Saturday, March 27, 2010 from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
“I encourage all students seeking guidance on obtaining a service academy appointment to take part in this informative informational seminar,” said Congressman Gregg Harper. “I look forward to visiting with the bright young men and women from across the Third Congressional District considering service to our country.”
High school students preparing for college in the approaching years and considering the service academies option should participate. Junior high students are also welcome to attend.
Fervent Republican's overshooting the mark?
calling for repeal of the law moments after the bill’s passage is a statement of ideological faith, a rallying cry for conservatives who never liked the bill and wish it had never passed.
OK. We get it. They didn’t like the bill and don’t like the law. And they voted against it. Fine.
But trying to refight the last war, on the same battlefield and with the same forces, isn’t dedication; it’s political stupidity.
Obviously, repeal is not possible now with Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress and the White House, and by demanding repeal, Republicans look like a bunch of spoiled children who didn’t get their way rather than adults focused on fixing a problem. Voters won’t like that.
From a political point of view, it’s an amateurish mistake. In fact, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has been goading Republican candidates into taking a stand on repeal for months, understanding the damage that Republicans could do to themselves by making the midterm elections a referendum on themselves, instead of on the president and Congress.
That doesn’t mean Republicans should forget about health care, of course.
Polling has long shown that the public isn’t crazy about the law (forget the quick post-passage polls that reflect short-term events), and as long as Republicans don’t make their quest for repeal into this cycle’s version of the Clinton impeachment zoo, the GOP stands to benefit from the issue in many states and districts this fall.
By demanding repeal immediately after passage, Republicans resemble unsuccessful candidates who keep challenging election results and refuse to concede. Voters don’t like candidates who sound like sour grapes, and they won’t like a party that sounds that way either.
Read the entire article at Rothenberg Political Report
MBJ: Barbour maneuvering for healthcare lawsuit
The Guv then let it be known with this Press Release that he had no intention of waiting despite Hood's insistance that the governor must wait on the Attorney General.Gov. Haley Barbour has reaffirmed his commitment to have Mississippi join the multi-state lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the healthcare reform legislation approved by the U.S. Congress. Barbour made the announcement after Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, a Democrat, declined to file a lawsuit by noon, March 25, as asked by Barbour, a Republican.
And, Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) has made public his “no” vote on the Senate healthcare “fix.”
“I’m trying to save the people of Mississippi from an enormous amount of taxes that would be caused by the Obama Administration’s healthcare plan,” Barbour said. “There is a pivotal constitutional argument that needs to be addressed: Does the federal government have the constitutional authority to force American citizens to buy insurance and then tell them what they can buy and at what price?
Hood notified Barbour March 25 that he needed more time to understand the complexities of a possible legal challenge. Fourteen states already have joined in a lawsuit seeking to stop the administration’s healthcare plan.
Barbour had said that if Hood refused to file the lawsuit, he would do it himself. However, in his March 25 response to Barbour, Hood said the case is under review, and the governor could not file a lawsuit as long as the review continued. Hood did not say how long that review might take.
Mississippi Business Journal
Throwing bad money after good
U.S. Plans Big Expansion in Effort to Aid Homeowners
The Obama administration on Friday will announce broad new initiatives to help troubled homeowners, potentially refinancing several million of them into fresh government-backed mortgages with lower payments.
Another element of the new program is meant to temporarily reduce the payments of borrowers who are unemployed and seeking a job. Additionally, the government will encourage lenders to write down the value of loans held by borrowers in modification programs.
The escalation in aid comes as the administration is under rising pressure from Congress to resolve the foreclosure crisis, which is straining the economy and putting millions of Americans at risk of losing their homes. But the new initiatives could well spur protests among those who have kept up their payments and are not in trouble.
The administration’s earlier efforts to stem foreclosures have largely been directed at borrowers who were experiencing financial hardship. But the biggest new initiative, which is also likely to be the most controversial, will involve the government, through the Federal Housing Administration, refinancing loans for borrowers who simply owe more than their houses are worth.
Read the article at The New York Times
McClatchy also has a story on it this morning:
The administration already has such a program in place for second liens, but will be doubling what it offers to lenders in this category to help get them out of the way when modifying a mortgage.
Some of the White House thinking is similar to proposals offered by Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. He was briefed on the plan Thursday.
Frank has proposed making loans from the TARP program to unemployed homeowners with good credit histories. He also shepherded legislation through Congress several years ago to pay banks that were willing to write off large portions of underwater mortgages, or those that exceed the home's underlying value. Lenders showed little interest in taking such losses, however.
Since then, the housing crisis has deepened as the recession piled foreclosures from job losses on top of the foreclosures tied to weak loans, often made to borrowers with the weakest credit.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Social Security to See Payout Exceed Pay-In This Year
This year, the system will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes, an important threshold it was not expected to cross until at least 2016, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Stephen C. Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, said that while the Congressional projection would probably be borne out, the change would have no effect on benefits in 2010 and retirees would keep receiving their checks as usual.
The problem, he said, is that payments have risen more than expected during the downturn, because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned. At the same time, the program’s revenue has fallen sharply, because there are fewer paychecks to tax.
Analysts have long tried to predict the year when Social Security would pay out more than it took in because they view it as a tipping point — the first step of a long, slow march to insolvency, unless Congress strengthens the program’s finances.
The New York Times
The left is outraged over Americans outrage over Congressional Dems outrageous behavior in pushing through an outrageously unpopular Health Care Bill.
The left is outraged at the current level of dissatisfaction among voters despite being told time and again through every poll (even the liberal leaning ones). The election of a Republican to the Senate seat previously held by one of the most liberal members of Congress didn't faze Democrats. In fact, according to the White House, the event was used as a launching pad to double their efforts. Of course, it should have been obvious after the Town Hall meetings last August that the public didn't support the ideas they were hearing. But, instead the seething anger became fodder for Democrats.
No one supports violence or threats against anyone. But, after being told in so many ways that TAXPAYING Americans didn't want this, and to still ignore the will of the people, many of whom are participating in the political process for the first time, is ignorance. Had they really been in touch with the real world they would have seen this coming.
Some observers still can't seem to come to grips with the fact that the outrage is genuine, blaming the current tone on Republicans. Despite the fact that Republicans have denounced violence, Democrats continue to promote these instances for political gain. Which, in turn, has begun to spill over to the very Republicans who have spoken out against it.
The arguments have been many, the parliamentary tricks have been creative. But, in the end, people know a rat when they smell it.
Democrats should stop playing partisan politics with their own members safety. It's time to work together to at least try to calm the outrage.
Related: Want to be a Congressman? Stupak and others targeted and threatened (Listen)
Health Care for ALL Americans . . . except senior officials and their staff
Governor Barbour to add Mississippi to list of states challenging Health Care Bill
Conservative voters to Democrats: "We're coming and hell is coming with us."
Obama to Dem fencesitters: "Time to pick"
No one supports violence or threats against anyone. But, after being told in so many ways that TAXPAYING Americans didn't want this, and to still ignore the will of the people, many of whom are participating in the political process for the first time, is ignorance. Had they really been in touch with the real world they would have seen this coming.
Some observers still can't seem to come to grips with the fact that the outrage is genuine, blaming the current tone on Republicans. Despite the fact that Republicans have denounced violence, Democrats continue to promote these instances for political gain. Which, in turn, has begun to spill over to the very Republicans who have spoken out against it.
The arguments have been many, the parliamentary tricks have been creative. But, in the end, people know a rat when they smell it.
Democrats should stop playing partisan politics with their own members safety. It's time to work together to at least try to calm the outrage.
Related: Want to be a Congressman? Stupak and others targeted and threatened (Listen)
Health Care for ALL Americans . . . except senior officials and their staff
Governor Barbour to add Mississippi to list of states challenging Health Care Bill
Conservative voters to Democrats: "We're coming and hell is coming with us."
Obama to Dem fencesitters: "Time to pick"
OPEN THREAD SOUND OFF: Did State Auditor address Madison Countians concerns?
State Auditor Stacey Pickering's time on the Gallo Radio Show this morning was all about the ongoing calls for a procedural audit in Madison County. He implied that an investigation has been ongoing for some time. While the discussion went on for the majority of Gallo's City/Metro Hour, Pickering didn't elaborate much more than that, saying to give status updates to the people of Madison County would jeapordize the investigation. He said that concerns brought to light by a recent independant investigation were not a surprise, but added that some of those concerns had now been turned over to the Ethics Committee for further review.
Did you listen to the interview?
Are you satisfied with the response by Pickering?
Was this, in your opinion, too late in coming? Or was it simply a matter of leading a responsibly quiet investigation?
Related Posts: "To Audit Or Not to Audit?" That is the question, Madison County Supervisor Asks for Audit of Engineer's Contracts . . . Again.
Did you listen to the interview?
Are you satisfied with the response by Pickering?
Was this, in your opinion, too late in coming? Or was it simply a matter of leading a responsibly quiet investigation?
Related Posts: "To Audit Or Not to Audit?" That is the question, Madison County Supervisor Asks for Audit of Engineer's Contracts . . . Again.
PERRY/The GOPers eye Lt. Gov.
By BRIAN PERRY
Three Republicans appear likely to enter the race for lieutenant governor in 2011. Senator Billy Hewes of Gulfport announced in fall 2009 he would seek the seat. Auditor Stacey Pickering of Laurel says if and when current Lieutenant Governor Phil Bryant announces he will not seek reelection, that Pickering would shortly afterward announce his intentions. Treasurer Tate Reeves is widely rumored to have decided on a run for this spot, but has not made any official announcement.
Senate District 49 in Harrison County first elected Hewes in 1991 when he won a three-way Republican Primary without a run-off and went on to beat Democrat Phillip Allen with 75 percent of the vote. In every subsequent primary and general election, Hewes was reelected without opposition (1992, 1995, 1999, 2003, 2007) - the only exception being the 1999 primary where Hewes won with 82 percent.
Hewes, an insurance agent and real estate broker, currently serves as President Pro Tempore of the Mississippi Senate, the top leadership position below lieutenant governor. Hewes faces a challenge to increase his name identification statewide, but benefits as the Gulf Coast's "native son" in the race - expecting a sizable share of that region's abundant Republican primary votes. His latest campaign finance report lists more than $670,000 cash-on-hand: well on his way to the war chest necessary for campaign efforts.
Reeves provides one of my favorite examples in breaking the rules of political predictions. I can remember numerous times sitting on Pete Perry's (no relation) Neshoba County Fair cabin porch engaged in the political parlor game of predicting who would be in what office next. Pete always challenged everyone to write their predictions down on a piece of paper and seal them in a box and open them ten years later to see how wrong we all would be. We've never done it - too much like work for Neshoba - but in the years preceding 2003, no one would have written down the name "Tate Reeves."
But in 2003, Reeves came out with a fundraising juggernaut in the three-way Republican Primary for Treasurer. Despite little experience in GOP politics, Reeves led the first primary with 48.6 percent of the vote over a state legislator and a former transportation commissioner and won the run-off with 69 percent of the vote. He went on to win the general election with 51.8 percent over Democrat Gary Anderson and Reform Party candidate Lee Dilworth. Reeves raised more than half-a-million dollars in his first political campaign in a down ticket race. He easily won reelection in 2007 with 60.5 % of the vote facing only perennial candidate Shawn O'Hara. Reeves most recent finance report lists nearly $1.2 million cash-on-hand.
In 2003, Pickering took 52.2 percent of the vote in a three-way Republican Primary in Senate District 42 in Jones County. He defeated Democrat Randy Ellzey in the general election with 58.8 percent of the vote. In 2007, he raised nearly half-a-million dollars to win election as State Auditor facing no primary challenge and defeating Democrat Mike Sumrall in the general election 55 percent to 45 percent. Pickering often serves as a visiting preacher on Sundays.
Read more at the Madison County Journal Online
Three Republicans appear likely to enter the race for lieutenant governor in 2011. Senator Billy Hewes of Gulfport announced in fall 2009 he would seek the seat. Auditor Stacey Pickering of Laurel says if and when current Lieutenant Governor Phil Bryant announces he will not seek reelection, that Pickering would shortly afterward announce his intentions. Treasurer Tate Reeves is widely rumored to have decided on a run for this spot, but has not made any official announcement.
Hewes, an insurance agent and real estate broker, currently serves as President Pro Tempore of the Mississippi Senate, the top leadership position below lieutenant governor. Hewes faces a challenge to increase his name identification statewide, but benefits as the Gulf Coast's "native son" in the race - expecting a sizable share of that region's abundant Republican primary votes. His latest campaign finance report lists more than $670,000 cash-on-hand: well on his way to the war chest necessary for campaign efforts.
But in 2003, Reeves came out with a fundraising juggernaut in the three-way Republican Primary for Treasurer. Despite little experience in GOP politics, Reeves led the first primary with 48.6 percent of the vote over a state legislator and a former transportation commissioner and won the run-off with 69 percent of the vote. He went on to win the general election with 51.8 percent over Democrat Gary Anderson and Reform Party candidate Lee Dilworth. Reeves raised more than half-a-million dollars in his first political campaign in a down ticket race. He easily won reelection in 2007 with 60.5 % of the vote facing only perennial candidate Shawn O'Hara. Reeves most recent finance report lists nearly $1.2 million cash-on-hand.
Read more at the Madison County Journal Online
Senate makes changes, returns reconciliation bill to House
The Associated Press
Senate Republicans learned early Thursday that they will be able to kill language in a measure altering President Obama's newly enacted health care overhaul, meaning the bill will have to return to the House for final congressional approval.
It was initially unclear how much of a problem this posed for Democrats hoping to rush the bill to Obama and avoid further congressional votes on what has been a politically painful ordeal for the party. Democrats described the situation as a minor glitch, but did not rule out that Republicans might be able to remove additional sections of the bill.
The president, who signed the landmark legislation into law on Tuesday, was flying to Iowa later in the day for the first of many appearances he will make around the country before the fall congressional elections to sell his health care revamp. Obama was appearing in Iowa City, where as a presidential candidate in 2007 he touted his ideas for health coverage for all.
His trip comes with polls showing people are divided over the law he signed Tuesday, and Democratic lawmakers from competitive districts hoping he can convince more voters by November that it was the right move.
As an exhausted Senate labored past 2 a.m. on a stack of GOP amendments, Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, told reporters that Republicans consulting with the chamber's parliamentarian had found "two minor provisions" that violate Congress' budget rules. The provisions deal with Pell grants for low-income students.
Senate Republicans learned early Thursday that they will be able to kill language in a measure altering President Obama's newly enacted health care overhaul, meaning the bill will have to return to the House for final congressional approval.
It was initially unclear how much of a problem this posed for Democrats hoping to rush the bill to Obama and avoid further congressional votes on what has been a politically painful ordeal for the party. Democrats described the situation as a minor glitch, but did not rule out that Republicans might be able to remove additional sections of the bill.
The president, who signed the landmark legislation into law on Tuesday, was flying to Iowa later in the day for the first of many appearances he will make around the country before the fall congressional elections to sell his health care revamp. Obama was appearing in Iowa City, where as a presidential candidate in 2007 he touted his ideas for health coverage for all.
His trip comes with polls showing people are divided over the law he signed Tuesday, and Democratic lawmakers from competitive districts hoping he can convince more voters by November that it was the right move.
As an exhausted Senate labored past 2 a.m. on a stack of GOP amendments, Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, told reporters that Republicans consulting with the chamber's parliamentarian had found "two minor provisions" that violate Congress' budget rules. The provisions deal with Pell grants for low-income students.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
"To audit or not to audit?" That is the question.
Some resident activists were on the radio show on March 18. A WAPT report on that same day noted the findings of an independent investigation by Madison Mayor Mary Hawkins-Butler through Detroit-based PMA Consultants. The investigation found potenital illegalities in subcontracting, an issue that has been discussed for several months according to Hawkins-Butler, and the spending of as much as $2 million without proper oversight from the Board of Supervisors.
Warnock has said he is the victim of politics, and that the investigator, Richard J. McAfee, was nothing more than a "hired gun."
"This bears further investigation," McAfee said in an interview. "Any government in the business of serving the people need to have better checks and balances. There are so many inconsistencies it would make sense to perform a thorough audit."
Pickering's office currently has 160 active cases probing misused funds. The state auditor's duties are to protect the public's trust by independently assessing state and local governmental and other entities to ensure that public funds are properly received, spent and reported.
"We are going to pursue each one of these and do it in a fair and just manner," Pickering said of the pending cases.
Pickering has recovered more than $3.6 million in embezzled, misspent or misappropriated funds since being elected in 2007. He announced today that his office has collected more than $1,038,000.00 in unpaid court assessments since February 22, 2010 from counties and municipalities, and that an estimated $1,061,000.00 was yet to be turned in. So, his effectiveness is not in question. The question is will he finally answer a simple question,
"Will you or won't you add this particular audit in Madison County to that list and help the taxpayers of Madison County potentially recover millions?"
And, if the answer is no, "Why not?"
Related articles: Madison County Supervisor Asks for Audit Of Engineers Contracts . . . Again.
Want to be a Congressman? Stupak and others targeted and threatened (Listen)
Bart Stupak Left Threatening Messages for Health Care Vote
Read the rest of the article at CBS News
Prior to the vote, Stupak also received threatening messages from supporters of the Health Insurance Legislation.
In the wake of his vote in favor of health care reform legislation, Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), a strong opponent of abortion rights, has been on the receiving end of a string of extremely hostile and threatening messages, including death threats.
Stupak's office released some of those messages to CBS News, and you can listen to them here.
"Congressman Stupak, you baby-killing mother f***er... I hope you bleed out your a**, got cancer and die, you mother f***er," one man says in a message to Stupak.
"There are millions of people across the country who wish you ill," a woman says in a voicemail, "and all of those thoughts that are projected on you will materialize into something that's not very good for you."
CBS News also obtained copies of faxes sent to Stupak, which include racial epithets used in reference to President Obama and show pictures of nooses with Stupak's name.
Read the rest of the article at CBS News
Prior to the vote, Stupak also received threatening messages from supporters of the Health Insurance Legislation.
The Catholic Failure
From March 22nd post on The New Ledger Blog:
Read the entire post at The New Ledger
The roster of names is so long that its recitation would be a total rebuke to the authority of any American Catholic bishop now living and many dead. Kennedy, Leahy, Kucinich, Drinan, Durbin, Pelosi, Casey (Jr.), Mitchell, Sebelius, Cuomo, I could go on. These are men and women who have made it the goal of their careers to advocate the abortion license, to preserve it and expand it. The leaders in the fight to keep public funding of abortion were overwhelmingly self-professed Catholics. Last night, they succeeded.
They teach by word and act that abortion is, at worst, an unfortunately necessary convenience, and is more often a good. They create scandal. They do so as Catholics.
Who among them has been publicly remonstrated by his bishop? Who among them has had to stand in public and choose between an honest recitation of the Nicene Creed and Planned Parenthood v. Casey? Who among them has been reminded of Christ’s injunction about scandal and millstones where their audiences and constituencies can hear?
Why would anyone expect Bart Stupak — otherwise a consummate Democrat — to hold up a health care reform bill against his Party and his Party’s President when even the men who are supposed to stand against evil every waking moment of their lives appear more concerned about the environment, about immigrant rights, about the death penalty? What Catholic sitting in the pews or watching on TV would think there’s anything wrong with abortion when Mario Cuomo’s dishonest justification has stood without censure or excommunication for over a quarter of a century?
The blood of millions will now be shed by the public coffers. That blood lies on the hands of the men with mitres.
Read the entire post at The New Ledger
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Health Care for ALL Americans . . . except senior officials and their staff
New Ledger writer and blogger Ben Domenech writes of a little discussed portion of the recent Health Care Legislation that exempts "senior Democrat staffers who wrote the bill from being forced to purchase health care plans in the same way as other Americans."
For his part Senator Chuck Grassley is renewing his efforts to show the Democratic Leaders hypocrisy for what it is.
A major story during the course of the health care debate was whether members of Congress would commit to placing themselves in the same health care exchanges as average citizens, or whether they would hang on to their government plans — that’s why leadership chose to add this portion to the bill, serving as a guarantee that members would participate in the same health plans as the people. Here’s the relevant text:
(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE-
(i) REQUIREMENT- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are–
(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or
(II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).
But as with a lot of legislative matters, the devil is in the details — or in this case, the definitions. As anyone who’s worked on Capitol Hill knows, the personal office staff for a member is governed by different rules than those who work on committees and in the leadership offices. It appears from the way this language is written that those staffers NOT in personal offices, such as those working and paid under the committee structure (such as those working for Chairman Henry Waxman) or those working on leadership staff (such as those working for Speaker Nancy Pelosi) would be exempt from these requirements (emphasis added).
(ii) DEFINITIONS- In this section:
(I) MEMBER OF CONGRESS- The term `Member of Congress’ means any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate.
(II) CONGRESSIONAL STAFF- The term `congressional staff’ means all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC.
According to the Congressional Research Service, this definition of staff will only apply to those staffers employed within a member’s “personal office” — meaning that it will absolutely not apply to committee staff members, and may not apply to leadership staff.
This problem was acknowledged earlier in the process — last year, Senator Grassley tried to repair it, but he was rebuffed.
As Speaker Pelosi said a few weeks ago, it’s only after this legislation is passed that we’ll truly find out what’s in it.
For his part Senator Chuck Grassley is renewing his efforts to show the Democratic Leaders hypocrisy for what it is.
Grassley says health care reform should apply to President Obama, top administration officials
WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley today said he will offer an amendment during Senate debate on the health care reconciliation bill this week to apply the reform legislation to the President, Vice President, cabinet members and top White House staff.
“It’s pretty unbelieveable that the President and his closest advisors remain untouched by the reforms they pushed for the rest of the country. In other words, President Obama’s health care reform won’t apply to President Obama,” Grassley said. “Last December, the effort to apply any new law to administration political leaders was rejected by the Senate Majority Leader. But there’s no justification for the double standard, and I’ll continue to work to establish fairness.”
The Senate legislation passed last night by the House of Representatives includes an amendment Grassley sponsored and got adopted by the Finance Committee last fall to have members of Congress and their staffs get their health insurance through the same health insurance exchanges where health plans for the general public would be available. During the closed-door negotiations on the bill late last year, the Senate Majority Leader carved out Senate committee and leadership staff from this requirement.
Subsequently, Grassley and Senator Tom Coburn attempted to offer another amendment to restore the requirement during Senate debate on the health care bill, but the Senate Majority Leader would not let their amendment to fix this loophole even come up for a vote. In addition to Senate committee and leadership staff, the amendment Grassley and Coburn filed during the Senate debate would have made the President, the Vice President, top White House staff and cabinet members all get their health insurance through the newly created exchanges. It would not have applied to federal employees in the civil service.
Grassley said, “It’s only fair and logical that top administration officials, who fought so hard for passage of this overhaul of America’s health care system, experience it themselves. If it’s as good as promised, they’ll know it first-hand. If there are problems, they’ll be able to really understand them, as they should.”
Grassley said the motivation for his amendments is simple: public officials who make the laws or lead efforts to have laws changed should live under those laws.
“This is the same principle that motivated me to pursue legislation over 20 years ago to apply civil rights, labor and employment laws to Congress,” Grassley said. Before President Clinton signed into law Grassley’s long-sought Congressional Accountability Act of 1995, Congress had routinely exempted itself.
The Congressional Accountability Act made Congress subject to 12 laws, including the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Veteran’s Employment and Reemployment Rights at Chapter 43 of Title 38 of the U.S. Code, and the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1989.
Today, Grassley is working to make sure Congress lives up to the same standards it imposes on others with legislation such as his Congressional Whistleblower Protection Act.
IRS to Enforce Health Reform
The tax collection agency will be responsible for monitoring and enforcing compliance with the individual and employer insurance mandates which form the backbone of the Democrats’ hard-won reforms.
The bill states that the purpose of the mandates is to regulate “economic and financial decisions about how and when health care is paid for, and when health insurance is purchased.”
The mandates require that all Americans carry a minimum level of health insurance or pay a separate tax for every month they are without such coverage. All employers with 50 employers or more will also be required to provide their employees with that same minimum level of coverage.
While that minimum level of coverage will be defined at a later date by the Department of Health and Human Services, it will be the responsibility of the IRS to monitor individuals and employers and to punish those who do not comply.
Under the bill, which passed despite bipartisan opposition March 21, starting in 2014 the IRS would be responsible for monitoring which employers are complying with the mandate and which ones are not. The IRS would begin such monitoring of individuals’ health insurance status in 2014 as well.
The IRS would monitor individuals and businesses’ health insurance statuses through the mandatory reporting the bill requires. Under the law, every individual and most businesses are required to report to the IRS, on their tax returns, whether they have purchased or provided the required level of coverage and disclose to the IRS which months, if any, in which they failed to do so.
Using this information, the IRS would then determine whether an employer or individual falls under the mandate, which contains exceptions for religious conscience, hardship, incarcerated persons, and members of Indian tribes.
If either an individual or a business has failed to comply with this mandate for any month out of the year, they are required to pay a separate tax to the IRS. For individuals this is a maximum of $750 per person (up to $2,250 per household) and $750 per uncovered employee for businesses.
Because these penalties would each apply on a monthly basis, individuals and employers would have to pay 1/12th of the maximum penalties for each month they failed to comply with the mandates.
In order to carry out its new monitoring and enforcement duties, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the IRS will need $10 billion in additional funds, funds which were not made available under the health reform bill.
An analysis done by Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee estimated that this $10 billion could go to fund an additional 16,500 new IRS agents and other personnel to monitor and enforce the new mandates.
“[T]he IRS could add more than 16,500 additional agents, auditors, examiners, and administrative support personnel to enforce large portions of the nation’s health insurance system,” the report said.
The IRS will also be in charge of collecting the new taxes on high cost insurance plans and on so-called unearned income from couples making over $250,000 per year and single filers making over $200,000 per year.
Both of these provisions could be modified should the Senate approve a budget reconciliation measure the House also passed March 21. Whichever final form they take, they are both direct taxes and thus will be directly administered by the IRS.
Because these new mandates and taxes are under the purview of the IRS, taxpayers and businesses could incur additional penalties normally reserved for normal income tax cheats, paying fees over and above those for not complying with Congress’ new mandates.
The IRS currently charges potentially hefty penalties for, among other things, filing false or fraudulent returns, filing late returns, and failure to pay a tax on time.
Taxpayers and businesses could be hit with these extra penalties because they are required to use their tax returns to prove to the IRS that they are complying with the mandates and because they will have to pay any tax penalties to that agency as well.
CNS News
Victor David Hanson: We’ve Crossed the Rubicon
We've Crossed the Rubicon
President Obama has crossed the Rubicon with the health care vote. The bill was not really about medicine; after all, a moderately priced, relatively small federal program could offer the poorer not now insured, presently not on Medicare or state programs like Medicaid or Medical, a basic medical plan.
We have no interest in stopping trial lawyers from milking the system for billions. And we don’t want to address in any meaningful way the individual’s responsibility in some cases (drink, drugs, violence, dangerous sex, bad diet, sloth, etc.) for costly and chronic health procedures.
No, instead, the bill was about assuming a massive portion of the private sector, hiring tens of thousands of loyal, compliant new employees, staffing new departments with new technocrats, and feeling wonderful that we “are leveling the playing field” and have achieved another Civil Rights landmark law. (NB: do the math: add higher state income taxes in most states; the new Clinton-era federal income tax rates to come; the proposed lifting of limits on income exposed to FICA taxes; and now new health care charges — and I think you can reach in some cases a bite of 65%to 70% of one’s income.)
So we are in revolutionary times in which the government will grow to assume everything from energy use to student loans, while abroad we are a revolutionary sort of power, eager to mend fences with Syria and Iran, more eager still to distance ourselves from old Western allies like Israel and Britain.
There won’t be any more soaring rhetoric from Obama about purple-state America, “reaching across the aisle,” or healing our wounds. That was so 2008. Instead, we are in the most partisan age since Vietnam, ushered into it by the self-acclaimed “non-partisan.” But how could it be anything else?
Partisanship all the time, everywhere
No, Obama has thrown down the gauntlet, and is trying to reify the sloganeering of the 1960s. He apparently reasons along the following lines: that centrist talk was campaign fluff; the voters fell for it, and now it’s his turn to remake America with 51% of the House and 44% of the people. Think Sweden, or, better, Greece as our model at home, and something like America as Brazil in matters of foreign policy. Apparently, Obama figures that people now may not like the present partisanship, but they didn’t like FDR at the time either. Yet whom do they associate their Social Security checks with? Hoover? Coolidge? Harding?
I don’t see why the ram-it-through, health care formula won’t be followed by similar strategies for blanket amnesty, cap and trade, and expansions of the state takeover of cars, banks, student loans, and energy.
Remember, all these will be packaged as “comprehensive” reform — comprehensive health care, comprehensive immigration, comprehensive energy, comprehensive monitoring of even the banal decisions we make. So what does comprehensive really mean, other than all of us are going to get even more official looking letters in the mail, advising us to fill out a form, pay a fine, and be warned that a new regulation or tax is on the way — followed by the usual state/federal representative’s newsletter bragging about some new entitlement that he “won” for us with our borrowed money?
The Logic of Statism
I expect a lot of the following in the next three years.
1) Them!: More Obama soaring speeches about some “historic” crisis that needs “comprehensive” solutions (e.g., more of “this is our moment” banalities). Those introductions will be followed by alternate praise of some heroic individual who lost her health care, struggled to unionize, breathed some sooty air, was deported while cooking the evening meal, etc. These gripping narratives will be mixed in with ‘Them!’ demagoguery (e.g., the health care industry, the big corporations, the polluters, the nativists and racists — all of “Them” are standing in the way of hope and change, and, together, yes, we can! defeat them. Oh yes, there is going to being even more sermonizing, and shriller human interest portraits about “Them” smashing poor five-year-old Billy Jones from Topeka who flew up to DC to find Harry Reid for “help”; or “Them” denying Herlinda Lopez from Fresno her college dreams, who then wrote a letter pleading to Michelle for assistance; or “Them” absolutely crushing the mother of Bobby Smith for no other reason than sheer greed, who then took the Greyhound to Nancy Pelosi’s office!
2) The Fedopus has far more than eight tentacles: More letters in the mail from more state and federal bureaucracies (both broke, and searching for billions of dollars for millions of workers who need to be paid). The official looking stationary letters will be advising us that there is a new fee, surcharge, rule, regulation, etc. — mostly in the context that we have already in some way violated something. (Expect in such writs to see your name misspelled, your address garbled, one letter canceling out the one of the prior month, and semi-threatening language demanding compliance. [Don’t dare call the government number since the U.S. can’t hire more competent answerers from India]). This last month, to name a few, I got IRS friendly reminders, State Board of Equalization new rules, federal agricultural surveys, county assessment questionnaires, and the Census. All in all, about 12 official letters came, and I expect more this month. (My favorites are all the county, state, and federal agricultural questionnaires that usually have a warning like, “Do not write ‘no change from last year!’”—meaning that, even though your vineyard hasn’t gone anywhere in the last twelve months, you must go through a zillion questions, marking “No” to things like “Do you have a billboard on your property?” or “Do you raise gaming horses?”
3) More cynicism: The more Obama talks about the greedy and selfish in society who “take” from others, the more the public will understand that they are in fact the greedy in these crosshairs. Costly health problems that originate with obesity, smoking, alcoholism, unsafe sex, violence, law-breaking, etc. are really due to lack of scheduled office visits. One missed colonoscopy — not 50 extra pounds or 1000 Big Macs over the years — causes cancer. People always ache due to a dearth of medical advisors and outreach counselors — or the diet and prescription drugs pushed on the victim by the profit-mongering corporation. In other words, the old days of a kindly, but tiny government politely advising us about what not to do have now transmogrified into a brave new world in which there is no individual. Instead, there exists only collective responsibility — a creed that assumes those in rehab or on parole or fighting weight-induced diabetes were victims of a system in which those who did not engage in that sort of behavior were culpable in some way and should pony up. Best of all, the system assumes we are greedy, cruel, and selfish for writing things like the above.
4) Pelosism: In our brave new world, expect more of the lurid stories about the secretary of the Treasury not paying his FICA taxes. The multimillionaire Madame Speaker will spend more of the state’s millions on private jet travel as she lectures on carbon footprints and a culture of corruption. We will hear more about the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee hiding his income, or a member of the House Rules Committee bragging that, given the historic importance of health care, they are just making up the rules as they go along — and proud of it. Our guardian class has become the new French aristocracy at Versailles. They will rail about Citation jets for the CEO, and then fly federally-owned Gulfstreams; they will put us in Smart cars but limo in Yukons and Tahoes on “official business.” Our lifestyles will be as monitored as much as those who do the monitoring will not be at all.
5) Greedy and Not-So-Greedy Capitalists: And there are “bad” and “not so bad” capitalists too. The CEOs for GM are trying to help America out with green designs and fair wages — so unlike those at Ford and Toyota. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are the model execs, quite unlike the yokels who run Caterpillar and whine about health care. George Soros is not really a money speculator that ruins banks, but a transferer of capital to progressive causes. In every statist society, large corporations either resist or join. For the latter, the machinery of government reinvents them as part of the solution rather than the problem — in the way that Al Gore really doesn’t really guzzle electricity, or John Edwards never really lived in a mansion. The transition to a Ministry of Industry requires a Ministry of Truth. With the Obama media we are already half there.
6) The Race/Class/Gender Cult: This federal caring creed trumps all religion. We will hear thousands of homophobic, racist, sexist anecdotes (but not those from a Ruth Ginsberg, or Harry Reid, or Joe Biden) that remind us why the government must enforce diversity set-asides and affirmative actions, and fund new sociological studies proving why group X hates group Y, and why government bureau Z is fighting X on behalf of Y for all our benefit. We are in perpetual war with perpetual ologies and –isms and we need far more Van Joneses to win them!
I understand the reasoning behind Obamism and am familiar with the feel-good, this-is-our-moment rhetoric of egalitarianism. But please at least spare us the fictions and simply be honest: Obama wants a state-run America, somewhere to the left of France or Denmark, a United States unexceptional and merely one of many nations at the UN. This vision follows an existing, decades-long encroachment of government. And it requires all sorts of highly credentialed overseers monitoring and at times justifiably attacking the upper middle class for its deplorable treatment of those below it.
This new America is ultimately predicated on the notion that we were born equal and must die absolutely equal as well. And this is entirely within our grasp, if we just understand that individual responsibility, talent, natural endowment, chance, merit, luck, tragedy, and a dozen other variables far too complex for government to imagine, much less solve, in fact, are not the real obstacles to ensuring equality.
Instead, it is simpler than that: greed, selfishness, racism, sexism, classism, and not niceness on the part of a few really are the culprits. Thank God that a few rare souls like Obama fathom that. And thank God, again, that it will take a singular humanitarian and genius like Obama to make us denser folks see it and do something about it.
That’s about where we are.
Subscript: Do Democrats realize that we really have crossed the Rubicon? In the future when the Republicans gain majorities (and they will), the liberal modus operandi will be the model—bare 51% majorities, reconciliation, the nuclear option, talk of deem and pass, not a single Democrat vote—all ends justifying the means in order to radically restructure vast swaths of American economic and social life. Is someone unhinged at the DNC? They just blew up any shred of bipartisan consensus when their President polls below 50%, the Democratically-controlled Congress below 20%, and health care reform less than 50%. Usually unpopular leaders and their unpopular ideas seek the shelter of minority rights and prerogatives. What will they do when they are in the minority—since they’ve entered the arena, boasted “let the games begin” and shouted “by any means necessary”?
We have no interest in stopping trial lawyers from milking the system for billions. And we don’t want to address in any meaningful way the individual’s responsibility in some cases (drink, drugs, violence, dangerous sex, bad diet, sloth, etc.) for costly and chronic health procedures.
No, instead, the bill was about assuming a massive portion of the private sector, hiring tens of thousands of loyal, compliant new employees, staffing new departments with new technocrats, and feeling wonderful that we “are leveling the playing field” and have achieved another Civil Rights landmark law. (NB: do the math: add higher state income taxes in most states; the new Clinton-era federal income tax rates to come; the proposed lifting of limits on income exposed to FICA taxes; and now new health care charges — and I think you can reach in some cases a bite of 65%to 70% of one’s income.)
So we are in revolutionary times in which the government will grow to assume everything from energy use to student loans, while abroad we are a revolutionary sort of power, eager to mend fences with Syria and Iran, more eager still to distance ourselves from old Western allies like Israel and Britain.
There won’t be any more soaring rhetoric from Obama about purple-state America, “reaching across the aisle,” or healing our wounds. That was so 2008. Instead, we are in the most partisan age since Vietnam, ushered into it by the self-acclaimed “non-partisan.” But how could it be anything else?
Partisanship all the time, everywhere
No, Obama has thrown down the gauntlet, and is trying to reify the sloganeering of the 1960s. He apparently reasons along the following lines: that centrist talk was campaign fluff; the voters fell for it, and now it’s his turn to remake America with 51% of the House and 44% of the people. Think Sweden, or, better, Greece as our model at home, and something like America as Brazil in matters of foreign policy. Apparently, Obama figures that people now may not like the present partisanship, but they didn’t like FDR at the time either. Yet whom do they associate their Social Security checks with? Hoover? Coolidge? Harding?
I don’t see why the ram-it-through, health care formula won’t be followed by similar strategies for blanket amnesty, cap and trade, and expansions of the state takeover of cars, banks, student loans, and energy.
Remember, all these will be packaged as “comprehensive” reform — comprehensive health care, comprehensive immigration, comprehensive energy, comprehensive monitoring of even the banal decisions we make. So what does comprehensive really mean, other than all of us are going to get even more official looking letters in the mail, advising us to fill out a form, pay a fine, and be warned that a new regulation or tax is on the way — followed by the usual state/federal representative’s newsletter bragging about some new entitlement that he “won” for us with our borrowed money?
The Logic of Statism
I expect a lot of the following in the next three years.
1) Them!: More Obama soaring speeches about some “historic” crisis that needs “comprehensive” solutions (e.g., more of “this is our moment” banalities). Those introductions will be followed by alternate praise of some heroic individual who lost her health care, struggled to unionize, breathed some sooty air, was deported while cooking the evening meal, etc. These gripping narratives will be mixed in with ‘Them!’ demagoguery (e.g., the health care industry, the big corporations, the polluters, the nativists and racists — all of “Them” are standing in the way of hope and change, and, together, yes, we can! defeat them. Oh yes, there is going to being even more sermonizing, and shriller human interest portraits about “Them” smashing poor five-year-old Billy Jones from Topeka who flew up to DC to find Harry Reid for “help”; or “Them” denying Herlinda Lopez from Fresno her college dreams, who then wrote a letter pleading to Michelle for assistance; or “Them” absolutely crushing the mother of Bobby Smith for no other reason than sheer greed, who then took the Greyhound to Nancy Pelosi’s office!
2) The Fedopus has far more than eight tentacles: More letters in the mail from more state and federal bureaucracies (both broke, and searching for billions of dollars for millions of workers who need to be paid). The official looking stationary letters will be advising us that there is a new fee, surcharge, rule, regulation, etc. — mostly in the context that we have already in some way violated something. (Expect in such writs to see your name misspelled, your address garbled, one letter canceling out the one of the prior month, and semi-threatening language demanding compliance. [Don’t dare call the government number since the U.S. can’t hire more competent answerers from India]). This last month, to name a few, I got IRS friendly reminders, State Board of Equalization new rules, federal agricultural surveys, county assessment questionnaires, and the Census. All in all, about 12 official letters came, and I expect more this month. (My favorites are all the county, state, and federal agricultural questionnaires that usually have a warning like, “Do not write ‘no change from last year!’”—meaning that, even though your vineyard hasn’t gone anywhere in the last twelve months, you must go through a zillion questions, marking “No” to things like “Do you have a billboard on your property?” or “Do you raise gaming horses?”
3) More cynicism: The more Obama talks about the greedy and selfish in society who “take” from others, the more the public will understand that they are in fact the greedy in these crosshairs. Costly health problems that originate with obesity, smoking, alcoholism, unsafe sex, violence, law-breaking, etc. are really due to lack of scheduled office visits. One missed colonoscopy — not 50 extra pounds or 1000 Big Macs over the years — causes cancer. People always ache due to a dearth of medical advisors and outreach counselors — or the diet and prescription drugs pushed on the victim by the profit-mongering corporation. In other words, the old days of a kindly, but tiny government politely advising us about what not to do have now transmogrified into a brave new world in which there is no individual. Instead, there exists only collective responsibility — a creed that assumes those in rehab or on parole or fighting weight-induced diabetes were victims of a system in which those who did not engage in that sort of behavior were culpable in some way and should pony up. Best of all, the system assumes we are greedy, cruel, and selfish for writing things like the above.
4) Pelosism: In our brave new world, expect more of the lurid stories about the secretary of the Treasury not paying his FICA taxes. The multimillionaire Madame Speaker will spend more of the state’s millions on private jet travel as she lectures on carbon footprints and a culture of corruption. We will hear more about the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee hiding his income, or a member of the House Rules Committee bragging that, given the historic importance of health care, they are just making up the rules as they go along — and proud of it. Our guardian class has become the new French aristocracy at Versailles. They will rail about Citation jets for the CEO, and then fly federally-owned Gulfstreams; they will put us in Smart cars but limo in Yukons and Tahoes on “official business.” Our lifestyles will be as monitored as much as those who do the monitoring will not be at all.
5) Greedy and Not-So-Greedy Capitalists: And there are “bad” and “not so bad” capitalists too. The CEOs for GM are trying to help America out with green designs and fair wages — so unlike those at Ford and Toyota. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are the model execs, quite unlike the yokels who run Caterpillar and whine about health care. George Soros is not really a money speculator that ruins banks, but a transferer of capital to progressive causes. In every statist society, large corporations either resist or join. For the latter, the machinery of government reinvents them as part of the solution rather than the problem — in the way that Al Gore really doesn’t really guzzle electricity, or John Edwards never really lived in a mansion. The transition to a Ministry of Industry requires a Ministry of Truth. With the Obama media we are already half there.
6) The Race/Class/Gender Cult: This federal caring creed trumps all religion. We will hear thousands of homophobic, racist, sexist anecdotes (but not those from a Ruth Ginsberg, or Harry Reid, or Joe Biden) that remind us why the government must enforce diversity set-asides and affirmative actions, and fund new sociological studies proving why group X hates group Y, and why government bureau Z is fighting X on behalf of Y for all our benefit. We are in perpetual war with perpetual ologies and –isms and we need far more Van Joneses to win them!
I understand the reasoning behind Obamism and am familiar with the feel-good, this-is-our-moment rhetoric of egalitarianism. But please at least spare us the fictions and simply be honest: Obama wants a state-run America, somewhere to the left of France or Denmark, a United States unexceptional and merely one of many nations at the UN. This vision follows an existing, decades-long encroachment of government. And it requires all sorts of highly credentialed overseers monitoring and at times justifiably attacking the upper middle class for its deplorable treatment of those below it.
This new America is ultimately predicated on the notion that we were born equal and must die absolutely equal as well. And this is entirely within our grasp, if we just understand that individual responsibility, talent, natural endowment, chance, merit, luck, tragedy, and a dozen other variables far too complex for government to imagine, much less solve, in fact, are not the real obstacles to ensuring equality.
Instead, it is simpler than that: greed, selfishness, racism, sexism, classism, and not niceness on the part of a few really are the culprits. Thank God that a few rare souls like Obama fathom that. And thank God, again, that it will take a singular humanitarian and genius like Obama to make us denser folks see it and do something about it.
That’s about where we are.
Subscript: Do Democrats realize that we really have crossed the Rubicon? In the future when the Republicans gain majorities (and they will), the liberal modus operandi will be the model—bare 51% majorities, reconciliation, the nuclear option, talk of deem and pass, not a single Democrat vote—all ends justifying the means in order to radically restructure vast swaths of American economic and social life. Is someone unhinged at the DNC? They just blew up any shred of bipartisan consensus when their President polls below 50%, the Democratically-controlled Congress below 20%, and health care reform less than 50%. Usually unpopular leaders and their unpopular ideas seek the shelter of minority rights and prerogatives. What will they do when they are in the minority—since they’ve entered the arena, boasted “let the games begin” and shouted “by any means necessary”?
Governor Barbour to add Mississippi to list of states challenging Health Care Bill.
Barbour to AG: File health care suit or I will
The Associated Press
The Mississippi Business Journal also reported on the story saying
Mississippi's Republican governor and lieutenant governor are asking the state's Democratic attorney general to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a sweeping federal health care bill.
The legislation passed Sunday, and President Barack Obama plans to sign it into law Tuesday.
Gov. Haley Barbour said he will file a lawsuit himself if Attorney General Jim Hood does not make a decision by noon Thursday.
"A physician's creed is to 'First, do no harm,"' Barbour, who's head of the Republican Governors Association, said in a statement Monday. "The health care legislation passed Sunday infects the economy with harmful tax increases, strips benefits from senior citizens and robs each citizen of their basic freedom to choose their own health care."
Hood made no commitment Monday, saying only that once the bill is signed, "we will review the law to determine if there are any viable causes of action for the state of Mississippi."
Clarion Ledger
The Mississippi Business Journal also reported on the story saying
Lt. Governor Phil Bryant joined the Governor by sending a letter to Attorney General Jim Hood Monday, asking the Democrat to file a lawsuit on behalf of the state. See the press release and entire letter here.
Bryant says Mississippi should assert its rights under the 10th Amendment, which “protects states from an overbearing federal government.”
Mississippi is not the only state mulling a challenge to the healthcare bill. Washington, Utah and Nebraska are also thinking of suing, according to The Associated Press.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Conservative Voters to Democrats: "We're coming, and hell is coming with us"
The Monday morning quarterbacking is in full stride as politicos look to explain the answers to the "what happens now" questions with Health Care legislation.
Mark Steyn of the National Review is playing the defeatist, but he seems to be in the minority among conservative political analysts. He says, "Dems wouldn't be doing what they're doing. Their bet is that it can't be undone, and that over time, as I've been saying for years now, governmentalized health care not only changes the relationship of the citizen to the state but the very character of the people."
But, does he underestimate the "character of the people"? And does he jump the gun on the "woe is me" talk? Is he wrong that voters will be inundated and then, once again, stop caring?
Yes.
The first thing to understand is that the fight has merely shifted from DC to the states as Attorneys General line up to challenge the constitutionality of the bill's mandate that requires everyone to buy health insurance.
FoxNews.com reports:
There are a few other reasons to believe that Sunday's vote was not the Armageddon many thought it would be. The main one being that it has awaken the conservative voters, and ruined the future chances of the Democrats getting much of anything else done. If that is the case, then all this celebratory hoo ha will be much ado about nothing, and Democrats will find that they are celebrating their parties banishment into the wilderness.
Powerline:
Powerline also makes one more "silverlining" observation that I think is good news for conservatives in general and the Republican Party specifically. That is that:
Paul Ryan is simply one of the brightest young minds in the country right now. He understands that conservative principles are more than just talking points. I've been a big fan for over a year now. It's really good to see his star rising.
So, if you like references to bible verses then be ye of good cheer, and worry not. Proverbs 18:2 says "A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions." But verse 13 adds, "He who answers before listening— that is his folly and his shame."
The folly and shame part is yet to come.
If you're a little more hardcore then try the classic line from Tombstone:
Mark Steyn of the National Review is playing the defeatist, but he seems to be in the minority among conservative political analysts. He says, "Dems wouldn't be doing what they're doing. Their bet is that it can't be undone, and that over time, as I've been saying for years now, governmentalized health care not only changes the relationship of the citizen to the state but the very character of the people."
But, does he underestimate the "character of the people"? And does he jump the gun on the "woe is me" talk? Is he wrong that voters will be inundated and then, once again, stop caring?
Yes.
The first thing to understand is that the fight has merely shifted from DC to the states as Attorneys General line up to challenge the constitutionality of the bill's mandate that requires everyone to buy health insurance.
FoxNews.com reports:
Health Care Reform Fight Shifts From Congress to the Courts
Now that the House, in a historic vote, has passed the Senate's health care bill and sent it to the president's desk, state lawmakers and attorneys general already are lining up to challenge its constitutionality and wage an outside-the-Beltway war against it in the courts.
Now that the House, in a historic vote, has passed the Senate's bill and sent it to the president's desk, state lawmakers and attorneys general already are lining up to challenge its constitutionality and wage an outside-the-Beltway war against it in the courts.
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli was the first to announce Monday that he will file a legal challenge -- as soon as Obama signs the bill.
Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum also plans to announce Monday morning that he and top prosecutors from nine other states are filing a lawsuit to "protect the rights" of the American people from the bill.
While some Republicans have threatened to pursue repealing the legislation down the road, the most immediate challenge will take place in the courts.
At least three dozen state legislatures are considering proposals to challenge the federal legislation. Some are pursuing amendments to their constitutions by ballot question; others are looking to change state law.
Constitutional lawyers have questioned whether such a lawsuit could be successful, since federal law trumps state law. But opponents are looking to get around that by questioning the law's constitutionality.
There are a few other reasons to believe that Sunday's vote was not the Armageddon many thought it would be. The main one being that it has awaken the conservative voters, and ruined the future chances of the Democrats getting much of anything else done. If that is the case, then all this celebratory hoo ha will be much ado about nothing, and Democrats will find that they are celebrating their parties banishment into the wilderness.
Powerline:
"repealing this disaster of a bill will be a rallying cry for the American people for years to come. Moreover, even if the Republicans only take over the House in November, and not the Senate, won't it be possible to throw roadblocks in the way of the bill's implementation? Won't budget appropriations be necessary to sustain the various federal tentacles the bill seeks to establish? What will happen if the House simply refuses to fund them?"
"Barack Obama has used his political capital--pretty much all of it--on unpopular legislation that will continue to rile the voters for years to come. As a result, Obama is a remarkably unpopular second-year President. And he hasn't even experienced any bad luck yet. It is hard to see how he will be able to regain his footing."
Powerline also makes one more "silverlining" observation that I think is good news for conservatives in general and the Republican Party specifically. That is that:
Paul Ryan has emerged as one of the conservative movement's strongest spokesmen. In the years to come, I think we will hear the words "I'm a Paul Ryan Republican" with increasing frequency.
Paul Ryan is simply one of the brightest young minds in the country right now. He understands that conservative principles are more than just talking points. I've been a big fan for over a year now. It's really good to see his star rising.
So, if you like references to bible verses then be ye of good cheer, and worry not. Proverbs 18:2 says "A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions." But verse 13 adds, "He who answers before listening— that is his folly and his shame."
The folly and shame part is yet to come.
If you're a little more hardcore then try the classic line from Tombstone:
Sunday, March 21, 2010
I just can't wait to see!
Pelosi is giddy with excitement last week telling the National Association of Counties why Health Care legislation must pass.
Out of the frying pan and into the fire!
With Health Care on the brink of passage, Dems will quickly turn to Immigration to take advantage of the momentum.
Reuter's is reporting that anti-abortion Democrats have reached a deal with the White House meaning it is highly likely that they now have the votes needed to pass Health Care legislation.
Thursday statements by the President indicated Democrat leaders will now shift quickly to another liberal plank and try to use the momentum to pass immigration "reform." The timing comes as 50,000 supporters plan a march on DC Sunday in support of amnesty. DC has been the scene of some ugly protesting over Health Care. Add thousands of immigration amnesty supporters to that mix and it's a recipe for disaster. Legislators may decide to rethink recent funding cuts to Capitol Police after today.
Washington Times report said:
Reuter's is reporting that anti-abortion Democrats have reached a deal with the White House meaning it is highly likely that they now have the votes needed to pass Health Care legislation.
The White House said on Sunday President Barack Obama would issue an order reaffirming a ban on using federal funds for abortion in a deal with holdout Democrats that could clear the way for passage of a healthcare overhaul.
"We have an agreement," said Representative Bart Stupak, who has led the group of a handful of holdout Democrats. His support could give House of Representative Democrats the 216 votes they need to pass the bill.
Thursday statements by the President indicated Democrat leaders will now shift quickly to another liberal plank and try to use the momentum to pass immigration "reform." The timing comes as 50,000 supporters plan a march on DC Sunday in support of amnesty. DC has been the scene of some ugly protesting over Health Care. Add thousands of immigration amnesty supporters to that mix and it's a recipe for disaster. Legislators may decide to rethink recent funding cuts to Capitol Police after today.
Washington Times report said:
President Obama gave a thumbs up Thursday to the outline of a plan to legalize illegal immigrants and create a flow of low-skilled foreign workers for the future, saying the immigration bill being worked on by a Republican and a Democrat is "promising."
In their broad blueprint, Sens. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, and Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, call for illegal immigrants to be put on a path to citizenship, offer green cards to keep high-skilled foreign university graduates and would create a temporary program for low-skilled workers, with some also getting the chance to become citizens.
The senators also proposed to turn all Social Security cards into tamper-proof IDs to be checked by employers when they are about to hire a worker. The cards would include biometric information designed to prevent counterfeiting -- but the senators said the information would not be stored in a government database.
"I congratulate Senators Schumer and Graham for their leadership, and pledge to do everything in my power to forge a bipartisan consensus this year on this important issue so we can continue to move forward on comprehensive immigration reform," Mr. Obama said in a statement soon after the two senators published their blueprint in a column submitted to The Washington Post.
The carefully orchestrated rollout came just three days before immigrant-rights advocates expect at least 50,000 supporters to rally and march in Washington, D.C., calling for Congress to act. The organizers of the rally had met with Mr. Obama last week and told him he needed to embrace a bill or else the thousands of marchers would be told that he had failed to live up to his promises on this issue.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
"Whip it good!" and a chance to toot my own horn.
I said in 2009 it would hinge on abortion. I so seldom get a chance to say "I told you so," so I'll take this opportunity while I have it. It looks like it still comes down to Michigan Representative Stupak and his band of pro-lifers.
House GOP whip Rep. Eric Cantor reports in his latest memo that Republicans need to find six other Democrats to vote no in order to defeat the bill. Cantor points to one original yes vote that has switched to no -- Arcuri -- and suggests there might be five others who could switch: Berry, Costa, Giffords, Lynch, and Space.
That leaves the much-discussed Stupak Group. The pro-life Democrat originally said he had 12 colleagues who originally voted yes but would now vote no. Stupak has lost some of those, but it is not clear how many.
Cantor suggests that in combining those two categories -- the yeses who have become no plus the Stupak group -- there might be another 12 votes against the bill. "If we add 12 to 32, we get 44 -- which leaves Speaker Pelosi seven votes short," Cantor concludes.
The Washington Examiner's Byron York writes:
Who is correct? It's clear the Democrats are working around the clock to create a sense of momentum and inevitability about the vote. But the fact is, there are still enough unknowns to say the outcome is entirely in doubt.
But, his colleague and online opinion editor for the same publication David Freddoso writes that Rep. Brad Ellsworth, D-Ind. is taking alot of heat at home for announcing he would vote "Yes". Even adding that a vote for Health Reform makes his announced run for Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh's seat "futile."
If Ellsworth is being pushed into voting for this, you can bet that Speaker Pelosi has no votes to spare. But by the same token, you wouldn't be hearing him commit in public if she didn't have the votes.
Votes are scheduled for Sunday afternoon. It will go down to the wire.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Ya'll Politics---U.S. Chamber Thanks Mississippi Rep. Childers for Opposing Health Care Bill
WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Chamber of Commerce Executive Vice President of Government Affairs R. Bruce Josten issued the following statement thanking Congressman Travis Childers (MS-01) for opposing the current health care legislation which will increase taxes and risk employer-sponsored healthcare:
“We thank Congressman Childers for his opposition to the current health care legislation being rammed through the House of Representatives. Congressman Childers has stood up for the working families and small businesses in his district by saying ‘no’ to this health care bill that would raise their taxes and jeopardize employer-sponsored health coverage. We appreciate Congressman Childers standing with Mississippians, many of which are small businesses and members of the U.S. Chamber, and against a health care bill that would wipe out more jobs, raise costs and put employers and employee’s current health benefits at risk.
“The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents hundreds of thousands of businesses large and small, has strongly advocated for health care reform and shares the goals of Congress and the Administration to reduce health care costs, while increasing access and quality. From the start of this debate, we have supported comprehensive insurance market reforms and new consumer protections to ensure every American has guaranteed affordable coverage. However, health care reform won't work without comprehensive provisions that will bring costs under control and make health care coverage more affordable. The current legislation before Congress does little to solve the problem of escalating costs for working families and small businesses and includes many provisions that are not consistent with those shared goals.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world’s largest business federation representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state and local chambers and industry associations.
Yall Politics
“We thank Congressman Childers for his opposition to the current health care legislation being rammed through the House of Representatives. Congressman Childers has stood up for the working families and small businesses in his district by saying ‘no’ to this health care bill that would raise their taxes and jeopardize employer-sponsored health coverage. We appreciate Congressman Childers standing with Mississippians, many of which are small businesses and members of the U.S. Chamber, and against a health care bill that would wipe out more jobs, raise costs and put employers and employee’s current health benefits at risk.
“The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents hundreds of thousands of businesses large and small, has strongly advocated for health care reform and shares the goals of Congress and the Administration to reduce health care costs, while increasing access and quality. From the start of this debate, we have supported comprehensive insurance market reforms and new consumer protections to ensure every American has guaranteed affordable coverage. However, health care reform won't work without comprehensive provisions that will bring costs under control and make health care coverage more affordable. The current legislation before Congress does little to solve the problem of escalating costs for working families and small businesses and includes many provisions that are not consistent with those shared goals.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world’s largest business federation representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state and local chambers and industry associations.
Yall Politics
You've heard of the Whirling Dervishes? Well, get ready for the Spinning Democrats!
Regardless of how the Health Care Reform vote goes on Sunday--and it will be a close one--Democrats know they have a hell of a fight on their hands come November. TEA Party activist, along with a push by the leftiest of the lefties to take advantage of this once in a lifetime opportunity this year, means the normal shift back to center for Congressional elections during a year when there will be no presidential election will be more of a jolt. The ground has shifted in ways unseen in decades, and the difference between Dems heavy losses and not-so-heavy losses--notwithstanding upcoming liberal legislative possibilities like Immigration Reform--will hinge on voters remembering today's atmosphere come Election Day in the Fall.
Democrats have already begun preparing for the spin. Joe Voter will be inundated with good news from the stimulus, Health Insurance Reform (if it passes), and a variety of other left leaning legislative accomplishments and potential accomplishments.
Stuart Rothenberg's latest Political Report is on how campaigns are already attempting to change the narrative using polling memos.
Rothenberg writes:
Rothenberg concludes his report:
How long is your memory?
Stuart Rothenberg's latest Political Report is on how campaigns are already attempting to change the narrative using polling memos.
Rothenberg writes:
Pollsters say that their surveys present only a “snapshot” of a race at a particular moment. That’s true. But often the snapshot presented in a memo is misleading, and the pollster knows it. Memos include numbers intended to build an argument that seems empirically based but isn’t. They don’t present the whole picture, because the whole picture isn’t in their client’s interest.
Even highly regarded, methodologically legit pollsters tell me to call them up privately if I want to get their real assessment about a race — don’t go by the memo they release. I get this from both Republican and Democratic pollsters, and I have received the same advice for years.
Actually, most pollsters hate to write these kinds of memos, but their clients want them to create a more favorable narrative, so they write them, usually using their words very carefully.
Rothenberg concludes his report:
Polling memos sometimes contain useful nuggets of data, but they often leave out other important data and stress the narrative the campaign wants to create. Don’t take them at face value.
How long is your memory?
Madison Co. Supervisor Asks For Audit Of Engineer's Contracts . . . Again.
Madison County residents turned activists Frank Halford and Billy Redd were on the Gallo Radio Show Thursday morning to discuss the lack of answers coming from the Board of Supervisors. Supervisor DI Smith continues to take his calls for a procedural audit to the airwaves as often as possible. Meanwhile State Auditor Stacy Pickering is trying to steer as clear as possible as he positions himself for a run for higher office.
County Engineer Rudy Warnock, in true Democrat fashion, continues his non-answer answers and to play the "poor me" victim. Back in June he was quoted as saying he is the victim of politics.
"Everything that D.I. is alleging is totally false and slanderous,” Warnock said in June. “Every contract and invoice that I have submitted to Madison County has been reviewed by the administration and then approved by the Madison County Board of Supervisors."
Boo Hoo!
WAPT is reporting that a recent investigation begun by Madison Mayor Mary Hawkins-Butler has only served to bring up more troubling questions about Warnock's practices.
Hawkins-Butler said a six-month investigation has revealed that Warnock has been paying other contractors to perform his projects, which she said is not allowed without county permission. Butler said the subcontracting issue has been raised for months now, and it was most recently talked about at a board of supervisors meeting.
“Two member of the board of supervisors voted for Rudy Warnock to produce those subcontracts,” the mayor said. “Three voted ‘no,’ that he didn't have to produce it. If there's nothing wrong with them, produce the subcontracts and all of this will go away.”
In addition to the issue of subcontracting, Hawkins-Butler said the investigation notes $2 million in tax dollars was spent without question or concern from the board of supervisors.
Bad timing Rudy!
The investigation cited a conflict of interest where Warnock, serving as county engineer, designs and approves his own work - something the report says flies in the face of the Mississippi Board of Licensure's code of professional conduct.
Warnock, holding true to form, blamed it all on "political theater" orchestrated by Hawkins-Butler.
In a statement released by his attorney--did I mention Warnock was in the Bahamas--Dorsey R. Carson, Jr., of Jackson and reported by the Madison County Journal,
Warnock railed against Hawkins-Butler, calling McAfee no more than a "hired gun" and questioning the integrity of the report.
The report's author, Richard J. McAfee of Detroit-based PMA Consultants, said with limited documentation he found no illegal acts, but pointed to over $2 million in questionable spending by the county.
"This bears further investigation," McAfee said. "Any government in the business of serving the people need to have better checks and balances. There are so many inconsistencies it would make sense to perform a thorough audit."
“State and local governments in Mississippi spend billions of dollars in taxpayer money each year. As a fiscal conservative, I want to make sure that our tax dollars are spent with the integrity the taxpayers expect and deserve.”
We're waiting sir.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)