Election 2012... Shelby Steele: The Exploitation of Trayvon Martin... Protecting You From The UN-Frendly Skies... Prohibited Items Found 3/2 to 3/8... Congressional earmarks sometimes used to fund projects near lawmakers' properties... Public Law List (112st Congress - 2012)... Congress's Phony Insider-Trading Reform... Obama denounces Senate vote to block Cordray at consumer watchdog agency... Walker signs 'castle doctrine' bill, other measures... Holder faces House Republicans over health-care law, ‘Fast and Furious’... Postal workers behaving badly!...
PositiveReform header image 4
When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; When the government fears the people, there is liberty.  ~ Thomas Jefferson

 

Entries Tagged as 'Economy'

Congressional earmarks sometimes used to fund projects near lawmakers’ properties

February 7th, 2012 · Congress, Corruption, Deception, Economy, Ethics, Federal Spending, Government, Government Control, Greed, Non-Transparency, Tax Dollars, Taxes, Terrorism, Terrorism from Within

By David S. Fallis, Scott Higham and Kimberly Kindy, Published: February 6

A U.S. senator from Alabama directed more than $100 million in federal earmarks to renovate downtown Tuscaloosa near his own commercial office building. A congressman from Georgia secured $6.3 million in taxpayer funds to replenish the beach about 900 feet from his island vacation cottage. A representative from Michigan earmarked $486,000 to add a bike lane to a bridge within walking distance of her home.

 Thirty-three members of Congress have directed more than $300 million in earmarks and other spending provisions to dozens of public projects that are next to or within about two miles of the lawmakers’ own property, according to a Washington Post investigation.

See earmarks near lawmakers’ property

In recent weeks, lawmakers have acknowledged the public’s growing concern that they appeared to be using their positions to enrich themselves. In response, the Senate last week passed legislation that would require lawmakers to disclose mortgages for their residences. The bill, known as the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (Stock) Act, would also require lawmakers and executive branch officials to disclose securities trades of more than $1,000 every 30 days. At the same time, the Senate defeated an amendment, 59-40, that would have permanently outlawed earmarks.

 The House is scheduled to vote on the Stock Act on Thursday.

Earmarks have long been controversial, with the focus on spending that unduly favors campaign donors or constituents. The Post’s review is the first systematic effort to examine the alignment of earmarks with lawmakers’ private interests.

Earmarks are a fraction of the federal budget, and the numbers uncovered by The Post are relatively small in the scheme of the overall Congress, but the behavior by lawmakers from both parties points to a larger issue at a time when confidence in Capitol Hill is at an all-time low.

The congressional financial disclosure system obscures certain relationships. Lawmakers are not required to disclose the addresses of their personal residences or the employment of their children and parents. The lawmakers are also allowed to put properties in holding companies without disclosing the properties’ locations. Current versions of the Stock Act would not change that. To provide a fuller portrait of congressional connections, The Post compared the financial disclosure forms with the public record to track spending on projects near legislators’ properties or on programs employing their relatives.

In interviews, lawmakers said their earmarks were needs brought to them by the city and state officials they represent to help pay for safer roads, nicer neighborhoods or improved local economies. They characterized questions about the nearby locations of their own holdings as irrelevant, insisting there is no conflict. Any potential personal benefit — financial or otherwise — is nonexistent, minimal or secondary to the needs of the public, they said.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

The supercommittee failed because Democrats insisted on $1 trillion in new taxes

November 25th, 2011 · Accountability, Deception, Democrats, Dissention, Economy, Ethics, Federal Spending, Government, Government Control, Greed, Money Lost, Money Matters, Non-Transparency, Obama Nominees, Obama's Scheme, Stimulus, Tax Dollars, Terrorism from Within

By Jon Kyl, Rob Portman, Pat Toomey, Jeb Hensarling, Fred Upton and Dave Camp, Published: November 25

We do not choose to add more to the blame game for failure of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction , but one Democratic talking point needs debunking: that the talks failed because of Republicans’ attachment to the Bush tax cuts.

The untold story of the negotiations is the significance of the Republican offer of fundamental tax reform. It is critical to understand the interplay between the proposal (dubbed the “Toomey plan”) and existing tax law.

First, a bit of history. The 2001 and 2003 changes to the tax code reduced marginal rates for all taxpayers as well as the rates for capital gains, dividends and the death tax. For technical reasons, all of these provisions expire at the end of next year — meaning that if Congress does not act, Americans will face the largest tax increase in our history.

This prospect has put a wet blanket over job creation and economic recovery. It would be the wrong medicine for our ailing economy. As President Obama has famously said, “You don’t raise taxes in a recession.” Partially to avoid this result, but also to try to meet the Democrats partway — given their absolute insistence on big, new tax increases — Republicans offered a proposal that would have both reformed the current code and produced significant new tax revenue.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

Supercommittee announces failure in effort to tame debt

November 21st, 2011 · Accountability, Congress, Economy, Federal Spending, Finance, Greed, Money Lost, Money Matters, Non-Transparency, Obama Nominees, Obama's Scheme, Politics, Stimulus, Tax Dollars, Terrorism from Within

By Lori Montgomery and Paul Kane, Published: November 21

A special congressional committee created to try to curb the national debt abandoned its work and conceded failure Monday, the latest setback in a long effort by Washington to overcome ideological differences and stem the rising tide of red ink.

In a joint statement issued hours before a midnight deadline, the Democratic and Republican leaders of the panel said that they were “deeply disappointed” by their inability to reach an agreement and that they hope for progress in the months ahead.

supercommittee conceded defeat Monday in its quest to conquer a government debt that stands at a staggering $15 trillion, unable to overcome deep and enduring political divisions over taxes and spending. (Nov. 21)

“Despite our inability to bridge the committee’s significant differences, we end this process united in our belief that the nation’s fiscal crisis must be addressed and that we cannot leave it for the next generation to solve,” said the statement from Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.). “We remain hopeful that Congress can build on this committee’s work and can find a way to tackle this issue in a way that works for the American people and our economy.”

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

Unions vs. the Right to Work: Collective bargaining:more similar to an antitrust violation than to a civil liberty.

February 28th, 2011 · Economy, Fraud Alert, Wisconsin

Collective bargaining on a broad scale is more similar to an antitrust violation than to a civil liberty.

By Robert Barro

How ironic that Wisconsin has become ground zero for the battle between taxpayers and public- employee labor unions. Wisconsin was the first state to allow collective bargaining for government workers (in 1959), following a tradition where it was the first to introduce a personal income tax (in 1911, before the introduction of the current form of individual income tax in 1913 by the federal government).

Labor unions like to portray collective bargaining as a basic civil liberty, akin to the freedoms of speech, press, assembly and religion. For a teachers union, collective bargaining means that suppliers of teacher services to all public school systems in a state—or even across states—can collude with regard to acceptable wages, benefits and working conditions. An analogy for business would be for all providers of airline transportation to assemble to fix ticket prices, capacity and so on. From this perspective, collective bargaining on a broad scale is more similar to an antitrust violation than to a civil liberty.

In fact, labor unions were subject to U.S. antitrust laws in the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, which was first applied in 1894 to the American Railway Union. However, organized labor managed to obtain exemption from federal antitrust laws in subsequent legislation, notably the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 and the National Labor Relations Act of 1935.

Remarkably, labor unions are not only immune from antitrust laws but can also negotiate a “union shop,” which requires nonunion employees to join the union or pay nearly equivalent dues. Somehow, despite many attempts, organized labor has lacked the political power to repeal the key portion of the 1947 Taft Hartley Act that allowed states to pass right-to-work laws, which now prohibit the union shop in 22 states. From the standpoint of civil liberties, the individual right to work—without being forced to join a union or pay dues—has a much better claim than collective bargaining. (Not to mention that “right to work” has a much more pleasant, liberal sound than “collective bargaining.”) The push for right-to-work laws, which haven’t been enacted anywhere but Oklahoma over the last 20 years, seems about to take off.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

The 111th Congress’s Final Insult to America

December 16th, 2010 · Democrats, Dissention, Economy, Federal Spending, Greed, Non-Transparency, Selling Out the US, Tax Dollars, Terrorism from Within

Bluto Blutarsky must have been an Appropriator.

The 111th Congress began with an $814 billion stimulus that blew out the federal balance sheet, so we suppose it’s only fitting that the Members want to exit by passing a 1,924-page, $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill. The worst Congress in modern history is true to its essence to the bitter end.

Think of this as a political version of the final scene in “Animal House,” when the boys from the Delta frat react to their expulsion by busting up the local town parade for the sheer mayhem of it. Bluto Blutarsky (John Belushi) did go on to be a U.S. Senator in the film, and a man of his vision must have earned a seat on Appropriations.

Democrats have had 11 months to write a budget for fiscal 2011, which began on October 1. But Majority Leader Harry Reid and Appropriations Chairman Daniel Inouye have dumped this trillion-dollar baby on Senators at the very last minute, when everyone is busy and wants to go home for the holidays. No doubt that was the plan. The continuing resolution to fund the government expires on Saturday, so Mr. Reid wants to squeeze Senators against the deadline. And with the press corps preoccupied by the tax debate, the spending bill is greased to slide through with little or no public scrutiny.

Defenders argue that the bill is restrained because it freezes overall spending for federal agencies at 2010 levels. But 2010 was an inflated budget with a $1.3 trillion deficit. Paul Ryan, soon to be House Budget Chairman, notes that nondefense discretionary spending rose 24% over those two years. Add stimulus funding and federal agency spending soared to $796 billion in 2010 from $434 billion, an 84% spending increase. (See nearby table.) Republicans have promised to return to 2008 spending levels, and the omnibus will make that much harder.

Then there are the pork and policy riders, such as a food safety bill with new authority for the Food and Drug Administration. The bill’s 6,630 earmarks will cost more than $8.1 billion, according to Citizens Against Government Waste. While that’s fewer than in 2009, what happened to the earmark ban promised by Republicans and supported by President Obama?

The late John Murtha of Pennsylvania is so powerful he’s still getting pork from his grave: $10 million for the John Murtha Foundation. Ted Kennedy also scored a legacy earmark. The omnibus includes $8 million for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute secured by Congressman Ed Markey (D., Mass.). Thad Cochran of Mississippi, one of the GOP Senators who may vote for the bill, secured $6 million for the Mississippi Polymer Institute at the University of Southern Mississippi. [View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

Senate approves tax cut deal; House Dems weigh amending estate tax

December 15th, 2010 · Economy, Taxes

  • Reference: Middle Class Tax Relief Act (111 HR 4853)
  • By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray Washington Post Staff Writers
    Wednesday, December 15, 2010; 2:46 PM

    A sweeping tax package negotiated by the White House and Republican leaders sailed through the Senate on a 81-19 vote and now awaits action by the House as early as Thursday.

    The Senate vote represented a rare moment of bipartisanship and underscored the depth of concern among lawmakers in both parties about the pace of the economic recovery. The legislation would extend for two years the income-tax cuts enacted 10 years ago under President George W. Bush. The cuts are set to expire on New Year’s Eve. But the package also includes a variety of measures aimed at spurring new hiring and consumer spending.

    The stimulus-related provisions include a one-year reduction in the payroll tax rate for individuals, to 4.2 percent from 6.2 percent; an expensing break that would allow businesses to write off new equipment purchases in the 2011 tax year; and continued funding for an emergency program that provides up to 99 weeks of benefits for jobless workers. Additional tax provisions would target businesses and individuals in narrower groups.

    Prospects for House passage appeared to be brightening Wednesday after an initially poor reception, but House Democratic leaders said that liberals continue to insist on changes to the estate-tax provision in the bill.

    “Middle class families need a boost in this economy, and that is exactly what this plan gives them,” Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said in a statement. “It is not perfect, but it will create 2 million jobs, cut taxes for middle class families and small businesses, and ensure that Americans who are still looking for work will continue to have the safety net they rely on to make ends meet.”

    Before senators began debating the $858 billion package in late morning, President Obama urged lawmakers in both houses to pass the tax package “as swiftly as possible.” He called the plan “an essential ingredient in spurring economic growth over the short run.”

    Speaking before a meeting with business leaders, Obama said: “I am absolutely convinced that this tax cut plan, while not perfect, will help grow our economy and create jobs in the private sector.” He acknowledged that lawmakers of both parties object to different aspects of the plan but said, “That’s the nature of compromise.” He added that “we can’t afford to let it fall victim to either delay or defeat.”

    The Senate considered and rejected three amendments before approving the legislation. A proposal by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) would have paid for the extension of jobless benefits and refundable tax credits included in the measure by cutting $156 billion in federal spending, as well as barring unemployment payments to millionaires.

    Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) proposed a permanent extension of the Bush-era tax cuts, permanent repeal of the estate tax and a permanent fix for the expanding alternative minimum tax. And Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) proposed to eliminate the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of taxpayers, dedicating half the savings to deficit reduction and the other half to fresh infrastructure spending.

    Despite the lopsided tally, many lawmakers were lukewarm about portions of the package. For Democrats, extending all the Bush tax breaks – if only temporarily – was a bitter concession, after many in the party, including Obama, had campaigned on a pledge to allow rate cuts for the wealthiest households to expire.

    “This wasn’t the bill I would have wanted,” Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) said in a Senate floor speech. “If there were a better way, I would do that in a heartbeat. But today we are forced to decide between taking a stand against irresponsible tax cuts for millionaires versus helping struggling families. And given that choice, I simply can’t turn my back on all the Minnesotans that desperately need the help this bill will provide.”

    Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) voted against the advancing the package on Monday “to send a message to the House that there are allies here,” but he supported it on final passage. Brown, one of the Senate’s most liberal members who is up for reelection in 2012, said he changed his mind after speaking with his minister and reading letters from constituents who are struggling to find jobs in his hard-hit home state.

    Fourteen Democrats voted against the bill: Sens. Jeff Bingaman (N.M.), Byron Dorgan (N.D.), Russell Feingold (Wis.), Kirstin Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kay Hagan (N.C.), Tom Harkin (Iowa), Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), Carl M. Levin (Mich.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Mark Udall (Colo.), Tom Udall (N.M.), Ron Wyden (Ore.) and Sanders. And five GOP senators were opposed: Sens. John Ensign (Nev.), Jeff Sessions (Ala.) and George V. Voinovich (Ohio), as well as Coburn and DeMint.

    [View Complete Article →]

    Tags:

    No Comments

    Senate spending bill contains thousands of earmarks

    December 15th, 2010 · Accountability, Congress, Corruption, Democrats, Dissention, Economy, Ethics, Federal Spending, Fraud Alert, Greed, Non-Transparency, Republicans, Selling Out the US, Tax Dollars, Taxes, Terrorism from Within

    By Philip Rucker and Paul Kane Washington Post Staff Writers
    Wednesday, December 15, 2010; 12:00 AM

    Weeks after swearing off earmarks, many senators stand to gain tens of millions of dollars for pet projects in a massive spending bill that could be their last chance at the money before a more conservative Congress begins next month.

    The $1.2 trillion bill, released on Tuesday, includes more than 6,000 earmarks totaling $8 billion, an amount that many lawmakers decried as an irresponsible binge following a midterm election in which many voters demanded that the government cut spending.

    “The American people said just 42 days ago, ‘Enough!’ . . . Are we tone deaf? Are we stricken with amnesia?” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a leading earmark critic, said on the Senate floor, flipping through the 1,924-page bill as he pounded his desk.

    The bill includes $18 million for two nonprofits associated with deceased Democrats, the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and Rep. John P. Murtha; $349,000 for swine waste management in North Carolina; and $6 million for a rural Iowa school program named after Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) epitomizes the conflicted nature of the debate. Formerly a member of the committee that doles out earmarks, McConnell reluctantly embraced a moratorium on the practice last month to send a signal that Republicans are serious about curbing spending.

    Yet the legislation includes provisions requested this year by McConnell, including $650,000 for a genetic technology center at the University of Kentucky, according to an analysis of the bill by Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog.

    Saying he was now “vigorously in opposition” to the legislation, McConnell said Tuesday that rushed consideration of the bill “here on Christmas Eve” compelled him to try to block the bill through a filibuster. “I’m going to vote against things that arguably would benefit my state. I do not think this is the appropriate way to run the Senate,” he said.

    [View Complete Article →]

    Tags: ···········

    No Comments

    Emptying the pork barrel would hit some states especially hard

    December 13th, 2010 · Accountability, Corruption, Deception, Economy, Ethics, Greed, Non-Transparency, Politics, Tax Dollars

    [View Complete Article →]

    Tags:

    No Comments

    The tax bill is becoming a favor festival, starting with ethanol.

    December 13th, 2010 · Deception, Economy, Non-Transparency, Taxes

    The public choice school of economics describes how the government and special interests collude against the public good, and it’s hard to think of a better model than the ethanol industry. Despite opposition from an emerging left-right anti-boondoggle coalition, the Senate version of the White House-GOP tax deal preserves the corn fuel’s multiple subsidies.

    One measure of ethanol’s political clout is that reformers merely hoped to cut the tax credit for blending ethanol into gasoline to 36 cents per gallon from the current 45 cents that was due to expire at the end of the year. Instead, the deal keeps the full subsidy in place for another year, at a cost to taxpayers of $4.9 billion, and it retains the 54-cent per gallon tariff on ethanol imports that was also expiring.

    Direct subsidies and trade protectionism, plus mandates that force consumers to buy ethanol: This is the trifecta of government support, and all for an industry that is 30 years old and that even Al Gore now admits serves none of its advertised environmental purposes.

    The ethanol extension is the bipartisan handiwork of Iowa Senators Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin, who both regularly abandon their professed principles (fiscal conservatism for the Republican and equity for the Democrat) in the service of agribusiness.

    Discredit also goes to the environmental lobby and its running game of bait and switch. The greens have turned on ethanol because of its carbon emissions, but their tax bill support has also been purchased with extensions of such energy subsidies as a Treasury grant program for wind and other renewable projects that were part of the stimulus.

    [View Complete Article →]

    Tags:

    No Comments

    Economic recovery leaving some behind this Christmas

    December 13th, 2010 · Economy, Unemployment

    By Ylan Q. Mui Washington Post Staff Writer
    Sunday, December 12, 2010; 12:12 AM

    A new division is emerging in America between those who have moved on from the recession and those still caught in its grip.

    This holiday season, those two worlds have been thrown into stark relief: At Tiffany’s, executives report that sales of their most expensive merchandise have grown by double digits. At Wal-Mart, executives point to shoppers flooding the stores at midnight every two weeks to buy baby formula the minute their unemployment checks hit their accounts. Neiman Marcus brought back $1.5 million fantasy gifts in its annual Christmas Wish Book. Family Dollar is making more room on its shelves for staples like groceries, the one category its customers reliably shop.

    “When you start to line up all the pieces, you see a story that starts to emerge,” said James Russo, vice president of global consumer insights for The Nielsen Co. “You kind of see this polarized Christmas.”

    Though economists declared the recession officially over last summer, the pace of recovery has been uneven across income levels. The rebound in the stock market and record low mortgage interest rates have mostly benefited affluent households, buoying their confidence in the economy along with their ability – and their desire – to spend. Meanwhile, progress largely has bypassed poorer families who remain hamstrung by anemic wage growth and a higher unemployment rate.

    This tale of two Christmases is being played out from the shopping mall to the kitchen table. At Towson Town Center outside Baltimore, sales are exceeding expectations in the mall’s new wing of luxury retailers such as Burberry, Louis Vuitton and Tiffany’s, executives said. But Miriam Pap of Baltimore City has never stepped inside those stores, even though she often works a few feet away, selling Auntie Anne’s pretzels at a small cart at the entrance to the hallway.

    “We don’t have the money,” Pap said on a recent afternoon, as she served up samples of cinnamon raisin to shoppers juggling Nordstrom bags and baby strollers.

    Pap, 24, said she does plan to spend more this holiday season – only for bills, not on gifts for her daughter in Guatemala and definitely not on shopping for herself. Food, gas, even drycleaning seems to be more expensive, she said. This Christmas, she plans to work and feels lucky to do so.

    “Here is job, job, job,” she said.

    [View Complete Article →]

    Tags:

    No Comments