● 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!... ● The supercommittee failed because Democrats insisted on $1 trillion in new taxes...
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 'Deception'

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

Government Unions vs. Taxpayers

December 13th, 2010 · Corruption, Deception, Democrats, Ethics, Greed

The moral case for unions—protecting working families from exploitation—does not apply to public employment.

By Tim Pawlenty

When Americans think of organized labor, they might think of images like I saw growing up in a blue-collar meatpacking town: hard hats, work boots, tough conditions and gritty jobs. While I didn’t work in the slaughterhouses, I did become a union member when I worked at a grocery store to help put myself through school. I was grateful for the paycheck and proud of the work I did.

The rise of the labor movement in the early 20th century was a triumph for America’s working class. In an era of deep economic anxiety, unions stood up for hard-working but vulnerable families, protecting them from physical and economic exploitation.

Much has changed. The majority of union members today no longer work in construction, manufacturing or “strong back” jobs. They work for government, which, thanks to President Obama, has become the only booming “industry” left in our economy. Since January 2008 the private sector has lost nearly eight million jobs while local, state and federal governments added 590,000.

Federal employees receive an average of $123,049 annually in pay and benefits, twice the average of the private sector. And across the country, at every level of government, the pattern is the same: Unionized public employees are making more money, receiving more generous benefits, and enjoying greater job security than the working families forced to pay for it with ever-higher taxes, deficits and debt.

How did this happen? Very quietly. The rise of government unions has been like a silent coup, an inside job engineered by self-interested politicians and fueled by campaign contributions.

Public employee unions contribute mightily to the campaigns of liberal politicians ($91 million in the midterm elections alone) who vote to increase government pay and workers. As more government employees join the unions and pay dues, the union bosses pour ever more money and energy into liberal campaigns. The result is that certain states are now approaching default. Decades of overpromising and fiscal malpractice by state and local officials have created unfunded public employee benefit liabilities of more than $3 trillion.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

House Democrats seek to delay Tax Cut until next year in fight for more spending money.

December 11th, 2010 · Corruption, Deception, Democrats, Economy, Ethics, Federal Spending, Greed, House, Taxes, Terrorism from Within

House Democrats seek changes to Obama’s tax-cut deal

By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 10, 2010; 12:58 AM

The House Democratic Caucus voted Thursday to try to block the tax-cut deal that President Obama struck with Republicans, a move that does not kill the legislation but shows that its opponents are digging in.

Rank-and-file Democrats passed a nonbinding resolution, introduced by Rep. Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.), by voice vote that said the tax package should not come to the House floor for consideration.

And in her first explicit declaration of dissatisfaction since the tax deal was cut, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) suggested that she would not bring the package to the floor in its current form.

“House Democrats share the president’s commitment to providing the middle class with a tax cut to grow the economy and create jobs” but “reject the Senate Republican tax provisions as currently written,” Pelosi said. “We will continue discussions with the president and our Democratic and Republican colleagues in the days ahead to improve the proposal before it comes to the House floor for a vote.”

After the caucus vote, House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) said: “People would like to see every opportunity to make revisions, and I’m one of them.” Asked whether he still expected the tax deal to come to the House floor for a vote, Clyburn said, “I don’t make those decisions.”

Said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex.): “If it’s take it or leave it, we’ll leave it.”

At one point during the meeting on the vote, House Democrats erupted in a chant of “Just say no!”

The White House played down the drama.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

Tax fight puts Schumer at odds with Obama

December 11th, 2010 · Change of Power, Deception, Democrats, Dissention, Economy, Non-Transparency, Taxes

By Shailagh Murray Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 10, 2010; 12:00 AM

President Obama is getting along better than ever with Capitol Hill Republicans. But his relationship with Democratic Sen. Charles E. Schumer has hit a rough patch.

The newly appointed Senate Democratic “message” guru has emerged as the White House’s chief antagonist over the tax cut deal Obama worked out with GOP leaders.

To Schumer (N.Y.), Obama’s decision to accept a two-year extension of all the tax cuts enacted by President George W. Bush – even at the highest income levels – is a needless capitulation to resurgent Republicans. Schumer wanted the president to push harder to extend the tax cuts, set to expire at year’s end, only for middle-class families.

But to the White House, it is Schumer who is acting recklessly by seeking to wage class warfare with just days left on the legislative calendar, risking the health of the economy and the pocketbook of every middle-class household with his threat to carry the fight into next year.

The contentious, mostly private standoff has turned Schumer into an unlikely villain among administration officials who have long valued his tactical skills and political acumen. It has also made him an unlikely champion to liberal activists who are seething at the Obama deal. In an appeal this week to supporters, the liberal group Moveon.org praised Schumer, a long-time ally of Wall Street, as one of their “progressive heroes” and saying “we need you now.”

Obama views the fate of the Bush breaks as chiefly an economic question, and to him, the answer is clear: The sputtering recovery can’t withstand any tax increases. The White House also hopes cutting a deal with Republicans will help to clear away some GOP opposition to additional stimulus spending the president wants to enact and to the ratification of the New START nuclear arms treaty with Russia.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

Facing frustration from Democrats, Obama defends tax cuts deal in attempt to save face.

December 8th, 2010 · Deception, Democrats, Economy, Ethics, Non-Transparency, Selling Out the US, Taxes

By Scott Wilson, Felicia Sonmez and David A. Fahrenthold Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, December 7, 2010; 5:00 PM

A defensive President Obama cast himself Tuesday as the guardian of middle-class Americans and the unemployed, saying sharply that he had to strike a deal with Senate Republicans over the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy in order to protect the fragile economic recovery.

Facing broad frustration from his party’s liberal base and many Democrats on the Hill, Obama emphasized the portions of the compromise he reached the previous day that benefit middle class families and the jobless, whose government insurance would have expired without the deal.

Obama said he had little choice but to compromise because he has been unable to persuade Senate Republicans to maintain middle-class tax cuts without also extending the top-tier tax rates for another two years – even though a majority of Americans agree tax cuts on high incomes should end.

“A long political fight that carried over into next year might have been good politics, but it would be a bad deal for the economy and it would be a bad deal for the American people,” Obama said during an afternoon news conference.

He also sharply criticized his party, accusing Democratic critics of failing to reasonably assess what he has achieved during a difficult political time. And he compared complaints that he has ceded too much ground on the tax debate to the objections from liberals during the health-care debate.

“This is a big, diverse country. Not everybody agrees with us,” he said. “I know that shocks people. You know, the New York Times editorial page does not permeate across all of America. Neither does The Wall Street Journal editorial page.

“Most Americans, they’re just trying to figure out how to – how to go about their lives and – and how can we make sure that our elected officials are looking out for us.”

Obama spoke as Vice President Biden urged Senate Democrats to support the tax compromise, a $700 billion package that will be paid for through additional borrowing even as public concern mounts over the country’s fiscal condition. Liberal Democrats, in particular, are furious over Obama’s decision to extend the top-tier tax cuts. Obama campaigned in 2008 and again during the midterm season to end them.

Democrats emerged from their luncheon with Biden divided on the proposal.

“I’m not talking, I’m not talking,” said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), whose proposal to let the cuts lapse for income over $1 million was defeated Saturday on a 53 to 37 vote. Schumer has said some Senate Democrats favor allowing the entire Bush tax package to expire on schedule Dec. 31, forcing the next Congress to resolve the issue.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

Nancy Pelosi’s Unwelcome Christmas Gift: Increase Taxes quickly before new session of Congress.

December 2nd, 2010 · Change of Power, Deception, Democrats, Dissention, Economy, Ethics, Federal Spending, Greed, Non-Transparency, Selling Out the US, Taxes, Terrorism from Within

A couple earning $80,000 could lose hundreds per month if the Bush tax rates aren’t extended.

By KARL ROVE

After ignoring congressional Republicans for 22 months and 10 days, President Obama hosted a “come together, right now” session with them Tuesday. The topic: the Bush tax cuts—on income, capital gains and dividends—that are set to expire at the stroke of midnight, Dec. 31.

The atmospherics at the White House on Tuesday were good, but the meeting isn’t likely to produce a quick agreement on substance. A lot of attention has been paid to congressional Republicans, whose strong desire to preserve the Bush rates is apparent. Less attention has been paid to the Democrats—among whom there is no consensus about what to do.

OpinionJournal.com Columnist John Fund on the tax debate within the Democratic caucus, and on the fight for key committee chairmanships in the House.

Thanks to her dogmatic rigidity and unquenchable passion for class warfare, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues insisting on extending the Bush tax cuts only for those who make less than $250,000. Mrs. Pelosi doesn’t have the votes to pass her proposal using a special House rule, the suspension calendar, which requires a supermajority and does not permit amendments. She might well lose if the bill proceeds through normal House rules—Democrats could join with Republicans to offer an amendment allowing an up-or-down vote on extending all the Bush-era tax cuts, which could pass.

Even if Mrs. Pelosi’s measure cleared the House, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has apparently signaled it can’t pass the Senate. All 42 Republican senators support extending all Bush-era tax cuts, depriving Mr. Reid of the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture. And there are Senate Democrats who also oppose raising taxes.

Since neither Mr. Obama nor Mr. Reid seem willing to force her to back down, Congress could go home without stopping the largest tax increase in the nation’s history.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ·········

No Comments

Obama Commission’s final deficit report preserves controversial spending cuts & tax increases

December 2nd, 2010 · Deception, Democrats, Economy, Ethics, Federal Spending, Government Control, Greed, Non-Transparency, Selling Out the US, Taxes, Terrorism from Within

By Lori Montgomery and Brady Dennis Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 1, 2010; 3:48 PM

The leaders of President Obama’s fiscal commission released a final report Wednesday that is full of political dynamite, recommending sharp cuts in military spending, a higher retirement age and reforms that could cost the average taxpayer an extra $1,700 a year.

But as commission co-chairmen Erskine Bowles and Alan K. Simpson unveiled the plan at a Capitol Hill hearing, it was unclear whether they would be able to build a convincing bipartisan consensus before the panel’s 18 members – 12 of them sitting lawmakers – are scheduled to vote on the report Friday.

The White House continued Wednesday to reserve judgment on the commission’s work, which is intended to help shape the administration’s next budget request, due out in February.

“The president looks forward to reviewing their work at the conclusion of their votes … and evaluating their proposals and their votes as we move forward and put together a budget of our own for next year,” said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. “So let me not get too far out on the commission until they’ve had a chance to complete their work.”

Two panel members – Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) – immediately came out in strong support, saying that although they don’t like everything in the package, it charts a responsible path away from the abyss of rising debt and potential fiscal crisis.

“America is in danger. And we can either look the other way, hope somebody else does something, or we can act,” Conrad said. “I’m going to support this plan and support it strongly. Because I don’t see another alternative. I just don’t.”

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ············

No Comments

Democrat Senate shuns push for elimination of pet projects: Votes for Money Stealing.

November 30th, 2010 · Accountability, Deception, Democrats, Economy, Ethics, Federal Spending, Greed, Non-Transparency, Selling Out the US, Tax Dollars, Terrorism from Within

By ANDREW TAYLOR – The Associated Press
Tuesday, November 30, 2010; 11:41 AM

WASHINGTON — The Senate Tuesday rejected a GOP bid to ban the practice of larding spending bills with earmarks – those pet projects that lawmakers love to send home to their states.

Most Democrats and a handful of Republicans combined to defeat the effort, which would have effectively forbidden the Senate from considering legislation containing earmarks like road and bridge projects, community development funding, grants to local police departments and special-interest tax breaks.

The 39-56 tally, however, was a better showing for earmark opponents, who lost a 29-68 vote earlier this year. Any votes next year should be closer because a band of anti-earmark Republicans is joining the Senate.

Earlier this month, Republicans bowed to tea party activists and passed a party resolution declaring GOP senators would give up earmarks. House Republicans have also given up the practice, but most Democrats say earmarks are a legitimate way to direct taxpayer money to their constituents.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said Tuesday that Democrats had made the earmarking process far more transparent than it previously had been under GOP control of Congress. The reforms include requiring lawmakers to document every projects they seek and receive.

Seven Democrats voted with all but eight Republicans to ban the practice.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ·········

No Comments

Senate passes sweeping food safety bill: Protection or Control?

November 30th, 2010 · Deception, Government Control, Senate

Reference:
Senate Bill (FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (111 S 510)); House Bill (Safe FEAST Act of 2009 (111 HR 1332));
CBO Cost Estimates, November 29, 2010; CBO Cost Estimates, November 19, 2010; CBO Cost Estimates, August 12, 2010

By Lyndsey Layton Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 30, 2010; 10:51 AM

The Senate on Tuesday approved the biggest overhaul to the nation’s food safety laws since the 1930s, voting 73 to 25 to give vast new authorities to the Food and Drug Administration; place new responsibilities on farmers and food companies to prevent contamination; and–for the first time–set safety standards for imported foods, a growing part of the American diet.

The legislation follows a spate of national outbreaks of food poisoning involving products as varied as eggs, peanuts and spinach in which thousands of people were sickened and more than a dozen died.

The measure passed with support from both Democrats and Republicans, one of the few pieces of legislation to bridge differences in an otherwise sharply divided body. The House approved a different, more stringent version of the bill more than a year ago.

House leaders have indicated that they would accept the Senate version of the bill, however, in order to avoid the time-consuming conference process and speed the sending of the legislation to President Obama‘s desk. Proponents hope to have the legislation signed into law by the end of the lame-duck session.

Despite strong bipartisan support and backing from a diverse coalition of major business and consumer groups, the bill was been buffeted by politics in recent weeks.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags:

No Comments

Obama administration gives billions in stimulus money without environmental safeguards

November 29th, 2010 · Accountability, Deception, Democrats, Economy, Environment, Federal Spending, Obama's Scheme, Selling Out the US, Stimulus

By Kristen Lombardi and John Solomon – Center for Public Integrity
Sunday, November 28, 2010; 9:41 PM

In the name of job creation and clean energy, the Obama administration has doled out about $2 billion in stimulus money to some of the nation’s biggest polluters while granting them exemptions from a basic form of environmental oversight, a Center for Public Integrity investigation has found.

The administration has awarded more than 179,000 “categorical exclusions” to stimulus projects funded by federal agencies, freeing the projects from review under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. Officials said they did not consider companies’ pollution records in deciding whether to grant the waivers. They said that creating jobs quickly was an important part of the stimulus plan, and that past environmental violations should not disqualify a company from pursuing federal contracts for unrelated projects.

The projects include:

- An electrical-grid upgrade project in Kansas led by Westar Energy, the state’s largest coal-burning utility, which settled a major air pollution case by paying half a billion dollars in penalties and remediation costs. The Energy Department granted the NEPA waiver to Westar’s project, funded by a $19 million stimulus grant that was approved on the same day the settlement became official. Westar considers its “smart grid” project to be “our basic,standard, above-ground upgrade,” said Brad Loveless, the company’s environmental director. “From everybody’s perspective, there really wasn’t the potential for smart grid to have environmental problems.”

- A wind farm project in Texas, as well as an electrical-grid upgrade project in five additional states, undertaken by Duke Energy. The department granted the NEPA waiver to both Duke projects, funded by a combined $226 million in stimulus grants, even as the energy corporation continues its decade-long defense against two of the largest air pollution cases involving coal utilities in the nation’s history. “We’re basically adding communication infrastructure on top of what is already there so it is not disturbing the environment,” Duke’s Paige Layne said.

- A project to create clean-burning biofuel from seaweed led by chemical giant DuPont, which received $8.9 million in stimulus funds in February. That amount nearly equals the environmental fine DuPont paid in 2005 for hiding the dangers of its toxic chemical known as C8 from federal regulators for two decades. In a statement, DuPont stressed that it “has not applied for an environmental exclusion” for its project, but rather is “following the necessary process set forth by the Department of Energy.” It concludes, “Each project that we work on includes, by our own policy, a comprehensive and individualized product stewardship program.”

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ·············

No Comments