● 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 'Throw Out The Constitution'

Lame Duck Session: Dems passing any bill they can before they loose their power

December 23rd, 2010 · Corruption, Deception, Democrats, Ethics, Federal Spending, Government Control, Greed, Selling Out the US, Terrorism from Within, Treason

A lame-duck session with unexpected victories

By Perry Bacon Jr. Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 22, 2010; 4:34 PM

When the lame-duck session of Congress started more than a month ago, President Obama looked defeated and deflated, publicly acknowledging the “shellacking” his party had taken in the November midterm elections.

Now, a six-week session that was expected to reflect a weakened president has turned into a surprising success. On Wednesday, Obama signed into law the repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay service members, and the Senate approved a new nuclear treaty with Russia that the president had declared a top priority.

Those accomplishments come after Obama successfully negotiated a free-trade agreement with South Korea, reached a deal with Republicans that extended unemployment benefits and prevented a tax hike for millions of Americans and signed a bill that will make school lunches healthier.

This blitz of bill signings completes a dramatic first two years for the nation’s first black president that included the enactment of arguably the most major liberal policies since the Johnson administration but also the Democrats’ biggest loss of House seats in 72 years.

After the election defeats and bitter battles over the health care and financial regulation legislation, the next two years were widely expected to be tied up by gridlock between the GOP-controlled House and the Democratic president. But the past month suggests the future could be different.

Obama and his team reinvented their political approach over the past several weeks to win key Republican votes, no longer relying mainly on the huge Democratic majorities in Congress that they won’t have in the new year.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ·······

No Comments

The Net Neutrality Coup funded by a who’s who of left-liberal foundations.

December 23rd, 2010 · Corruption, Deception, Democrats, Ethics, Federal Spending, Government Control

By John Fund

The Federal Communications Commission’s new “net neutrality” rules, passed on a partisan 3-2 vote yesterday, represent a huge win for a slick lobbying campaign run by liberal activist groups and foundations. The losers are likely to be consumers who will see innovation and investment chilled by regulations that treat the Internet like a public utility.

There’s little evidence the public is demanding these rules, which purport to stop the non-problem of phone and cable companies blocking access to websites and interfering with Internet traffic. Over 300 House and Senate members have signed a letter opposing FCC Internet regulation, and there will undoubtedly be even less support in the next Congress.

The FCC has approved rules that would give the federal government authority to regulate Internet traffic and prevent broadband providers from selectively blocking web traffic. WSJ’s Amy Schatz explains what the new rules really mean.

Yet President Obama, long an ardent backer of net neutrality, is ignoring both Congress and adverse court rulings, especially by a federal appeals court in April that the agency doesn’t have the power to enforce net neutrality. He is seeking to impose his will on the Internet through the executive branch. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a former law school friend of Mr. Obama, has worked closely with the White House on the issue. Official visitor logs show he’s had at least 11 personal meetings with the president.

The net neutrality vision for government regulation of the Internet began with the work of Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor who founded the liberal lobby Free Press in 2002. Mr. McChesney’s agenda? “At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. “But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.”

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ·······

No Comments

FCC passes first net neutrality rules: Democrats made up the majority vote

December 23rd, 2010 · Democrats, Government Control

By Cecilia Kang

update: 3:23 p.m. with statement of support from President Obama, plans for Congressional hearings from House Republicans.

The Federal Communications Commission voted Tuesday to approve its first ever Internet access regulation, which ensures unimpeded access to any legal Web content for home Internet users.

The FCC’s three Democratic members made up a majority of votes in favor of the so-called net neutrality regulation, which was introduced more than a year ago by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski.

The rules have sparked intense debate and lobbying over whether such legislation is needed, and are likely to face a legal challenge. Genachowski has argued that Internet access rules would protect companies just starting out on the Web, as well as consumers who are increasingly relying on the Internet for news, entertainment and communications.

The agency’s two Republican members voted against the rules, showing support for Internet service providers who say the regulations will impede their ability to create new business plans to expand their broadband networks and boost speed.

Genachowski said the measure represents a compromise between industry and consumer interests.

“I reject both extremes in favor of a strong and sensible framework — one that protects Internet freedom and openness and promotes robust innovation and investment,” Genachowski said.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ····

No Comments

The FCC’s Threat to Internet Freedom

December 20th, 2010 · Ethics, Government Control, Terrorism from Within

‘Net neutrality’ sounds nice, but the Web is working fine now. The new rules will inhibit investment, deter innovation and create a billable-hours bonanza for lawyers.

By Robert M. Mcdowell

Tomorrow morning the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will mark the winter solstice by taking an unprecedented step to expand government’s reach into the Internet by attempting to regulate its inner workings. In doing so, the agency will circumvent Congress and disregard a recent court ruling.

How did the FCC get here?

For years, proponents of so-called “net neutrality” have been calling for strong regulation of broadband “on-ramps” to the Internet, like those provided by your local cable or phone companies. Rules are needed, the argument goes, to ensure that the Internet remains open and free, and to discourage broadband providers from thwarting consumer demand. That sounds good if you say it fast.

Nothing is broken and needs fixing, however. The Internet has been open and freedom-enhancing since it was spun off from a government research project in the early 1990s. Its nature as a diffuse and dynamic global network of networks defies top-down authority. Ample laws to protect consumers already exist. Furthermore, the Obama Justice Department and the European Commission both decided this year that net-neutrality regulation was unnecessary and might deter investment in next-generation Internet technology and infrastructure.

Analysts and broadband companies of all sizes have told the FCC that new rules are likely to have the perverse effect of inhibiting capital investment, deterring innovation, raising operating costs, and ultimately increasing consumer prices. Others maintain that the new rules will kill jobs. By moving forward with Internet rules anyway, the FCC is not living up to its promise of being “data driven” in its pursuit of mandates—i.e., listening to the needs of the market.

It wasn’t long ago that bipartisan and international consensus centered on insulating the Internet from regulation. This policy was a bright hallmark of the Clinton administration, which oversaw the Internet’s privatization. Over time, however, the call for more Internet regulation became imbedded into a 2008 presidential campaign promise by then-Sen. Barack Obama. So here we are.

Last year, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski started to fulfill this promise by proposing rules using a legal theory from an earlier commission decision (from which I had dissented in 2008) that was under court review. So confident were they in their case, FCC lawyers told the federal court of appeals in Washington, D.C., that their theory gave the agency the authority to regulate broadband rates, even though Congress has never given the FCC the power to regulate the Internet. FCC leaders seemed caught off guard by the extent of the court’s April 6 rebuke of the commission’s regulatory overreach.

[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

Harry Reid’s Holiday Jam: What the Senate wants to pass while you’re not paying attention.

December 15th, 2010 · Deception, Democrats, Ethics, Federal Spending, Greed, Non-Transparency, Selling Out the US, Senate, Tax Dollars, Taxes, Terrorism from Within, Treason

Reid's Holiday Message to the American People.

In the famous formulation often attributed to George Washington, the U.S. Senate is the saucer designed to cool the drink before it becomes law. In Majority Leader Harry Reid’s rush to beat the looming expiration of the 111th Congress, the Senate has become the express lane to jam through changes in military rules, a giant spending bill and even an arms treaty—and all with virtually no deliberation. Why are Republicans putting up with it?

The lame duck Congress was supposed to limp out of town this Friday, but yesterday Mr. Reid announced that in the dwindling days before Christmas he plans to pass the bipartisan tax deal, the New Start arms treaty with Russia, the immigration Dream Act, a “lands bill,” and a bill to let gays serve openly in the military. Oh, and yesterday he also dropped on his colleagues a 1,924-page, $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill for fiscal 2011 that no one but a few Appropriators have read, if even they have.

Any one of these issues could warrant at least a week of debate if the Senate were playing its designated constitutional role. But the New Start pact and spending bill in particular deserve at least eight or nine legislative days of debate, with opportunities for Senators to educate the public and offer amendments. As it is, most Americans are preoccupied with their busy holiday lives and have no idea that the world’s greatest deliberative body isn’t deliberating at all.

The rush for New Start is a special affront to Senate prerogatives under the Constitution, which requires a two-thirds vote for ratification precisely to guarantee a considered debate. The Administration claims that failure to ratify the treaty in two weeks will offend the Russians, though the Russians have said they feel no such urgency. GOP leaders have given Mr. Reid dates in either January or February to bring the treaty to the floor, and upwards of a dozen Republicans seem to be leaning in favor of the pact.

At a minimum the GOP ought to insist on a debate that is long enough to clarify the U.S. understanding of the treaty. That’s especially important on missile defenses because the pact’s preamble includes the major blunder of re-linking offensive and defensive weapons. At the time the pact was negotiated, the Russians claimed this language meant they could leave the treaty if the U.S. developed new missile defenses. In remarks at the time, U.S. officials did not forcefully counter that claim.

The Obama Administration has since said the Russians are wrong, but the Senate must make this absolutely clear during the ratification debate. GOP Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl are preparing a formal “understanding” to accompany the treaty that would stipulate that specific future U.S. missile defense plans aren’t part of the deal.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ···········

No Comments

Reid plays school yard games as he seeks votes that are sure to fail: Not fit for Congress

December 8th, 2010 · Accountability, Democrats, Dissention, Ethics, Federal Spending, Government Control, Greed, Non-Transparency, Terrorism from Within

Reid salutes America...Not fit for Congress!

In political gamble, Reid seeks votes that are sure to fail

By David A. Fahrenthold Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 8, 2010; 5:17 PM

On Wednesday afternoon, the most powerful man in the U.S. Senate did something that sounds odd: He set himself up to lose an important vote.

Then he planned to do it again, on another key issue.

And then another.

And then another.

Four times in the same afternoon, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) planned votes where his favored bills were expected to fail. For Reid, failure is actually the point. He wants to put Republicans on record as blocking all four – which deal with immigration rules, police and firefighters’ unions, health benefits for responders to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and seniors’ benefits.

These “test votes” are a sign of the sclerotic state of Congress, clogged by filibuster threats. Usually, it is the people out of power who resort to grand, futile gestures.

Now – in a political gamble – it’s the guys in charge.

“Just because the party of ‘Just say no,’ has been blocking all these initiatives, it doesn’t mean we’re not going to try,” said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid. “At some point, you’ve got to take a stand, and let the chips fall where they may.”

Senate Democrats, who hold a majority in the chamber, held their last “test vote” on Saturday. That proposal called for an end to tax cuts, passed under President George W. Bush, on income greater than $250,000 for a family.

Democrats needed 60 senators to agree. They got just 53.

[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

Even after their defeat, Democrats keep insisting on a tax increase.

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

‘It is not a sensible way to run a country to have this magnitude of tax issues left to annual uncertainty,” said Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner earlier this month, and he’s certainly right about that. But at the current moment the single biggest obstacle to more certainty is his boss, President Obama, who still refuses to compromise on the tax increase set to whack the economy in a mere 30 days.

After meeting with Congressional leaders yesterday, Mr. Obama dispatched Mr. Geithner and budget director Jacob Lew to negotiate a deal. Yet the President is still holding out against even a temporary extension of the 2001 and 2003 tax rates. Republicans won 63 House seats running against those tax increases, but Mr. Obama still seems under the spell of the dead enders led by soon-to-be-former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The magnitude of the looming tax increase ought to snap him out of this hypnosis. If the Democrats who still run Capitol Hill for another month fail to act, tens of millions of American households will see their paychecks shrink immediately in the New Year.

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

Capital gains and dividend tax rates will climb to 20% and 39.6%, respectively, from 15%, and the top two income tax rates will climb to 38% and 41% (including deduction phaseouts), from 33% and 35%. The typical family with an income between $40,000 and $75,000 a year will pay as much as $2,000 more in 2011, as the 10% tax rate bracket and the $1,000 per child tax credit vanish.

This could have been resolved months ago, except that the White House and Congressional Democrats insist that some taxes must be raised. Mr. Obama wants the lower rates to expire on incomes of $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. Dozens of Democrats revolted against that in the campaign, so the latest gambit, courtesy of New York Senator Chuck Schumer, would raise that threshold to $1 million.

Republicans shouldn’t be suckered into raising taxes on anyone, especially not on small business job creators. The U.S. corporate tax rate of 39% (a combination of state average and federal rates) is already about 15 percentage points above the international average, and for the first time in a generation the personal rate of 41% would rise above the average of our overseas rivals. That’s all before the 3.8% surtax on investment income arrives in 2013, courtesy of ObamaCare.

Because most nations tax their companies at a business rate lower than the personal rate, the Tax Foundation says the Obama plan would mean that many Subchapter S corporations in the U.S. would pay “virtually the highest tax rates in the world on their business income.” In other words, the after-tax rate of return on investment in the U.S. would fall relative to investing in Europe or Asia. This is an invitation to outsource more jobs. The U.S. should be cutting tax rates to become more competitive, as President Obama’s deficit reduction commission and tax reform advisory panel have recommended.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ·········

No Comments

Progress in Afghan war called ‘uneven’: Congress and Administration paint a false picture.

November 24th, 2010 · Accountability, Afghanistan, Deception, Defense, Democrats, Foreign Policy, Non-Transparency, Obama's Scheme, Selling Out the US, Terrorism from Within

By Karen DeYoung Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 24, 2010

A new Defense Department report on Afghanistan described progress in the war as “uneven” and painted a more sobering picture than public comments made recently by President Obama and U.S. military officials.

The report, mandated by Congress for delivery every six months, spoke of “modest gains in security, governance and development in operational priority areas.” But the advances cited appeared to be outweighed by what the report’s authors called “numerous challenges.”

The period covered by the assessment ended Sept. 30, and a defense official authorized to brief reporters on the condition of anonymity said there had been “a lot of encouraging signs over the past six to seven weeks.”

The report came as the Pentagon and other government departments and agencies have provided the White House with internal war assessments that will form the basis of a strategic review to be completed by mid-December. An interagency group is now collating the various “inputs” for consideration next week by the National Security Council’s deputies committee, a senior defense official said.

That committee will report overall findings to national security principals and Obama, who will determine whether to make any changes in the strategy he outlined a year ago. The strategy included deployment of an additional 30,000 troops, for a total U.S. force of about 100,000, and a tripling, to more than 1,000, of U.S. civilian officials.

“We’re looking at the path and pace of progress,” the senior official said. “How is the strategy being implemented? Where are we achieving the desired effects, and where we are not, why not? What adjustments can be made?”

As far as the Pentagon is concerned, the official said, “we are seeing the shift of momentum that we aimed for” against Taliban forces. “It’s not complete, and there are still challenges.” But “the concept is being proven in key areas.” Other officials have said they do not anticipate significant changes in the strategy.

[View Complete Article →]

Tags: ·····

No Comments