Congressional Shenanigans, Taking From the Food Stamp Program to Pay for Their Programs

Russell Berman, in a recent article in THE HILL, reports that the legislation proudly pushed through Congress as “Not adding to the deficit” has actually done so by tapping funds from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or commonly called the food stamp program.

”The proposed cuts would come on top of a 13.6 percent food stamp reduction in the $26 billion Medicaid and education state funding bill that President Obama signed this week.”

The cuts he refers to is for Michelle Obama’s $8 billion child-nutrition bill. Since it is not considered emergency legislation it needs to have its’ funding defined in the bill. The bill is at the center of the first lady’s “Let’s Move” initiative and the people that want it pushed through don’t want to take the time to establish a new tax to cover its cost. Congress has so over used the concept of taxing-the-rich, they propose taking the money from food stamps.

When the Food Stamp Program runs short on funds they will push through emergency legislation to cover the short fall and will blame the Republicans for not caring for the poor if they balk. Emergency legislation does not need to specify where the money is coming from and is just added to the deficit. That way they will be able to pass their pet projects and appear to be doing only what is necessary.

There is a real need by the states to find addition funds to cover their lack of discipline. The state aid bill has been called a union bailout bill because the funds are designated to support the wage levels and jobs of state unionized workers. But why did they need some money for Medicaid? Could it be that they are just replacing funds to Medicaid that they pillaged to cover the cost of one of their other initiatives. And so it goes, what we don’t know won’t hurt us.

Last week I watched a Democrat Senator tell Cavuto that the State Aid Bill does not add a penny to the deficit and that there is even some extra in it to pay the deficit down. Remember this the next time you hear any of our Proud Elected Officials brag about anything. Not once has this been brought out in any of the discussions before the bill was passed.

Link to Mr. Bermans’ article: Dems may use food stamp money to pay for Michelle Obama's nutrition initiative

The Honeymoon Is Over And I Want A Divorce - Obama’s Interest Rate Quagmire

He lives in Fairy Land and The White House has become His Magic Kingdom.

My last article talked about the quagmire that our economy will be in if Obama's uncontrolled deficit spending, in His attempt to reshape America, is not brought under control. Two days ago He made a speech where He stated the same thing. Bloomberg published this article: Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ‘Unsustainable’.

Yes, higher interest rates would devastate the budget causing astronomical deficits – beyond the enormous ones already in the pipeline. But the problem is NOT HIGHER INTEREST RATES, it’s that He will not stop spending money He does not have. It’s the spending that is causing us to borrow in the first place. He will not give up his dreams to reshape the American economy. Here is another campaign speech (oops, Presidential Address) He made a couple of days ago. He recognizes the danger of increased borrowing but places His vision for health care, energy and the environment at a higher level of importance than mere monetary concerns.

The implication is that we will have to raise our level of commitment to society, lowering the level of our bank accounts.

If He will not stop deficit spending then the only way to reduce the governments’ need to float Treasury Notes is to find different ways of raising taxes. He loves hidden taxes; a dime on a coke or candy bar, a quarter on a gallon of gas, a buck a six-pack, 10% on anything plastic. He’ll nickel-dime-quarter us to death but will not raise our taxes.

His carbon tax could devastate the lower income portion of our society, severely curb the spending habits of the middle class and we already know what He plans for the upper class. His health plan would eventually dictate everything that impacts our health. People that are considered over-weight will have restrictions put on them because they are now a burden to the health care system. We will be told what foods we’re allowed to eat, what doctors we will see and our health care will be monitored for our own welfare. The majority of a person’s medical expenses come in the last few years of life, euthanasia would be the single biggest money saver.

He said today that people should pursue fulfilling careers such as volunteering their time or working for a non-profit. That the American People should aspire to higher level of commitment to the society. That leaves government work out, their all about the money. If He thinks He can dictate salaries in the private sector then the next logical step is to dictate salaries of Physicians, Nurses, procedures, medicines and hospital costs. All would benefit society. Doctors should aspire to a higher level and donate their time.

He lives in Fairy Land and The White House has become the Magic Kingdom.

Congress - Trust Lost

Michael Scherer in his article, A Failure Of Leadership and posted on Time's blog Swampland, expresses what most of us know but haven't put into words yet. At least by the media.

It seems that the American people would rather face economic ruin than put their trust in today's Congress.

Vote our incumbants out.

Government Loves Cigarettes

Or how to raise taxes $15.25 billion a year 61¢ at a time.

Politicians love to demonstrate their concern over the welfare of the American people by piling on the anti-tobacco bandwagon. At the same time fall all over themselves to figure out how they can tax, sue and squeeze more money from tobacco.

Currently the Senate Finance committee is passing an increase of the cigarette tax from 39¢ to $1.00 or a 156% increase. Of course this added revenue will be used to finance a health plan program for children. What happens when everyone stops smoking? I guess they will just raise taxes.

While the Democratically controlled Congress shouts about taxing the rich and helping the poor, they continually find it easier to impose taxes that impact the lowest wage earners the most. If you smoke one pack a day that will equate to a $222 annual tax increase.

From a Reynolds American Inc. Press Release (pdf):

Does The Right Hand of the Senate Know What The Left Hand is Doing?

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. – July 17, 2007 -- This week, two Senate committees will likely approve separate, but diametrically opposed, pieces of legislation related to tobacco products.

On the one hand, the Senate Finance committee is expected today to increase the tax on tobacco products by 156 percent to fund expansion of the SCHIP program. The increased taxes, falling primarily on middle- and lower-income tobacco users, will generate an additional $35 billion in government revenue.

Federal and state taxes and payments already account for more than 50 percent of the average cost of a pack of cigarettes.

On the other hand, the Senate HELP committee is scheduled on Wednesday to consider and likely approve legislation granting virtually unlimited regulatory authority over tobacco products to the Food and Drug Administration.

A chief proponent of the FDA legislation, Dr. Greg Connelly of Harvard University School of Public Health, testified before the HELP committee in February that the bill “could turn Marlboro into lard: legal, but no one uses it.”

“These consecutive committee actions beg the question of whether the Senate is trying to have it both ways: sell more cigarettes so the federal government can have billions of dollars more in tax revenue, while at the same time regulating tobacco products to the point no one will use them,” said Tommy Payne, executive vice president of public affairs for Reynolds American Inc.

What’s The Chance Of Congress Passing Tort Reform?

Then Edward’s might have to get bargain-basement haircuts for $200.

From a Cincinnati Business Courier article, by Washington Bureau Chief Kent Hoover, the cost of lawsuits or the measures taken to prevent them is costing Americas small business $98 billion a year.

The article states: “The study tracks damage awards, settlements, legal costs, liability insurance premiums and costs incurred by insurance companies on behalf of policy holders.”

This is from a US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform study based on 2005 data. If you care to take a look at the study click: TORT LIABILITY COSTS FOR SMALL BUSINESS pdf required.

Since attorneys represent 25% to 50% of our state and federal legislators and 100% of our judiciary, the odds of effective tort reform getting passed is fodder for new lawyer jokes.

Bush Abandons Manufacturing

Over the last six years President Bush has signed numerous Trade Agreements with countries in Asia, Middle East and the Americas. These Agreements often ignore human rights issues and have the practical effect of diminishing the ability of American businesses to compete and grow.

In his unexplainable and continuous effort to open the borders while exporting American jobs he is sending to Congress a budget that cuts by more than 55% the funding for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership.

From a Kent Hoover article in the Tampa Bay Business Journal:

“The partnership is a network of 59 centers with 350 locations around the country. These centers provided technical assistance and business support services to 16,448 small and medium-size manufacturers in fiscal 2005.”
“They receive state, local and private-sector funding in addition to federal funds.”
“The National Association of Manufacturersalso criticized the proposed MEP cut.”

Why Are Prescription Drugs So Expensive

As previously posted in my article Pfizer Has No Cure For Michigan’s Headache and Health Insurance The Wild Card the health care industry is operating outside of any economic realities. Costs have consistently raised at 2 to 3 times inflation, medical coverage has gone up so much and has become such a problem, that in a recent CNN survey 43% of company CEOs consider health insurance premiums the #1 threat to their companies future.

So it came as no surprise when I read Insiders article Pfizer's decimation - will the lobbyists be cut? On his/her blog PharmaGossip:

“According to the Centre for Responsive Politics, in 2005 there were 2,326 registered pharmaceutical lobbyists. That amounts to 4.3 lobbyists for every member of Congress, and the drug companies spent $146,783,853 on their efforts.”

”And the Center for Public Integrity reports that between 1998 and 2005, the industry spent over $675 million on federal lobbying”

Renewed Call For Reservists Legislation

As posted previously in Employers Snubbing Reservists employing reservists can be a risky endeavor for small business and a pain for larger companies. With 550,000 reservists called up since the beginning of the Iraq War, a majority of employers, albeit to themselves, resist hiring a reservist. Besides the inconvenience of losing a valued worker there are stiff penalties if something should happen.

Legislation is needed that offers employers tax credits that kick in when an employee returns to work from performing their reservists duties. Why hire someone if their work might be disrupted and all you have to look forward to is penalties. It time to provide a carrot to employers.

Response To Neil Cavuto On Minimum Wage vs.Legal Status

If an employer is already breaking the law by hiring illegal workers, then he is breaking two or more laws by not paying them a minimum wage. The problem is in the enforcement. We do not need more laws with more political correctness, we need enforcement of our current law. When that happens, the solution to the issue of illegal workers also begins. Until then all our politicos achieve is more free air-time.

Neil expressed his opinion that the latest numbers on the U.S. savings rate are misrepresented and in our economy is meaningless. Every time people start to ignore basic economic tenants, we learn why they are considered rules the hard way.

There are two distinct attitudes towards our economy, one is that everything is fine and the other is that we our on the brink of catastrophe. Either way the negatives are numerous and enormous, there has to be a time when they are reversed or we will experience some very negative consequences. The U.S. savings rate is just one of them. With the age of our populace, savings through retirement vehicles, should be at its peak.

It Takes An Act Of Congress to Display The Ten Commandments

H.Con.Res. 12 (ih) Requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in the United States Capitol. [Introduced in House]

There is absolutely no benefit, to the citizenry, for 95% of what goes on in Washington or in most of our state capitals. The fact that Congress has to legislate permission to display the Ten Commandments is only symbolic, after the attorneys get the issue into their “court” the whole issue becomes doubtful and could take years of litigation to go nowhere.

Imagine our capitalist upbringing where improving, growing, doing-better and thinking outside-the-box has replaced a slower built-on-fundamentals approach. Add that entrepreneurial dynamism to years of advocacy legal training and you start to get a feel for our current legal system. At one time we could brag about our legal professionals that would defend the guilty with the same efficacy as the innocence, advocate for the weak with the same audacity as the strong. But as causes for various individual rights issues gained in popularity, funding improved, allowing their positions to be championed by the best and the brightest.

The American people have always shown their resiliency to overcome and conquer the many obstacles that circumstances have thrown our way. Depressions, wars and diseases are easy to identify and Americans have always stiffened, pooled their resources, and prevailed. But what about a threat we can’t identify, a threat that works from the inside and whose only goal is to win.

Does an atheist have rights, absolutely. The exact same rights as any other recognized religious group. If having the Ten Commandments on the wall of a Capital building is in support of a religion and offensive to atheists then NOT having it on the wall is in support of Atheists and equally offensive to someone else. This argument can go on forever and everyone loses, but it’s the lawyers from both sides that gain in stature, obtain lucrative commissions and what is most important, create a never ending argument.

It’s this advocacy training that prepares attorneys to do so well in politics, the ability to aggressively debate an issue or put into contention an issue that they don’t want action to be taken on. The will of the people or even personal opinion has nothing to with it, the first priority is self-interest, the next is party politics, then there are the needs of the special interests, and lastly come the constituents.

Even it they lose on an issue it is still not over. Look at the issue of the “Border Fence”. Congress passes a bill to build the fence, then passes a bill to fund it and the President reluctantly signs both bills. Does that mean we have a fence? No. The funds are not going to be appropriated and if they are, a court will find an excuse to block it.