Boehner’s Folly

I titled this post, “Boehner’s Folly.”  I can’t publicly speak my real opinion on this monstrosity.  The only winners were the dems.  Let’s examine what they gained.

  1.  More spending.  They can now float loans for another $2.5 Trillion dollars.
  2.  The debt crisis has been postponed until 2012—after the 2012 elections that Obama wanted.  When the economy tanks further, he can blame Boehner, McConnell and the ‘Pubs for the 2nd recession. Many economist believe we’re already in that second recession and now the dems can rightly blame the ‘pubs.
  3. Likely more taxes when the Bush Tax Rate cuts expire.  Why will they expire?  We lost our leverage.  Now the bottom rate will increase by 50% from the current 10% to 15%.  The top rate will increase from 35% to 39%.  And, 50% of the country will still pay no taxes.
  4. No cut in the debt.  It will still increase by another $6Trillion dollars over 10 years to nearly $20Trillion. Any cuts were just a reduction of the rate of INCREASED spending.
  5. The US credit rating will still fall because of the continued wild spending and higher debt. Some international sources have already reduced our rating to A-.
  6. Any spending reductions will be heavily laid on the DoD and other security organizations.
  7. No Balanced Budget Amendment.  Oh, there may be a vote in the House.  It’ll end there. Reid will kill it in the Senate.  A previous version of the bill required a Balanced Budget Amendment.
(For more info on the bill, go here.)

This was the largest debt increase in the history of the country.  Every Representative who voted for this…uhmmm…(I can’t find a word that fits in polite company), should be replaced in the 2012 primaries.  None of them can be trusted.  That also applies for any ‘Pub in the Senate who vote for it as well.

I’m so disgusted with the establishment republicans in Washington that I just want to spit!

Implosion?

The Imperious President

I’ve been scanning the headlines and noticed they’ve taken a marked shift in the last few days.  Obama’s intransigence in the debt talks is hurting—him!  He’s continued the usual dem/lib tactics of blaming conservatives for everything while ignoring the fact that there has been a number of proposals that increased the debt limit and it has been Obama that has blocked every one.  He even blocked a plan submitted by Harry Reid!


The shift isn’t for Obama nor for the dems.  Here’s just a short sample of headlines that attest to the shift.

More Americans unhappy with Obama on economy, jobs

(Drudge headline for above: WASHPOST/ABC: Blacks, liberals flee in droves…)

Sanders: Would be ‘good’ for Obama to face primary challenge

One of the Senate’s liberal stalwarts suggested over the weekend that President Obama could benefit from a primary challenger over the next year.

AP:  widest wealth gap between US whites, minorities

“What’s pushing the wealth of whites is the rebound in the stock market and corporate savings, while younger Hispanics and African-Americans who bought homes in the last decade, because that was the American dream, are seeing big declines,” said Timothy Smeeding, a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor who specializes in income inequality. 

The dem/lib scheme to push minority home ownership, the Community Reinvestment Act, to many who could not afford them, is the primary reason why the “minorities” have seen their assets decline or disappear completely.  When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac forced banks to issue loans to those who’d not otherwise qualify for those loans, that requirement led to the failure of the housing market.

Such policies and others similar to them have NOT made one of the dem/lib core groups happy.

Poll: Obama losing support from base

President Barack Obama is losing support from his base, according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll released on Tuesday that finds his backing from liberals and African-Americans has plummeted.
The percentage of liberal Democrats who strongly support the president’s job policies has dropped in the past year, from 53 percent to 31 percent, the poll shows.
Here’s another similar headline. No, the future isn’t bright for Hispanics either.

Recession Study Finds Hispanics Hit the Hardest

WOODBRIDGE, Va. — Hispanic families accounted for the largest single decline in wealth of any ethnic and racial group in the country during the recession, according to a study published Tuesday by the Pew Foundation.
The study, which used data collected by the Census Bureau, found that the median wealth of Hispanic households fell by 66 percent from 2005 to 2009. By contrast, the median wealth of whites fell by just 16 percent over the same period. African Americans saw their wealth drop by 53 percent. Asians also saw a big decline, with household wealth dropping 54 percent.  
The future isn’t bright for Obama.  Nor is it bright for democrats. 

Exiting the sinking ship? Ark. Dem. US Rep. Mike Ross won’t run again

With somewhat curious timing, Arkansas Democratic Rep. Mike Ross has announced that he will not run for reelection in 2012. One year ago today, Ross was part of a congressional delegation that was 5-1 Democratic: both the state’s U.S. senators, Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, and three out of its four congressmen—Ross of the 4th district, Marion Berry of the 1st district and Vic Snyder of the 2nd district—were all Democrats.
But Berry and Snyder decided to retire rather than run for reelection in 2010, and both were replaced by Republicans. Lincoln was defeated by John Boozman, then the state’s only Republican in Congress, by a breathtaking 58%-37% margin. Now Ross, who as a Blue Dog leader and member of the Energy and Commerce Committee played a high-visibility game on Obamacare, has announced he’s quitting. Ross was reelected by a solid 58%-40% margin in 2010, one of the few Blue Dogs to do so well, and although redistricting reportedly made his district a little less Democratic he obviously hs the capacity to run ahead of his party. But Arkansas, the most Democratic Southern state in the years when Bill Clinton was running, voted 59%-39% for John McCain and against Barack Obama, and no one thinks that opinion has moved in Obama’s direction since.
The future isn’t bright for the dems. Their numbers are imploding. But…if the GOP caves during the debt limit talks, it won’t be bright for any of us.

Cartoons of the Week: McCoy

I’m taking the land-barge, uhhh, my Tahoe in for an oil change, inspection and licensing today.  Here’s a cartoon by Glenn McCoy to tide you over.
       
Obama’s reaction to Cut, Cap and Balance

Summertime trials

There was great news last night.  The US House passed Cut, Cap and Balance on a vote of 234 to 190.  Five dems voted for the bill.
By Russell Berman 07/19/11 09:07 PM ET
Five Blue Dog Democrats joined House Republicans in backing a conservative plan to condition a $2.4 trillion increase in the debt limit with immediate spending cuts, an annual cap on spending and a strict balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
Reps. Heath Shuler (N.C.), Dan Boren (Okla.) Jim Matheson (Utah), Mike McIntyre (N.C.) and Jim Cooper (Tenn.) all voted for the GOP “cut, cap and balance” plan that passed the House Tuesday on a vote of 234-190. The support from Democrats was a surprise, one GOP leadership aide said. Most Democrats railed against the GOP plan as a “radical” attempt to enact deep spending cuts and reforms that would threaten entitlement programs.

Cooper, also a member of the New Democrat coalition, signed a letter Tuesday endorsing the Senate’s “Gang of Six” plan, which includes $3.7 trillion in budget savings and is likely to draw more support from Democrats.

The bill didn’t get complete republican support.  Nine ‘Pubs voted against Cut, Cap and Balance.

GOP presidential candidates Reps. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and Ron Paul (Tex.) were among the nine House Republicans to vote no. The others were Reps. Paul Broun (Ga.), Quico Canseco (Tex.), Scott DesJarlais (Tenn.), Morgan Griffith (Va.), Connie Mack (Fla.), Walter Jones (N.C) and Dana Rohrabacher (Calif.).
Michele Bachmann said she voted against the bill because it didn’t include a repeal of Obamacare.  I can understand that.  There were already sufficient votes to insure passage and she is able to maintain her position against Obamacare.  I can understand why, I don’t agree with her.  I think she’d get more mileage supporting the Constitutional amendment.

Ron Paul’s reasoning is a bit different.  He continues his efforts to cut defense in order to force the US back into isolationism.
Rep. Ron Paul said he voted against the bill because it only serves to sanction the status quo by putting forth a $1 trillion budget deficit and authorizing a $2.4 trillion increase in the debt limit.
Paul said it’s “impossible” to eventually balance the budget without cutting military spending, Social Security or Medicare.
“These three budget items already cost nearly $1 trillion apiece annually,” he noted. “This means we can cut every other area of federal spending to zero and still have a $3 trillion budget.  Since annual federal tax revenues almost certainly will not exceed $2.5 trillion for several years, this Act cannot balance the budget under any plausible scenario,” Paul said.
 I maintain my position that Ron Paul is unfit to hold any national office.  If he had been President in the years leading to WW2, Europe would still be under Nazi control.  Paul has yet to understand that National Defense is best when it’s performed over there rather than over here.
As the news of the passage of Cut, Cap and Balance spread, there came an announcement by Obama about a deal among the Senate’s Gang of Six. That group consists of Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)
Supposedly it contains $3.6/3.7 Trillion in cuts over ten years, cuts to be determined at some unspecified time, with $1 Trillion immediate new tax increases—uhhh, new revenue.  In short, it reinstates Obama’s 2011 budget plan.  A plan that didn’t get ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT VOTE!
By Erik Wasson 07/19/11 01:09 PM ET
The Gang of Six plan unveiled to senators on Tuesday punts on key details, including exactly how it would reform Social Security and Medicare, according to a detailed outline obtained by The Hill.
The plan adopts a two-track approach: a $500 billion down payment and a later reform bill generating an additional $3.2 trillion in deficit reduction. That later bill is largely left up to committees of jurisdiction, and they are only required to meet specific savings targets.

So the cuts, instead of being specified, would be left to the discretion of some later committee.
Yeah, sure.
We can believe that just like there were $38 Billion in cuts in the last funding CR.  Those cuts turned out later to be only $343 Million, not Billions.  Whenever a democrat is involved, you can be sure the basis of any agreement is a lie and a fraud.
Getting back to Cut, Cap and Balance.  I have one disagreement with it.  The Constitutional Amendment should have been separate.  The President has no vote in the passage of an Amendment—only the two houses of Congress and 2/3rd of the states.  With the Amendment embedded in the bill, Obama can, as he’s already stated, veto it.
Neither plan has any hope of passage.  Harry Reid won’t let Cut, Cap and Balance pass in the Senate. The House ‘Pubs won’t pass the non-plan from the Gang of Six.
The best option that I can see for any increase in the debt limit is a one-for-one deal.  That would be for every Dollar of increase in the debt limit there would be one Dollar of REAL spending cuts. Real cuts. Not some unspecified, nebulous item that doesn’t really exist.  Defunding Obamacare and Dodd-Frank would be a good start.
As far as reaching any agreement by Obama’s August 2nd deadline?  Ain’t gonna happen.  Unhappy Birthday, Obama.

Follies from Jackass Bend on the Potomac

I’ve been screening the headlines since Friday.  Obama set a deadline for raising the debt limit.  The House passed a bill to raise the debt limit.  It also contained a Constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget. That item is known as Cut, Cap and Balance.

The House and Senate dems screeched and declared it dead.  BO said that 80% of Americans want taxes increases.

Well the first may be true.  As long as the dems hold the majority of the Senate and toe the party line, the House bill will die.  The second however is another Obama lie. 

Editorial: No, Americans Don’t Want Higher Taxes

Budget: Four of five Americans are “sold” on higher taxes to solve the deficit impasse, according to President Obama. Either he’s deceiving himself or he completely misunderstands how the public really feels.
The president on Thursday cited a recent Gallup poll that purportedly shows, in his words, “80% want higher taxes” as part of a deal to slash the deficit. “The American people are sold,” he said. “The problem is members of Congress are dug in ideologically.”
In fact, a quick look at the polling data referenced by the president shows this isn’t true. Not even close.
Gallup itself breaks it out: Those who say they want the deficit reduced “only/mostly with spending cuts” total 50% of those polled. Those who say they’d like it done “only/mostly with tax increases” total 11%. That’s not 80%.
Americans aren’t fools. Democrats just think they are. Whether its a $4 trillion “grand bargain” or a smaller $2.4 trillion cut in the expected $10 trillion in deficits over the next decade, if tax hikes are part of the deal it will sink the economy. Tax hikes are a nonstarter.
Americans see the explosion of $1 trillion-plus deficits stretching for decades to come, $107 trillion in unpaid bills for entitlements and a failed two-year Keynesian experiment that has pushed up federal spending by 25%. They know taxes didn’t do this — spending did.
That’s why Republicans should ignore Obama’s demand for tax hikes. In our own IBD/TIPP Poll, 60% of Americans said they’d be “less likely” to vote for someone who supports increasing the debt ceiling without “major spending cuts.” Heck, 58% said they either “somewhat” or “strongly” oppose raising the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling at all.
In our June poll, 74% of Americans opposed tax hikes as a way of getting out of our economic mess, while 80% also opposed more government spending.

I think BO is a pathological liar. He lies when there is no need. But, be that as it may, I’m not confident the ‘Pubs have the moral fortitude to stand firm.

There is no need to raise the debt limit.  As has been documented here, there is sufficient continuing income to service our debt, SS, Medicare, Veterans and the Military.

Other government spending, however, would be affected.  But, if the administration chooses wisely—more likely forced by Congress, there is a plethora of discretionary spending that can be blocked. 

The Heritage Foundation has a proposal to cut $343 Billion from the budget.  It’d be a good start.
 

Table 1: Spending Cuts for FY 2012
(in millions of dollars)
Agriculture
$15,000
Replace farm subsidies with Farmer Savings Accounts and improved crop insurance.
$2,033
Eliminate the Foreign Agriculture Service.
$1,500
Merge all four agriculture outreach and research agencies and cut their budget in half.
$1,000
Fund the Food Safety and Inspection Service with user fees.
Commerce
$500
Eliminate business subsidies from the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Community Development
$6,000
Eliminate the Community Development Block Grant program.
$598
Eliminate the Rural Utilities Service.
$523
Eliminate the Economic Development Administration.
$480
Eliminate NeighborWorks America (formerly the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation).
$200
Consolidate the Rural Housing and Development Programs and convert them into block grants.
$73
Eliminate the Appalachian Regional Commission.
$48
Eliminate the Denali Commission.
$31
Eliminate the Minority Development Business Agency.
$8
Eliminate the Delta Regional Authority.
Education
$8,000
Return Pell Grants to their 2009 funding level of $24 billion, which is still double the 2007 level.
$2,000
Trim Head Start by $2 billion and convert it into vouchers.
$2,000
Scale back the Education Department bureaucracy.
$1,500
Eliminate dozens of small and duplicative education grants.
$298
Eliminate state grants for Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities.
Energy and the Environment
$6,500
Reduce energy subsidies for commercialization and some research activities.
$600
Block grant and devolve Environmental Protection Agency grant programs.
$200
Restructure the Power Marketing Administrations to charge market-based rates.
$63
Eliminate the Science to Achieve Results Program.
Government Reform
$44,000
Halve federal program payment errors by 2012, especially by reducing Medicare errors and earned income tax credit errors.
Tighten oversight by spending $5 billion on new resources, such as updated computer systems, and then recover $49 billion in payment errors.
$20,000
Rescind unobligated balances after 36 months.
$12,500
Halve the $25 billion spent to maintain vacant federal properties.
$10,000
Cut the federal employee travel budget to $4 billion (half of FY 2000 spending).
$3,000
Freeze federal pay until it can be reformed.
$1,000
Suspend acquisition of federal office space.
$600
Trim the federal vehicle fleet by 20 percent (a reduction of 100,000 vehicles).
$300
Cut the House and Senate budgets back to the 2008 level of $2.2 billion.
$215
Eliminate the Presidential Election Campaign Fund.
$100
Tighten controls on federal employee credit cards and cut down on delinquencies.
$70
Require federal employees to fly coach on domestic flights.
Health Care
$6,200
Reform Medigap.
$5,000
Repeal Obamacare (larger savings in later years).
$3,700
Require Medicare home health co-payments.
$673
Eliminate the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant.
$414
Eliminate Health Professions grants.
$327
Eliminate Title X Family Planning.
$150
Eliminate the National Health Service Corps.
$98
Repeal Rural Health Outreach and Flexibility grants.
Homeland Security
$2,700
Eliminate most homeland security grants to states and allow states to finance their own programs.
Income Security
$500
Better enforce eligibility requirements for food stamps.
Interior
$1,500
Open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to leasing.
(The savings are leasing revenues, which are classified as negative spending in the federal budget.)
$200
Suspend federal land purchases.
International
$2,636
Eliminate the Development Assistance Program.
$625
Eliminate the State Department’s education and cultural exchange programs.
$321
Eliminate the International Trade Administration’s trade promotion activities or charge the beneficiaries.
$183
Eliminate the Democracy Fund.
$68
Eliminate the International Trade Commission and transfer oversight of intellectual property rights to the Treasury Department.
$56
Eliminate the Trade and Development Agency.
$29
Eliminate the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
$19
Eliminate the East–West Center.
$17
Eliminate the United States Institute of Peace.
$2
Eliminate the Japan–United States Friendship Commission.
Justice
$7,334
Eliminate all Justice Department grants except those from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Institute of Justice,
thereby empowering states to finance their own justice programs.
$398
Eliminate the Legal Services Corporation.
$32
Eliminate the Justice Department’s Community Relations Service.
$30
Eliminate the duplicative Office of National Drug Control Policy.
$26
Reduce funding for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division by 20 percent
because of its policy against race-neutral enforcement of the law.
$4
Eliminate the State Justice Institute.
Labor
$4,300
Eliminate failed federal job training programs.
$2,000
Eliminate the ineffective Job Corps.
$576
Eliminate the Senior Community Service Employment Program.
National Science Foundation
$1,700
Reduce National Science Foundation funding to 2008 levels.
$86
Eliminate National Science Foundation spending on elementary and secondary education.
Transportation
$45,000
Devolve the federal highway program and most transit spending to the states.
$1,900
Privatize Amtrak.
$1,009
Eliminate grants to large and medium-sized hub airports.
$554
Eliminate the Maritime Administration.
$125
Eliminate the Essential Air Service Program.
Treasury
$26,646
Eliminate the additional child refundable credit.
$103
Eliminate the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.
Veterans
$2,500
Cap increases in Department of Veterans Affairs health care spending.
$1,930
Reduce Veterans’ Disability Compensation to account for Social Security Disability Insurance payments.
Cross-Agency and Other
$60,000
Repeal unspent stimulus spending.
$8,000
Switch to using the “Superlative CPI” in funding calculations.
$6,000
Repeal the Davis–Bacon Act.
$2,250
Eliminate Federal Communications Commission funding for school Internet service.
$2,000
Ban project labor agreements on all federally funded construction projects.
$1,000
Eliminate the Small Business Administration, which unnecessarily intervenes in free markets.
$736
Eliminate the National Community Service programs, such as AmeriCorps.
$253
Eliminate the Institute of Museum Services and Library Services.
$140
Eliminate the National Endowment for the Humanities.
$133
Eliminate the National Endowment for the Arts.
$61
Eliminate Army Corps of Engineers funding for beach replenishment projects.
$10
Eliminate the Commission of Fine Arts.
$8
Eliminate the National Capital Planning Commission.
$5
Eliminate the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
Total
$343,207 million

Like I said, it’s a good start…but it’s just the start.