Well, it appears that our efforts are paying off.  Responding to our charge that the GOP was violating the pledge against bundled megabills, Boehner announced that he will split the proposal into three separate bills; the highway bill (HR 7), pension reform (HR 3813), and expanded oil and gas drilling (HR 3408).  This from Roll Call:

In a joint statement with Rules Chairman David Dreier (Calif.), the Ohio Republican sought to cast the decision as part of his pledge for a more open environment in the House.

“Republicans pledged to pass bills in a more transparent manner and reverse the era of quickly moving massive bills across the floor without proper examination. Accordingly, the energy/infrastructure jobs plan will be considered on the floor in the same manner in which it was written and voted upon in committee — in separate pieces,” Boehner and Dreier said.

Such a process will allow “each major component of the plan to be debated and amended more openly, rather than as a single ‘comprehensive’ bill with limited debate and limited opportunity for amendment,” they added.

This is great news.  But here’s the catch (via CQ subscription):

Read More →

Well, it appears that our efforts are paying off.  Responding to our charge that the GOP was violating the pledge against bundled megabills, Boehner announced that he will split the proposal into three separate bills; the highway bill (HR 7), pension reform (HR 3813), and expanded oil and gas drilling (HR 3408).  This from Roll Call:

In a joint statement with Rules Chairman David Dreier (Calif.), the Ohio Republican sought to cast the decision as part of his pledge for a more open environment in the House.

“Republicans pledged to pass bills in a more transparent manner and reverse the era of quickly moving massive bills across the floor without proper examination. Accordingly, the energy/infrastructure jobs plan will be considered on the floor in the same manner in which it was written and voted upon in committee — in separate pieces,” Boehner and Dreier said.

Such a process will allow “each major component of the plan to be debated and amended more openly, rather than as a single ‘comprehensive’ bill with limited debate and limited opportunity for amendment,” they added.

This is great news.  But here’s the catch (via CQ subscription):

Read More →

This Robert Samuelson piece on the inherent problem with Keynesian economic theory – which, in my opinion, can be summed up neatly as “First, assume that your planned economy will be managed forever by an immortal, unelected, and incorruptible Keynesian economist” – is pretty good, but it has one passage in it that makes my teeth ache. Here it is, in all of its questionable glory:

For the record, I supported Obama’s stimulus – though disliking some details – and, under similar circumstances, would again. The economy was in a tailspin; the stimulus provided a psychological and spending boost. But how much is less clear. As Romer notes, estimating the effect is “incredibly hard.” For example, the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of added jobs from the stimulus ranged from 700,000 to 3.3 million for 2010.

We’re going to unpack this, sentence by sentence. Because it has to be unpacked.

Read More →

This Robert Samuelson piece on the inherent problem with Keynesian economic theory – which, in my opinion, can be summed up neatly as “First, assume that your planned economy will be managed forever by an immortal, unelected, and incorruptible Keynesian economist” – is pretty good, but it has one passage in it that makes my teeth ache. Here it is, in all of its questionable glory:

For the record, I supported Obama’s stimulus – though disliking some details – and, under similar circumstances, would again. The economy was in a tailspin; the stimulus provided a psychological and spending boost. But how much is less clear. As Romer notes, estimating the effect is “incredibly hard.” For example, the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of added jobs from the stimulus ranged from 700,000 to 3.3 million for 2010.

We’re going to unpack this, sentence by sentence. Because it has to be unpacked.

Read More →

In an interview October 2011, with George Stephanopoulos, Obama just admitted that Americans are not better off than they were four years ago. In essence, he’s saying that the 4 trillion dollar increase in our National Deficit was merely a costly exercise in futility. Many Democrats realize they were duped in 2008 – they are starting to worry about their Country, their children, grandchildren and of course job security is right there at the top of their list.

Here’s a news update that is factual, not laced with lies or political rhetoric – it was DEMOCRATS who refused to give him more money to redistribute. It was Democrats who turned down his idiotic budget this spring and it is Democrats who are questioning his ability to serve as Commander in Chief.

Senator Joe Manchin, D-W. Va isn’t happy with Obama’s economic and energy issues – Chris says he’ll evaluate what is best for West Virginia before deciding if he’ll even consider backing Obama in 2012. Chris like so many other Democratic Senators must face their constituents at home who are concerned about the strangling EPA regulations, a frozen economy and extremely high unemployment.

There’s a consensus with many Democrats starting way back in the summer of 2010, that Obama is totally disengaged leaving all the heavy lifting to them without any real support. They feel that the stimulus, Obamacare, his jobs plan, taxing the wealthy has been dumped in their laps and we all know that’s true. In fact one lawmaker stated that Obama says “we’ve got to get tough” and then he looks back over his shoulder at Congress and says, “You Guys Do It.”

But, why should the Democrats be surprised – that is Obama’s mode of operation. He’s going on a 17 day vacation and threatened Congress before departing, saying, “Any effort to tie Keystone Pipeline to the payroll tax cut, I will reject. So everybody can be on notice.” He just dumped 10,000 Americans, the Unions and the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper on their heads – they have been counting on Keystone Pipeline job for jobs.

So to the Liberal News Media, can quite pretending that Obama cares about restoring our economy or creating jobs. Americans are tired of your malicious rants accusing everyone but Obama for our fallen economy and lack of leadership. Your news reminds me of sewer water – it’s dark, dirty with a rank odor and an endless supply of rotten content.

There’s some mighty fine Democrats out there – they’re Patriots and want to restore our Country and create a robust economy again, but Obama’s breakfast club elite keep slapping them around and threatening them.

Rep. Dan Boren, is pro industry from head to toe, but guess who’s trying to wipe him off the map – the weak kneed NYT’s who have about as much clout as bad boy Charlie Sheen. Dan is one of the most Conservative Democrats in the House and Dan has made a decision to work from the outside in – keep an eye on Dan, he’s someone we can all be proud of today and tomorrow.

In a recent Gallop Poll 44% of the Democratic base aren’t thrilled with Obama and the upcoming Presidential Election of 2012. Just think about that, almost half of the Democrats are having second thoughts about Obama.

Two of Obama’s most devoted followers, Chris Matthews and James Carville doubt Obama’s leadership abilities. Chris no longer gets that “Thrill up his leg,” he was bragging about and says, “Obama isn’t happy in the White House and Chris wonders why Obama wants a second term and what are his plans for a second term.” Chris chastises Obama’s advisers saying, “They’re little kids running around with propellers on their heads.”

Not much left for this person to run on in 2012, he absolutely doesn’t have any ammo for his gun – except class warfare and racism.

The question is this – will the Democrats allow Obama to continue his destruction against them or will they stand up and fight for their children, grandchildren and future generations?

May God Bless America
As Always,
Little Tboca

As the original 2% payroll tax cut for employees is set to expire next month, Democrats are proposing an even bigger cut.  Earlier this week, they introduced legislation (S.1917) to cut the payroll tax to 3.1 percent for employees, and for employers on the first $5 million of their payroll.  The bill would also eliminate the payroll tax paid by employers for the last quarter of 2011 and all of 2012 on the first $50 million of a company’s increased annual wage costs.  In order to pay for it, they are proposing a “surtax on millionaires,” which applies a 3.25 percent tax on modified adjusted gross income over $1 million, or $500,000 for a married individual filing separately.

Even though this cut will discard 38% of the annual revenue for Social Security, Democrats are accusing opponents of supporting a tax increase on “working families.”  For their part, most Republicans have only voiced opposition to the tax hikes, but shied away from assailing the very premise of a temporary payroll tax cut extension.  In fact, Senator McConnell told reporters yesterday, “In all likelihood, we will agree to continue the current payroll tax relief for another year, but we believe it should be paid for.”  He has yet to divulge how they would pay for it.  Kudos to Senator Jon Kyl for uprooting the entire premise behind Democrats’ rationale by noting that this cut has not been pro-growth and it has only further endangered the future of Social Security.

Republicans must show how it is the Democrats who are treating Social Security like a Ponzi scheme by indiscriminately marauding it, while paying out the shortfall with deficit spending, in addition to tax hikes.  Payroll taxes supposedly singlehandedly fund Social Security, yet Obama and the Democrats plan to cut 38% of its revenue source with this bill, even though SS already faces a $50 billion shortfall.

Republicans should force Democrats to answer the following questions:

Read More →

As the original 2% payroll tax cut for employees is set to expire next month, Democrats are proposing an even bigger cut.  Earlier this week, they introduced legislation (S.1917) to cut the payroll tax to 3.1 percent for employees, and for employers on the first $5 million of their payroll.  The bill would also eliminate the payroll tax paid by employers for the last quarter of 2011 and all of 2012 on the first $50 million of a company’s increased annual wage costs.  In order to pay for it, they are proposing a “surtax on millionaires,” which applies a 3.25 percent tax on modified adjusted gross income over $1 million, or $500,000 for a married individual filing separately.

Even though this cut will discard 38% of the annual revenue for Social Security, Democrats are accusing opponents of supporting a tax increase on “working families.”  For their part, most Republicans have only voiced opposition to the tax hikes, but shied away from assailing the very premise of a temporary payroll tax cut extension.  In fact, Senator McConnell told reporters yesterday, “In all likelihood, we will agree to continue the current payroll tax relief for another year, but we believe it should be paid for.”  He has yet to divulge how they would pay for it.  Kudos to Senator Jon Kyl for uprooting the entire premise behind Democrats’ rationale by noting that this cut has not been pro-growth and it has only further endangered the future of Social Security.

Republicans must show how it is the Democrats who are treating Social Security like a Ponzi scheme by indiscriminately marauding it, while paying out the shortfall with deficit spending, in addition to tax hikes.  Payroll taxes supposedly singlehandedly fund Social Security, yet Obama and the Democrats plan to cut 38% of its revenue source with this bill, even though SS already faces a $50 billion shortfall.

Republicans should force Democrats to answer the following questions:

Read More →

If one thing stood out from President Obama’s speech on Wednesday, his second attempt at a budget in as many months, it’s how little credence the president gives to the idea of prosperity. In fact, he only mentioned the word once in his entire speech, and that came as he was describing America’s past. By contrast, President Obama mentioned taxes and his plans to raise taxes at least two dozen times.

For those keeping score at home, that’s 24 to 1 in favor of tax hikes, a number that speaks volumes about this president’s agenda. Is there a clearer way to describe the difference between the two parties budget proposals?

Republican Paul Ryan‘s plan is a path to prosperity that enacts serious entitlement and tax reforms to considerably limit onerous government, while the president proposes an economic road block in the form of more taxation and deficit spending much like that of the past three years. In fact, you would be hard pressed to recognize America’s entrepreneurial spirit in the vision President Obama laid out Wednesday, crediting not the people of this great nation for our accomplishments, but instead the myriad of government agencies.

The president’s efforts to tackle debt with tax increases rather than sharp reductions in spending is hardly a worthwhile goal, an attempt to scapegoat the most productive industries in our nation and shift the burden from bureaucrats to the taxpayers. This ignores the real problem – a bloated, obstructive, and inefficient centrally planned government that truly threatens American prosperity and ingenuity.

President Obama has failed to act to reduce the debt, passing budgets that dwarfed those of his predecessor, George W. Bush. Since taking office, he has spent more money than any president in our history, including a one trillion dollar stimulus that failed to create jobs. Now he is suggesting tax hikes as companies just now start to emerge from the recession and hire again.

The president’s plan is bad for the U.S. economy. If your boss or employer suddenly has to pay more to the government in taxes, it means they have less money to bump up your salary, less money to pay those just starting out in the workforce. This doesn’t help middle class families, it hinders them.

President Obama is proposing tax hikes and more spending when we need to limit the size and scope of the government to focus on prosperity. That means lifting burdensome regulations and expanding economic freedom, not tying the hands of small businesses and entrepreneurs.

Republican’s need to champion a real stimulus plan!

The title is a quote by Victorian era English philosopher Herbert Spencer and is a perfect allegory for Stimulus 2.0 and the Obama Administration in general.

We all warned against the first stimulus bill, we knew this was nothing more than what Newt Gingrich calls – a politician bailout bill – laden with pork and having absolutely zero chance at stimulating the economy. In fact, by definition you can’t move money around like a shell game and call it recovery or stimulus!

A quick look at the numbers tells the story: As of this writing only 8-10% of the $787 billion has been spent, most of the spending is slated to be spent in the latter part of 2010 and 2011. We were also promised, if we hurried up and got on board this 1,073 page monstrosity without reading it, that unemployment rates wouldn’t top 8%… we’re now at 9.5% And 90% of the money paid out has gone to State and Local governments so they could stay afloat, not have to make sacrifices, and avoid hard belt tightening decisions.

Let’s not forget $16 Million for the salt marsh harvest mouse in San Francisco or the 18 million dollars for recovery.org the government site set up to track the spending of stimulus dollars. (btw- the company that got the contract doesn’t even list wed design as an expertise on their site)

Read More →

Many people have complained that the recent "stimulus" bill is really just a trojan horse for a vast array of agenda spending - but few have offered effective ways to reverse the whole far left takeover of the Democratic Party.