News for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited government, free markets, liberty & individual freedom. All content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles. Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home Page
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
Friday, September 24, 2010
Readers Digest: Blanche Lincoln & Family - "Phony Farmers" Get $715,000 From Tax Payers
Billions in tax dollars go to frauds who have never plowed a field.
How did the system get so corrupt?
In a Readers Digest article titled "Phony Farmers Exposed," Michael Crowley identified: A dead man farming? That was the unsettling image that came to mind last November, when a Miami television station analyzed records of federal farm subsidies paid to South Florida residents. By cross-referencing payments against death notices, the reporters found that at least 234 people listed as deceased were still getting checks from Washington; some had been dead for as long as eight years. All told, about $9.5 million in farm subsidies went to folks who were pushing up plants, not harvesting them.
And then there are the rich phonies taking handouts. A government audit found that of the 1.8 million so-called farmers who received federal funds between 2003 and 2006, 2,702 of them had adjusted gross incomes of more than $2.5 million. . . .
Why in the world is Washington sending subsidy checks to millionaires, foreign residents, and corpses? The answer can be found in one of the most maddening federal programs around: farm subsidies. Every year, the government spends more than $13 billion on subsidies to farmers and agribusinesses—much of it in cash payments that keep coming regardless of economic and crop conditions. . . .
“Farm subsidies are America’s largest corporate welfare program,” says the Heritage Foundation’s Brian Riedl. “They survive as a case study in special interest politics.”
The agricultural industry, with 1,200 registered lobbyists in Washington, spends about $133 million a year to make sure the money keeps flowing. Defenders of farm supports like to hold up the classic image of a hardworking American farmer in his overalls. But small farmers aren’t getting much more than the crust of this pie. Seventy-five percent of all farm subsidies go to just 10 percent of recipients, according to the watch-dog Environmental Working Group. . . .
Oh, and don’t forget the people who are paid not to farm. In 1996, Congress approved payments for farmers regardless of whether they planted, as long as they didn’t develop their land. The payments were supposed to be temporary help and then phased out. But—surprise, surprise!—they kept on coming. . . . It’s not just lobbyists who keep this racket going; our lawmakers are guilty too. . . .
Other members of Congress have profited from subsidies directly. Arkansas Democratic senator Blanche Lincoln’s family received more than $700,000 over a ten-year period, . . . Speak up. Contact the House and Senate agriculture committee chairs, Representative Collin Peterson (202-225-2165) and Senator Blanche Lincoln (202-224-4843), and tell them to stop the wasteful spending. [Full Article ]
Wow - Lincoln and family get $700,000.
Should Arkansas Elect Sen. Blanche Lincoln to continue to control
the farm subsidies program from which she and her family benefit?
November is Coming!
Tags:Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas, farm subsidies, phony farmers, personal gain, Readers Digest, 2010 Election, November is ComingTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
LOL, I don't believe we will have to go far to accept one term former president James Earl "Jimmy" Carter, Jr.'s hostage demands. In the cartoon, Jimmy appears so deranged - which he is - because he is unable to grasp that he has been booted up a couple levels from "worst president ever." We have been reminded about the example of former president Thomas Woodrow Wilson (D) (March 4, 1913 – March 4, 1921) who led the progressive movement by the present progressive elitist president: Barack Hussein Obama II.
-------------- William Warren:
Tags:Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama, Woodrow Wilson, progressive, elitists, hostage, crisis, worst president, Political Cartoons, William WarrenTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Sept 24, 2010 - Democrats Spend A Week On Political Show Votes, Then Punt On Taxes
The Senate reconvened and began a period of morning business. No votes are scheduled for today. Earlier this morning, Reid filed for cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 3816, a bill giving tax incentives to companies that hire workers in the U.S. for work done abroad. Yesterday, Democrats again failed to get 60 votes to advance their partisan Disclose Act, by a vote of 59-39. Several democrat senators facing losing their re-election still choose to vote in favor of the democrat partisan bill that would have limited free speech and is cloaking behind a euphemism - saying the bill is about transparency. A prior form of this bill had been overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States as unconstitutional.
However, the democrats keep trying to pass and implement this bill. One of the senators is Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas (D) who is also desperately raising funds not in Arkansas but in New York. Interesting enough is the fact that Lincoln, who represents Arkansas, lives almost exclusively in Virginia. It is Lincoln's liberal voting record on big spending, bailouts and limitation of free speech which have endangered her re-election as a Senator from Arkansas. However, politically she surmised the bill would be defeated if all the Republicans voted against the bill. Lincoln is gambling that no one in Arkansas will note a defeated bill attacking free speech and she desperately focused on getting campaign money from her liberal out of state sources.
Also yesterday, the Senate voted 43-56 against a motion to proceed to S.J. Res. 30, a resolution of disapproval offered by Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) of a National Board of Medication decision on labor union regulations.
Responding to a comment from Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell this morning, Majority Leader Harry Reid said, “There has been a lot of wasted time here in the Senate but it hasn't been because of the majority. We've had to answer to more than a hundred filibusters here in the Senate, which has eaten up weeks and weeks of our time, where we should have been talking about jobs for the American people.” Sen. Reid is certainly correct that the Senate “should have been talking about jobs for the American people.” But, it is Reid and the Democrat majority who set the schedule in the Senate, and while Americans are concerned about their jobs and the economy, the Senate was engaged in a Democrat "politics-only" week in the U.S. Senate.”
Indeed, on Tuesday, Democrats tried to bring the Defense Authorization bill to the floor, but they insisted on loading down the bill with controversial political items such as repealing the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell policy” and the DREAM Act. As The Hill noted, “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is getting pushback from Democratic colleagues balking at the legislative agenda he set for the weeks before Election Day. Several Democratic senators have questioned the wisdom of voting on the military’s ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy and a scaled-down version of immigration reform, known as the DREAM Act. Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) said Democrats are worried about bringing up hot-button political issues that are likely to rev up the liberal base but could alienate more conservative swing voters.”
And then when the Senate wouldn’t take up a politicized Defense bill, Democrats delved even further into politics, bringing back the Disclose Act, which the Wall Street Journal called a “blatantly partisan effort to limit the free political speech of some Americans but not of others,” and which Roll Call noted was an “appeal to [his] Democratic base.” Sen. McConnell described the effort: “The only thing transparent here is the effort this exercise represents to secure an electoral advantage for Democrats. So this is a completely distasteful exercise. At a time when Americans are clamoring for us to do something about the economy, Democrats are not only turning a deaf ear, they’re spending two full days here working to silence the voices of even more people with a bill that picks and chooses who has a full right to political speech.”
Yet this whole time, the Senate could have been doing something to help the economy and prevent tax increases on all Americans next year. If Congress does not act, every taxpayer, including hundreds of thousands of small business owners, will face higher taxes in January. Sen. McConnell explained last week, “[T]he uncertainty that persists now while Washington decides what to do is paralyzing businesses from making the kinds of investments that would help turn our economy around. That’s why I recently proposed legislation in the U.S. Senate to definitively prevent these disastrous tax hikes. It would keep current income tax rates where they are now, giving small businesses the certainty they need to plan for the future.”
But according to The New York Times, “Senate Democrats said Thursday that they would postpone a highly contentious floor fight over what to do about the expiring Bush-era tax cuts until after the November elections, a decision that spares some politically vulnerable incumbents from casting a potentially difficult vote to let taxes rise for the rich. . . . It also raised a political risk for Democrats that they would be seen as wavering on one of President Obama’s signature campaign promises and abandoning a fight that could have mobilized the party’s base ahead of the elections. A number of Democrats in the Senate and in the House have also called for a temporary extension of the tax breaks at all income levels and that was clearly a factor in the decision by party leaders to hold off.”
U.S. Senate vote on extending tax cuts
scheduled to expire is now unlikely
before the November elections.
John McKinnon has the latest.
The Wall Street Journal summarizes it best: Congress Punts on Taxes: Democrats Put Off Showdown on Bush Cuts Until After November Election. "Democrats abandoned plans to vote before Election Day on extending Bush-era tax cuts for the middle class while eliminating them for better-off Americans, spooked by protests from vulnerable incumbents and bleak prospects for passage. With time running out to plan for 2011, the delay raises uncertainty for small businesses and individual taxpayers over their future liabilities. It also sets up a titanic battle over taxes after the election. If returning lawmakers don't pass legislation by Dec. 31, the expiration date of the cuts, tax rates would rise not only on income, but also on estates, capital gains and dividends. Important corporate tax credits and relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax also are up for renewal."
In other words, Democrats have punted on preventing job-killing tax hikes on Americans in what many consider to be a very painful recession. A recent CNBC poll found that “[a] majority of the respondents believe the Bush tax cuts should be extended, even for people making more than $250,000 a year. Fifty-five percent think increasing taxes on any Americans will slow the economy and kill jobs.” And a CNN survey of economists found that “extending the tax cuts for all taxpayers is the most important thing Congress can do to help the economy.”
But instead, Senate Democrats spent the week on political show votes that won’t create jobs or prevent tax increases. They could have been trying to foster an environment to create “jobs for the American people.” But Democrats apparently decided once again that politics trumped addressing the economy. No wonder Americans are fed up with this out-of-touch Congress. Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, military appropriations act, Harry Reid, Blanche Lincoln, dream act, amnesty, don't ask, don't tell, military, raising taxes, jobs, pollsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Huckabee's Rejected Editorial: Facts and the Fair Tax
The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette has continued to live by its name in its bias favoring Arkansas democrats verses the people of Arkansas. Recently, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette refused to publish a guest column by Mike Huckabee, the former Governor of Arkansas, the 2008 presidential Republican candidate, a Fox News Commentator and host of the Huckabee Show.
So, the ARRA News Service will evidence its bias toward conservatives and against the lame street media by reporting what the AR-Dem would not report. Below, Gov. Mike describes the situation and presents his rejected guest editorial addressing Facts and the Fair Tax.
------------- by Mike Huckabee: Recently, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette published an editorial attacking John Boozman and me for supporting the Fair Tax. The criticism mirrored that of Senator Blanche Lincoln and like most of the attacks on the fair tax, it didn't let the facts get in the way of a strong opinion to keep the status quo of the tax system. I asked to submit a guest column to thoroughly present the other side, but the idea of a guest column was rejected by the newspaper, which is their prerogative. Since they chose not to tell the other side, I will take to the forum of my website to do so and would ask that you forward the article to everyone you can, especially if you have friends in AR so they will know that Blanche Lincoln is as wrong on the Fair Tax as she was on Obamacare and the stimulus. It's apparent that she hasn't read the Fair Tax bill anymore than she read the 2300 pages of the Obamacare bill.
Guest Column----“Facts and the Fair Tax” by Mike Huckabee
It is unfortunate that you have consistently written with contempt about the Fair Tax, but have obviously done so without bothering to conduct even the most perfunctory research on what it actual does and does not do. I expect that kind of “shoot first, aim later” approach from the local tabloids, but the Democrat-Gazette editorial staff is better than your understanding of the Fair Tax would reflect.
The Fair Tax is hardly a “half-baked” idea. It is the result of over $22 million dollars of scholarly research involving economists from Harvard, MIT, Stanford, University of Chicago, Boston University, and other prestigious universities.
In a nutshell, the Fair Tax is a flat tax, but instead of taxing our productivity (income, investment, savings, capital gains, or inheritance), we are taxed at the point of consumption at the retail level on new items. It is flat, fair, finite, and family friendly. It is totally transparent, unlike the hideous tax structure we currently have and is not a VAT that assesses taxes at production points, but remains largely hidden to the consumer.
The criticism that it would “hurt the poor” is the surest evidence that the critic is ignorant of the pre-bate built into the fair tax, which un-taxes consumption of our basic necessities, and which the studies show actually creates the greatest benefit to those in the lower third of the economy, significant benefit to the middle third of the economy, and some benefit, but less to those in the top third of the economy.
Here’s what the Fair Tax will do:
1. Eliminate the IRS and its indecipherable 67,000 pages of tax code so complex that even Treasury Secretary Timothy Geitner and 41 members of the White House staff seem unable to understand it (or else simply unwilling to comply with it.)
2. Release $13 TRILLION of U. S. capital back into our economy that is presently legally, but unfortunately parked offshore to protect it from the ravenous tax rates.
3. End the nightmarish accounting and legal nightmare for small business operators (and large ones) and allow them to actually make BUSINESS decisions instead of TAX decisions.
4. Eliminate an estimated $500 Billion of expenses related to compliance with the complicated tax code that produces nothing but government paperwork.
5. Virtually eliminate the underground economy by making taxpayers out of illegals, prostitutes, pimps, drug dealers, gamblers, and others who work “off the books.”
6. Restore a person’s full paycheck—one will receive in many cases his or her first full paycheck with no deductions taken out.
7. Eliminate the hidden and embedded tax on all the things we purchase, which is approximately 22%.
Unfortunate and misguided or perhaps dishonest statements have been made about the Fair Tax, some of which stems from the utterly nutty critique some years ago by Robert Bartley of the Wall Street Journal who went so far as to try and allege that the Fair Tax was a secret plot of the Church of Scientology. Some point to a supposed study of the Fair Tax by the Bush administration, which was a consumption tax, but not one that involved the all critical pre-bate. Some simply fail to understand the power of the pre-bate for low income earners or have failed to recognize how significantly the political dynamics of Washington would change if Congress were no longer able to manipulate the tax code so as to create winners and losers according to the whims of Congress rather than to the free marketplace.
The so-called “sticker shock” of a 23% tax rate seems ominous until one realizes that with the various payroll taxes, hidden taxes in our purchases, etc., the average American already pays almost 33% in taxes now at the federal level.
The Fair Tax would be a legitimate economic stimulus package by creating a level playing field for manufacturing. When U. S. companies are having to factor in the embedded taxes on our side, but our competitors in China don’t, we have a hard time keeping our manufacturing and our jobs here.
I recommend that one read “The Fair Tax” by Congressman John Linder and Neal Boortz or the follow-up book by the same authors, “The Fair Tax Answers,” or go to fairtax.org and then at least base whatever criticism on something other than internet chatter and less than complete understanding of the facts of the Fair Tax. ----------------- Other sites of interest: FairTax Nation, FairTax FaceBook Page, FairTax Nation FB Group, FairTax Nation Twitter Tags:Mike Huckabee, Arkansas, Fair Tax, FairTax, FairTax, facts, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, attacks, John Boozman,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Sebelius Admits: "Substantial" Premium Hikes Coming, Despite Promises About Obamacare
Update: President Obama Repeats Rhetoric On Health Insurance Premiums, Even As New Reports On Rate Hikes Emerge PRESIDENT OBAMA:“All This Is Going To Lower Premiums. It’s Going To Make Healthcare More Affordable”(President Obama, Remarks, 9/22/10)
HHS Secretary Says Health Insurance Premium “Rate Increases Are Likely To Continue To Be Somewhat Substantial,” But That’s Not What Dems Promised
HHS SEC. SEBELIUS: “What Will Happen With Health Reform, Premiums Will Go Down Between 14% And 20% Just By Passing The Bills.” “And again, the Congressional Budget Office has suggested that if you look at just the individual market, which our report focuses on, and look at the impact of the House and Senate bills on the individual market, comparing similar benefit packages and what will happen with health reform, premiums will go down between 14 percent and 20 percent just by passing the bills.” (Sec. Sebelius, Press Conference, 2/18/10)
SEBELIUS: “Well, CBO Says Your Premiums Should Go Down, Dylan, Of People Who Have Coverage Right Now, Should Go Down.” (MSNBC, 3/23/10)
WASHINGTON STATE: “Whopping Rate Increases Are Coming Soon For Many People With Individual Health-Insurance Policies. Most insurers offering individual policies in the state have asked for and been granted rate increases, effective Oct. 1, according to the state's insurance commissioner. Regence BlueShield's rate increase an average 16.5% was one of the highest. It was topped by Asuris Northwest Health, a Regence subsidiary, with an increase of 23.7%. Group Health Cooperative, the fifth-largest insurer of individuals, was considerably lower, asking for an 8.2% increase. But its newer program, Group Health Options, asked for a 22% increase. By reducing benefits and making other changes, the plans trimmed increases to 7.8 and 13.8%, respectively. A lot of angry customers are asking why.” (“Steep Rate Hikes On Way For Individual Health Insurance,” The Seattle Times, 9/7/10)
NATIONWIDE: “Health Insurers … Have Asked For Premium Increases Of Between 1% And 9% To Pay For Extra Benefits Required Under The [Democrat Health Care] Law.” “Health insurers say they plan to raise premiums for some Americans as a direct result of the health overhaul in coming weeks, complicating Democrats' efforts to trumpet their signature achievement before the midterm elections. Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1% and 9% to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators.”(“Health Insurers Plan Hikes,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/8/10)
“Aetna, One Of The Nation's Largest Health Insurers, Said The Extra Benefits Forced It To Seek Rate Increases For New Individual Plans Of 5.4% To 7.4% In California And 5.5% To 6.8% In Nevada After Sept. 23. Similar steps are planned across the country, according to Aetna.”ibid
“Regence BlueCross BlueShield Of Oregon Said The Cost Of Providing Additional Benefits Under The Health Law Will Account On Average For 3.4 Percentage Points…”ibid
Tags:HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, Barack Obama, Obamacare, Health Insurance Premiums, Rate Increases, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Sept 23, 2010 - Warning: Shenanigans - Democrats Move to Silence Free Speech
Update 2:35 PM: It was a close call but Disclose Act failed again today. The vote was Final roll call vote 59-39. While harry Reid was defeated again, expect him to try again with some backroom deal. He gained two votes today from the last vote! To quote Michelle Malkin, "What part of NO more union pay-off gag orders masquerading as “reform” doesn’t he understand?"
Today, senators began debating the motion to proceed to S.J. Res. 30, a resolution of disapproval offered by Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) of a National Board of Medication decision on labor union regulations. This afternoon, the Senate voted 43-56 against the motion to proceed to S.J. Res. 30.
WARNING: Following disposition of the disapproval resolution, the Senate resumed consideration of the motion to proceed to Democrats’ partisan Disclose Act bill, S. 3628. At 2:15 PM, the Senate will vote on reconsidering cloture on the motion to proceed to the Disclose Act. The Senate had previously defeated the H.R. 3628, the Schumer-Van Hollen “Disclose Act.” The Disclose Act a partisan campaign finance bill crafted solely to help Democrats and designed to overturn the Citizens United Supreme Court decision. This partisan bill limits free speech and is cloaking behind a euphemism - saying the bill is about transparency. Most Americans are for greater transparency but we are against the progressive elitists agenda and this fake transparency bill which intends to limit free speech. It is not limiting their free speech but the free speech of liberty loving Americans. Tired of the lies? November is Coming! More comments below If this bill passes, it will be another tragic day in America. Democrats had previous vowed vow to keep bringing it up for a vote - so this shenanigan was expected. To add the confusion, Democrats have attempted to pass this bill off as more transparency when in fact they are playing politics. Unfortunately, the Democrats are trampling on free speech rights and are are even willing to exempt liberal special interests groups in the bill.
ALERT:Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) has vowed to bring up the DREAM Act Amnesty as a stand alone bill next week in the Senate. Sen. Durbin and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) are determined to force this amnesty attempt through Congress now. They realize their opportunity to win amnesty will grow much smaller after November's midterm election. The democrats are desperate for votes and are pushing every agenda to secure them even when taking action to grant amnesty to illegals in the U.S. The situation that the DREAM Act would not even exist if those in Congress and the Administration had done their job to protect the American borders and to remove ILLEGAL aliens living in the US for a generation or more.
Six months ago, President Obama signed his massive, unpopular health care bill into law and today the White House is “celebrating” that anniversary. But beyond the Obama administration, there aren’t many people celebrating this flawed law today. If anything, this anniversary puts in stark contrast how wrong Democrats were about this bill. In a must-read story, Politico writes today, “Rarely have so many political strategists been so wrong about something so big. But when it comes to the health care bill, everyone from former President Bill Clinton on down whiffed on some of the more significant predictions.” Indeed, over the last six months, reality has shown that the promises made by Democrats about the bill are not bearing out.
Democrats promised that if they passed their bill, Americans’ health insurance premiums would go down. In February, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius boasted, “What will happen with health reform, premiums will go down between 14 percent and 20 percent just by passing the bills.” But earlier this month, The Wall Street Journal reported, “Health insurers … have asked for premium increases of between 1% and 9% to pay for extra benefits required under the [Democrat health care] law.” And just at the beginning of this week, Sebelius actually admitted in an interview, “I think the rate increases are likely to continue to be somewhat substantial.”
A year ago, in his speech to a Joint Session of Congress to push for his health care legislation, President Obama said, “The plan I’m announcing tonight … will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government.” Yet earlier this month the Los Angeles Times reported, “Pushed by a dramatic increase in the number of Americans who will get insurance under the new healthcare law, total U.S. medical spending will continue to gallop upward, consuming nearly 20% of the economy by 2019, according to a new government estimate.” And CBO director Doug Elemendorf wrote back in June, “[F]ederal spending on major mandatory healthcare programs will grow from roughly 5 percent of GDP today to about 10 percent in 2035 and will continue to increase thereafter.”
Another Democrat promise was that the half a trillion dollars worth of Medicare cuts in the law wouldn’t hurt Medicare benefits. Obama said in his speech last year, “[D]on't pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut . . . . That will not happen on my watch.” Yet with $200 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage alone, was it ever possible that benefits would stay the same? The actuary for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services predicted a month after the law’s passage, “The new provisions will generally reduce [Medicare Advantage] rebates to plans and thereby result in less generous benefit packages.” And sure enough The Wall Street Journal reported in June, “Dozens of Medicare Advantage providers plan to cut back vision, dental and prescription benefits.” And a month later the WSJ noted, “The Congressional Budget Office says on average, Medicare Advantage enrollees will get $68 less a month in benefits by 2019 because of the [health care] law.”
Democrats also promised Americans over and over again, “If you like your current plan, you will be able to keep it,” in the words of President Obama last summer. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid echoed, “In fact, one of our core principles is that if you like the health care you have, you can keep it.” However, barely two months later, the AP wrote, “Over and over in the health care debate, President Barack Obama said people who like their current coverage would be able to keep it. But an early draft of an administration regulation estimates that many employers will be forced to make changes to their health plans under the new law. In just three years, a majority of workers—51 percent—will be in plans subject to new federal requirements, according to the draft.”
As today’s Politico story notes, “Obama told Democrats repeatedly that they would be proud to campaign on legislation as historic as comprehensive health care reform, something that had eluded generations of lawmakers and presidents.” And Sen. Chuck Schumer predicted in March, “By November, those who voted for health care will find it an asset, those who voted against it will find it a liability . . . .” But a majority of Americans still opposes the bill, and Time’s Kate Pickert wrote at the beginning of this month that “Democrats grossly underestimated the political damage of pushing through health care reform.” According to a Politico story from around the same time, Democrat “[p]arty officials in Washington can’t identify a single house member who’s running an ad boasting of a ‘yes’ vote.” Today’s Politico piece adds, “Some Senate Democrats . . . ignore the law altogether in the health care section of their campaign websites. They don't take credit for helping pass the Affordable Care Act.”
Sen. Mitch McConnell responded today, “Americans never wanted this massive government-driven intrusion into their health care, and virtually every day it seems, we see that the concerns Americans had about this bill are being vindicated. Throughout the day, administration officials will tell people the things it wants Americans to believe about this bill. Based on the promises the administration made to pass it, Americans should be deeply skeptical. . . . Democrats were eager to listen to the strategists and the administration officials who told them what this bill would do and how it would be received, when what they should have been doing is listening to the American people, who never liked this bill and who knew it couldn’t deliver on the promises Democrats made. So this is no anniversary Democrats should be celebrating.” Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, Disclose Act, Democrats, stopping free speech, free speech, Dream Act, amnesty, insurance premiums, medicare cuts, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Citizens for the Republic: In 1984, the Reagan reelection campaign set the standard for modern political advertising with its fabled "Morning in America" series, which included one of the greatest political ads of all time -- "Better, Prouder, Stronger." The ad captured the zeitgeist -- America under President Reagan was coming back, full of optimism and confidence in the future.
Today, the zeitgeist is exactly the opposite. Americans are worried about their future, and about a government determined to implement policies that just don't work. But like its predecessor, "Mourning in America" offers a new hope -- if we can just get our government to return to time-tested policies that can spark a rebirth of liberty.
An initial review of the video ad by NewsMax.com: “Unlike the Reagan ad about a bright future under his leadership, this new ad is about failed leadership, about a government growing out of control, about a government taking away our ability to make important choices,” CFTR Executive Vice President Bill Pascoe said. “It’s about an America that’s suffering because of the failed policies and failed leadership of President Obama – and reminding Americans that they can change that with their vote on November 2.”
The ad reads in part:
“There’s mourning in America. Today, 15 million men and women won’t have the opportunity to go to work. Businesses shuttered …
“Our government is now taking over the choices we once made in life. There’s mourning in America.
“Under the leadership of President Obama, our country is fading, and weaker, and worse off. His policies were a grand experiment – policies that failed.
“This November let’s choose a smaller, more caring government … one that remembers us.”
“When Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, America was depressed,” Pascoe continued. “Inflation and interest rates were sky high, the economy was lagging, and around the world it seemed as if we had a ‘kick me’ sign on our back. But under Ronald Reagan’s leadership – and with the kind of pro-freedom, pro-growth policies he enacted with bipartisan support – America turned the corner, and came back strong. The ‘Better, Prouder, Stronger’ ad succeeded in the 1984 campaign, and became one of the greatest political ads of all time, because it so brilliantly captured the zeitgeist of the age.
“Take heart, America,” Pascoe concluded. “With the right kind of leadership, and the right kind of policies, America can come back. Ronald Reagan proved that.”
The board of Citizens for the Republic includes longtime Reaganites Ed Meese, Peter Hannaford, Dan Oliver, Mari Massing Will, Craig Shirley, Diana Banister and William Pascoe. Tags:Mourning in America, Morning in America, Ronald Reagan, Reagan, Barack Obama, Obama, debt, spending, zeitgeistTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Tags:Michael Ramirez, political cartoon, Barack Obama, plans, democrats avoiding Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry ReidTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Investor's Business Daily: They're making a bundle inside the Beltway, while across the country it takes $2 million to create a pothole-filling job. Never has Washington spent so much to get so little real work.
When the Democrats are in charge, the rich just get richer. Wait — isn't that what we're supposed to say about Republicans? Not so when federal stimulus funds are being spent.
Washington has taken trickle-down economics to a whole new level of inefficiency. Those closest — literally — to the seat of federal power get the most. By the time the funds make their long journey to paychecks for people doing productive work, there's not a whole lot left.
Take the example, revealed this past week, of how $111 million in stimulus money has so far funded a paltry 55 public-works jobs in Los Angeles. City Controller Wendy Gruel says two municipal departments, Public Works and Transportation, plan eventually to create or retain 264 jobs with that money, but the contracting process is so slow that most of the money is still waiting to be spent. So the price tag per job is $2 million at this point. Even if the city departments meet their target of 264, it will drop to only $420,000. This is still several times what workers will actually get paid.
So where does all the money go in cases such as this? In part it goes to the capital costs and profit of the contractors. But much of it also gets absorbed into the normal process of government contracting, in which public employees are paid to ensure (ideally) that the taxpayers are getting the most for their money and aren't being cheated by favoritism.
Of course, bureaucrats typically feel no need to rush things along. They don't get paid any less if a street gets repaved a few months late. L.A. may be worse than most at getting people to work, but its low return on stimulus spending is certainly not unique. Even projects touted by the Obama administration have this problem.
Vice President Joe Biden on Friday cited one in which the New York City Department of Transportation is spending $175 million to renovate bridges and a parking lot, putting all of 120 people to work. That's $1.46 million per job. Another job on Biden's list, a highway project in Ohio, has created 300 jobs and costs $138 million — $460,000 per worker. Tags:Obama, Recovery, fails, Investmentor's Business DailyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Sept 22, 2010 - Dems Again Prioritize Partisan Bill To Save Their Own Jobs Over Saving Jobs For Ordinary Americans
The Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 3454, the Fiscal Year 2011 Defense Authorization bill. No votes are expected today. Yesterday, Democrats failed to get the 60 votes needed to take up the Defense Authorization bill which Democrats wanted to use as a vehicle for controversial policy measures ike repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” and the “DREAM Act.” But don't be fooled, Harry Reid is not backing down. The Defense Authorization Bill does not need or require these items which previously failed to be passed. Expect more from Reid and other liberals during the lame Duck Session of Congress.
Tomorrow afternoon, the Senate is scheduled to vote on reconsidering cloture on the motion to proceed to Democrats’ partisan Disclose Act bill, S. 3628. When the bill was last voted on in July, cloture failed by a vote of 57-41.
Just yesterday, a Gallup poll found that “[t]he economy in general and the specific economic problem of unemployment or lack of jobs far outpace all other issues when Americans are asked to name the most important problem facing the country.” Asked what the most important issue is, 33% of respondents named the economy and another 28% cited jobs and unemployment.
Yet Democrats have apparently decided the only jobs they’re interested in saving at the moment are their own. Recall that the Disclose Act is designed to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which struck down certain limits on campaign speech. The bill is transparently partisan: it was written by the man in charge of electing Democrats in the House, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), and the man who just recently had the equivalent job in the Senate, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY). And the senator currently charged with electing Democrats to the Senate, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ), took to the floor this morning to advocate for it.< But it gets even more absurd. Politico reported last night, “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid just scheduled a vote on the DISCLOSE Act, which would force donors to publish their involvement in political ad campaigns, for Thursday. Why not [Wednesday], you might ask? Because there are no votes in the Senate scheduled for [Wednesday]. And that may be, in part, because there's something else going on [Wednesday]: A big New York fundraiser for the Senate Democrats. . . . The event has prices raising up to $15,200, but a mere $2,500 contributed or raised buys you access to a ‘VIP reception with members of Congress.’ . . . And then, it's back to D.C. to get all that big money out of politics. The source who sent this one over puts it in the ‘you can’t make this up category.’”
In other words, Democrats have put off addressing the economy or impending tax hikes to vote on a bill that they claim is to reign in big money in political campaigns. But they put the vote off for another day so they could raise some big money for their political campaigns.
Sen. McConnell blasted the Democrats’ priorities today, saying, “[A]fter spending the past year and a half enacting policies Americans don’t like, [Democrats] want to prevent their opponents from being able to criticize what they’ve done. . . . That's it. It’s that simple. . . .It seems like the more Americans say they want Democrats to focus on jobs. . . . the more determined they are to press ahead with some piece of legislation aimed either at killing private sector jobs or preserving their own. Here we are, in the middle of a recession, with 27 states yesterday reporting increases in unemployment, 14 million Americans looking for work, and a national debt that’s putting the very future of the American Dream in jeopardy, and here we are voting on a bill that amounts to little more than an incumbency protection act for Democrats in Congress. If Americans are looking for one final piece of evidence in this Congress that Democrats have lost perspective, then this, Mr. President, is it.” Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, military appropriations act, Harry Reid, economy, jobs,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
By Bill Smith (Ozark Guru): In the Ozarks, we have lots of raccoons, often abbreviated as "coons." Sometimes, people even have made friends with a few of these animals and have them as quasi pets. But when we learn that a Nevada dessert rat, make that democ-rat, calls Coons his pet, we say "wait a minute." Yes, I'm rambling a bit - but I wanted you to read this post. And who want's to read about loser Harry Reid? Maybe Mrs. Reid whom we hope is successfully recovering from injuries last March. She and her daughter were rear-ended by a tractor-trailer.
In truth, it has been Harry Reid who has been rambling around helping to drive our country into debt with wasteful spending. Harry Reid recently evidenced that Delaware's Democrat candidate Chris Coons has deep ties to the Washington, D.C. progressive elites. Reid last week said that Chris Coons was "my pet." The last thing anyone should want to be called is Reid's pet. Coons ought to demand an apology!
Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) recently said, "Folks in Delaware don't want to send another 'business as usual' politician to Washington. That's why Christine O'Donnell is the best choice. She's not afraid to stand up to the big spenders in both political parties." Beltway pundits continue to say Christine can't win and that Republicans in Delaware should have nominated a tax hiking, big spending liberal. Well, folks, neither Delaware or the the rest of the country can afford a "pet" of Harry Reid being elected to the US Senate.
"Democrats are spending money in this race because they know Christine can win," said Matt Hoskins, spokesman for the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF). "Republicans cannot abandon her and give up on this seat." In addition to this new ad, SCF also raised $174,000 last week for Christine O'Donnell's campaign
You can let both the Democrats and liberal establishment Republicans know that you are not pleased with them or their agenda by supporting Christine O'Donnell -- even in a small donation from those who live in another state will be very helpful against the Obama advertising machine which will be supporting Reid's "pet."
Tags:Delaware, Harry Reid, my pet, Chris Coons, Christine O'Donnell, adTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Lincoln, Reid & Other Dems Use Defense Bill To Push Liberal Agenda - Americans Want The Focus On The Economy
The Senate resumes consideration of the S. 3454, the Fiscal Year 2011 Defense Authorization bill. This afternoon, around 2:15, the Senate will vote on a procedural motion on the bill. Democrats have indicated they will use the bill as a vehicle for controversial policy measures like repealing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy and adding the amnesty provision called the “DREAM Act” which was sponsored by Democrat Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas.
In an ARRA News Service article by Curtis Coleman, he summarized the situation: "Harry Reid’s inclusion of the DREAM Act in the Defense Authorization bill is a despicable political ploy with no redeeming motivation. It is adequately tragic that the children of illegal aliens are victims of their parents’ illicit actions. It is deplorable that Reid would use their plight for no other purpose than to attempt to advance his personal political future. It is no wonder this Congress is regarded as the most irresponsible Congress in history." No wonder, the citizen's of America both disapprove of Harry Reid and this Congress.
As The Hill notes, “The defense authorization bill, which includes many critical military policies including authority for pay raises, is considered a must-pass bill. It's been passed by Congress for 48 consecutive years.” But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other Democrats have apparently decided that instead of simply passing a bipartisan bill for our military, they’re going to use it to advance controversial policies at the behest of various special interest groups.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell explained the situation this morning and pointed ou tthat Democrats “want to use this week for a political exercise they want to weigh this bill down with controversy in a transparent attempt to show their special interest groups that they haven’t forgotten about them ahead of the election. It’s astonishing, really. Democrats have called up this bill not to have a vote on it or to consider amendments to help our troops in the field, but to put on a show to use it as an opportunity to cast votes for things Americans either don’t want or aren’t interested in seeing attached to a bill that’s supposed to be about defense.”
Even some Democrats don’t think this is the way to handle this defense bill. The Hill reports today, “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is getting pushback from Democratic colleagues balking at the legislative agenda he set for the weeks before Election Day. Several Democratic senators have questioned the wisdom of voting on the military’s ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy and a scaled-down version of immigration reform, known as the DREAM Act. Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) said Democrats are worried about bringing up hot-button political issues that are likely to rev up the liberal base but could alienate more conservative swing voters. ‘I think there’s a little concern about bringing these issues up right now,’ he said. . . . One of the critics is Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), a prominent member of the Armed Services Committee. Webb argues that Congress should not vote to repeal ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ until the Pentagon has completed an analytical study of how it may affect the armed services.”
The Hill article also notes, “Some lawmakers would prefer to consider legislation that focuses on jobs and the economy . . . . They expressed their concerns at a Democratic policy meeting on Thursday, according to sources familiar with the meeting. . . . Since January, Democratic leaders have promised to focus on ‘jobs, jobs, jobs,’ in the words of Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). Much floor time this year has been spent debating healthcare reform and Wall Street reform, bills that were not on the Democratic jobs agenda.”
As Sen. McConnell said, “It seems like the more Americans say they want Democrats to stop what they’re doing and focus on jobs and the economy, the more determined they are to press ahead with their various liberal agenda items while they’ve still got the chance. And that’s basically what today’s vote on the Defense Authorization Bill is all about.” Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, military appropriations act, Harry Reid, Blanche Lincoln, dream act, amnesty, don't ask, don't tell, military, raising taxes, tax cutsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Curtis Coleman, Contributing Author: A few months ago I granted an interview to National Public Radio (NPR). One of the interviewer’s first questions was about the DREAM Act, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act introduced March 26, 2009 by Sens. Richard Durbin (D-IL), and Richard Lugar (R- IN).
Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) has inserted the DREAM Act provision into the Defense Authorization legislation scheduled for a vote on Tuesday, September 21 at 2:15 p.m. (ET). Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) is a co-sponsor of the bill. Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) has reportedly not yet made up his mind about his vote on the legislation.
Under the bill, students age 12-35 at the time of the enactment of the law who came to the United States before they were 16 and were raised in the United States continuously for at least five years, graduated from an American high school, obtained a GED or joined the military and are of “good moral character” could gain permanent legal status. It could grant citizenship to an estimated 800,000 to one million illegal immigrant youths who complete high school or military service.
The NPR host asked me if I would support the DREAM Act as a path to citizenship. I responded that there was already a path to citizenship and that the nation’s immigration laws and regulations need to be enforced. And I expressed my belief that if the nation’s immigration laws were uniformly enforced todo ello¸ the country would have more available resources for accelerating citizenship applications. I wasn’t a big hit with NPR.
“Over three million students graduate from U.S. high schools every year. Most get the opportunity to test their dreams and live their American story. However, a group of approximately 65,000 youth do not get this opportunity; they are smeared with an inherited title, an illegal immigrant. These youth have lived in the United States for most of their lives and want nothing more than to be recognized for what they are, Americans.
“The DREAM Act is a bipartisan legislation…that can solve this hemorrhaging injustice in our society. Under the rigorous provisions of the DREAM Act, qualifying undocumented youth would be eligible for a 6 year long conditional path to citizenship that requires completion of a college degree or two years of military service.”
I can admit that I have struggled with the DREAM Act. If my family lived in some other countries and, solely because we lived there, my children were malnourished, under-educated and inadequately clothed, I would risk my life to get them to a better place with adequate food, clothing and opportunity. I understand why we have so many illegal immigrants.
I wanted to write here that their children become the ultimate victims, living under the stigma and insecurity of growing up as an illegal alien, but that would be an inaccurate statement. The fact is that life is better than the one they escaped. I know former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee well enough to understand his motivation when he supported providing financial aid for college to the children of illegal aliens:
His words tugged at my heart and I admired his courage, but I did not support Governor Huckabee on this issue then and I do not now. These families did not come to Arkansas through “open doors.” We did not say, as Governor Huckabee suggested, “that our doors are open but our opportunities are closed.”
These families may have done the right thing, but they did it the wrong way. Dan Stein of the Federation for American Immigration Reform was clearly right when he said
Passage will “send a clear message to parents that violating U.S. immigration laws will result in eventual citizenship and access to expensive taxpayer-financed benefits for their kids.”
I would that America had such limitless resources that we could throw open our doors and without restriction or caution say,
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
America does not have that unlimited capacity. Our ultimate demise lies at the end of our attempt to act otherwise.
Harry Reid’s inclusion of the DREAM Act in the Defense Authorization bill is a despicable political ploy with no redeeming motivation. It is adequately tragic that the children of illegal aliens are victims of their parents’ illicit actions. It is deplorable that Reid would use their plight for no other purpose than to attempt to advance his personal political future.
It is no wonder this Congress is regarded as the most irresponsible Congress in history.
-------------------- Curtis Coleman is President of The Curtis Coleman Institute for Constitutional Policy, headquartered in North Little Rock, Arkansas. Coleman is also the Co-founder and former President and Chief Executive Officer of Safe Foods Corporation. He lectures on team building and servant leadership in the Emerging Leaders program at the Center for Management and Executive Development, University of Arkansas Sam M. Walton School of Business. Tags:DREAM Act, Amnesty, Defense Authorization Bill, Harry Reid, Blanche Lincoln, US Constitution, unfunded mandate, States rights, Curtis Coleman, Institute for Constitutional PolicyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Harry Reid Promoting Repeal of the Military "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Policy Started by President Clinton
by Kerby Anderson, Point of View: As early as tomorrow (9/20), the Senate will vote on the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The Pentagon is currently conducting a study on the impact a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell would have on the military. That report is not due out until after the election, but rather than wait for the report, the Senate leadership [Harry Reid] is pushing to move forward with the repeal of this policy, allowing homosexuals to serve openly in our military.
The repeal was a major campaign promise made by Obama to the homosexual community. This is one of many that the administration has had trouble delivering on despite having a majority in both houses of congress.
Please contact both of your US senators right away and let them know how you feel about the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. You can use the Point of View online system to do so quickly and easily. Please also encourage your friends to contact their senators as well. With the election right around the corner, many senators are feeling the heat and will be more receptive to input from their constituents. Tags:Kerby Anderson, Point of View, military, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, gay rights activism, Harry ReidTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Sept 20, 2010 - Economists, Majority Of Americans Agree: Don't Raise Taxes On Anyone
The Senate will resume consideration of S. 3454, the Fiscal Year 2011 Defense Authorization bill. Tomorrow afternoon, the Senate is scheduled to vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to the Defense Authorization bill. However, Sen. Harry Reid and other Democrats have indicated they want to use the bill as a vehicle for other policy measures like Repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the “DREAM Act.”
Sen. Harry Reid is again giving the citizens of America his "middle finger." As Michelle Malkin points out, "Open-borders lawmakers have tried and failed to pass the DREAM Act through regular channels for the past decade. That’s because informed voters know giving green cards to illegal alien students undermines the rule of law, creates more illegal immigration incentives and grants preferential treatment to illegal alien students over law-abiding native and naturalized American students struggling to get an education in tough economic times." She adds, "The so-called DREAM Act would create an official path to Democratic voter registration for an estimated two million college-age illegal aliens. Look past the public relations-savvy stories of “undocumented” valedictorians left out in the cold. This is not about protecting “children.” It’s about preserving electoral power through cap-and-gown amnesty."
While Democrats inside the beltway seem brain dead and are making a move to add the DREAM Act onto the Defense Authorization Act, "Democrats outside the Beltway have grown increasingly averse to signing on to illegal alien incentives— especially as the Obama jobs death toll mounts and economic confidence plummets."
CNN Money reports today, “With income tax rates set to go up on Dec. 31, Congress is hotly debating what to do next. But most economists agree: Keep them where they are. . . . [A] majority of a panel of leading economists surveyed by CNNMoney.com said that the tax cuts should be renewed for everyone. . . . ‘Extend tax cuts for all income levels and do nothing else,’ said Sean Snaith, economics professor at the University of Central Florida. ‘More of the same piecemeal, patchwork policies put forth by this administration will undermine confidence and do little to change the path the economy is on.’”
This is just what Republicans in Congress have been calling for. Now is not the time to raise taxes on anyone. Preventing these tax increases would give job creators some badly needed certainty after all the turmoil the Obama administration’s policies have fostered.
As Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell said previously,“This common-sense principle of not raising taxes in the middle of a recession is receiving bipartisan support. More and more Democrats are joining Republicans to say no to President Obama’s plan to raise taxes on small businesses in the middle of an economic downturn.”
However, these more sensible Democrats are currently at odds with their leadership, who seem intent on raising some taxes. Because of these divisions, Democrats can’t seem to decide how to move forward, as Roll Call reported last Friday: “Even as they eye the exits, both House and Senate Democrats are struggling to create momentum in their own ranks for a pre-election debate on extending Bush-era tax cuts, and they are bickering over who should move first on the contentious issue. . . .[O]ne senior Senate Democratic aide said Senate leaders are waiting for [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi to signal what is possible in her chamber, given that she may not have the votes to pass a clean extension of middle-class tax breaks. ‘We can’t be totally at odds’ in which legislation comes to the floor, the senior aide said. Part of the problem is that neither House nor Senate Democratic leaders have solidified support in their respective caucuses for a specific approach.”
The approach to taxes here should really be obvious: simply extend all the tax cuts to prevent massive tax hikes in January. CNBC reports on a new poll taken last week that found “[a] majority of the respondents believe the Bush tax cuts should be extended, even for people making more than $250,000 a year. Fifty-five percent think increasing taxes on any Americans will slow the economy and kill jobs.”
Even President Obama seemed to know the best solution when he told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd last year, “[T]he last thing you want to do is to raise taxes in the middle of a recession because that would just suck up — take more demand out of the economy and put businesses in a further hole.”
With a growing chorus of Democrats agreeing that “raising any taxes right now could negatively impact economic growth,” as 31 House Democrats wrote to Pelosi, a majority of Americans and most economists echoing that sentiment the solution is clear. As Sen. McConnell said, “It’s not too late for both parties to come together and reassure American families and businesses that, with all the economic worries ahead, increased taxes will not be one of them.” Tags:Washington, D.C., US Senate, US House, military appropriations act, Harry Reid, dream act, amnesty, don't ask, don't tell, military, raising taxes, tax cutsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
FDA Moves Ahead With Rationing -- ObamaCare Needs To Be Repealed
Brian Darling, RedState notes: Until recently, the implications of ObamaCare were debated in a vacuum. There were allegations and responses, but no results to support either side. Now that we have entered the implementation phase of ObamaCare, things are becoming more clear. Many of the bold promises that were offered to sell ObamaCare to the American public were not based in reality.
Taxes increases hit Americans next year and, in many states, they are already seeing health insurance rates increase as a result of ObamaCare. In addition to the Obama Administration promising that insurance rates would not go up, they have also promised that rationing of care would not happen. But bad things seems to be happening sooner than expected and contrary to explicit promises of this Administration.
This past August, an advisory panel for the Food and Drug Administration recommended that the late stage cancer drug Avastin be “de-labeled” because of cost considerations. It is critical to note, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not propose denying cancer victims the right to the drug because of the safety of the drug, but because of a formula containing cost as factor.
Senator David Vitter (R-LA) has taken a leadership position on the issue and has written letters to the FDA and expressing concern about “cost rationing.” Senator Vitter is worried that the Avastin case will be the beginning of ObamaCare rationing for drugs that may extend life.Rationing for seriously ill patients based on cost.
Should the FDA agree with the advisory panel’s recommendation, private insurers and Medicare will drop coverage for the drug for breast cancer patients, despite the fact that the drug extends life for an average of six months. This is a classic example of why many conservatives are concerned about government run health care.
By using cost as a factor in their decision-making, the FDA has begun the implementation of ObamaCare and breast cancer patients may be its first victim. Politically, this is another disaster for those who voted for health care reform. If this drug, or any other, is denied because of cost, they will be forced to defend the decision.
The FDA has put off a final decision for another 90 days on the future of the drug according to the AP:
Drugmaker Roche said Friday that U.S. health regulators will take more time to review its drug Avastin for breast cancer, a use that has generated vigorous debate among cancer specialists and patients. The company said in a statement that the Food and Drug Administration extended its review of the drug by 90 days, or until Dec. 17.
This kicks the decision until after the fall Congressional elections. It will be much easier for the FDA to make a difficult decision after the election removing pressure from Americans who oppose government rationed care. The American people do not want rationed care and drugs for the seriously ill.
The senior advocacy group 60 Plus released the findings of a new poll that asks people about the FDA basing cancer decisions on cost. Let’s just say, the argument about ObamaCare is no longer theoretical — denial of care will impact lives and the American people know it.
Key findings of the poll include:
56% of registered American voters believe the new healthcare reform law will lead to so-called “rationing” of care;
82% believe that cost-effectiveness is not a justification for rationing;
78% “worry” that the FDA’s revocation represents the “start of healthcare rationing;” and
71% of registered American voters report they would be less likely to vote for any member of Congress who supported the FDA decision on drugs like Avastin. 49% would be “much less likely.”
Will someone have the guts to ask an ObamaCare supporter if breast cancer patients should be denied insurance coverage for Avastinor other life extending drugs? Will others join Senator Vitter in his fight to protect cancer patients? With Members of Congress running away from ObamaCare, even members of the President’s party, they are sure to run away from the FDA’s potential decision to deny patients access to a drug that extends the life of seriously ill cancer patients. This situation is yet another example of why ObamaCare needs to be repealed. Tags:ObamaCare, FDA, rationing, 60 Plus, David Vitter, RedState, Repeal Obamacare, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Christine O'Donnell No Longer Ignored by Lame Street Press
Christine O'Donnell may have been ignored or down played by the main stream (lame stream) press, but after winning on Tuesday, September 14th, the Delaware Republican nomination for US Senate, O'Donnell is getting a lot of press. It is interesting that her admission to a young discretion of dabbling 11 years ago in witchcraft is making the liberal news. We could understand conservatives being concerned. However, conservatives are known to be forgivers because they again accept the fact that people make mistakes and can admit their mistake. Just look at Senator Scott Brown (MA) who posed nude for a magazine and later won the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts. By comparison, note the unforgiving nature of liberals for conservatives. Democrats are still blaming GW Bush, and the Obama White House continues to fan the flames of animosity toward GW Bush in an attempt to hide their failures.
People obviously aren't looking for saints, many tried doing that in 2008 with the "anointed one" who even admitted doing cocaine and that didn't work out too well. All you Democrat earth worshiping wonks, pot heads, abortionists, Ouija board playing, big spending, non-tax paying elitist need to stop feigning outrage at O'Donnell's admission. We know what you they are doing. Imagine the fear in the White House, the former Senate seat of Massachusetts democrat Ted Kennedy goes Republican. Now, they are facing the potential of filthy mouthed Vice President Joe Biden's former senate seat being lost to a perky young conservative woman. It has been rumored that Old Joe has been expressing a few F-bombs this week in his office in the United States Naval Observatory (USNO) as he helps rally volunteers for Coons
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru
Married 48yr #Conservative #Constitution #NRALife #GunRights #USAF 22yr #military #veteran #Christian #CCOT #ProLife #TEAParty #GOP #TCOT #SGP #schoolchoice
Comments by contributors or sources do not necessarily reflect the position of ARRA, its Officers, memberships or the Editors.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.