Vol. 09 No. 30
Page I of IV ->
THE FOUNDATION
"[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government." --James Madison
GOVERNMENT & POLITICS
Red October Looms for ObamaCare
Americans can breathe a sigh of relief, however briefly, because Congress will not pass health care legislation before lawmakers depart for recess on August 7. "This bill, even in the best-case scenario, will not be signed -- we won't even vote on it probably until the end of September or the middle of October," said President Barack Obama.
In a sense, Obama is admitting the unpopularity of the major proposals being bantered about in Congress. "This has been the most difficult test for me so far in public life," he complained, "trying to describe in clear, simple terms how important it is that we reform this system. The case is so clear to me." And the case is equally clear to us that Barack Obama and the U.S. Congress are acting unconstitutionally. Look it up -- health care ain't there. Economist Walter E. Williams points to the Founders' own words on the lack of constitutional authority for such actions, adding, "What we're witnessing today is nothing less than a massive escalation in White House and congressional thuggery."
That said, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) asked rhetorically, "Is health care a constitutional right?" He answered, "Well, we believe that people do and we're introducing a constitutional amendment just to make it real clear so that you don't have to infer or assume that that's a given and all that."
What Conyers and other Democrats don't understand is that, as columnist Rich Hrebic explains, "A right is not a guarantee that the government (i.e., other people) will provide you something for free. We have the right to engage in religious expression, but that doesn't mean that the government pays for the construction of the church. We have the right to peacefully assemble, but the government doesn't promise to supply your transportation. You have the right to keep and bear arms, but don't expect the government to provide you with a free firearm and bullets. You have the right to free speech, but the government won't grant you free radio or TV air time. What makes something a right is not whether the government can force somebody else to pay for it."
But back to the proposal. House and Senate negotiators are working to cut the cost of the bill by $100 billion -- cuts that have suddenly allayed the concerns of so-called fiscally conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats. The compromise still includes major tax increases and a public option health entitlement, which were supposed to be deal killers for these "principled" Blue Dogs.
The Senate Finance Committee claims that its package now comes with a price tag of $900 billion over 10 years. Such projections are laughable for several reasons: The unpredictability of how many will switch to the "public option," how that plan will affect other plans on the market, and the cost of actual medical care in general. Beyond that, the Congressional Budget Office said that Obama's plan to cut medical costs by shortchanging providers in order to offset the cost of the bill is a hoax. "In CBO's judgment, the probability is high that no savings would be realized." No savings. So what's the point, Mr. President?
Democrats have proposed one way to raise money for the bill -- tax payroll. The Wall Street Journal writes that the tax could reach 10 percent. So much for "no tax increases for those making less than $250,000 a year."
Democrats have also proposed yet another creative way to raise money for the bill -- tax soda (known simply as Coke down here in the South). The CBO estimates that a three-cent tax on soda, including Gatorade and other sugary or energy drinks, would generate $24 billion in the next four years, all while fighting obesity. We have been through this before. If Congress taxes something expecting people to stop using that something for their health, the revenue source dries up. Brilliant. We say, "No taxation on carbonation!"
All in all, if the public option is so good, why don't Democrats in Congress want it to be their health plan? Amendments requiring them to be covered by the plan have been defeated in both the House and Senate. One reason for the defeat might be the example of Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), who, if his case went before a review board, could be denied his current level of cancer treatment. One might say he'd be left to sink or swim.
The BIG Lie
"We spend about $6,000 per person more than any other industrialized nation on earth -- $6,000 more than the people do in Denmark, or France, or Germany, or -- every one of these other countries spend at least 50 percent less than we do, and you know what, they're just as healthy." --Barack Obama
The American Spectator's Philip Klein explains why this is a lie: "Obama is correct that all of those countries spend less per person on health care, but it isn't anywhere near $6,000 less. The widest gap among the countries mentioned, between the U.S. and Denmark, is $3,778 per person. Of course, other systems don't keep costs down with magic wands, but with rationing care to the sick -- something Obama denies he wants to do in the U.S." Indeed, there's no question that our system needs some treatment, but ObamaCare is not the right prescription.
This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award
"I love these members, they get up and say, 'Read the bill.' What good is reading the bill if it's a thousand pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?" --Rep. John Conyers
The Wall Street Journal's John Fund responds, "Perhaps Mr. Conyers has a point. A bill that seeks to reorder one-seventh of the nation's economy is probably too complex and convoluted for any single human being to fully comprehend and can't possibly capture all the unintended consequences of such sweeping changes. Maybe Mr. Conyers has latched on to the main reason why big government can't work and why less sweeping health care reform is in order."
Rangel Supports Higher Taxes, Just Not Paying Them
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY) is one of the drivers of a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge in order to help pay for the Democrats' nationalization of health care. Taking a look back at Rangel's personal tax history, however, it's easy to see why he's so keen on the proposal -- he isn't likely to pay any of it himself. The Wall Street Journal published a refresher course in Rangel's tax history this week, reminding us all of the scams that he's put forth in order to dodge taxes on his now famous Dominican villa.
Rangel failed to report $75,000 in real estate income from the villa, which commands $1,100 per night during the peak season and is rarely -- if ever -- vacant. He has blamed his wife for not keeping the books properly (bet that went over well), and he has blamed the locals for speaking Spanish, but he has never come completely clean about how such a large mistake could be made on his returns year after year. Rangel has promised to rectify the situation but he still has not filed the corrected paperwork. Nor has he paid the overdue taxes. Nor is the IRS knocking on his door.
There have also been issues surrounding rent-controlled apartments that Rangel occupies in Harlem. It turns out that he has played fast and loose with the income-reporting rules so that he can still be eligible for rent-control status, which allows him a steep discount below market value.
We could go on about the other four issues about which the House Ethics Committee is investigating Rangel, but the picture is already clear. He's in deep for years of tax evasion and questionable real estate ventures, but Charles Rangel is still perfectly comfortable telling us that a 5.4 percent tax surcharge is "the moral thing to do."
Speaking of housing corruption, a Countrywide official testified before the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee and the Senate Ethics Committee that Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) did in fact know he was the recipient of a sweetheart deal on two mortgages as part of the unofficial "Friends of Angelo" program. Angelo Mozilo, the founder and former CEO of Countrywide, was able to snag fixed rates of 4.25 percent and 4.5 percent on mortgages for the Senate Banking Committee chairman. Suddenly, Dodd's re-election chances just got slimmer.
New & Notable Legislation
House Democrats have been busy patting themselves on the back after approving legislation this week that would purportedly lead to fiscal discipline. The so-called pay-as-you-go plan would require all new spending increases to be offset by either cuts in other spending measures or tax hikes that would keep the deficit from rising. We've seen this movie before. The same scheme was put in place during the Clinton years, and it didn't curtail either Democrat or Republican spending. As we have noted in the past, pay-go rules are riddled with exceptions and loopholes that allow Congress to ignore the cuts that are supposed to offset the increased spending. Also, Democrats have no problem whatsoever with raising taxes to fund new initiatives, making tax hikes their usual escape hatch for pay-go proposals of no consequence. The only way the government is going to reduce the deficit is by -- wait for it -- spending less. No other magic formula or miracle legislation to it.
Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and Kay Hagan (D-NC) introduced legislation to impose a federal ban on using a cell phone to send text messages while driving. "This legislation addresses a growing problem on our nation's highways: distracted drivers," Landrieu said. "Studies show that texting while driving increases the chances of a high-speed collision and has been found to be even more dangerous than driving drunk." People who text while driving are indeed, to coin a phrase, acting stupidly, but a federal law is over the top. Fourteen states already ban it, but these senators want to strip highway funds from those who don't.
The Washington Post reports, "The House approved a $636 billion defense spending bill Thursday after voting to strip money for the controversial F-22 fighter. However, it left funding in place for several other military programs that the Obama administration said it does not want. The defense measure, which passed 400 to 30, was the last of 12 appropriations bills for 2010 to clear the House."
Sotomayor Clears Judiciary Committee
In a 13-6 vote that saw only South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham cross party lines, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Judge Sonia Sotomayor for a floor vote to confirm her as the first Hispanic justice to the U.S. Supreme Court. Many Republicans have voiced opposition to Sotomayor because they simply do not believe that she will put the law above personal prejudices and ethnic identity. Years of speeches and articles by the judge have indicated an unswerving belief in the politics of racial identity and victimhood. She made a number of excuses for these comments when pressed during her confirmation hearings, but her vague and misleading answers did not sway skeptics. If anything, her performance during the hearings should only make people more worried about what direction she will take on the bench.
Sotomayor is expected to be confirmed by the full Senate, even if largely by party-line vote. The upside is that since she is replacing David Souter, she won't sway the ideological balance of the Court. The downside, of course, is that she will be a Justice on the United States Supreme Court, most likely for a long time.
Just arrived -- New "Annoy a Liberal" sticker design
Give other drivers something to think about (and Annoy a Liberal while you're at it) with our new "Work, Succeed, Be Happy" sticker. Made in the USA exclusively for PatriotShop.US from durable, high quality vinyl.
Palin Steps Down
On Sunday, Sarah Palin's term as governor of Alaska came to a self-induced end as she resigned to save herself and the state from being paralyzed by the scurrilous ethics investigations that continue to dog her. As arguably the most popular Republican on the current scene and easily the conservative woman most reviled by liberals and Beltway elites, the question now being raised is what's next for Palin.
Speculation has her writing a book about her part of the 2008 campaign, but her stated plans are to campaign for right-of-center candidates around the country and increase Twitter's popularity as a news source by frequently updating her status there. Palin could also concentrate on how to best spend the funds in SarahPAC, her political action committee that has raised more than $1 million since its formation in February.
In her farewell address the former governor also expressed her differences with the mainstream media, chiding them, "How about, in honor of the American soldier, you quit makin' things up?" Chances are the media will be doing a lot of "makin' things up" about Palin between now and 2012.
Barack Obama's Birthday
Tuesday, August 4, is the 48th anniversary of President Obama's birth -- at least so says the state of Hawaii. With the continuing speculation surrounding Obama's original birth certificate, the Aloha State steadfastly claims Obama as a native son, while we are treated to repeated exasperated attempts by the administration to address the "10,000 more important issues" our country faces and not those who question Obama's citizenship, citizens derided as "birthers" by the president's spokesman and the media.
That said, The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto argues convincingly that the issue is settled. "Hawaiian birth certificates have changed in form since Obama was born. Back then, the official record was a paper document with the title 'certificate of live birth' (rather than 'certification'), and it included 'more information, such as the name of hospital, certifier's name and title; attendant's name and title, etc.' Hawaii no longer issues those old-style birth certificates," having switched to electronic copies in 2001 to ensure uniformity, according to the Honolulu Star Bulletin. Hawaii Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo says that Obama's original certificate still exists and she has seen it.
We have long found the questions surrounding the circumstances of Obama's birth worth pursuing, but we also don't have sufficient reason to doubt that the Hawaiian officials who claim to have seen the actual original birth certificate are telling the truth or that the president was born in Hawaii just as he says. But the controversy continues because the public has not seen the certificate. It seems like no difficult matter for the state of Hawaii to allow an exception to state law requiring birth certificates be kept private for past and present residents who are running for elected office. That could end the debate once and for all. Then again, Obama has nothing to lose by letting the hullabaloo continue. It ends up marginalizing the opponents who won't settle for less.
1 comments:
A sigh of relief that they're not passing health care reform till after the break! Yes I'm sure that this is exactly what people that desperately needed health care are doing!
Post a Comment