Obama Eliminates U.S. Senate

Satire from the Onion:

In an effort to reduce wasteful spending and eliminate non-vital federal services, the U.S. government announced plans this week to cut its long-standing senator program, a move it says will help save more than $300 billion each year.

According to officials, the decision to cut the national legislative body was reached during a budget review meeting on Tuesday. After hours of deliberation, it was agreed that the cost of financing U.S. senators far outweighed the benefits they provided.

"Now more than ever, we must eliminate needless spending wherever possible," President Obama said at a press conference Wednesday. "When we sat down to go over our annual budget, we asked ourselves, where can we safely trim back? What programs can we do away with without negatively impacting the American people? Which bloated and ineffective institutions can we no longer justify having around?"

"The answer was obvious," Obama added. "The U.S. Senate just needed to go."

It's funny, if you don't stop to think about it too much. Maybe the Onion is predicting the future, because there certainly doesn't seem to be any interest in understanding the role the Senate was originally designed by the Constitution to play. As it is now, it only serves to create a vast federal bureaucracy.

Satire serves to highlight how ridiculous people can be sometimes. For example:

In fact, the program has gone unchecked for so long that many in Washington are now unable to recall what purpose U.S. senators were originally meant to serve.

...

Moreover, the study found that the U.S. government already funds a fully operational legislative body that appears to do the exact same job as the Senate, but which also provides a fair and proportional representation of the nation's citizens and has rules in place to prevent one individual from holding the operations of the entire chamber hostage until he is guaranteed massive federal spending projects for his home state of Alabama.

Reform the Senate by repealing the 17th Amendment to restore its role as protector of the Constitution. The only way this can happen is if we reach out, educate, and lead enough people into understanding why we have a Senate in the first place.

Fight over 9/11 ads riles Ky. Senate race

Fight over 9/11 ads riles Ky. Senate race; The Washington Post; 44

The Republican Senate primary in Kentucky is heating up, as candidates Rand Paul and Trey Grayson trade charges that each is exploiting the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks for political gain.

Paul -- the son of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and the favorite of many "tea party" activists in the race -- released a campaign ad Tuesday that uses images of the burning Twin Towers and the blackened Pentagon, a controversial choice. The ad is designed to rebut charges from Grayson, the Kentucky secretary of state and party establishment favorite, that Paul is soft on national security issues.

After recalling his own experience on Sept. 11, Paul says, "America was attacked and fighting back was the right thing to do. Now a desperate Trey Grayson is using September 11th to attack my integrity and my patriotism. Trey Grayson, your shameful TV ad is a lie, and it dishonors you."

Paul's spot was a response to a pair of ads aired by Grayson, directing viewers to the Web site RandPaulStrangeIdeas.com. In the ads, Grayson alleges that Paul wants to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay and send detainees there back to their home countries, that Paul believes Afghanistan "is not a threat to our national security" and that Paul is unconcerned by whether Iran develops a nuclear bomb.

Grayson has the backing of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R), a heavyweight in Kentucky politics, and recently picked up the public endorsement of former vice president Dick Cheney. But Paul -- aided by his father's popularity and fundraising network -- has built up significant grassroots support.

A Research 2000 poll taken in mid-March and a Survey USA poll conducted earlier in the month both showed Paul opening up a double-digit lead in the primary contest.

Comment: It's too bad the race has turned away from Kentucky, where it should be, and to the international scene. While I won't argue that this isn't important, I am reminded of Chuck Baldwin's recent comment, "For all intents and purposes (at least in the larger states), US Senators are more like "mini-Presidents" than they are representatives of sovereign states." The "states" are the missing factor.

Specter Wins AFL-CIO Endorsement For US Senate

Specter Wins AFL-CIO Endorsement For US Senate; The Associated Press

The Pennsylvania AFL-CIO is endorsing Arlen Specter as he seeks a Pennsylvania record sixth term in the U.S. Senate.

The executive council of the organized labor federation met Tuesday in a suburban Harrisburg hotel to take a closed-door vote.

Specter and his principal opponent in the Democratic primary, U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, met separately with the group before the vote.

Specter won 34 out of 43 votes, or better than the two-thirds necessary to win the endorsement. Specter also won the group's endorsement in his last campaign in 2004, before he switched from Republican to Democrat.

The AFL-CIO is not endorsing a Republican candidate in the Senate primary contest.

Comment: Special interest leverage in the US Senate will be curbed when the 17th Amendment is repealed. Any other attempt is wishful thinking.

Drug lobby comes out a big winner in health care reform: The influence game

Drug lobby comes out a big winner in health care reform: The influence game; AP

Chalk one up for the pharmaceutical lobby.

The U.S. drug industry fended off price curbs and other hefty restrictions in President Barack Obama's health care law even as it prepares for plenty of new business when an estimated 32 million uninsured Americans gain health coverage.

To be sure, the law also levies taxes and imposes other costs on pharmaceutical companies, leaving its final impact on the industry's bottom line uncertain. A recent analysis by Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street firm, suggests the overhaul could mean "a manageable hit" of tens of billions of dollars over the coming decade while bolstering the value of drug-company stocks. Others expect profits, not losses, of the same magnitude.

Either way, pharmaceutical lobbyists won new federal policies they coveted and set a trajectory for long-term industry growth. Privately, several of them say their biggest triumph was heading off Democrats led by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who wanted even more money from their industry to finance the health care system's expansion. ...

As Obama's health care drive began last year, drugmakers agreed with Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., and White House officials to support the effort. In exchange, the companies volunteered $80 billion in 10-year savings for the health care changes, and backed it up with an expensive TV ad campaign pushing Obama's proposal. ...

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Baucus, said in an interview last week that as a trade-off for rolling back that expansion, the drug industry agreed to provide an additional $10 billion over a decade to help close the gap in Medicare coverage.

As for what Democrats gained from their ally, the industry and coalitions it joined spent about $67 million on supportive TV ads since the beginning of 2009, according to Evan Tracey, president of Kantar CMAG, which tracks political ads. That made it one of the biggest players in an airwaves battle that saw all sides spend $220 million.

Pharmaceutical interests spent $188 million lobbying last year, more than all but a handful of industry sectors, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. They employed an army of 1,105 lobbyists.

And after years of funneling most of its campaign contributions to Republicans, the industry has favored Democrats with 56 percent of the $5 million it has handed candidates so far this year. The biggest recipient, by far, of the industry's 2008 election cycle contributions of $13.8 million was Obama, who received $1.2 million for his presidential campaign.

Comment: The 17th gave us "democracy?" Me thinks it made a lot of Senators rich.

I’m Running For Free Markets, For Capitalism, For Liberty, For The Constitution

SCHIFF: Washington has infected the country with excessive regulation, excessive taxes, excessive government spending. I’m running for free markets, for capitalism, for liberty, for the Constitution, for the values that helped build this country.

Reid casts wrong vote on health care for second time

Reid casts wrong vote on health care for second time; CNN

Note: This is a few days old but funny nonetheless. I had some trouble embedding the video, but go to the link above to view Reid's performance.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid mistakenly called out "no" Thursday when asked for his vote on the health care reconciliation bill, setting the chamber howling with laughter.

Reid voted the wrong way when the clerk called for his vote, realized his error and quickly changed his vote to "yes."

"He did it again," someone said amid laughter.

Reid, who spent months persuading fellow senators to vote "yes" on President Obama's top domestic priority, made the same mistake December 24 when voting on the original health care bill.

His office said Reid made the gaffe because he was so focused on getting health care passed.

What's fueling health care rage?

The reconciliation measure, also known as the "fixes" bill, makes changes in the broader health care overhaul measure that Obama enacted Tuesday.

The Senate had to vote again on health care after Republicans forced two minor provisions involving student loan funding to be stripped from the bill. The final vote was 56-43 for approval, after which it was sent to the House, which also passed the measure.

The "fixes" bill now goes to Obama to be signed into law.

Next Power Grab: Cap-and-Trade

Next Power Grab: Cap-and-Trade; NRO

E&E Daily reports this morning that Obama administration officials have met with Kerry-Graham-Lieberman to prepare an April push for the-tax-formerly-known-as-cap-and-trade.

That’s very good timing for reasons I’ll explain as the moment nears. Also timing well, on the heels of this report, is a piece in today’s Wall Street Journal-Europe which, in the words of Open Europe’s daily update, “looks at the EU’s emissions trading scheme for carbon and argues that it is "a cautionary tale in how quickly environmental policy engineering degrades into rent-seeking for the fortunate few.”

You Gamecocks need to explain to your neighbors the bag of magic beans that their senior senator is chasing. I’m not claiming that Senator Graham is listening to his constituents of late, just that it may be worth one last effort to educate him and his staff.

Then again, maybe this explains what he is up to: he's been cuddling up with GE.

Comment: Oh...a Senator cuddling up with business (special interest), say it isn't so.

Check out Senators and Special Interests: A Public Choice Analysis of the Seventeenth Amendment, 73 Oregon L. Rev. 1007 (1994), by Todd Zywicki; this is very good read, which highlights that dramatic rise in special interest influence within the US Senate since the enacting of the 17th Amendment. This article dispels the 'greater democracy' myth purported by progressives and demonstrates the consequences we see today, for instance Graham cuddling up with GE.

Voinovich to join forum on trans-Atlantic issues

Voinovich to join forum on trans-Atlantic issues; The Columbus Dispatch

Sen. George V. Voinovich will spend part of the congressional spring break in Brussels, Belgium, where the Ohio Republican will be a co-chairman of the American Congressional Delegation to the Brussels Forum, his office said.

Voinovich left for Brussels Thursday night. This will be the fourth time he has attended the forum.

The forum describes itself as an "annual high-level meeting of the most influential North American and European political, corporate and intellectual leaders to address pressing challenges currently facing both sides of the Atlantic. Participants include heads of state, senior officials from the European Union institutions and the member states, U.S. Cabinet officials, congressional representatives, parliamentarians, academics and media."

Comment: I'm sure this trip will benefit the State of Ohio.

O'Reilly Covers Issa's Call for Special Prosecutor to Investigate White House Bribe Allegations

O'Reilly Covers Issa's Call for Special Prosecutor to Investigate White House Bribe Allegations; FOXNews

Last night, Bill O'Reilly dove into Ranking Member Issa's call for a special prosecutor to investigate Democrat Joe Sestak's allegations that the Obama White House tried to bribe him to get out of the Democrat Primary of US Senate in Pennsylvania against Senator Arlen Specter.

Senator Graham Sees Financial Bill in Face of ‘Tough Sledding’

Senator Graham Sees Financial Bill in Face of ‘Tough Sledding;’ Bloomberg

Republican U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham said he is confident his party and Democrats can pass a financial regulation measure even after the fight over health- care legislation.

“Tough sledding lies ahead because of the acrimony around health care,” Graham, of South Carolina, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program. “But on financial regulation we’ll get a bill.”

The Senate’s banking panel last week approved Senator Christopher Dodd’s financial-rules overhaul, advancing the Obama administration’s bid for the biggest restructuring of Wall Street oversight in seven decades.

Republicans threatened after the health-care vote last week not to cooperate with the White House on major legislation. Senate Democrats used a budget process called reconciliation that enabled them to pass the health legislation with no Republican votes.

Graham said the battle over health care would make it harder to advance on immigration overhaul, and he called on President Barack Obama to present legislation to Congress. Graham sits on both the Judiciary and the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committees.

“Let him do some heavy lifting here on immigration,” Graham said. Graham, saying not all Democrats supported a previous measure, called on Obama to “write a bill and send it to me.”

Graham said March 19 in a statement that passage of the health-care bill would “pretty much kill” any chance of an immigration overhaul this year.

Hard Pressed, Senator Dodd Gives Ground

Hard Pressed, Senator Dodd Gives Ground; Huffington Post

Senator Chris Dodd has good political antennae. He knows that his financial reform bill will come under severe pressure because it has a weak heart -- the provisions that deal with "too big to fail" are simply "too weak to make any sense."

Sen Baucus: Time For Re-Distrubution of Income America

Democratic Senator: Health Care Law to Address 'Mal-Distribution of Income;' FOXNews

After the Senate passed a "fix-it" bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an "income shift" to help the poor.

As Democrats tout the moral underpinnings of the federal health care system overhaul -- ensuring health care coverage for nearly all Americans -- one senator appeared to go off message when he said the legislation would address the "mal-distribution of income in America."

After the Senate passed a "fix-it" bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an "income shift" to help the poor.

Comment: We can complain quietly among ourselves or we can get together with our neighbors and begin organizing small local groups to call for the repeal of the 17th Amendment through our state and local elected officials. The choice is ours, not theirs.

Dates That Destroyed America

Dates That Destroyed America; By Chuck Baldwin

April 8, 1913

This is the date when the 17th Amendment was ratified. This amendment overturned the power of the State legislatures to elect their own senators and replaced it with a direct, popular vote. This was another serious blow against State sovereignty. The framers of the Constitution desired that the influence and power in Washington, D.C., be kept as close to the people and states as possible. For example, the number of representatives in the House of Representatives was to be decided by a limited number of voters. In the original Constitution, the ratio of "people of the several States" deciding their House member could not exceed "one for every thirty thousand." (Article. I. Section. 2. Paragraph. 3.) And when it came to the US Senate, the framers also recognized the authority of each State legislature to select its own senators, thereby keeping power and influence from aggregating in Washington, D.C. The 17th Amendment seriously damaged the influence and power of the states by forcing them to elect their US senators by popular vote. The bigger the State, the less influence the State legislature has in determining its US senator. Senators who answered to State legislators, each answering to a limited number of voters, are much more accountable to the "citizens of the several States" than those who are elected by a large number (many times numbering into the millions) of people. For all intents and purposes (at least in the larger states), US Senators are more like "mini-Presidents" than they are representatives of sovereign states.

Comment: Mr. Baldwin hits it right on the head, "mini-Presidents!"

Democrats Defend Appointments

Democrats Defend Appointments; The New York Times

A leading Republican predicted Sunday that President Obama’s appointment of 15 officials while sidestepping Senate confirmation would make it more difficult to get bipartisan support for future legislation.

But senior members of the Obama administration said that obstructionist Republicans had given the president little choice.

“This is going to make problems worse,” Lindsey Graham, a Republican and South Carolina’s senior senator said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

He singled out the appointment to the National Labor Relations Board of Craig Becker, a former associate general counsel for the A.F.L.-C.I.O. whom 41 Republican Senators have depicted as a pro-labor radical and who has been opposed by business groups.

But David Axelrod, a senior White House adviser, speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union,” said the Republican Party had “taken a position where they’re going to try and slow and block progress on all fronts whether it’s legislation and appointments.” He said 77 people nominated for high-level positions within the administration have not been voted on for months because Republicans have blocked any action in the Senate through such maneuvers as filibusters.

Presidents have the constitutional authority to fill vacancies without the advice and consent of the Senate when Congress is in recess — as they are now for a spring break. Other presidents have used that authority, with George W. Bush making 15 recess appointment by this point in his presidency and a total of 171 by the end, according to Congressional Research Service.

This item was found toward the end of the article.

In addition to the president’s recess appointments, Senator Graham said the Obama administration’s decision to pass health care without a single Republican vote would also make it harder to pass other tough legislation like an a immigration bill.

Senator Graham has been working with Senator Charles Schumer, the New York Democrat, on crafting a bill that would require illegal immigrants to admit they broke the law before being eligible for legal residency and require workers to carry a biometric identity card to be eligible to work.

Comment: More legislation being pushed through the Senate, when clearly the majority of our population is opposed.

Senate Climate Bill's Allocation Fight Expected to Go Down to the Wire

Senate Climate Bill's Allocation Fight Expected to Go Down to the Wire; The new York Times

The food fight is just getting started.

Senators cobbling together a sweeping energy and climate bill are at the early stages of divvying up valuable emission allocations among regulated firms and well-financed interest groups.

Their decisions are big ones, worth hundreds of billions of dollars over the climate program's roughly 40-year lifespan. Already, lawmakers are fighting over who should get a bigger share of the allowances, as well as the broader philosophical mechanics of pricing greenhouse gases.

Interests pressing for Senate allocations run the gamut. Investor-owned power companies say they need more than a third of the free allocations for their customers to help them compensate for higher energy bills. States that stepped up first on climate policy claim their early actions deserve recognition. Other voices in the debate include retirees, wildlife conservationists, religious groups and advocates for keeping tropical rain forests standing.

Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said yesterday they were getting closer to unveiling their "breakthrough" proposal on allocations with Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), promising a bill that would be both business and consumer-friendly. Graham and Lieberman said about 60 percent of the revenue raised by the government would immediately go directly back to the public as soon as the climate program starts.

Sources briefed on the senators' proposal say it has been dubbed "reduction and refund" instead of the "cap and trade" term that has been demonized by opponents.

The senators said that each industrial sector -- electric utilities, petroleum refiners, manufacturers -- will face different emission limits and startup dates. As such, the allocation plan for each also will be different.

For transportation fuels, the senators said an idea being offered up by BP America, ConocoPhillips and Shell Oil Co. involves a "linked fee" that would be tied to the carbon market price for the other industrial sectors.

Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) are pushing in another direction entirely. Their proposal, dubbed the "CLEAR Act" (S. 2877 (pdf)), would skip the widespread trading of carbon allowances and instead require energy producers to bid in monthly auctions for carbon shares. It also would direct 75 percent of the resulting auction revenue as a refund to help compensate the public for increased energy costs, with the remaining 25 percent going toward clean energy research and development.

Cantwell said a primary driver of the bill was to avoid creating a multitrillion-dollar trading platform susceptible to market manipulation and price volatility -- something she fears will cause a public backlash under the Kerry-Graham-Lieberman proposal. She also said she disagreed with the idea of Congress setting up a system for free allowances through midcentury.

"I think a transparent process in which Congress paid attention to this issue every year for the next several decades is a better way to go," Cantwell said. "I think whatever happens with allowances, it's tough, we'd all like to think we could make those decisions right now for the next 50 years. But every person I've asked, do you want that responsibility and do you think you can do it accurately? They'd say no. And so they know you really need a process every year."

Read the whole of the article here.

Comment: As said time and time before, this is an incredible scheme that would enact new taxation on the American people and will eventually lead to a loss of sovereignty as the global 'cap and trade' components expand.

Additional Information:

Senators Outline US Utility Carbon Market for Climate Bill Business Week

'Cap and Trade' Loses Its Standing as Energy Policy of Choice New York Times

10 Senate Democrats oppose climate bill if it expands coastal drilling Miami Herald

Sens. Gillibrand, Sanders, Udall Join Brown in Bill to Amend WIA to Assist States and Local Communities to Increase Youth Corps Programs

Sens. Gillibrand, Sanders, Udall Join Brown in Bill to Amend WIA to Assist States and Local Communities to Increase Youth Corps Programs; ProgressOhio

U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) today introduced legislation that would expand Youth Corps programs throughout the nation. The Youth Corps Act of 2010, cosponsored by Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Tom Udall (D-NM), will amend the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) to establish a competitive grant program to assist states and local communities in replicating and expanding Youth Corps Programs.

"This is about turning today's students into tomorrow's leaders," Brown said. "This program will build stronger communities, while preparing our young people for the jobs of the 21st century. All Ohio students deserve the opportunity to get ahead."

"We can prepare youth to become productive members of our communities by giving them the support and guidance they need to thrive," said Udall. "By expanding Youth Corps programs nationwide we are building on proven methods of preparing America's future workforce."

The core components of the Youth Corps model include:

• opportunities for educational advancement, including secondary school completion and preparation for postsecondary education;
• work experience, skills training, and career counseling;
• collaboration with other youth serving systems, such as child welfare and juvenile justice, to provide and coordinate support services for vulnerable youth;
• partnerships with local workforce and education systems, including labor, employers, postsecondary institutions, and community-based organizations, to develop pathways to postsecondary and labor market success; and
• post-program support.

The grants, awarded to states and municipalities, will be awarded for a period of three years with an option for renewal. In the Youth Corps model, adult leaders serve as mentors and guide crews of 8-12 Corps members as they gain the paid work experience and learn the skills that are essential to the development of a strong work ethic and success in the workplace. Corps members also receive a living allowance, classroom instruction to improve basic academic competencies, complete high school, and prepare for postsecondary education, and a wide range of supportive services. Additionally, they participate in technical skills training and leadership development.

Ohio is currently home to several youth corps program including:

• City Year Cleveland
• City Year Columbus
• Ohio Division of Forestry
• Ohio Woodlands Job Cops
• WSOS Quitter Conservation Corps

Comment: I spotted this news article this morning on the Ohio Freedom Alliance discussion group and thought it was equally as alarming as those in the group.

This is a dangerous and I have to question why the federal government continues on this path creating "youth corps." Historically I think we can all say that such actions have been exclusively affiliated with totalitarian states.

Without a doubt this future legislation proves the necessity to repeal the 17th Amendment.

Student Loan Overhaul Approved by Congress

Student Loan Overhaul Approved by Congress; The New York Times

Ending one of the fiercest lobbying fights in Washington, Congress voted Thursday to force commercial banks out of the federal student loan market, cutting off billions of dollars in profits in a sweeping restructuring of financial-aid programs and redirecting most of the money to new education initiatives.

The revamping of student-loan programs was included in — if overshadowed by — the final health care package. The vote was 56 to 43 in the Senate and 220 to 207 in the House, with Republicans unanimously opposed in both chambers.

Since the bank-based loan program began in 1965, commercial banks like Sallie Mae and Nelnet have received guaranteed federal subsidies to lend money to students, with the government assuming nearly all the risk. Democrats have long denounced the program, saying it fattened the bottom line for banks at the expense of students and taxpayers. ...

Congressional allies of the student-loan industry attacked the overhaul as an overreaching government takeover. The legislation substitutes an expanded direct-lending program by the government for the bank-based program, directing $36 billion over 10 years to Pell grants, for students from low-income families.

“The Democratic majority decided, well look, while we’re at it, let’s have another Washington takeover,” said Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee and a former federal education secretary. “Let’s take over the federal student loan program.”

Even as the Democrats’ decision to attach the student-loan overhaul to the health care package virtually ensured its passage, banks fought fiercely up to the last minute, prompting some lawmakers, like Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, where Nelnet has its headquarters, to cast their vote against the overall bill. ...

Comment: There was a time when a person could go to college and pay for all the associated expenses at the time of graduation. Then the Federal Government became involved...

Republicans warn Obama against bypassing Senate

Republicans warn Obama against bypassing Senate; CNN

All 41 Republican senators have signed a letter warning President Barack Obama not to appoint a controversial nominee to a federal agency overseeing relations between unions and employers.

Led by Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch and Arizona Sen. John McCain, the GOP senators urged the president against putting union lawyer Craig Becker on the National Labor Relations Board during Congress' upcoming Easter break.

"We are writing to urge you not to overturn the bipartisan vote against the nomination of Craig Becker to be a Member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) through a recess appointment," the senators state in the letter. "To do so would bypass the advice and consent traditions of the Senate."

Senate Republicans, along with Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Nebraska, and Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Arkansas, effectively blocked Becker's nomination to the NLRB on February 9.

Becker previously served as a lawyer for the Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO.

The GOP senators cast Becker as a radical whose past writings, their letter states, "clearly indicate that he would use his position on the NLRB to institute far-reaching changes in labor law."

Stimulus Bill May Give J.P. Morgan a Tax Refund of $1.4 Billion

Tax-Break Battle Flares; The Wall Street Journal

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. is nearing a deal that would allow it to benefit from a tax refund of as much as $1.4 billion, becoming the latest company to tap a little-noticed plank in an economic stimulus bill.

That law let companies apply losses from 2008 or 2009 against taxes paid in the previous five years, instead of the previous two years. Failed Seattle thrift Washington Mutual Inc. is eligible for about $2.6 billion in tax refunds, thanks to big losses in 2008. Now J.P. Morgan, which took over WaMu's banking operations in September 2008, is in discussions with ...

Read the rest by subscription.

Comment: ...and Senator Dodd wants to put a consumer financial protection agency under the control of the Federal Reserve.

Folks the 17th Amendment didn't bring democracy to the US Senate, it provided an open door for special interest. Isn't it obvious that Wall Street, a special internet, is controlling the Senate to some degree?

With the 17th Amendment there is no "check and balance' within the Federal Government nor the US Senate! Look, look, the bankers are robbing us blind and we think we have democracy in the Senate! This is lunacy!

The US Senate must be re-instituted and the States must have their place in Congress restored before it's too late. We must repeal the 17th Amendment and restore the balance of power. This is the only way we can stop the Robber Barons from JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs from looting our country.

Remember, this web-log was brought to you over a free and uninhibited Internet; let's keep it that way!

Sen. Baucus: Health Bill Will Redistribute Income

Senator Baucus is the senator from Montana:

"Too often, much of late, the last couple three years the mal-distribution of income in America is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind. Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America. This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America."

Video here.

Hat tip: Ace of Spades

Toomey Leads in Pennsylvania

Toomey Leads in Pennsylvania; Political Wire

A new Franklin & Marshall College poll in Pennsylvania finds Pat Toomey (R) leading both possible Democratic rivals in the U.S. Senate race, though large numbers are still undecided.

Toomey leads Sen. Arlen Specter (D), 33% to 29%, and beats Rep. Joe Sestak (D), 27% to 19%.

US Senate panel clears plan for tighter cybersecurity

US Senate panel clears plan for tighter cybersecurity; AFP

A US Senate committee on Wednesday approved a bill to try to tighten cybersecurity to better protect US government agencies and businesses from Internet threats.

The text was unanimously approved and now moves to a full Senate vote.

"The status quo is not sustainable. We need a new model for the 21st century. We must secure America?s critical networks, innovation and competitiveness in the global market," committee chair and cosponsor John Rockefeller said in a statement.

The Cybersecurity Act is a new draft of a bill introduced last year and was revised to take into account the views of more cybersecurity experts in the private sector, government and civil liberties community.

The bill would not allow the president to shut down the Internet unilaterally -- a revision to address critics of the prior bill who claimed it would provide that authority.

The proposal would require collaboration with the private sector in responding to a "cybersecurity emergency."

A "cybersecurity emergency" is defined as "a cyber event that is equivalent to an act of war, a terrorist attack, or a major natural disaster."

Another new provision in the bill would allow the president to provide security clearances to private sector officials to allow for the sharing of classified information.

Comment: On other forums I participate I have received some fairly vital attacks because I oppose this bill and see this as a means to limit speech. I have been labeled a hard-liner, to put it mildly. However, I say if it wasn't for the Internet I would be extremely limited in my ability to discuss the matter of repealing the 17th Amendment. Without the Internet we would be extremely restricted concerning the news information we now know about the daily activities of the US Senate and the senators. I could on for hours writing about what our communicative life would be like if there wasn't an Internet. But the question put before us is, is the US Senate, Congress and the President's effort to create a Cybersecurity Act meant to help protect the Internet or restrict and control it?

I would like to be obtimistic, but modern history is replete with example of the latter. And likewise, any time government involves itself in matters best suited for the private sector it ends up ruining it, maybe not at first, but in short order it does.

I say we need no such a law. I say let the US Government spend whatever it needs to protect the government infrastructure and leave the rest for private enterprise and the free market to figure out.

We all know if given the choice between a private business paying for something or the government, business will let the taxpayer pick up the bill. But we also know when there is a dollar riding on the line and business has the choice to decide the best course of action or allow for the government to, business will always want to make the choice. So I say let them. Let US businesses protect their interests on their own. Because when they do there certainly will be a better product on the market than anything that US Government will produce.

No law or President is going to protect us as well as those that have a vested interest in protecting their profit. Let the market protect us.

Malpass Will Seek U.S. Senate Seat From New York

Malpass Will Seek U.S. Senate Seat From New York; Bloomberg

Wall Street economist David Malpass, who worked at Bear Stearns Cos. before its collapse in March 2008, said he’ll run for the U.S. Senate because the government has failed to address the causes of the crisis.

Malpass, founder and president of investment advisory firm Encima Global, said he will seek the Republican Party’s nomination to challenge Democratic incumbent Kirsten Gillibrand. Gillibrand was appointed in January 2009 to replace former Senator Hillary Clinton when she was named secretary of state.

Government officials “haven’t done enough about the core problem” that led to the financial crisis and the deepest recession since the 1930s, Malpass said today in an interview on Bloomberg Radio. “You’ve got a huge portion of the population dependent on Washington,” he said. “That’s the way Washington likes it.”

Malpass was chief economist at Bear Stearns and served as an economic adviser to the Republican presidential campaign of Rudolph Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City. Bear Stearns was acquired by JPMorgan Chase & Co. in March 2008 in a transaction backstopped by the Federal Reserve.

“A lot of what I want to talk about in the campaign is job creation,” said Malpass, who served in the Treasury and State Departments in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. He has also worked as Republican staff director of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.

While in government, Malpass worked on the 1986 tax cuts, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings budget law, the savings and loan bailout, the North American Free Trade Agreement and Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady’s plan for developing country debt.

Note: Bold fonts used by the blogger.

Comment: It seems that America is truly being run by Wall Street.

Considering his past government work (highlighted in bold font above), I am incredibly distressed by this man running for office during this period of $17 Trillion "too big to fail" banker bailouts, the fascist take over of our health care system, and potential loss of our sovereignty through a "cap and trade" scheme cooked up by another group of Senators and European bankers. I all I can say is, it is a little distressing.

Senate parliamentarian: He's the only one both parties trust

Senate parliamentarian: He's the only one both parties trust; McClatchy Newspapers

Alan Frumin is barely known and rarely heard, but he could make or break the Senate Democrats' effort this week to put the final touches on President Barack Obama's health insurance overhaul.

Frumin is the Senate parliamentarian, and his advice this week is crucial to Democrats' success as they battle Republican bids to derail the bill that's designed to add important fixes to the health care overhaul that Obama signed into law on Tuesday.

"I compare him to the umpire at a baseball game," said Senate Historian Donald Ritchie. "Everyone is rooting for one team or another, but he's going to call 'em as he sees 'em. His job is the honest broker."

Like an umpire, Frumin's guidance infuriates the losers, heartens the winners and could decide the ballgame. Rarely, however, do players publicly protest.

"You really establish relationships of trust with members of both parties, and people tend to give you the benefit of the doubt," said Kevin Kayes , a Washington lobbyist who served as assistant parliamentarian from 1987 to 2000.

The Senate on Wednesday continued considering the last piece of the Democrats' health care initiative, a "reconciliation" bill that would change parts of the new health law.

The House of Representatives passed the fixes package late Sunday, and the Senate is hoping to concur as soon as Thursday. Since 51 votes are needed, and Democrats control 59 seats, victory is virtually assured _unless Republicans succeed in winning an amendment. Then the House would have to approve it, too.

Or, should Frumin advise that a part of the bill could be inappropriate under the rules governing the special "reconciliation" process, the presiding officer of the Senate , who's always a senator from the majority party, currently the Democrats, would have to rule on how to proceed.

If he or she agreed with Frumin that something in the bill wasn't admissible, Democrats could try to overturn the ruling, but likely would need 60 votes, which probably would be unattainable. If the presiding officer disagreed with Frumin, he or she would be doing something rare in the tradition-heavy Senate — defying the referee.

Read the rest of the article here.

How to Piss Off a Sitting U.S. Senator

How to piss off a sitting U.S. Senator; Jerry Berggren

Louie Gohmert has discovered how to do this. Today he released a call to state legislatures around the country to review Article V of the U.S. Constitution and consider proposing an amendment to stop the runaway Congress and White House. That’s not going to make him many friends in our more austere legislative body because Rep. Gohmert wants to repeal the 17th Amendment which allows for the direct election of Senators by the people.

GOP Senator Looks to Ban Sex Offenders from Getting Viagra

GOP Senator Looks to Ban Sex Offenders from Getting Viagra; FOXNews

One of Coburn's amendments would prohibit federal taxpayer money, in the form of subsidies for the poor to buy insurance, from being used by sex offenders to buy drugs like Viagra. It goes further, according to a release from his spokesperson, prohibiting coverage of "Viagra and other ED medications to convicted child molesters, rapists, and sex offenders, and prohibits coverage of abortion drugs."

Comment: In the legislative tradition of Clay and Calhoun we have Viagra...

Senator says U.S. may hit back over EU fund rules

Senator says U.S. may hit back over EU fund rules; Reuters

The United States should retaliate if a European Union proposal to curb access for U.S. fund managers to the European markets becomes law, a senior U.S. lawmaker says.

Planned EU limits on hedge funds are "protectionist rules that discriminate against U.S. firms and activities," Democratic Senator Charles Schumer of New York said in a letter to U.S Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, dated Tuesday.

The proposed law, backed by most EU members but facing opposition from the UK government, would make it difficult for European investors to invest in non-EU hedge funds and would curb non-EU money's access to the EU market.

Schumer said if the law is enacted he would propose legislation that would "prohibit funds that are not headquartered in the U.S. from marketing and raising money here and require all funds operating in the U.S. to use only U.S.-headquartered custodian banks."

He urged Geithner to work to ensure the proposed law will not discriminate against U.S. firms "just as EU-based funds and custodian banks currently have full access to our market."

In a letter sent on March 1, Geithner had complained to EU financial markets chief Michel Barnier about proposed rules to tighten control of hedge funds. The hedge fund industry believes Geithner's letter helped Britain stall the draft law.

Leaders from the Group of 20 agreed last year to move forward on an overhaul of financial regulations, but discussions have stalled amid worries about the need to protect still fragile economies.

Schumer's letter comes as global concerns about protectionism are increasing.

A World Trade Organization panel called on Tuesday on the European Union to end illegal subsidies to Airbus (EAD.PA).

Separately, the French and German governments urged U.S. authorities last week to "reject protectionist temptations" over a big U.S. military tanker deal that looks set to go to Boeing.

Former Governor Senator And Goldman Chairman Appointed MF CEO (MF)

Former Governor Senator And Goldman Chairman Appointed MF CEO; Benzinga

In a recent report Citi comments on the appointment of new CEO at MF Global Holdings Ltd (NYSE: MF). Jon Corzine has been appointed CEO replacing Bernie Dan who has resigned for personal reasons.

Jon Corzine served as governor of NJ from 2006-2010 and US senator from 2001-2006. Before that, Corzine spent 24 years at Goldman Sachs and served as its former chairman and senior partner.

This was a somewhat unexpected appointment because Bernie Dan was just appointed CEO in October 2008.

Citi does "not believe there are any underlying business issues that necessitated Bernie's resignation."

Mr. Corzine was also appointed Chairman replacing Alison Carnwath who is retiring.

Citi believes that "Jon Corzine brings strong leadership and credibility to a
growing company that has suffered a series of missteps.""

Comment: Does anyone out there find this as troubling as I do?

Senate writing final chapter to health care bill

Senate writing final chapter to health care bill; The Associated Press

President Barack Obama has signed into law the most sweeping overhaul of U.S. health care since Medicare, but one last chapter in the epic struggle is still playing out in the Senate.

Senators are debating a package of fixes to the new health law, demanded by House Democrats as their price for passing the mammoth overhaul legislation that will extend coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans over the next decade. Obama signed the bill on Tuesday, declaring "a new season in America" as he sealed a victory denied to a line of presidents stretching back more than half a century.

The fix-it bill under consideration in the Senate eliminates a special Medicaid deal for Nebraska from the new law, softens a tax on insurance plans that was repugnant to organized labor, sweetens the pot with more expansive subsidies for lower-income people and offers more generous prescription drug coverage to seniors, among other changes.

Its approval at the end of this week is virtually assured, since it's being debated under fast-track budget rules that allow passage with a simple majority instead of the 60 votes usually required for action in the 100-seat Senate. Democrats control 59 Senate seats.

Debtor Nation

Debtor Nation; James Turk; Gold Speculator

Only a few decades ago, the United States was the world’s largest creditor nation. American capital spanned the globe financing all types of investments in virtually every country. But that dominance began to erode in the 1960s because growth in consumption in the United States was starting to outpace new production. Wealth built up over generations was being consumed.

To compensate for the resulting decline in living standards, the nation turned to debt, rather than hard work and savings. This trend continued through the next decade. A focus on consumption and a seemingly unstoppable reliance on debt at all levels of American society had become the dominant force in economic activity.

By the 1980s, the inevitable happened. As generations of accumulated wealth disappeared, a line was crossed. America now owed more to the rest of the world than the world owed to it. The United States had become a debtor nation, and it has continued to run up the tab in the decades since.

The mindset of policymakers today continues to be one of debt and consumption instead of savings, investment and production. We see this way of thinking in their pronouncements and actions. Worryingly, the tipping point appears to have been reached. Not only is the United States living beyond its means, it is now borrowing beyond its means, as graphically illustrated in the following chart prepared by Nathan Martin.






















Here’s is how Mr. Martin explains the crucial message from this chart.
“This is a very simple chart. It takes the change in GDP and divides it by the change in Debt. What it shows is how much productivity is gained by infusing $1 of debt into our debt backed money system.

Back in the early 1960s a dollar of new debt added almost a dollar to the nation’s output of goods and services. As more debt enters the system the productivity gained by new debt diminishes…[but now] total income can no longer support total debt. In the third quarter of 2009 each dollar of debt added produced NEGATIVE 15 cents of productivity, and at the end of 2009, each dollar of new debt now SUBTRACTS 45 cents from GDP!”

The US is digging itself into a hole, and if the message in the above chart was not clear enough, another bell tolled last week. Moody’s warned that the triple-A credit rating of the United States is at risk of being downgraded if the nation fails to come to grips with its growing debt. It warned:

“Preserving debt affordability at levels consistent with Aaa ratings will invariably require fiscal adjustments of a magnitude that, in some cases, will test social cohesion.” [Emphasis added]

It is an unusually stark assessment with profound implications that require thoughtful attention. Debt has always been and will always be a two-edged sword. Iceland now knows that lesson well. So do Dubai and Greece. Other nations – including the United States – are about to learn that lesson too.

As I see it, a lot of the federal government’s promises are about to be broken. The collapse of the once almighty dollar is rapidly approaching.

Comment: Readers of this weblog can certainly understand how we became a debtor nation and it was through the financial policy crafted in Congress and particularly in the US Senate.

However because of the 17th Amendment the states are almost powerless to protect the citizenry from the massive debt that is being heaped on our backs. Now with the health care scheme being passed by both houses in Congress, which will be signed into law by the President, I doubt anyone can accurately forecast the new debt. This will be tremendous. Yet the states can stop what will surely set a record deficit and increase our taxes to levels never seen by most Americans.

While some states will assuredly attempt to nullify this new law, another road is available to correct scam It is by repealing the 17th Amendment. Only by repealing the 17th Amendment will the states have their rightful authority restored in order to turn back the spending, and in the case of the cap and trade fiasco, stop the ratification of a treaty that will assuredly take away our sovereignty. Repealing the 17th Amendment will restore the states rightful and historical place within the Federal Government.

A look at the health care overhaul bill

A look at the health care overhaul bill; The Associated Press

Congressional Democrats have released a final version of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul bill in advance of a House vote planned for Sunday. Some features of the legislation, which makes changes to the bill the Senate passed on Christmas Eve:

COST: $940 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

HOW MANY COVERED: 32 million uninsured. Major coverage expansion begins in 2014. When fully phased in, 95 percent of eligible Americans would have coverage, compared with 83 percent today.

INSURANCE MANDATE: Almost everyone is required to be insured or else pay a fine. There is an exemption for low-income people. Mandate takes effect in 2014.

INSURANCE MARKET REFORMS: Starting this year, insurers would be forbidden from placing lifetime dollar limits on policies, from denying coverage to children because of pre-existing conditions, and from canceling policies because someone gets sick. Parents would be able to keep older kids on their coverage up to age 26. A new high-risk pool would offer coverage to uninsured people with medical problems until 2014, when the coverage expansion goes into high gear. Major consumer safeguards would also take effect in 2014. Insurers would be prohibited from denying coverage to people with medical problems or charging them more. Insurers could not charge women more.
ad_icon

MEDICAID: Expands the federal-state Medicaid insurance program for the poor to cover people with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level, $29,327 a year for a family of four. Childless adults would be covered for the first time, starting in 2014. The federal government would pay 100 percent of costs for covering newly eligible individuals through 2016. A special deal that would have given Nebraska 100 percent federal financing for newly eligible Medicaid recipients in perpetuity is eliminated. A different, one-time deal negotiated by Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu for her state, Louisiana, worth as much as $300 million, remains.

TAXES: Dramatically scales back a Senate-passed tax on high-cost insurance plans that was opposed by House Democrats and labor unions. The tax would be delayed until 2018, and the thresholds at which it is imposed would be $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families. To make up for the lost revenue, the bill applies an increased Medicare payroll tax to the investment income and to the wages of individuals making more than $200,000, or married couples above $250,000. The tax on investment income would be 3.8 percent.

PRESCRIPTION DRUGS: Gradually closes the "doughnut hole" coverage gap in the Medicare prescription drug benefit that seniors fall into once they have spent $2,830. Seniors who hit the gap this year will receive a $250 rebate. Beginning in 2011, seniors in the gap receive a discount on brand name drugs, initially 50 percent off. When the gap is completely eliminated in 2020, seniors will still be responsible for 25 percent of the cost of their medications until Medicare's catastrophic coverage kicks in.

EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITY: As in the Senate bill, businesses are not required to offer coverage. Instead, employers are hit with a fee if the government subsidizes their workers' coverage. The $2,000-per-employee fee would be assessed on the company's entire work force, minus an allowance. Companies with 50 or fewer workers are exempt from the requirement. Part-time workers are included in the calculations, counting two part-timers as one full-time worker.

SUBSIDIES: The proposal provides more generous tax credits for purchasing insurance than the original Senate bill did. The aid is available on a sliding scale for households making up to four times the federal poverty level, $88,200 for a family of four. Premiums for a family of four making $44,000 would be capped at around 6 percent of income.

HOW YOU CHOOSE YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE: Small businesses, the self-employed and the uninsured could pick a plan offered through new state-based purchasing pools called exchanges, opening for business in 2014. The exchanges would offer the same kind of purchasing power that employees of big companies benefit from. People working for medium-to-large firms would not see major changes. But if they lose their jobs or strike out on their own, they may be eligible for subsidized coverage through the exchange.

GOVERNMENT-RUN PLAN: No government-run insurance plan. People purchasing coverage through the new insurance exchanges would have the option of signing up for national plans overseen by the federal office that manages the health plans available to members of Congress. Those plans would be private, but one would have to be nonprofit.

ABORTION: The proposal keeps the abortion provision in the Senate bill. Abortion opponents disagree on whether restrictions on taxpayer funding go far enough. The bill tries to maintain a strict separation between taxpayer dollars and private premiums that would pay for abortion coverage. No health plan would be required to offer coverage for abortion. In plans that do cover abortion, policyholders would have to pay for it separately, and that money would have to be kept in a separate account from taxpayer money. States could ban abortion coverage in plans offered through the exchange. Exceptions would be made for cases of rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother.

GOP HEALTH CARE SUMMIT IDEAS: Following a bipartisan health care summit last month, Obama announced he was open to incorporating several Republican ideas into his legislation. But two of the principle ones - hiring investigators to pose as patients and search for fraud at hospitals and increasing spending for medical malpractice reform initiatives - did not make it into the legislation released Thursday. The legislation incorporates only one, an increase in payments to primary care physicians under Medicaid, an idea mentioned by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

Senate Approves Bill To Reduce Crack-Cocaine Sentencing Disparity

Senate Approves Bill To Reduce Crack-Cocaine Sentencing Disparity; News One

The U.S. Senate on Wednesday approved a bill to reduce the disparities in sentences handed down for people convicted of crack and powder cocaine charges, but some question whether the legislation goes deep enough in addressing the problem.

“What we have is progress, it’s not justice,” said Jennifer Bellamy, criminal justice legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Tenn. Reaction to House Health Care Vote

Reaction to House Health Care Vote; WDEF

U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., made the following statement Sunday evening after the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Senate’s version of health reform legislation.

“Tonight’s vote is disappointing, and its cost will hit our state and future generations very hard,” said Corker. “On Friday, Governor Bredesen let me know this bill will cost Tennessee an estimated $1.1 billion in Medicaid expansion over five years – a huge unfunded mandate that creates a very difficult situation for our state.

“Beyond that, I think what bothers me most about the bill are its disingenuous accounting mechanisms. It’s insulting to the American people. First, the bill applies 10 years of new taxes to finance six years of spending, resulting in huge deficits over the next decades. Second, even President Obama’s own Medicare officials have determined that Medicare savings are counted TWICE in the bill, hiding the legislation’s true cost. This comes down to elementary school logic; you can’t spend the same dollar twice. And finally, almost as soon as the ink dries on this legislation, a new bill will come forth to deal with all or part of what is called the ‘doc fix’ to ensure that physicians who treat Medicare recipients do not receive a 21 percent cut. The cost of that over 10 years is more than $200 billion, proving that Americans have not been dealt with squarely on the true accounting associated with this bill.”

-----------------------------------
U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) today released the following statement regarding passage of the health care bill in the U.S. House of Representatives:

“This is an historic mistake. And unlike Social Security, Medicare and civil rights legislation, the only thing bipartisan about it is the opposition to it.

“The mistake is to expand a health care delivery system that is already too expensive instead of reducing its cost so more Americans can afford health insurance.

“This taxes job creators in the middle of a recession. It means Medicare cuts and premium increases for millions of Americans. When you include the cost of paying doctors who serve Medicare patients, it will increase the national debt.

“It will force governors to cut higher education funding, and raise taxes and tuition to pay for new Medicaid costs. In Tennessee, the governor says the cost will be $1.1 billion or more over five years.

“And the last-minute Washington takeover of the student loan program will add a half trillion more to the debt and overcharge 19 million student loans to help pay for health care.”

Health-Care Reform Attacks Federalism

Health-Care Reform Attacks Federalism; Sam Staley; Reason Foundation

Federalism is one of the bedrock principles of American governance. I wonder how many Congressman really understood how the health-care reform plan passed by Congress on Sunday really was a direct challenge to Federalism.

Federalism is the governing principle by which the national government has certain rights and responsibilities and state governments have independent rights and responsibilities. The two governments are not subservient to the other; they act as independent governments and sovereign to themselves. They are also not "partners".

Federalism was so important, the Bill of Rights--a nonnegotiable set of Amendments added to the Constitution in order for it to be passed--included the 10th Amendement which says that any rights and duties not given to the Federal government in the U.S. Constitution are reserved for state government.

The health-care reform plan, according to the White House summary, undermines the core governing principle of Federalism in several ways, not the least of which is treating states as if they are, at best, junior partners with the Federal government, or, at worst, little more than wards of the Federal government. The health-care reform legislation will mandate that states provide certain levels of benefits to medicaid patients, force them to expand Medicad eligbility, require them to create and regulate insurance exchanges for low-income households, require them to "monitor and remediate high-risk billing activity" for prescription drugs, require state insurance "authorities to conduct annual rate reviews, backed by the oversight of the [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services] Secretary."

States already receive 40 percent of their Medicaid funding from the federal government. So this reform is simply reinforcing a broader trend toward a unitary system of government, with the national government setting goals and objectives and lower levels of government carrying them out.

Unfortunately, this is really all part of a progressive vision to change the way America governs itself. The U.S. Constitution, by dividing power to protect liberty, is an antiquated governing system that gets in the way of doing what's right--like federalize health care. The priority of government is implementing goals hashed out in the national legislature.

Some states, most notably Viriginia, are taking this challenge head on. The state passed legislation prohibiting the federal government from mandating that Viriginia citizens buy health insurance. I hope they are successful, nothing less than the continued viability of American Federalism depends on it.

Comment: The State through the US Senate were once part of this "American Federalism," but with the passing of the 17th Amendment this was removed. It's time to restore the States role in American Federalism; repeal the 17th Amendment.

Schumer and Graham on Immigration Reform: Why Not Do it Without the Biometric National ID?

Schumer and Graham on Immigration Reform: Why Not Do it Without the Biometric National ID? CATO Weblog

There is much to commend in the op-ed on immigration reform that Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) published in this morning’s Washington Post. Unfortunately, they lead with their worst idea: a biometric national ID card, mandatory for all American workers.

Here’s the good: “Americans overwhelmingly oppose illegal immigration and support legal immigration,” they say. “Throughout our history, immigrants have contributed to making this country more vibrant and economically dynamic.”

Their plan includes problem-solving proposals: “creating a process for admitting temporary workers” and “implementing a tough but fair path to legalization.” The latter would reduce the population of illegal aliens in the U.S.—good—and the former would reduce the need to enter illegally in the first place—also good.

Joined with the enhanced border security they propose, these ideas would address the immigration challenge as well as anyone knows how. (Details matter, and my colleagues will have more to say, I’m sure.)

But then there is their gratuitous national ID proposal for all American workers, and stepped up interior enforcement. “Interior enforcement” is a euphemism for “rounding up illegal workers” under some administrations and “raiding employers” under others.

This is the most specific Senator Schumer has ever been about his biometric national ID proposal, though he’s had it in mind since at least 2007. But it is hardly satisfactory, and the claim there will be no national ID database is almost certainly not true.

Read the rest here.

Comment: Once again we sit here on the merry-go-round called the US Senate where we go round and round on an issue that we the people do not want and the clowns in the Senate are going to pass anyway. Would someone please tell me where is the overwhelming consensus for a national ID card? There is none. Not only is there no consensus, most US Citizens understand that this is a police state measure to track us, the group who are here legally, rather than the illegal group of 20 million.

Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations

A quote posted in the 18 March 2010 edition of the Future of Freedom Foundation Newsletter, which should highlight the malady of the health care and climategate bills being pushed through Congress...(pun intended)

It is the highes impertinence and presumption, therefore, in kings and ministers to pretend to watch over the economy of private people, and to restrain their expense.... They are themselves always, and without any exception, the greatest spendthrifts in society. Let them look well after their own expense, and they may safely trust private people with theirs.

— Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations [1776]

Is the US manipulating currency?

The US senate wants to level the playing field with China as they introduce a new bill aimed at controlling foreign currencies. The senate introduced legislation today that condemns currency manipulation by foreign governments as an unfair subsidy and would slap those governments with US trade restrictions.

Senators tiptoe on climate deals

Senators tiptoe on climate deals; POLITICO

Senators working on a major climate bill have a near impossible task: how to cut deals without looking like they’re cutting deals.

Such is the toxic legislating environment in wake of the so-called Cornhusker Kickback on health care — even mild legislative compromises designed to attract votes are now under much greater scrutiny, as lawmakers fear political repercussions from anything perceived as a side deal.

So very carefully, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) have been conducting climate bill negotiations across the Senate, hoping to make a few palatable deals that will get them to 60 votes.

And Republicans are set to pounce on anything that looks like a special set-aside for a state or an industry. That means Alaska Democratic Sen. Mark Begich’s request for help with melting glaciers or West Virginia Democratic Sen. John Rockefeller’s wish for carbon capture subsidies for coal plants could be fodder for political opponents.

“That’s one of the things that sank the health care bill,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). “It wasn’t just the policy; it was the unseemliness of the various deals.”

Democrats have grown increasingly sensitive about what kind of “deals” it might take to get a climate change bill passed this year.

“That’s such an offensive question; it’s just offensive,” said Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu, after being asked what she would “need” to see to support a climate bill during a hallway encounter in the Capitol. “It’s not what I need; it’s what I believe what the people that I represent believe.”

Landrieu came under intense fire when she agreed to back the health care bill after securing $100 million in extra federal money for her home state.

Lawmakers stress that the climate negotiations don’t involve the type of narrowly tailored, transactional provisions that got Democrats into so much trouble during the health care debate.

But the potential for danger is there, given that regional deals appear to be the only way to pass a climate bill. The House cap-and-trade bill, for example, passed only after House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) cut deals with groups of coal-, oil- and manufacturing-state Democrats.

And in the Senate, negotiators have dropped an economywide cap-and-trade system in favor of a more specific sector-by-sector approach to the bill designed to satisfy industry and members from different regions of the country.

“All states aren’t created equal when it comes to energy sources, so it’s going to have to be a varied bill just by the nature of the problem,” said Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, a coal-state Democrat who says the climate bill is “apples to oranges” compared with the health care bill.

While none of these negotiations amount to a direct kickback, several key swing voters in the Senate are pushing items that would disproportionately benefit their home states.

Begich said he’s “aggressively” pushing for tens of billions of dollars to help his state cope with melting sea ice, eroding coastal villages, shrinking permafrost and other devastating effects of climate change.

“There’s no state that is affected like us, and for that not to be addressed will be a significant problem for me,” he said. ...

Read the rest here.

Comment: After reading the whole article, I wonder if you came away with the same conclusion I did...the US Senate is a pack of morons. I can't say it any nicer or clearer.

Congressional Report: US Has the Largest Energy Resources on Earth

CRS: AMERICA'S COMBINED ENERGY RESOURCES LARGEST ON EARTH

Inhofe, Murkowski Release Memo Showing U.S. Is World Leader in Conventional Fuels

Link to CRS Report

Washington, D.C.-Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, released a preliminary government report today showing America's combined recoverable natural gas, oil, and coal endowment is the largest on Earth. America's recoverable resources, Congressional Research Service (CRS) shows, are far larger than those of Saudi Arabia (3rd), China (4th), and Canada (6th) combined. And that's without including America's absolutely immense oil shale and methane hydrates deposits.

Comment: With all this available energy you have to wonder why the Senate is pushing for the cap and trade and the move to green technologies that will not amount to powering an electric scooter much less a small town. You have to wonder why China is building new coal burning plants and a huge new manufacturing industry while our EPA continues to block the building of any fossil fuel plants and at the same time our manufacturing industry has long since dissolved or gone to China.

I have said it before, the pack of 100 are mostly beholden to special interest, and as we are seeing this is not a special interest that resides in the United States. At the rate we are going with the defict, government spending, war, and the loss of all manufacturing we should be in the 'developing nation class' before 2025.

...SOS...REPEAL THE 17TH...SOS...REPEAL THE 17TH...SOS...REPEAL THE 17TH...

Inhofe: Al Gore, Global Warming Alarmists Running for Cover After Climategate

Deal nearing on US Senate climate bill

Deal nearing on US Senate climate bill; TimesLive

The US Senate is close to wrapping up talks ahead of introducing a compromise climate change bill, said a top Democratic lawmaker who discussed ideas with industry groups.

“We’re planning to button up our efforts somewhere I hope next week,” Senator John Kerry told reporters after meeting with a coalition that represents automakers, forestry and paper companies, Big Oil, steel, mining, electricity and others.

Kerry is working with Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and independent Senator Joseph Lieberman on a bill to require US

industry to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases associated with global warming.

Indicating there was still work to be done, Kerry said,

“We’re trying to build support as we develop (bill) language.”Bruce Josten, an executive vice president at the US

Chamber of Commerce, left Wednesday’s meeting with the three senators and told reporters: “They’re being very constructive; they’re trying to figure out how to make this work for the American economy.”The measure will not take the exact approach of legislation approved by the House of Representatives in June, and by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in November. This would set an economy-wide “cap and trade” direction to reducing carbon pollution.

Kerry said that while “a lot of language is there” to craft legislation, “we don’t have a full outline” yet of a bill. ...

The climate bill has been stalled in the Senate and supporters have missed several informal deadlines for producing and passing a bill.

Under cap and trade, companies would face limits on the amount of carbon pollution Washington would let them emit.

Those limits would become stricter over the next 40 years, when supporters want an 80% reduction from 2005 levels. Also, required pollution permits could be sold on a regulated market.

The three senators also talked about pollution reductions of 17% by 2020 below 2005 levels, a goal President Barack Obama has embraced.

The Chamber of Commerce, which says it represents more than 3 million US businesses of all sizes, is staunchly opposed to US Environmental Protection Agency regulation of carbon dioxide.

The three senators said on Wednesday the bill would pre-empt the EPA from regulating the gases, said a source with knowledge of the meeting.

The EPA is ready to issue final regulations as early as March 31 for automobile carbon emissions. That would clear the way for expanding regulations to smokestack emissions, although the agency prefers Congress tackles that problem.

Instead of an economy-wide cap and trade, the three senators are aiming to impose the market system initially on power companies, which contribute about 40% of carbon emissions.

The senators are “talking about allowances for that sector that are built around pollution-reduction targets and prohibiting price spikes,” Josten said.

Power plants would face emissions limits starting in 2012 while big manufacturers and energy-intensive industry would not face limits until 2016, the source said.

The senators presented an eight-page outline to the industry groups but took it back at the end of the meeting, he added.

The bill would also include a hard price collar that would keep carbon prices between $10 and $30 a ton. Any polluter emitting below 25 000 tons a year would not be regulated, the source said.

As for a possible oil industry tax, the senators discussed a fee on fuels linked to the market price of carbon. The fee would be visible to consumers at petroleum pumps and on airline tickets, the source said.

A tax at the oil refinery level that would not be as visible to consumers has also been discussed by the senators.

Once a bill is put together, the Congressional Budget Office will analyze the potential costs to the federal government and the economy. EPA also is expected to conduct a six- to eight-week analysis of the bill before it could be debated on the Senate floor, possibly in June.

Comment: To hell with the costs to the federal government, how about the cost to sovereignty! This is a freaking lie and these knuckleheads could care less.

SOS...REPEAL THE 17TH...SOS...REPEAL THE 17TH...SOS