Saturday, December 11, 2010

Senator Jim DeMint: Why I Oppose the Tax Deal

From Senator Jim DeMint: Why I Oppose the Tax Deal

Many of you have contacted me about the bipartisan tax deal reached between President Obama and Republican leaders. I've carefully reviewed the legislation and I wanted to explain to you why I cannot support it.

First, I do not want to see anyone's taxes go up and I have been fighting for years to permanently extend all the tax rates. I disagree with the President that we cannot afford to extend these rates for everyone. It's the people's money and we should not raise taxes on hardworking American families.

But this bill does much more than simply extend tax rates.

For starters, it includes approximately $200 billion in new deficit spending and stimulus gimmicks. That's a lot of money that will have to be borrowed from China and repaid by our children and grandchildren. If we're going to increase spending on new programs, we must reduce other spending to pay for it.

The bill also only extends rates for two years. We don't have a temporary economy so we shouldn't have temporary tax rates. Individuals and businesses make decisions looking at the long-term and we're not going to create jobs without giving people certainty as to what their taxes will be in future.

The bill also fails to extend all of the tax rates. It actually increases the death tax from its current rate of zero percent all the way up to 35 percent. One economic study shows that this tax increase alone will kill over 800,000 jobs over the next ten years.

Finally, the bill now includes dozens of earmarks for special interests, including ethanol subsidies, tax breaks for film and television producers, give aways for Puerto Rican rum manufacturers, favors for auto racing track owners, and a hand out for businesses in American Samoa.


The President called Republicans "hostage takers" this week but he should be pointing his figure squarely at himself. We've known for years that these tax rates were going to expire but he did nothing about it until the last minute. Now Americans are being told they have to accept hundreds of billions in new spending and stimulus gimmicks, an increase the death tax, and a bunch of unnecessary earmarks or their taxes will go up.

I'm not going to be bullied into voting for things that will hurt our country because politicians in Washington ignored the problem until it was a crisis.

Many of you fought hard to elect new leaders to the Senate this year with the expectation that they would fight deficit spending, tax hikes, and backroom deals. I take that commitment very seriously and I'm prepared to vote against this bill even if I'm the only one in the Senate to do so.

I appreciate the efforts made by my party's leaders to negotiate this deal but I believe Americans deserve much better. This deal should be rejected and then fixed. We can easily extend these tax rates without increasing spending once the new crop of Republican senators, including Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and Ron Johnson, are sworn in. The President has already conceded that taxes cannot go up and we'll have more Republicans in Congress in a few weeks to fight for a better deal.

Thank you for supporting the principles of freedom and for your continued encouragement. I will continue to do my very best to be your voice in the United States Senate.

My Comment
I am with Senator DeMint. This bill should not pass. It is time for Republicans to stand firm on cutting spending. This is old fashioned vote buying and deal making. The deficit is going to bankrupt this nation if we do not get serious about cutting spending and growing the economy.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

$5 billion in subsidies for corn-based ethanol

The recent tax cut deal worked out between Republicans and the White House is bloated with wasteful spending, the worst of which is $5 billion in subsidies for corn-based ethanol and a continuing tariff to protect against ethanol imports. To the $45 billion already wasted on ethanol, they are going to add another $5 billion.

This is insanity! Almost everyone agrees that ethanol has been a failure. Corn for ethanol competing with corn for food has led to higher corn prices and this has led to hunger in the third world. The increase in corn production has led to an increase in pollutant run-offs which has created a large dead area in the waters of the Gulf of Mexico. It takes almost as much energy to produce a unit of ethanol energy as the energy produced. And, corn-based ethanol may be a greater contributor to global warming than oil. Corn-based ethanol is an inefficient source of fuel and would not exist without government subsidies and protectionism.

Even Al Gore has come out and admitted ethanol was a mistake and he has said the only reason he supported it as a senator and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination was to gain the support of the Tennessee and Iowa farmers.

One of the leading proponents of ethanol is Iowa's Senator Charles Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. I am not optimistic the government can cut spending.Unless Republicans take a principled stand for fiscal sanity we are doomed. As of yet, I don't see it happening.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Friday, December 10, 2010

Nacny Pelosi reacts to ......

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Wednesday, December 08, 2010

'Prince of Pork' to be Chief Budget Cutter

This is something else from the "I-ain't-believing-this" department.

Hal Rogers, a thirty-year veteran of Congress, who has brought so much pork home to his district that he has earned the title "Prince of Pork" and whose hometown of Somerset, Kentucky is called "Mr. Rogers Neighborhood" due to all the projects he has had funded there, is going to be Chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee.

"This fiscal year, Rogers sponsored or co-sponsored 50 earmarks totaling $93.4 million, ranking 10th out of the 435 representatives, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan research group that tracks money in politics." (link)

According to Taxpayers for Common Sense he had the fourth most earmarks of any Member of Congress last year. Citizens Against Government Waste listed him as one of its “Oinkers of the Year.”

He has sponsored projects that  give federal funding to his daughter's nonprofit organization, which promotes overseas wildlife protection for cheetahs. Other projects include $17 million in federal dollars for a small  airport that has so little traffic that the last commercial airline pulled out in February.

This is the guy that the Republicans are going to put in charge of ending wasteful spending? Talk about the Fox guarding the hen house. This is an outrage.

Tell me again why we kicked out Democrats and put Republicans in charge. Did Republicans think we were voting for more of the same? I am still disgruntled.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Feds to stop sale of unregulated cupcakes


By MARY CLARE JALONICK, The Associated Press, 12/3/2010

WASHINGTON — Don't touch my brownies!

A child nutrition bill on its way to President Barack Obama — and championed by the first lady — gives the government power to limit school bake sales and other fundraisers that health advocates say sometimes replace wholesome meals in the lunchroom.(link)

My Comment

Can anyone say "nanny state?" It seems to be that whether or not to allow cupcake sales at school should be dealt with at the school level or at the school board level. Do we really need this kind of micromanagement from Washington? Are we not capable of self governance?  What is next? Will they regulate your backyard garden?

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Madison Eggs and Bacon Summit for Dec. 11 is cancelled.

The previously scheduled meeting for Saturday December 11 at the Madison Piccadilly has been canceled.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Sunday, December 05, 2010

Quanititative easing explained

I am posting this for it's entertainment value. I don't know how accurate it is but it is entertaining. I know a lot of stuff but I admit I am not an expert on monetary policy or the Federal Reserve. (Hey, I try, but I can't be an expert on everything.) When I heard about the Feds' inflating of the money supply, called "quantitative easing," I did not find it reassuring. Creating a lot of money out of thin air does not sound too smart to me, but what do I know. This video explains it. Now, I understand it. Enjoy.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Scrap the Minimum Wage

By Art Carden, Forbes Magazine, September 13, 2010

Raising hourly wages seemed like a good idea, but it has only destroyed jobs.

Do you want to get serious about expanding employment? Then it's time to realize that spending on jobs programs is the wrong approach. It would be much better to eliminate hurdles for people who want to find work. One of those hurdles is the minimum wage.

The effect of a minimum wage is a classic example of the law of unintended consequences: Minimum wages create unemployment.

Eliminating the minimum wage would send a powerful and positive economic message. It would show investors, entrepreneurs and employees that policymakers appreciate the laws of supply and demand--and that prosperity comes from harnessing production, not redistributing wealth.(link)

My Comment

This article explains how the minimum wage hurts young people and minorities most of all and shows how government stimulus spending simply reshuffles resources and creates temporary increases in employment in some sectors at the expense of other sectors.

It is time for a Republican leader to step up and advocated the things we know to be true. With employment at 9.8% and unemployment insurance needing to be extended again beyond the current 92 weeks, it is time for someone to advocate getting government out of the way and letting the market work.

If it were up to me, I would like to see the minimum wage completely eliminated but know that that is not realistic. However, it Republicans would show the same devotion to rolling back the minimum wage as they do expanding the Bush era tax cuts, it may be possible to negotiate a modest roll back to perhaps the 2007 level of $5.85. I suspect that a roll back of the minimum wage is at least as important to economic growth as expanding the tax cuts. It may be even more important. If Republican could not get an across the board roll back, they could try for a roll back in those states with greater than average rates of unemployment.
If unemployment dropped in those states, that would show the wisdom of the rollback. 
Will no politician step forward and advocate this? 

It is time to roll back the minimum wage and let people go to work.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories