Auto-Pilot Toward the Fiscal Cliff

Auto-Pilot Toward the Fiscal Cliff

With the failure of “Plan B” in the House last night, it appears very likely that the “fiscal cliff” is going to arrive. Of course, the mainstream media is blaming Tea Party-minded (read: principled) Congressmen for not supporting the plan.

This is outrageous, and an insult to the American people. Yes, principled Members of Congress held the line on tax hikes. Yes, Speaker Boehner has been awful in negotiating an alternative to the “fiscal cliff." But in the end, blame lies almost exclusively on the backs of two people: President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (R-NV).

Consider that even before details of “Plan B” had been released, President Obama and Senator Reid had already declared the legislation dead. The Senate departed Washington until after Christmas, and President Obama went on vacation, leaving the nation on auto-pilot as we speed toward the fiscal cliff. Apparently, kicking the proverbial can down the road is more important than actually doing the jobs for which both men were elected. Apparently, the ideology of raising taxes is more important than actually solving the spending problem that Washington has.

Because of their lack of leadership, America is likely to go over the fiscal cliff. Yet looking at the facts, it’s clear that raising taxes and not cutting spending really is the problem:

1. A major study has found that the combination of expiring tax cuts and the implementation of ObamaCare will cost the country 710,000 jobs.
2. Imposing a 100% tax on all households earning more than $250,000 – the “wealthy,” according to the President and Senator Reid – would keep Washington running for only 190 days according to Walter E. Williams.
3. The government currently spends about of $30.60 per hour on welfare compared to the median income of $25.03 per American worker according to a study by Congressional Research Service.
4. Cutting taxes in a time of economic stagnation would help boost the economy, boost employment, and increase revenue to the federal government to reduce the deficit.
5. Many in the media and Washington will try to accuse the Tea Party of causing the dive over the “fiscal cliff.” Yet, we have outlined over the last 12 days, 12 solutions that would be a positive step in the right direction. It is time for Washington to stop avoiding their responsibilities, as they seem to have done here by leaving the country speeding on auto-pilot toward the fiscal cliff.

---------------------------------

A few members of Congress voted against "Plan B"; here's part of the report from The American Spectator: 

Thursday night 13 conservative House Republicans defeated the Rule for the vote on Speaker Boehner’s highly controversial “Plan B.”

Those conservatives, by name (an asterisk denoting those who will not be returning to Congress next year) are:

Justin Amash of MI
Paul Broun of GA
Trent Franks of AZ
Louie Gohmert of TX
Tim Huelskamp of KS
Walter Jones of NC
Jim Jordan of OH
Andy Harris of MD
Jeff Landry of LA*
Thomas Massie of KY
Ron Paul of TX*
Jean Schmidt of OH*
Joe Walsh of IL*

Let’s not forget here that in terms of pressure, a great deal of it was coming from the GOP House Leadership. Congressmen Amash, Huelskamp, and Jones were removed from their committee assignments for not cooperating with the Leadership.

--------------------------------------------

Ohio Patriots may want to thank Reps. Jim Jordan and Jean Schmidt for standing strong.

Gov. Kasich's plan to issue Ohio Turnpike bonds

A better plan for the Ohio Turnpike: 

Gov. Kasich's proposal to issue bonds 

Over the past year there has been much speculation and hand-wringing over Governor Kasich’s eyeballing of the Ohio Turnpike and his possible desire to sell off and/or lease one of our state’s greatest assets as a way to raise revenue.

After commissioning a $3.4 million dollar study, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that this study would have been another typical political ploy to justify Governor Kasich’s desire to sell or lease the turnpike just as other states have done.

This thought was reinforced with the routine dog & pony shows of public hearings for citizens to voice their concerns about the future of the Ohio Turnpike. The general consensus of citizens and businesses at these hearings were that the State of Ohio should NOT lease the Turnpike as a way to garner one-time funds for the state.

In a show of common sense using innovative solutions and listening to the voices and concerns of Ohio citizens and business owners, last week, much to everyone surprise, Governor Kasich announced he will not try to step over dollars to pick up one-time pennies for the state by leasing the turnpike.

With a decision that must be applauded, in Governor Kasich’s new proposal, the State of Ohio will NOT lease or sell the Ohio Turnpike, but instead will use one of our state’s greatest and strongest assets to leverage money for much needed infrastructure repairs.

By issuing low-interest bonds against future revenues, this plan will allow the Turnpike Commission to remain independent, save jobs, and raise an initial projected $1.5 billion -- and with available matching funds up to $3 billion. These funds will be used for road repairs and rehabilitation, which will in the long run end up also creating up to 65,000 jobs and increasing development.

Showing this is a win/win solution, many of the one-time detractors of Governor Kasich's plan to lease the turnpike are now singing praise.

The Ohio Legislature will need to approve this proposal which is expected to be included in Ohio Department of Transportation's funding request in early 2013.  

Sources and more info at the Columbus Dispatch here, and at the Ohio Department of Transportation website here.

# # #

When is a Republican not a Republican?

When is a Republican not a Republican? When his name is John Boehner.

Tea Party Patriots, as well as other conservative organizations, have offered solution after solution for addressing the self-inflicted “fiscal cliff.” Click HERE to read the solutions offered to date.  

Even Dick Morris offered a solution that would still provide some leverage while negotiating for cuts in spending. Click HERE to read.     

Rather than push the President to address the spending issue, Speaker John “Caveman” Boehner’s latest plan would see the top income tax rates rise to 39.6 percent from 36 percent for those with net incomes above $1 million a year.

This tax increase would not affect any of us directly, but that’s not the point.

When has an increase in tax rates ever stimulated an economy?

Even if in some strange phenomenon, opposing all of history, this tax increase does increase revenue to the government, who believes it will be used to reduce the deficit?

More importantly, if revenue truly is the issue, which we know it is not, why isn’t Speaker Boehner insisting that President Obama issue the 15 permits sitting on his desk, that would allow for the export of our overly abundant supply of natural gas?

It is projected that the export of this God given natural resource would create a revenue stream similar to the oil boon, not to mention the jobs that would be created for the “middle class” that the President keeps insisting he is trying to help. Click HERE to read more.  

The answer is simple. The President would rather continue his class warfare rhetoric. He has no desire to help or lift the middle class, whose income has dropped an average of $3,700 per year during his presidency. His goal is to make them more dependent, while continuing to payback his supporters by investing our tax dollars in failing green industries.

Regarding “Caveman” Boehner, he has obviously lost his way regarding what it means to be a Republican, let alone a conservative. Republicans are supposed to stand for lower taxes, smaller government and free enterprise. If the Speaker agrees to increasing taxes, for anyone, and does not insist on real and clear cuts to spending, what is left for the Republican party?

Call Your Representatives

Call your representatives and insist that any “fiscal cliff” deal that involves raising taxes on anyone is unacceptable, then ask why he/she is not exposing President Obama for refusing to promote prosperity and success in our own country by issuing the permits sitting on his desk.

History has proven, repeatedly, that reducing taxes increases revenue to the government. If it is prosperity for all that is wanted, then unleash the free market.

For a list of your representatives contact information, click HERE. 

h/t Marianne G.

Agenda 21 and property rights

Phyllis Schlafly has an excellent summary of Agenda 21, the treaty strategy to implement in all of our backyards, and thoughts about how to prevent that. Read the rest of the article (today on Townhall website)  here.

From The U.N. Wants to Tax Us, Too

Agenda 21 is a document called the Declaration on Environment and Development and the Statement of Principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests, which was signed by 178 governments including President George H.W. Bush in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. In 1995, President Bill Clinton followed up by an executive order that established a Presidential Council on Sustainable Development, giving globalist busybodies the excuse to work on it ever since.

Agenda 21's goal is to "save the planet" and "sustain" life on earth regardless of its adverse effect on human life and our standard of living. It is based on the very un-American notion that private property is "a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it."

We certainly hope our Congress will reject any U.N. proposal to tax Americans or control our property rights. Farsighted Republicans adopted a Party Platform in Tampa Bay this year stating, "We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty, and we oppose any form of U.N. global tax."

To understand the relationship of Agenda 21 to taxes and property rights, you have to learn a new vocabulary of words and expressions. A basic dictionary of about a hundred words and phrases has been assembled by a group called Democrats Against Agenda 21, and here are just a few of their favorite words: climate change, Common Core curriculum, environmental impact, New World Order, outcome-based education, public/private partnership, quality of life, smart growth, social justice, growth management, high speed rail, land use policies, multi-use dwellings, sustainable development and wildlands.

Agenda 21 lays down the rule that "Land ... cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market." The U.N. hopes to require every decision about property use to be based on environmental impact, global land use and global population control and reduction, which means by the government, not by property owners.

The purpose of this U.N. attack on property rights is to reduce the U.S. standard of living to that of the rest of the world because the U.N. bureaucrats resent our prosperity using abundant energy. Agenda 21 was never approved by Congress or ratified as a treaty by the U.S. Senate, so Congress should have no trouble saying No to all U.N. tax or property restriction proposals.

Obamacare: Obamacreep 2012-13

Some updates as Obamacare begins to creep into our daily lives. First Michelle Malkin reports that

Buried in the trillion-dollar stimulus law of 2009 was an electronic medical records “incentive” program. Like most of President Obama’s health care rules, this top-down electronic record-sharing scheme is a big fat bust.

Oversight is lax. Cronyism is rife. The job-killing and privacy-undermining consequences have only just begun. . . .

As for the claim that the EMR conversion will reduce paperwork, many doctors say the reality is just the opposite. In Greensboro, N.C., Dr. Richard Aronson told local TV station FOX 8 that the mandate doubled the amount of paperwork in his private practice. Everyone from optometrists to general practitioners to chiropractors to podiatrists must divert precious time and resources to conforming with Washington health bureaucrats’ imposed vision. Some medical professionals are now warning that the dangerous phenomenon of “distracted doctoring” is on the rise as a result of data-driven imperatives that direct health care providers’ attention away from their patients and onto their screens and hand-held devices.

Then there’s the still-growing and untold number of doctors nationwide who are closing up shop or limiting their practices and converting to “concierge care” to escape this and myriad other Obamacare intrusions. My own primary care physician in Colorado Springs quit her regular practice and converted to “concierge care” because of the EMR imposition. Creve Coeur, Mo., doctor Shari Cohen made the same move.

“The demands of caring for my patients while navigating through the current health care delivery systems dictated that I take more and more time away from patient care and spend an increasing part of my day on the system itself,” she told the Creve Couer Patch. “Electronic Medical Records was the final shove for me. It added another whole layer in interference in the doctor-patient relationship and one I was not sure I wanted to take on.”

More paperwork. More waste. Less accountability. Less care. Government malpractice at work.

It's only going to get worse. Here's more from Mark Steyn at NRO:

Most towns in the North Country [in New Hampshire] now have fewer doctors than they did in the 19th century, and the smaller towns have none. The Yellow Pages lists more health insurers than physicians, which would not seem to be an obvious business model.  . . .

Obamacare governmentalizes one-sixth of the U.S. economy — or the equivalent of the entire French economy. No one has ever attempted that before, not even the French. In parts of rural America it will quickly achieve a Platonic perfection: There will be untold legions of regulators, administrators, and IRS collection agents, but not a doctor or nurse in sight.

Not just in New Hampshire. One healthcare center in Medina has NO primary care physician, so it jobs in out-of-town doctors once a week.

Ohio healthcare exchange issues

This from Marianne at the Mansfield Tea Party:

There has been a lot of confusion about the decision made by Governor Kasich regarding state run health care exchanges.

While the statement ”Governor Kasich confirms that creation of Ohio's Obamacare exchange will be left to the Feds” is technically correct, it is also a bit misleading.

Yes, the Governor has rejected the state run exchanges, but the Governor has agreed to enter into what the federal government is calling a “partnership” or “hybrid” agreement.

This means that the federal government will run the exchanges, but Ohio will, supposedly, maintain its right to regulate its health insurance industry.

The issue with this plan is that Ohio still needs to submit a “blueprint” to the feds, for approval. In Governor Kasich's own statement he says, ”I am confident Ohio will meet federal standards to maintain its control of these responsibilities.”

Based on that statement, and history, it appears that the federal government will still be determining acceptable plans, minimums, etc., therefore, in my opinion, eliminating the “control” that the Governor is seeking to maintain.

ObamaCare has always been about control; and now we learn that the President has decided to levy fines on states that choose, legally, not to set up their own exchanges. With each passing day, more rules and regulations come into play; we're still trying to aim at a moving target. 

OHIO WILL NOT RUN AN OBAMACARE HEALTH EXCHANGE

Today is the deadline for states to opt in or out of the Obamacare exchanges. From Governor John Kasich's website, posted today:

OHIO WILL NOT RUN AN OBAMACARE HEALTH EXCHANGE: On Nov. 16, 2012 Gov. John Kasich notified the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that Ohio will not run an Obamacare health exchange in Ohio, but will instead leave that to the federal government to do. This decision was made after thoroughly investigating all options available to Ohio under the law, including conducting separate studies by the respected health policy research specialists Milliman, Inc. and the global business and information technology consultancy KPMG.

ABC reports more states are opting out:

On Thursday, South Carolina governor and rising Republican star Nikki Haley sent a letter to Sebelius on Thursday saying that South Carolina “should not and will not set up a state-based health care exchange.”

Several other Republican governors, including Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a GOP leader who is frequently cited as a potential candidate in 2016, and Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley announced that their states would also not set up an exchange.

. . .

Under the law, if a state falls behind or opts not to set up the exchange, the federal government, specifically the Department of Health and Human Services, steps in and sets up the exchange. That would not likely be well-received by Republican governors either, but the law forces each state’s executive to make a decision one way or the other. “If the state decides not to establish an exchange, then the federal government establishes the exchange for them. So it’s kind of a pick-your-poison scenario, if you will,” said Renee M. Landers, a professor of law at Suffolk University Law School in Boston.  . . .

More battles ahead.