Excellent observations from Bob Howard:
What about Governor Corbett’s budget message?
I had the opportunity to attend Governor Corbett’s budget address during a joint session of the PA General Assembly in Harrisburg yesterday.
Summary:
Corbett followed through on his campaign promise to balance the budget without tax increases.
Summary Comments:
"Unlike the past eight years that earned a fiscal grade of F, this budget puts the taxpayers first and deserves a solid B for not increasing taxes, reducing expenditures, and putting the taxpayers' interests first," said Commonwealth Foundation President and CEO Matthew J. Brouillette. "But much more can be done to limit state government to its core functions and begin reducing Pennsylvania's ranking as the 10th highest tax burden in the nation."
What does it take to get an A+ from the Commonwealth Foundation? To earn an A+, the Commonwealth Foundation recommends the complete elimination of "corporate welfare" programs; a more fiscally conservative revenue projection; reducing welfare fraud and abuse; and better financial planning for the coming pension, retiree health care, and Medicaid funding crises.
If you are one of the Pennsylvania voters who voted for a balanced budget without a tax increase now it is your turn to support the cuts. Here is what you are up against.
Penn State President Spanier declared that “Abraham Lincoln is weeping today” and he whined another 55 minutes about how a $182 million cut would result in cutting programs, freezing salaries, laying off staff, and perhaps even closing one of its 24 campuses.
This might be a 50% cut in state funding but this cut represents about only 4% of Penn State’s $4 billion plus operating budget. I bet a lot of Pennsylvanians will feel differently when they realize we are only talking about 4% of Penn States operating budget.
I talked to one newly elected representative who responded that it appears Penn State has some decisions to make. Voters are tired of sending money to Penn State year after year while tuition climbs faster than inflation and the University adds studies that parents find offensive and don’t result in real world jobs. Private worker’s salaries have been stagnant while University salaries and spending have continued to climb. It is time for Penn State to join the real world.
Pitt Chancellor Mark Nordenberg called the proposed cuts devastating, vowed to take his fight to Harrisburg and signaled a willingness to promote student advocacy efforts with lawmakers. NOTE: PITT IS THREATENING TO SEND STUDENTS TO HARRISBURG! ARE YOU PLANNING TO REACT AND SUPPORT WHAT YOU TOLD CORBETT YOU WANTED?
By the way I am a Penn State grad. Every time I get a call from Penn State I inform them that I gave by force when I paid my taxes. If they persist I tell them to call me back after an independent investigation of Mann’s environmental fraud at Penn State. If they persist again I donate to Grove City College to honor Grove City College’s commitment to education not compromised by Federal or State funding.
Bob Howard
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Pima County sheriff should remember duty
From the Arizona Republic. Somewhat lengthy, but a must read:
On Saturday afternoon, with his friend Gabby Giffords in surgery fighting for her life, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik railed against the tense partisan politics - "the anger, the hatred, the bigotry" - that prompted the mass murders outside Tucson, in his view.
And, jarring as such claims may be, we understood. Or tried to understand, despite the spectacle of a lawman - an official whose very job it is to dispassionately gather facts and to maintain order and calm - tying the attack on Rep. Giffords and others to political speech in Arizona, which he considers prejudiced and bigoted. There is no evidence that the state's politics in any way contributed to this atrocity.
Was Dupnik unnecessarily inflammatory? It seemed so. But it came mere hours following a horrific, bloody mass murder. If you weren't on edge, you weren't being human. But then, on Sunday, the venting continued anew. And a horrified nation began paying closer attention to the Pima County sheriff.
The world's eyes, once again, focused on Arizona for the worst of reasons. And Dupnik stood before the cameras interpreting the shootings as politically motivated, despite an increasing weight of evidence depicting the shooting suspect, Jared Loughner, as a mentally ill young man who rambled incoherently about pervasive bad grammar and other apolitical obsessions. Even Dupnik has observed that Loughner had made death threats against others and that they had been investigated by police.
Still, Dupnik used the opportunities to blame Arizona's lax, new gun laws and, again, the angry "rhetoric" of talk radio. The shootings were spurred, he suggested, by "the rhetoric about hatred, about mistrust of government, about paranoia of how government operates."
Dupnik took up his cause again on Monday. And, in response, we have to say at last . . . enough. Enough attacks, sheriff. Enough vitriol. It is well past time for the sheriff of Pima County to get a grip on his emotions and remember his duty.
With each passing hour, we learn more about the 22-year-old suspect. And everything we learn adds to the profile of a deeply troubled young man detached from reality. There is nothing to date that suggests any partisan motivation for his crimes, whether right-wing or left.
Dupnik needs to recall that he is elected to be a lawman. With each additional comment, the Democratic sheriff of Pima County is revealing his agenda as partisan, and, as such, every bit as recklessly antagonistic as the talk-show hosts and politicians he chooses to decry.
From: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2011/01/11/20110111tue1-11.html
On Saturday afternoon, with his friend Gabby Giffords in surgery fighting for her life, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik railed against the tense partisan politics - "the anger, the hatred, the bigotry" - that prompted the mass murders outside Tucson, in his view.
And, jarring as such claims may be, we understood. Or tried to understand, despite the spectacle of a lawman - an official whose very job it is to dispassionately gather facts and to maintain order and calm - tying the attack on Rep. Giffords and others to political speech in Arizona, which he considers prejudiced and bigoted. There is no evidence that the state's politics in any way contributed to this atrocity.
Was Dupnik unnecessarily inflammatory? It seemed so. But it came mere hours following a horrific, bloody mass murder. If you weren't on edge, you weren't being human. But then, on Sunday, the venting continued anew. And a horrified nation began paying closer attention to the Pima County sheriff.
The world's eyes, once again, focused on Arizona for the worst of reasons. And Dupnik stood before the cameras interpreting the shootings as politically motivated, despite an increasing weight of evidence depicting the shooting suspect, Jared Loughner, as a mentally ill young man who rambled incoherently about pervasive bad grammar and other apolitical obsessions. Even Dupnik has observed that Loughner had made death threats against others and that they had been investigated by police.
Still, Dupnik used the opportunities to blame Arizona's lax, new gun laws and, again, the angry "rhetoric" of talk radio. The shootings were spurred, he suggested, by "the rhetoric about hatred, about mistrust of government, about paranoia of how government operates."
Dupnik took up his cause again on Monday. And, in response, we have to say at last . . . enough. Enough attacks, sheriff. Enough vitriol. It is well past time for the sheriff of Pima County to get a grip on his emotions and remember his duty.
With each passing hour, we learn more about the 22-year-old suspect. And everything we learn adds to the profile of a deeply troubled young man detached from reality. There is nothing to date that suggests any partisan motivation for his crimes, whether right-wing or left.
Dupnik needs to recall that he is elected to be a lawman. With each additional comment, the Democratic sheriff of Pima County is revealing his agenda as partisan, and, as such, every bit as recklessly antagonistic as the talk-show hosts and politicians he chooses to decry.
From: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2011/01/11/20110111tue1-11.html
Friday, November 19, 2010
GM Spinning the Facts....
From Gary Bauer of American Values:
The spin is not right. Where to begin…
For starters, GM bondholders, including many retirees, were wiped out. Under the usual rules, bondholders are supposed to be first in line in any bankruptcy. But Obama wiped them out in order to bailout the United Auto Workers union, which is a major source of support for Obama.
Second, according to one report, the government is taking a $9 billion loss on this sale of new GM stock. GM still owes taxpayers roughly $40 billion, and one analysis suggests that the stock will have to increase roughly 60% just for the government to break even.
Additionally, think about this situation from the standpoint of Ford. It was responsible in its borrowing and it thrived without taxpayer money. GM was reckless and got into huge problems. Taxpayer money was used to bail it out and now "Government Motors" is emerging with a debt-free balance sheet. How many future car sales will Ford lose because the Obama administration treated GM more favorably for its bad business practices?
This is a lot like the mortgage fiasco. Two guys buy into the same neighborhood. One does so only after years of savings and careful planning, while the other gets in over his head with a no-money down loan. The second guy gets a bailout or mortgage modification, while the responsible man looks out his window and sees his neighbor with new patio furniture thanks to the money he has just saved.
GM should have been held to the same standard and played by the same rules that apply to you and to me and to every other business. Bankruptcies take place all the time. There are laws and procedures designed to handle such cases. Instead, the unions called up the White House, and Obama put up $50 billion of your money.
By the way, the same administration that accused Republican candidates of sending jobs overseas rigged this IPO so that the Chinese and Saudi investors got major stakes in the new Government Motors. So much for this administration's "America first" investment policies.
The spin is not right. Where to begin…
For starters, GM bondholders, including many retirees, were wiped out. Under the usual rules, bondholders are supposed to be first in line in any bankruptcy. But Obama wiped them out in order to bailout the United Auto Workers union, which is a major source of support for Obama.
Second, according to one report, the government is taking a $9 billion loss on this sale of new GM stock. GM still owes taxpayers roughly $40 billion, and one analysis suggests that the stock will have to increase roughly 60% just for the government to break even.
Additionally, think about this situation from the standpoint of Ford. It was responsible in its borrowing and it thrived without taxpayer money. GM was reckless and got into huge problems. Taxpayer money was used to bail it out and now "Government Motors" is emerging with a debt-free balance sheet. How many future car sales will Ford lose because the Obama administration treated GM more favorably for its bad business practices?
This is a lot like the mortgage fiasco. Two guys buy into the same neighborhood. One does so only after years of savings and careful planning, while the other gets in over his head with a no-money down loan. The second guy gets a bailout or mortgage modification, while the responsible man looks out his window and sees his neighbor with new patio furniture thanks to the money he has just saved.
GM should have been held to the same standard and played by the same rules that apply to you and to me and to every other business. Bankruptcies take place all the time. There are laws and procedures designed to handle such cases. Instead, the unions called up the White House, and Obama put up $50 billion of your money.
By the way, the same administration that accused Republican candidates of sending jobs overseas rigged this IPO so that the Chinese and Saudi investors got major stakes in the new Government Motors. So much for this administration's "America first" investment policies.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Jim DeMint writes "Welcome Senate Conservatives"
From the Wall Street Journal. As usual, Jim DeMint nails it:
Congratulations to all the tea party-backed candidates who overcame a determined, partisan opposition to win their elections. The next campaign begins today. Because you must now overcome determined party insiders if this nation is going to be spared from fiscal disaster.
Many of the people who will be welcoming the new class of Senate conservatives to Washington never wanted you here in the first place. The establishment is much more likely to try to buy off your votes than to buy into your limited-government philosophy. Consider what former GOP senator-turned-lobbyist Trent Lott told the Washington Post earlier this year: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them."
Don't let them. Co-option is coercion. Washington operates on a favor-based economy and for every earmark, committee assignment or fancy title that's given, payback is expected in return. The chits come due when the roll call votes begin. This is how big-spending bills that everyone always decries in public always manage to pass with just enough votes.
But someone can't be bribed if they aren't for sale. Here is some humble advice on how to recognize and refuse such offers.
First, don't request earmarks. If you do, you'll vote for legislation based on what's in it for your state, not what's best for the country. You will lose the ability to criticize wasteful spending. And, if you dare to oppose other pork-barrel projects, the earmarkers will retaliate against you.
In 2005, Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) offered a measure to kill funding for the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere." Before the vote, Sen. Patty Murray (D., Wash.), an appropriator, issued a warning on the Senate floor.
"If we start cutting funding for individual projects, your project may be next," she said. "When Members come down to the floor to vote on this amendment, they need to know if they support stripping out this project, Senator Bond [a Republican appropriator] and I are likely to be taking a long, serious look at their projects to determine whether they should be preserved during our upcoming conference negotiations."
The threat worked. Hardly anyone wanted to risk losing earmarks. The Senate voted 82-15 to protect funding for the Bridge to Nowhere.
Second, hire conservative staff. The old saying "personnel is policy" is true. You don't need Beltway strategists and consultants running your office. Find people who share your values and believe in advancing the same policy reforms. Staff who are driven by conservative instincts can protect you from unwanted, outside influences when the pressure is on.
Third, beware of committees. Committee assignments can be used as bait to make senators compromise on other matters. Rookie senators are often told they must be a member of a particular committee to advance a certain piece of legislation. This may be true in the House, but a senator can legislate on any matter from the Senate floor.
Fourth, don't seek titles. The word "Senator" before your name carries plenty of clout. All senators have the power to object to bad legislation, speak on the floor and offer amendments, regardless of how they are ranked in party hierarchy.
Lastly, don't let your re-election become more important than your job. You've campaigned long and hard for the opportunity to go to Washington and restore freedom in America. People will try to convince you to moderate conservative positions and break campaign promises, all in the name of winning the next race. Resist the temptation to do so. There are worse things than losing an election—like breaking your word to voters.
At your swearing-in ceremony, you will, as all senators do, take an oath to "support and defend the Constitution." Most will fail to keep their oath. Doing these five things will help you maintain a focus on national priorities and be one who does.
Congress will never fix entitlements, simplify the tax code or balance the budget as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests. Time spent securing earmarks and serving personal ambitions is time that should be spent working on big-picture reforms.
When you are in Washington, remember what the voters back home want—less government and more freedom. Millions of people are out of work, the government is going bankrupt and the country is trillions in debt. Americans have watched in disgust as billions of their tax dollars have been wasted on failed jobs plans, bailouts and takeovers. It's up to us to stop the spending spree and make sure we have a government that benefits America instead of being a burden to it.
Tea party Republicans were elected to go to Washington and save the country—not be co-opted by the club. So put on your boxing gloves. The fight begins today.
Congratulations to all the tea party-backed candidates who overcame a determined, partisan opposition to win their elections. The next campaign begins today. Because you must now overcome determined party insiders if this nation is going to be spared from fiscal disaster.
Many of the people who will be welcoming the new class of Senate conservatives to Washington never wanted you here in the first place. The establishment is much more likely to try to buy off your votes than to buy into your limited-government philosophy. Consider what former GOP senator-turned-lobbyist Trent Lott told the Washington Post earlier this year: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them."
Don't let them. Co-option is coercion. Washington operates on a favor-based economy and for every earmark, committee assignment or fancy title that's given, payback is expected in return. The chits come due when the roll call votes begin. This is how big-spending bills that everyone always decries in public always manage to pass with just enough votes.
But someone can't be bribed if they aren't for sale. Here is some humble advice on how to recognize and refuse such offers.
First, don't request earmarks. If you do, you'll vote for legislation based on what's in it for your state, not what's best for the country. You will lose the ability to criticize wasteful spending. And, if you dare to oppose other pork-barrel projects, the earmarkers will retaliate against you.
In 2005, Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) offered a measure to kill funding for the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere." Before the vote, Sen. Patty Murray (D., Wash.), an appropriator, issued a warning on the Senate floor.
"If we start cutting funding for individual projects, your project may be next," she said. "When Members come down to the floor to vote on this amendment, they need to know if they support stripping out this project, Senator Bond [a Republican appropriator] and I are likely to be taking a long, serious look at their projects to determine whether they should be preserved during our upcoming conference negotiations."
The threat worked. Hardly anyone wanted to risk losing earmarks. The Senate voted 82-15 to protect funding for the Bridge to Nowhere.
Second, hire conservative staff. The old saying "personnel is policy" is true. You don't need Beltway strategists and consultants running your office. Find people who share your values and believe in advancing the same policy reforms. Staff who are driven by conservative instincts can protect you from unwanted, outside influences when the pressure is on.
Third, beware of committees. Committee assignments can be used as bait to make senators compromise on other matters. Rookie senators are often told they must be a member of a particular committee to advance a certain piece of legislation. This may be true in the House, but a senator can legislate on any matter from the Senate floor.
Fourth, don't seek titles. The word "Senator" before your name carries plenty of clout. All senators have the power to object to bad legislation, speak on the floor and offer amendments, regardless of how they are ranked in party hierarchy.
Lastly, don't let your re-election become more important than your job. You've campaigned long and hard for the opportunity to go to Washington and restore freedom in America. People will try to convince you to moderate conservative positions and break campaign promises, all in the name of winning the next race. Resist the temptation to do so. There are worse things than losing an election—like breaking your word to voters.
At your swearing-in ceremony, you will, as all senators do, take an oath to "support and defend the Constitution." Most will fail to keep their oath. Doing these five things will help you maintain a focus on national priorities and be one who does.
Congress will never fix entitlements, simplify the tax code or balance the budget as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests. Time spent securing earmarks and serving personal ambitions is time that should be spent working on big-picture reforms.
When you are in Washington, remember what the voters back home want—less government and more freedom. Millions of people are out of work, the government is going bankrupt and the country is trillions in debt. Americans have watched in disgust as billions of their tax dollars have been wasted on failed jobs plans, bailouts and takeovers. It's up to us to stop the spending spree and make sure we have a government that benefits America instead of being a burden to it.
Tea party Republicans were elected to go to Washington and save the country—not be co-opted by the club. So put on your boxing gloves. The fight begins today.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Friday, October 22, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Republican Establishment - Still No Principles
From Tony Perkins at the FRC:
The Republican establishment is in shock this morning after FRC Action PAC-endorsed candidate Christine O'Donnell defeated liberal Republican Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) in the Delaware Senate primary. Immediately she was denounced, not congratulated, by Rep. Castle, as well as former President Bush advisor Karl Rove -- who seems to have a personal vendetta against the candidate.
The Republican establishment is in shock this morning after FRC Action PAC-endorsed candidate Christine O'Donnell defeated liberal Republican Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) in the Delaware Senate primary. Immediately she was denounced, not congratulated, by Rep. Castle, as well as former President Bush advisor Karl Rove -- who seems to have a personal vendetta against the candidate.
The Republican establishment has lectured us about being loyal to "the cause" (by which they mean their questionable leadership). Whether it's Arlen Specter, Dede Scozzafava, Charlie Crist, Jim Jeffords, Mike Castle, Lincoln Chafee, etc., these establishment-backed candidates have repeatedly shown to be disloyal to the Republican Party that has spent so much time and money on them, despite their opposition to the stated ideals of the Party's own platform. This is not new for the Republican Party. The party leadership has done this for many years, something I've witnessed first hand. The difference is that conservative voters have had enough!
According to this same establishment, WE are the problem. No, the problem is with self-described "moderate" Republicans who don't stand FOR anything -- so we shouldn't be surprised when they don't stand BY anything.
Conservative icon William F. Buckley had a rule that he always supported the most conservative candidate who was electable. In the Delaware race, there was only one conservative in the primary, and she won.
The irony is that it is not FRC Action PAC's job to only elect Republican candidates, but continuously the candidates we support from both the Democratic and Republican parties are more loyal to the principles in the Republican Party platform than the Republican establishment backed candidates are. I am proud to stand by people loyal to principles like Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), and others. FRC Action PAC will continue to work to help conservative candidates in both primaries and general elections -- no matter what the establishment whines about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)