<?xml version="1.0" encoding="windows-1252"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" >

	<channel>
		<title>Government Bytes</title>
		<description>The Official Weblog of NTU/NTUF</description>
		<link>http://blog.ntu.org/</link>
		<language>en-us</language>

		<item>
			<title>Cartoon Blogging</title><description><![CDATA[
HT: TaxGuru

If you would like to support NTU's efforts to defeat Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid's efforts to "reform" your health care, you can make a financial contribution of support using our secure server here.

]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:42:04 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4980</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Senate Phone Lines</title><description><![CDATA[A little bird has told me that some of the Senate phone circuits are very busy.  If you can't call your Senators about tomorrow's health care vote, you can email them here or you can call, write, or tweet at highnoonforhealthcare.org.  The time to speak out is now!
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:29:15 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4979</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Who Is Paying Taxes?</title><description><![CDATA[Tim Wise from ACTA passes along this chart from Mint.com showing who pays taxes.  We have IRS data going back to 1999 here.
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 07:29:35 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4978</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Do They Get Overtime?</title><description><![CDATA[The lights will be burning on Capitol Hill again this weekend as the Senate takes a procedural vote on the Reid health care bill late Saturday, according to CQ.  It's not too late to let your Senators know that you oppose tax hikes and more governmental control over health care.  
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 06:59:04 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4977</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>NTU Study Finds Every GM Vehicle Sold Costs Taxpayers $12,200</title><description><![CDATA[The season of giving is near, and leave it to the government to think it has the prerogative to “give” away taxpayer money.

It was bad enough that the federal government bailed out banks last fall, but then they went a step further in the wrong direction by bailing out the automotive industry.  To date,  $78.9 BILLION in taxpayers' money  has gone to bailout GM, Chrysler, and GMAC.  

This number may seem easier to swallow when one considers other costs of late (the one-trillion dollar health care bill or the national debt), but to be sure, $80 billion still boils down to more than a pretty penny. 

To put this $80 billion in auto bailouts into perspective, NTU released a study,  The Auto Bailout -- A Taxpayer's Quagmire,   this week that found that the American taxpayer has put up $12,200 for every General Motors vehicle sold and $7,600 for every Chrysler vehicle.  Bet you didn't know your money was helping buy all those cars.  

The study also found that the average American taxpaying family invested  roughly $800   in the auto companies through the bailout. 

So the next time one of your neighbors comes home in a brand new GM or Chrysler make sure they know to thank you for helping them purchase it. 
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:26:39 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4976</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>A Look at Reid's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act</title><description><![CDATA[Senator Reid tonight released the latest version of the many health care reform packages that are slowly working their way through Congress. His is called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and weighs in at 2,074 pages -- over twice as long as House Speaker Pelosi's America's Affordable Health Choices Act.

Here is a link to a Google Spreadsheet NTU Foundation put together that contains a word count of the key terms in Pelosi's original package and Reid's new text: Reid Word Count.

For example, in Reid's bill, the words "tax" and "taxes" appear 200 times. "Regulations" 192 times. In contrast, "choice" and "options" appear 26 and 40 times, respectively.

According to CNN, the CBO's preliminary analysis of the bill puts the 10-year cost at $849 billion.  As with the previous health care reform bills, CBO's score is incomplete. The Budget Office has not yet put together estimates for all the discretionary spending in the bills; thus the final tally is likely to be higher. And, as the Washington Times points out, U.S. health plans have a history of cost overruns.

NTUF is working on putting together a list of all the authorizations and appropriations in the new health care reform bill. I can't look at it any more this evening (it is now 11:30PM), but through page 717, I've totaled up $19.017 billion in funding, including, ironically enough, $375 million for "Personal Responsibility Education." 

Reid's funding wish list (a work-in-progress) for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is viewable here (also as a Google Spreadsheet).

Update:
ATR has put together a list of all the new taxes in Reid's bill.
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:46:00 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4975</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Stimulus Transparency?</title><description><![CDATA[Thanks to our friends at the Mercatus Center for giving us the heads up that the new version of Stimulus Watch is now available!  The original site featured proposed stimulus projects taken from the US Conference of Mayors survey.  The new version contains actual stimulus spending across the country.  The information comes directly from the official recipient reports available at Recovery.gov.

StimulusWatch.org was created to help the Administration keep its pledge to invest stimulus money wisely, and to hold public officials accountable for the way in which they spend taxpayer money.  It allows taxpayers to search for contracts and grants awards by state and by city, by awarding agency, or by recipient.  It also allows you to vote on whether you are satisfied with the award or not, add to the wiki description of the project, and join in a conversation about the award.  

Here are just a few examples of the stimulus-funded projects you can find on StimulusWatch.org:

•	R.J. Thomas Manufacturing Company, Inc. received $30,480 in July to furnish and deliver picnic tables in Cherokee, Iowa.  No jobs were created as a result of this project.  14.29% of voters are satisfied while 85.71% of voters are not satisfied with this use of taxpayer dollars.  

•	Atlantic Air Corporation received $3,634 in September for the purchase of an ice machine/dispenser in Virginia Beach, Virginia.  No jobs were created and 100% of voters were dissatisfied with the purchase. 

•	The most expensive expenditure is $4,387,948,882 for the support of public elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education, and, early childhood education programs and services in Sacramento, California.  It is receiving mixed reviews with 25% of voters satisfied and 75% dissatisfied.  While the project is 50% completed, it has already created 53,391 positions. 

Be sure to check out StimulusWatch.org and look for stimulus-funded projects in your neighborhood!
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:30:35 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4974</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>"Best" Bill -- Ever!</title><description><![CDATA[From The Hill:
"Of all the bills we've seen, it'll be the best," Reid said. "Saves more money, is more protective of Medicare, is a bill that's good for the American people."

He added confidently: "I think if you're not impressed, you should be."And how impressed should you be?  How about $849 billion worth, according to MSNBC.]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:14:28 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4973</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>NTU Vote Alert: Senators vote "No" on any motion to proceed to Reid's health care bill</title><description><![CDATA[        NTU urges all Senators to vote “NO” on ANY motion to proceed to the health care bill being introduced by Senator Harry Reid (D-NV).

	All published reports suggest that this bill will dramatically expand the size and scope of our federal government, boost taxes on millions of small businesses and families, and increase health costs at a very difficult time for many Americans.

	There is a bipartisan consensus that our health care system is in need of reform. But rather than addressing the underlying problems of the high cost of our employer-based system, a lack of transparency, and regulations that stifle private-sector competition, this bill resorts to the tired old formula of higher taxes, bigger government, and more damaging regulations.

	Americans deserve real health reform, but this bill would not deliver it. More than $500 billion in tax hikes, many of which would hammer struggling middle class Americans, will not deliver it. Creating a massive new government-run health insurance plan will not deliver it. And adding to the heap of restrictive regulations that are pushing costs higher today will not deliver it. The time has come to scrap this “reform” and start over.

	The vote on cloture on the motion to proceed to this health care bill is THE important vote for taxpayers. Any vote in favor of that motion is effectively a vote in favor of this monstrosity of a bill. As such, a vote on cloture on the motion to proceed will be among only a handful in the last decade to receive the highest weight of 100 in our annual Rating of Congress and we urge all Senators to vote “NO.”

If you have any questions, please contact 
NTU Director of Government Affairs Andrew Moylan at (703) 683-5700
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:21:38 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4972</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Still more "jobs created or saved" lies and errors</title><description><![CDATA[After the Associated Press broke the left-leaning media's cone of silence about the Administration errors and/or lies regarding jobs "created or saved" with so-called "stimulus" money, other would-be journalists and even Democratic politicians have found a bit of courage and are castigating the reported statistics. On Monday, ABC News reported more than $100 million in spending and hundreds of "jobs created" in congressional districts which do not exist, both in the US and in territories such as the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Administration has deleted at least 60,000 jobs "created or saved" so far from their prior reports -- roughly 10% of the total.&nbsp; And that's probably just a start.&nbsp; The Washington Examiner has already mapped out more than 75,000 bogus job claims.&nbsp; It's an admission of such egregious errors that even Rep. David Obey (D-MI), the powerful chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, is slamming the White House: "The inaccuracies on recovery.gov that have come to light are outrageous and the Administration owes itself, the Congress, and every American a commitment to work night and day to correct the ludicrous mistakes."&nbsp; He added "Whether the numbers are good news or bad news, I want the honest numbers and I want them now."&nbsp; I'm guessing he'd much prefer them if they were good news for the Democrats, but they won't be.&nbsp; That said, I applaud Mr. Obey for his accurate criticism of the Administration, something far too few Democrats have been willing to do. Republican congressman Darrell Issa (CA) sent a letter to the Chairman of the "Recovery Act Transparency and Accountability Board, Earl Devaney, with this question and suggestion: "Are you able to certify personally that the number of jobs reported as 'created/saved' on www.recovery.gov is accurate and auditable? If you are unable to do so, will you commit to incorporating some kind of qualifying information such as an asterisk or footnote to accompany the presentation of this information, warning visitors to the web site that the information is no accurate and auditable?" Nobody should be surprised that the government is either incapable of managing data or telling the truth or both.&nbsp; After all, what do you want from a government web site which cost $18 million just for its latest redesign?At some point...and that point might be now...the Administration's claims of jobs "created or saved" will become a joke, even among Democrats.&nbsp; I'm sure Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi will attempt to quote recovery.gov statistics with a straight face, but nobody will take them seriously. Of course, an administration which almost seems to make being a tax cheat a requirement for a high-ranking position should not be expected to have high standards when it comes to emphasizing the truth.&nbsp; What's needed now is for enough of the kool-aid drinking Democrats and open-minded independents to begin to recognize these people for what they are: scheming statists for whom the end (government control of everything) justifies any means necessary.]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:24:00 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4971</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>National Taxpayers Union Vote Alert: Vote "NO" on H.R. 3961</title><description><![CDATA[
	NTU urges all Representatives to vote “NO” on H.R. 3961, the so-called “Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act.” Introduced by Representative John Dingell (D-MI), this bill is part of an appalling display of bait-and-switch to reduce the apparent cost of health care reform.

	H.R. 3962, the recently passed House health care “reform” bill, received a 10-year cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office of $1.05 trillion. It achieved that number, nearly $200 billion lower than actual costs, in part by reducing physician reimbursements in Medicare. H.R. 3961 would immediately counteract the House-passed bill by reinstating higher reimbursement rates. By splitting these efforts into two separate pieces of legislation, leaders are attempting to deceive American taxpayers into believing that health care reform will be less expensive and deficit neutral – neither of which is true since H.R. 3961 contains no spending reductions elsewhere to offset its considerable cost.

	This odious piece of deception should be rejected by any Representative who wants an honest debate about health reform moving forward.

	Because it misleads taxpayers, NTU urges all Representatives to vote “NO” on H.R. 3961. Roll call votes on the legislation will be significantly weighted in our annual Rating of Congress.

If you have any questions, please contact NTU Federal Government Affairs Manager Jordan Forbes at (703) 683-5700
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:50:55 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4970</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Best Line of the Day</title><description><![CDATA[From today's Wall Street Journal editorial entitled "The Rationing Commission":
The core problem with government-run health care is that it doesn't make decisions in the best interests of patients, but in the best interests of government.
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:18:30 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4969</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>About those jobs...</title><description><![CDATA[Following up on Ross Kaminsky's post about problems with the Obama Administration's stimulus job estimates, I took a closer look at the Illinois job numbers. What I found wasn't pretty. 

Some examples:
Guesses: The Illinois Institute of Technology was awarded $97,900 to “purchase a high performance computer cluster” and related software. One job was listed as saved and/or created. By what means? The associated “job creation” entry surmised: “I think the vendor of the computer equipment can retain about one job for this amount of purchase.” So the group thinks that the vendor will save about one job from the purchase. That’s a unsubstantiated guess, as best. Still, that one job that was added into Illinois’s statewide jobs tally.

Mistakes: An entry for Head Start noted they would use $169,279 to “hire 2 additional staff and increase compensation of staff through a COLA to improve overall quality of program.” The two jobs created were “Interventionist Manager and FCP Manager.” Yet under “number of jobs,” they listed 63.65 positions. These 63.65 jobs went toward the statewide jobs total, even though it is clear that just 2 jobs were created.

Waste: $1,108 in stimulus funds was used to install a new “thermoplastic-coated steel” picnic table in “North Fork of Pound Lake Campground” in Batavia, Illinois. Jobs created? “No new positions were created as far as we are aware.”]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:55:06 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4968</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Will a Budget Commission Work?</title><description><![CDATA[According to the Journal's Washington Wire:  "After months of behind-the-scene discussions, Sens. Kent Conrad (D., S.D.) and Judd Gregg (R., N.H.), the Budget Committee's chairman and top Republican, have agreed in principle on a bill to establish a powerful commission to try to solve the government’s serious fiscal problems."  The panel "would review major entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, as well as the tax code, to find ways of cutting future spending growth and patching the leaky tax code."  The recommendations would be fast-tracked and require an up or down vote, similar to the base closing commission.

Is this a good idea?  Would it work?
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 21:13:00 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4967</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>More "jobs created or saved" lies and errors</title><description><![CDATA[I reported a couple of weeks ago on an AP story describing how errors or lies are massively inflating the "jobs created or saved" number touted by the Administration as a sign of the effectiveness of the so-called "stimulus". In that note, I pointed out that when as pro-Obama an organization as the AP is critical of the Administration, the offense must be grievous indeed

If there is any publication to the left of the AP, it's the Boston Globe.  And it's that very Boston Globe which had a lead web site article on Wednesday entitled "Stimulus job boost in state exaggerated, review finds.

The first sentence of the article, from the normally pro-Obama paper, reads: "While Massachusetts recipients of federal stimulus money collectively report 12,374 jobs saved or created, a Globe review shows that number is wildly exaggerated. Organizations that received stimulus money miscounted jobs, filed erroneous figures, or claimed jobs for work that has not yet started

The stories are becoming common-place: Private companies don't understand the report filing instructions (and I actually believe that's frequently true). Some recipients of taxpayer money are reclassifying money that wasn't "stimulus" money as if it did come from the stimulus, giving credit where none is due. And government agencies are likely overstating the stimulus-related jobs intentionally. After all, even if a government agency is not dominated by pro-Obama people, it's still likely to be dominated by people who believe in big government and who want citizens to believe that their tax money isn't wasted (though most of us know better.)

As Glenn Beck has been saying lately, we're seeing "scattered showers of journalism" appearing. Now we're just waiting for the downpour...but I have rather little confidence in its impending arrival.]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:11:29 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4966</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Cartoon Blogging -- Just Trust 'em</title><description><![CDATA[Tim Wise sends along this cartoon that makes me -- as a Mac user -- laugh and as a taxpayer cry.



And if you haven't seen the inspiration for the cartoon, here it is:


Disclaimer: this blog does not endorse products or services, but would be willing to consider offers of swag.
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 05:57:29 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4965</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Mounting Debt</title><description><![CDATA[George Will talking about America's growing national debt:
Gold increasingly looks to investors to be a more reliable store of value than governments' bonds are, especially U.S. bonds as the U.S. government threatens to pile a mammoth health care entitlement onto the nation's Ponzi welfare state, increasing the nation's debt and borrowing.If you haven't read Andrew Moylan's issue brief on the debt run up, you can do that here.
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:40:16 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4964</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Veteran's Day</title><description><![CDATA[Thanks to those who serve, have served, and the families who support them.


]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:01:33 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4963</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>A Fundamental Disconnect</title><description><![CDATA[From CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf blogging about a recent presentation to the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management:
I concluded the talk by emphasizing that fiscal policy is on an unsustainable path to an extent that cannot be solved by minor tinkering. The country faces a fundamental disconnect between the services the people expect the government to provide, particularly in the form of benefits for older Americans, and the tax revenues that people are willing to send to the government to finance those services. That fundamental disconnect will have to be addressed in some way if the budget is to be placed on a sustainable course.
One wonders whether adding a new health care entitlement would be considered "minor tinkering" or not.
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:31:16 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4962</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>"Mr. Obama, Tear Up That Bill!"</title><description><![CDATA[This is posted on behalf of NTU Research Analyst Eric Sundheim.


20 years ago yesterday, the West won the Cold War and the Berlin Wall was torn down.  Last Friday, I attended an event at Ronald Reagan Presidential Library which featured Secretary of State George Schultz, Attorney General Ed Meese, and Steve Forbes among others.  It was amazing to hear the perspectives of those who helped engender and were greatly affected by this momentous occasion.  I was most struck by the reflections of Vaclav Klaus, economist and President of the Czech Republic.  Klaus maintained that while the fall of the Berlin Wall signaled the end of Communism in Europe, it did not mean the end of “socialistic tendencies,” either in the East or in the West.  He held that the appeal of socialist policies, even though empirically and theoretically dis-proven, will continue to persist and that those policies must be fought with constant vigilance.  NTU could not agree more.

The Berlin Wall is the ultimate demonstration of the superiority of free markets and democracy.  While ostensibly built to keep out Western influence, the Berlin Wall and its guards were necessary to keep those under communist oppression from choosing a better life for themselves in the West.  Today there are still those who migrate to free countries with free systems:  In addition to those who immigrate to the U.S. outright, there are many who come to the US to use our superior health care system.  Hospitals have sprung up along our northern border to serve Canadians for whom the "public option" just doesn’t cut it.  Because of the long wait times, rationing of care, or inferior quality of treatment under the free Canadian system, many Canadians choose to purchase the services of U.S. hospitals and owe their lives to them.  Those Canadians now face a threat even more insidious than a wall:  Thanks to Nancy Pelosi and 218 other House Democrats, the superior U.S. system may cease to exist.

On this 20th anniversary of the beginning of the end of the USSR, let us remember the strength of free enterprise and the horror of government intervention.  Let us be confident in the righteousness of our principles and demand of our president:  "Mr. Obama, tear up that bill!"
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:27:54 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4961</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>The Devil's Dictionary of Healthcare Reform</title><description><![CDATA[One of the strengths of the American left is their mastery of using language. They say things that mean exactly the opposite of what they sound like (such as the "Employee Free Choice Act" which means to strip the right to a private ballot in a decision about unionizing.) And, with the help of a credulous press and often lazy electorate, they get away with it more often than not.

In no area is the understanding of the difference between what the Democrats say and what they mean more important than in health care.

Therefore, for today's reading, may I suggest my article at HumanEvents.com entitled the "Devil's Dictionary of Healthcare Reform".  I think it's a particularly good and fun read.

See "Devil's Dictionary of Healthcare Reform", Ross Kaminsky, Human Events, 11/10/09http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34341]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:17:20 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4960</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>$1 million stimulus payout to study new taxes?</title><description><![CDATA[We've heard of plenty dubious uses of federal stimulus money. Those dollars have paid for doorbells, road signs, and, most recently iPods for underserved residents - all while unemployment continues to rise. 

But the latest stimulus #fail should have taxpayers' collective blood boiling. The University of Illinois at Chicago last week received a $1 million stimulus payout to study the relationship between the relationship between "fat taxes" and obesity. To be clear, this is not a fair and balanced study. One of the co-investigators, Frank Chaloupka, co-authored a report for the New England Journal of Medicine last month extolling the virtues of targeted tax increases on sugary beverages. Chaloupka argues that "taxes on beverages that help drive the obesity epidemic should and will become routine."

I can almost guarantee the outcome of the new $1 million study is the same: in favor of a new regressive and arbitrary tax on products that "cause obesity." Next up: $1 million study arguing in favor of a tax on couch-sitting, or perhaps a fee for those Americans who don't do an allotted number of sit-ups per day. ]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 15:30:27 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4959</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>List of 36 Democrats who once opposed the health bill, then voted for it anyway</title><description><![CDATA[I wrote earlier about the list of 69 Democrats who had expressed opposition to the health care bill at some point.  Well, digging through the roll call vote records, I've compiled a list of people who appear to have gone back on their earlier statements.  They are...

Marion Berry (AR)
Leonard Boswell (IA)
Dennis Cardoza (CA)
Chris Carney (PA)
Gerry Connolly (VA)
Jim Cooper (TN)
Jim Costa (CA)
Jerry Costello (IL)
Henry Cuellar (TX)
Kathy Dahlkemper (PA
Artur Davis (AL)
Lincoln Davis (TN)
Brad Ellsworth (IN)
Baron Hill (IN)
Jim Himes (CT)
Paul Kanjorski (PA)
Marcy Kaptur (OH)
Dan Lipinski (IL)
Betsy Markey (CO)
Alan Mollohan (WV)
Dennis Moore (KS)
John Murtha (PA)
Jim Oberstar (WI)
Bill Owens (NY)
Tom Perriello (VA)
Gary Peters (MI)
Earl Pomeroy (ND)
Nick Rahall (WV)
Ciro Rodriguez (TX)
Mark Schauer (D-MI)
Adam Schiff (CA)
Kurt Schrader (OR)
Adam Smith (WA)
Zack Space (OH)
Bart Stupak (MI)
Charlie Wilson (OH)

Be sure to read through all of the quotes on the link above to see what they said about the bill once upon a time.  In the words of Ricky Ricardo, these people will have some 'splainin to do.]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:55:10 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4958</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>$1 Trillion Health Care Bill Passes...Barely</title><description><![CDATA[The House of Representatives just narrowly passed the massive $1 trillion health care bill by a vote of 220-215 (they needed 218 to pass it).  Despite the fact that at least 69 Democrats had expressed some sort of opposition to the bill, only 39 had the guts to actually follow through on their statements.  Imagine that, somebody saying something and then sticking by it.

These Democrats deployed a very smart argument today in order to justify voting for this monstrosity of a bill.  Several claimed that they'd vote for this "flawed" legislation in order to move the process forward and put pressure on the Senate to act.  The political undertone to this is: we don't want to hand President Obama a massive loss this early, so we're holding our nose and voting for this in the hopes that we can improve it in conference later.  For what it's worth, it is a fool's game to hope that ANYTHING improves in conference.

So, what now?  Start saving your pennies, I guess.  If the Senate health care bill passes, the President will sign whatever comes out of conference and you'll be stuck with a minimum of $900 billion in new costs over the next ten years.  Several analyses have placed the real cost at as much as $1.5 trillion over the first ten years, or more than $2 trillion over a decade when the bill is fully phased in.  The House legislation used innumerable gimmicks to artificially reduce its score, including splitting the so-called "doc fix" into another bill to hide a quarter-trillion dollars and not indexing the taxes in the bill for inflation, meaning they'll run deficits in the future if they don't "fix" those provisions like they have to do with the Alternative Minimum Tax.

The real answer to "what now" is that the Senate must act.  They have a bill in the works right now, but they haven't seen fit to actually release it to the public so people can review it.  In all likelihood, they'll drop it soon before the vote and watch while the American people scramble to read it in its entirety.  If/when that happens, President Obama will undoubtedly sign it.  It probably won't matter if it follows through on all of his promises, he simply can't NOT sign the thing.

So, get ready America.  You're about to get a health care system delivered with the efficiency of the postal service and the compassion of the IRS.
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:13:10 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4957</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Health Care Whip Count</title><description><![CDATA[The Hill has updated its whip count of Democrats for this weekend's health care bill vote.  See where your Representative is and then let them know how you feel about the bill.

]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:34:53 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4956</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>National Taxpayers Union Vote Alert</title><description><![CDATA[NTU urges all Representatives to vote “NO” on H.R. 3962, the “Affordable” Health Care for America Act. This 1,990-page, $1 trillion bill is NOT health care reform, but rather a political ploy to deceive taxpayers and forever distort the relationship between government and the people it serves. While there are innumerable provisions in this legislation that we oppose, we have chosen to highlight those that we believe are most detrimental to taxpayers.

H.R. 3962 will hurt, if not destroy, small businesses. Small business owners making $500,000 or more will be hit with a 5.4 percent surtax to fund part of this supposed “reform.” That, coupled with the pending expiration of the Bush tax cuts, will increase the marginal tax rate from 35 to 45 percent, resulting in the loss of approximately 5.5 million jobs nationwide. Additionally, businesses will be slapped with a mandate requiring them to offer “approved” health insurance to their employees. Businesses could be taxed as high as 8 percent because of this mandate, leading many to lay off workers if they cannot afford the extra costs.  

H.R. 3962 contains 100 authorizations and appropriations that inflate the role and size of the federal government at unprecedented, not to mention unsustainable, levels. The dollar figures in H.R. 3962 total in excess of $100 billion, as well as 32 additional authorizations “for such sums as may be necessary.” Looking at the larger picture, the Congressional Budget Office estimates this bill will cost $1.055 trillion; however, that does not include the additional $34 billion states will pay for Medicaid expansion or the $245 billion for Medicare reimbursements for doctors. Nor does it include the authorized discretionary spending for grants, public programs, changes and funding for a variety of agencies forced into implementing H.R. 3962.

Unbridled spending, tax hikes, and a more powerful, less accountable government are not the way to lower costs and improve our health system. It is our hope that you will put party politics aside, vote NO on H.R. 3962, and work toward passage of a common-sense, more fiscally responsible health care bill that empowers patients, not Washington bureaucrats. 

	Roll call votes on H.R. 3962 will be among only a handful in the last decade to receive the highest weight of 100 in our annual Rating of Congress.

If you have any questions, please contact 
NTU Federal Government Affairs Manager Jordan Forbes at (703) 683-5700
*************************************************
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:24:08 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4955</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>NTU's Pictures from the November 5th House Call Event</title><description><![CDATA[NTU joined conservatives and libertarians on Capitol Hill yesterday to protest Pelosi's health care bill.  The event had tens of thousands of participants from all across our nation.  Pretty phenomenal turn out, especially when the entire event was planned in only four days!

Go to our Flickr page to view NTU's pictures from the event. ]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:09:19 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4954</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>America's Public Option for Mail Continues Slip into Fiscal Quagmire</title><description><![CDATA[The Government Accountability Office reports  that the U.S. Postal Service's recent efforts to cut costs and increase revenues have been a $7 billion bust, the third consecutive year of losses and the largest in decades. And in keeping in the spirit of  Bailout Nation, Congress shipped $4 billion to the Postal Service to help it make its mandatory payment to prefund employee retirement benefits. 

The generous contracts that union employees have in the USPS is a large part of the system's fiscal problems. Despite improvements in technology and automation, compensation and benefits have comprised a steady 80 percent of the USPS's costs over the years. 

With the GAO forecasting that the mail service will lost $7 billion in 2010 and 2011, the USPS will have to quicken efforts to cut costs and generate revenue. But if they raise the price of postage, they risk losing out on more business to electronic delivery. The USPS is looking for ways to generate revenue outside of its regular purview. It has asked Congress for permission to offer non-postal products such as insurance and banking. The GAO warns such a venture could very well lose more money for the USPS, and it also opens up "fair competition issues."

Our public option for mortgages has already gone belly up, and our public option for mail is on life support. Why would a public option for health insurance not meet a similar fiscal fate?]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:57:24 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4953</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>US unemployment rate rises to 26 year high of 10.2%. How many jobs has Obama "created or saved now"?</title><description><![CDATA[Not much needs to be added to the somber statistic except to wonder how it will effect waivering Democratic votes on the House health care "reform" bill, given that all but the most far-left of the Dems must understand that the measure will be extremely destructive to American employment.

Canadian unemployment made a similiar unexpectedly high jump during October.

I've written in the past, about the so-called "stimulus" plan, that it was never intended to stimulate the economy at the time it was passed.  Instead, the Administration has been keeping its powder dry so that it could pump hundreds of billions of dollars of your money into temporary, mostly-union, jobs in  the middle of 2010 in order to minimize Democratic election losses next November.  I stand by that prediction of their intent.

However, just as nobody but the far left puts any credibility in the "jobs created or saved" statistics put out by the Administration, these make-work jobs -- most often in places which already have relatively low unemployment and on projects which are not the most necessary -- will not work into beneficial economic news for Obama.  (If employment begins to rise noticeably in the next 6 months, it will be in spite of, not because of, his economic policies.  And most of the nation knows it.)

Speaking of "jobs created or saved", did you see this story about a community organization which reported more jobs created or saved than they have in total employees at the place?  When even the AP is shredding Obama's numbers, you know they must be unbelievably blatant lies.

With the persistent uncertainty about what productive sector of society the Democrats will target for tax increases, regulation, or just threats, and the upcoming barrage of tax hikes, anywhere from fairly large to a tsunami of economic destruction (if the tax hikes in the House health care "reform" bill were to pass), very few businesses will be looking to expand.  I see no reason for any substantial improvement in unemployment until these issues are resolved in a way that's better than anything the Democrats are currently proposing.  If anything were to lower the  unemployment rate, it would probably be discouraged would-be workers simply giving up on finding a job.

Nothing says "vote out the party in power" like high unemployment.  If I were a Democrat in a conservative or even moderate district, I'd be extremely nervous for my political future right now.  All the more so with the GOP domination in Wednesday's most important elections.  Again, I wonder if today's news will make it more difficult for Nancy Pelosi to come up with 218 votes for her takeover of 1/6th of our economy.]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 07:49:32 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4952</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>House Health Care Vote This Saturday</title><description><![CDATA[From AP:
 The second-ranking House Democrat predicted that historic health care legislation will be passed Saturday, extending coverage to tens of millions of uninsured and banning the industry from turning people away.

Rep. Steny Hoyer told reporters House leaders would have the 218 votes needed to pass the sweeping bill that President Barack Obama has made the defining social goal of his young administration — presuming a couple of final issues are resolved. Hoyer acknowledged that the vote could be tight.Time is running out!  If you have not expressed your opposition to your Members of Congress, now is the time to do so. 
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:38:03 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4951</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>A "Tax Horror Show"</title><description><![CDATA[This morning, I had the privilege of a one-on-one interview with Congressman John Fleming (LA-4) to discuss his thoughts surrounding the prevailing health care debate. It was interesting to get his take on an issue that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is now saying could very well carry over to next year. While it is good news that a final bill may not be signed into law until the next session of Congress, we must continue to focus on House Representatives as they prepare to cast their votes this Friday or Saturday.  

The Republicans have offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute to Nancy Pelosi’s H.R. 3962, the “Affordable” Health Care for America Act. Among several other key differences between the two pieces of legislation, Congressman Fleming said that the amendment would “not add one dime to the deficit,” include tort reform to save taxpayers $30 billion, contain no federal mandates on states, and allow small businesses to aggregate for health care coverage.

Since we have heard a lot of rhetoric from the Democratic majority about their proposed health care reform plan, I asked Congressman Fleming to break down the specific tax implications in H.R. 3962 that he found most problematic. He started out by saying that this bill is a “tax horror show.” He went on to elaborate that the Democratic bill will ultimately hurt small businesses the most because a majority of their profits do not go into owners’ pockets, but instead are invested back into their respective businesses. Taxing these companies, many of them LLCs, at a greater rate through H.R. 3962 is particularly harmful. The Congressman also explained that H.R. 3962 would increase the marginal tax rate from 35% to 45% and result in the loss of approximately 5.5 million jobs nationwide. This 10% increase comes from the inevitable expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the excise tax of 5.4% found in H.R. 3962. And, don’t forget about the individual and employer mandates – a 2% tax on individuals if they do not purchase “approved” health insurance and 8% tax on businesses if they do not offer coverage to their employees. Neither mandate is contained within the Republican alternative. 

I really appreciate the Congressman taking the time to speak to us this morning, as it is always helpful to get an inside perspective – and from a doctor to boot! He is particularly in tune to problems surrounding the health care industry, and how we can most successfully implement true reform that does not dramatically hurt taxpayers. 

Stay tuned for health care updates throughout the week. Again, a House vote will likely take place this FRIDAY or SATURDAY, so please call your Representative and tell them to vote NO on H.R. 3962.
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:33:55 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4950</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>NTU Ad Campaign</title><description><![CDATA[In a continued effort to speak out against government-run health care, NTU has launched an aggressive campaign in key Democratic districts across the nation. We will sponsor radio ads and phone banks opposing the $1 trillion health care bill, and the following Members of Congress will be targeted:

Travis Childers, MS-01
Mike McIntyre, NC-07
Heath Shuler, NC-11
Dina Titus, NV-03
Ann Kirkpatrick, AZ-01
Glenn Nye, VA-02
Harry Teague, NM-02
Tom Perriello, VA-05
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, SD-AL
Joe Donnelly, IN-02
Brad Ellsworth, IN-08
Charlie Wilson, OH-06
Christopher Carney, PA-10
Mike Ross, AR-4
Vic Snyder, AR-2
Mark Schauer, MI-7
Marion Berry, AR-1
Rick Boucher, VA-9
Dennis Moore, KS-3
Frank Kratovil, MD-1
Kathy Dahlkemper, PA-3
Bart Gordon, TN-6
Martin Heinrich, NM-1
Betsy Markey, CO-4
John Salazar, CO-3
Ben Chandler, KY-6
Allen Boyd, FL-2
Scott Murphy, NY-2
Earl Pomeroy, ND (At Large)

The fight is far from over. We hear that Speaker Pelosi will bring H.R. 3962 to the floor as soon as she obtains 218 votes, which could occur THIS WEEK. We have put a tremendous amount of resources into this campaign because we believe it could have a significant impact on fence-sitting lawmakers. It is our hope that these ads will energize taxpayers to call their Representatives and demand that their voice be heard.

Here is an example of one of the ads:

]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:56:31 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4949</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>House Call on Washington</title><description><![CDATA[The House of Representatives may vote on health care legislation THIS WEEK, and we need your help to try to stop them. Right now, we are hearing that Speaker Pelosi does not have the votes, but will bring the bill to the floor as soon as she reaches the magic number of 218. WE CANNOT LET THIS HAPPEN!

The $1 trillion bill, complete with its massive tax hikes, government-forced insurance, new regulations and bureaucracies – all leading to a much larger and more powerful federal government – will be one of the most important votes you will ever witness. For the sake of your future, for the sake of your children’s future, please speak out! House conservatives will lead a “House Call” protest rally on the Capitol steps this Thursday, November 5, at noon. I encourage you to join us in this effort as we tell Congress, one more time, that we do not want the government taking over one-fifth of our economy through passage of this horrific health care legislation. If you cannot make it out to Capitol Hill, please call your Representative  around the same time and tell them to vote NO on H.R. 3962, the “Affordable” Health Care for America Act.  
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:35:42 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4948</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Defeat in hand; Obama administration claims victory</title><description><![CDATA[Everyone remembers the famous (infamous?) shot of President Bush on the aircraft carrier with the mission accomplished banner waving, in my head I substitute in Obama and pretend the war was against the economy.  Instead of acknowledging that their stimulus has clearly NOT worked (unemployment heading over 10%) they're simply claiming victory.  

On Friday (as reported in the Huffington Post), Jared Bernstein, white house economic advisor, declared that Obama’s stimulus package has “saved or created about 650,000 jobs”.  The problem is, that statistic, according to Harvard Economist Greg Mankiw, is an “immeasurable metric” (i.e. complete fiction).  We cannot possibly calculate jobs saved and the evidence seems to point to gross overstatement of jobs created.  There is simply no way to find out.  In the phrase ‘jobs saved or created’ the spin gurus have worked a masterpiece.  They found a ‘macroeconomic estimation’ of the impact spending could have on employment and they’ve ran with it.

If there is any silver lining here, the inverse statistic is easily measured: jobs NOT saved.  Since Obama’s stimulus passed in February the American economy lost nearly 3.7 million jobs, not even counting October.  So if Obama’s plan saved/created 650,000 jobs (dubious), but we still lost 3.7 million, by their best guess the plan was not even 15% effective at stemming the tide of job losses.  It seems they pushed a plan to spend 787 billion dollars of tax payer money on a stimulus that hasn’t actually stimulated anything... definitely a 'mission accomplished'.
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 09:05:13 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4947</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Election Night Primer</title><description><![CDATA[I'm blogging today from the State Policy Network Annual Meeting in gorgeous Asheville, NC. It's a phenomenal conference for anyone with an interest in state fiscal and economic issues, as it brings together the leaders of free market think tanks across the country for policy discussions, training seminars, and networking. This year's event could not come at a better time, as Election Night falls smack dab in the middle of the four-day conference. Thus, I'll be following returns on several ballot initiatives and two gubernatorial races with free market thinkers and activists representing key states in this "off-year" election.

NTU's 2009 Ballot Guide gives a succinct look at key measures that will expand or contract state government. In this post I'll flesh out the details of the gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia and a few key measures in other states.

Governor's Races


New Jersey. Incumbent Gov. Jon Corzine (D) faces a tough test tomorrow, running for re-election against former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie (R) and former EPA administrator Chris Daggett (I). Corzine's record as governor is abysmal. He has raised taxes on income, property, cigarettes, alcohol, and lottery winnings just this year. New Jersey's tax climate is among the nation's most onerous, and residents are leaving the state in droves - over 462,000 left between 1998 and 2007, according to ALEC. Corzine was one of the first governors to vocally support President Obama's federal bailout of state governments, which propped up New Jersey's budget temporarily but will leave a gaping deficit the next time around. Corzine promised spending transparency in New Jersey (see NTU's letter to the Governor) but ultimately has not delivered. 

Christie, on the other hand, has offered a vague plan to cut taxes. He blames Corzine for the state's fiscal woes, but offers few details on how he would restore fiscal sanity in Trenton. His campaign has focused more on corruption and law-and-order; these are important issues, but it is the tax-and-spend culture in the Garden State that should be the true winning issue. Middling poll numbers (Christie +1.2 according to RealClearPolitics) suggest that he has not convinced voters that he has a clear-cut plan for restoring government to its proper size and scope. 

Unfortunately for Christie, Independent candidate Chris Daggett stands to receive 11.6 percent of the vote per RCP. Many of his supporters are likely anti-Corzine voters who find little to like about the Republican alternative. Daggett's tax plan is heavy on details - he would cut property taxes and raise sales taxes, while eliminating a variety of tax rebates and credits. There is debate as to whether his plan represents a net increase in taxes.

For what it's worth, the New Jersey Taxpayers Alliance, a friend of NTU, has endorsed Christie. Taxpayers really can't fare much worse than they have under Jon Corzine, and in this too-close-to-call race it will be interesting to see if they trust Christie's anti-Corzine meme or if Daggett siphons enough votes to ensure four more years of high taxes, exploding debt, and rampant overspending - with no semblance of transparency to boot.

Virginia. This is an open race, as Virginia has a one term limit for Governor. Virginia is a former red state that has been purpling; its last two governors have been Democrats, and both U.S. Senate seats are Democrats. This race pits Attorney General Bob McDonnell (R) against State Sen. Creigh Deeds. It is a rematch of the extremely close AG race in 2005, when McDonnell beat Deeds by less than 1,000 votes. 

As in Virginia, this race features a Republican somewhat vague on the tax-and-spend issue, though much less so than Chris Christie. McDonnell has hit Deeds on his willingness to hike taxes to pay for transportation upgrades. Deeds has stammered, hemmed and hawed when asked about his predilection to tax increases, and attempted to make the race about McDonnell's views on social issues. McDonnell has refused to engage, instead portraying himself as a "jobs candidate." I have yet to meet an anti-jobs candidate, but that's another story.

Polling dictates that McDonnell (along with the rest of the statewide Republican ticket) will cruise tomorrow. The Republican leads by an RCP average of 14 percent. We aren't too sure how Governor McDonnell will treat taxpayers, but we are heartened by his criticism of Deed's position on tax increases.

Ballot Initiatives


Maine Question 4. Mainers will vote on a Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR) tomorrow that will cap the annual growth of government spending at the rates of inflation plus population growth, allow voters to decide on any tax increases, and refund a portion of surplus revenues to taxpayers via broad-based tax cuts. Colorado is currently the only state with such a strong set of taxpayer protections, and Maine's TABOR actually improves on the Colorado manifestation. 

To put it succinctly: Government continues to grow at an unsustainable rate in Maine, leading to perpetual deficits and tax increases. After a similar version of TABOR narrowly failed in Maine in 2006, lawmakers promised to reign in spending and taxes. Since then, they have increased taxes by $300 million. Over the past decade, Maine has lost 13,000 private sector job while adding 3,400 employees to the government payroll.

Because politicians insist on saying one thing and doing another, TABOR is necessary to control the growth of government and give citizens a voice. Polling is mixed on this issue, as labor unions and those who profit from government (like the hedge fund manager who received a $200 million taxpayer-funded bailout) continue to pour millions of dollars into efforts to defeat the measure. If Question 4 passes (along with Washington Initiative-1033), other states may feel emboldened to replicate the success of Colorado's TABOR amendment, relieving taxpayers across the country from the burdens of big government.

For more information on Question 4, visit NTU's http://maine4taxpayers.com and the YES on 4 campaign's http://www.tabornow.com. Follow Maine for Taxpayers on Twitter: @ME4Taxpayers.

Washington Initiative-1033. Washington State voters will decide tomorrow on a measure similar to Maine Question 4. Rather than spending, I-1033 will cap government revenues at the rates of inflation plus population growth. Taxpayers will be able to vote on any proposed tax increases or revenue increases above the cap, and surplus revenues will be refunded to them via property tax cuts. 

The case for I-1033 is similar to that of Question 4. The state recently grappled with the largest deficit in its history, a $9 billion budget hole created by a 31 percent explosion in spending during Gov. Gregoire's first term. Government was allowed to grow rapidly during periods of economic expansion, only to face drastic budget cuts and the threat of tax increases during the current slowdown. I-1033 would impose predictability in the budgeting process, rather than the boom-and-bust status quo. It is also important to note that government would not shrink under I-1033, and no cuts would be made as a direct result. Government continues to grow, only at a responsible rate.

Like Question 4, poll numbers are fluid and subject to millions of dollars of lobbying from out-of-state union bosses. I-1033 would be revolutionary for Washington's economy, allowing the private sector to flourish while helping to restore government to its proper role.

For my take on these spending cap measures, see today's Stateline story. Also check out NTU's Taxpayers for 1033 at http://taxpayersfor1033.com. Follow on Twitter: @1033Taxpayers.

There are a number of other important state and local ballot initiatives across the country rated in NTU's Ballot Guide. Proposition 11 in Texas would protect against eminent domain abuses. Voters in Palm Springs will be faced with a measure to increase the telephone tax. Numerous localities in multiple states will vote on measures to increase debt. 

Most importantly, get to the polls tomorrow. You can impact the way government treats you today, while giving momentum to further reform efforts in the near future.]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:58:05 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4946</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>The Christmas Party You Paid For</title><description><![CDATA[Thanks to our friends at the Idaho Freedom Foundation for this story.  We’re approaching the holiday season and already the Christmas commercials are playing and the malls are displaying their holiday merchandise.  So as you begin thinking about planning your Christmas party, you may be interested to hear about the party that you paid for last year.  Oh yeah, did I mention that you weren’t even invited?

The city of McCall threw its employees a $5,490 Christmas party at taxpayer expense.  City records show that the party was held at the McCall Golf Club and included $2,783 for dinner and $2,707 for gifts and gift certificates.  Hope the prime rib was delicious!

The bigger question here is why McCall is spending so much for a holiday party during a recession that’s hurting the tourism industry the city depends on.  Employees are already getting a great deal from the taxpayers!  They have full-time jobs that aren’t dependent on the weather like the rest of us have to live with.  They have paid vacation and paid sick leave that most of the business people in McCall cannot offer to their employees.  Many businesses are asking their employees to take a pay cut.  To make matters worse, they hosted the party at the same time the city raised property taxes.  They raised taxes by 3%.  When everybody else is cutting back, is it too much to ask that they refrain from giving increases?
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:09:07 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4945</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Authorizations and Appropriations in the Affordable Health Care for America Act</title><description><![CDATA[Here is a link to a Google Docs spreadsheet I put together of all the authorizations and appropriations available in H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act.

The dollar figures in the bill total in excess of $100 billion, plus there are 32 additional authorizations for "such sums as may be necessary."


]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 12:07:27 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4943</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Amtrak Understates Losses</title><description><![CDATA[Note: This article is posted on behalf of NTU Foundation Research Analyst Eric Sundheim.

A recent study by Subsidyscope (a project of Pew Charitable Trusts "to raise public awareness about the role of federal subsidies in the economy") estimates that Amtrak loses $32 per passenger- four times the $8 figure Amtrak reported.  The discrepancy is the result of contrasting accounting methods:  Subsidyscope's calculation includes depreciation on capital and overhead costs (wearing down of trains, HR costs, etc.) while Amtrak's does not.  Given that depreciation and overhead are included in virtually every other accounting department, I asked Steve Klum, Director of Amtrak media relations to explain this exception.  He responded:Farebox recovery [excluding depreciation] … is the accepted measure of financial performance in the passenger rail industry.Seeing as Amtrak is the ONLY intercity passenger railroad in the continental United States, Klum is basically saying "because that's how we do it."  In 2005 the Government Accountability Office suggested  that Amtrak change their policy.  Amtrak ignored the suggestion because they don't want to admit how much money they lose.

The question is:  Why do taxpayers cover $462 of the $750 train ride from LA to New Orleans?  The American Public Transportation Association says we should do it because we create "green jobs."  They cite a study by the Economic Development Research Group which claims that increased train ridership reduces automobile emissions.  Yet this study also claims that Amtrak investment directly and indirectly increased spending on manufacturing and construction which, last I checked, were not green sectors of the economy.  If we want to help the environment, there are better uses for the $1.5 billion a year we currently spend on train ticket subsidies.

The next time you hear a headline stating that Amtrak ridership increased by 1,000 passengers last month you should be thinking, "great- taxpayers just lost 32 grand."]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 10:51:29 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4942</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>The fiscal disaster of Pelosicare</title><description><![CDATA[Just like the Baucus bill, the health care "reform" bill which is being pushed by Nancy Pelosi (and which she might or might not have the votes to get through the House) is nothing more than financial smoke and mirrors, a massive tax and spend program which will cost far more than Pelosi or her useful idiots at the CBO want you to believe.

Please see my full discussion of the subject in my article at HumanEvents.com today:
See "Pelosicare’s Costly Formula", Ross Kaminsky, Human Events, 11/2/09]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 07:21:49 MST</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4941</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Best Line of the Week</title><description><![CDATA[Holman W. Jenkins Jr writing in yesterday's Wall Street Journal:  "It's no exaggeration to say the Senate health-care bill taking shape is the equivalent of climbing aboard a train about to plunge into a canyon and deciding what it really needs is a bomb on board."

Now, that is a well-turned phrase.
 ]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:32:42 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4939</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>A Matter of Simple Fairness</title><description><![CDATA[Today, Ken Blackwell, former Ohio Secretary of State and member of our Board of Directors, has a fantastic op-ed in The Examiner. The piece, entitled “Hiking the death tax is an insult to Jack Kemp’s legacy,” discusses the need for a permanent repeal of the death tax – a core goal of NTU.  

Mr. Blackwell eloquently captures Jack Kemp’s history of protecting the rights of minorities. Whether through the Civil Rights Movement, enterprise zones, or protecting the rights of the unborn, Jack Kemp always stood up for the voiceless and those who struggled to get a fair shake. 

The group most heavily impacted by the death tax is no exception. While they may be a minority, their rights should still be fought for, especially considering it is a tax on top of earned money that has already been taxed. While there is a strong case for repealing the death tax on these individuals, there are broader economic implications as well. A permanent elimination could produce as many as 1.5 million jobs and powerfully stimulate small business capital accumulation. 

Let’s hope Congress takes action on behalf of all taxpayers and works to repeal this unjust burden on society. In the words of Jack Kemp on another minority issue, it is “a matter of simple fairness.”

Check out Mr. Blackwell’s op-ed here.  
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:09:47 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4938</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Righting a Federal Wrong: Compensation for Bone Marrow Donations</title><description><![CDATA[The Institute for Justice, a civil liberties law firm, filed suit against the U.S. Attorney General on Monday “to put an end to a ban on offering compensation to bone marrow donors.” Currently, the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 incorrectly treats bone marrow as a nonrenewable solid organ, like a kidney. Apart from the skewed, narrow-view world Congress lives in, bone marrow is renewable, comparable to blood. 

Under the act receiving compensation for bone marrow donation is punishable by up to five years in prison. Such a match is rare, especially for minority patients who have only a 25% chance of finding a donor in the current national registry. The law results in around 1,000 Americans losing their lives from lack of a registered marrow match.

When the law is overturned, MoreMarrowDonors.org, a California nonprofit, plans to offer marrow donors a fixed $3,000 scholarship, used for housing allowance or as a gift to a charity of the donor’s choice. It is specifically designed to help more people register in the bone marrow network. 

One might question the path we might go down if bone marrow would have a dollar value attached to it but Americans are already paid for donating blood plasma and you don’t have a plasma black market. There is no reason to assume bone marrow, a much more difficult fluid to match to a patient, would result in anything resembling a kidney market. This change in the law would save lives and encourage more people to register as donors.

]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:01:37 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4937</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>When even the AP suggests the stimulus isn't working...</title><description><![CDATA[When even the liberal Associated Press suggests the stimulus isn't working as we're told, you know the bloom is coming off the Obama rose, and Americans are slowly but surely learning the destructive fiscal folly of his economic policies.

In an article reprinted in the Denver Post yesterday entitled "Stimulus jobs overcounted nationwide", two AP reporters lay out details of companies that substantially overstated the number of jobs they claimed to have "saved or created" with stimulus money.

The AP's early conclusion is that at least 1 out of 6 of the so-called 30,000 jobs "saved or created" so far is a fiction.

Let me put my big surprise face on.]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:09:17 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4936</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Democrats dead-on with comparisons.</title><description><![CDATA[On Thursday, house democrats decided to hold a press conference (supporters-only rally?) outside the capitol to celebrate the grand unveiling of an $894 billion dollar health package.

House Speaker  Nancy Pelosi  was quoted saying It is with great pride and with great humility that we come before you to follow in the footsteps of those who gave our country Social Security and then Medicare — and now universal, quality, affordable health care for all Americans 
While these claims (quality, affordable… humility) are obviously rubbish, I believe her comparison to ‘reforms’ of the past is perfect.  Social Security and Medicare are currently in the process of doing exactly  what universal health care will do: go bankrupt.

According to the  Washington Post (not quite a bastion of conservatism) as recently as May of this year, the Office of the Chief Actuary warned of the insolvency and coming collapse of both Social Security and Medicare.  In less than 7 years (2016) the Social Security program will begin spending more money than it takes in, by 2037 the fund is completely depleted.  As if that’s not bad enough, Medicare is actually even MORE pressing.  Medicare’s fund is depleted in less than 8 years (2017) and that doesn’t even count the parts that cover doctor’s visits and prescription drugs!

Now despite the fact that both these programs are already marching off the cliff, Speaker Pelosi wants to add on another lemming “following in the footsteps”… an 894 billion dollar lemming.
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:49:14 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4935</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Speaker Pelosi's Health Care Press Conference</title><description><![CDATA[Earlier today, Speaker Nancy Pelosi unveiled the newest House health care bill at a press conference on the West Front of the Capitol. The Democratic bill is nearly 2,000 pages in length – twice as long as the original, but “essentially the same.” How is that even possible?

I attended the press conference, but was unable to get in because there was a list at the door. I have been around the Hill for several years now and can assure you that was the first time I have seen a “list” at an outside press conference. I even watched people as they walked in, hoping to see some individuals who may be on the other side of the health care debate, but sadly no. The only people to receive invites were supporters of the Democratic bill, many of them House staff. 

I stood, outside the barricades, with friends from other organizations who wanted to hear the Speaker and what the new bill contained. We were constantly reminded by Capitol police officers that we would be “forcibly removed” if we congregated in groups of 20 or more. It seems they are instituting a lot of firsts in the House of Representatives these days.  

Much like the talk of Internet town halls (see blog post below), this is another attempt by House Democrats to stiffen the voice of taxpayers and the people they serve.

I encourage you to take a look at the new health care bill and contact your Members of Congress with any and all questions and concerns.

Click  here  for a summary of H.R. 3962. Click  here  for the full text.]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:06:23 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4934</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Town Hall Meetings in Cyberspace</title><description><![CDATA[How would you like less interaction with your Member of Congress at the expense of real scientific research that could potentially cure our world’s most debilitating illnesses? 

A new study released by the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) reveals that Internet “town hall” meetings supposedly increase constituent trust and perception in their lawmakers. To that end, CMF is hosting a briefing tomorrow to discuss these findings and how Members can replace direct contact with cyber dialogue. Call me old-fashioned, but I tend to like meeting those who represent me face-to-face. And, besides, isn’t that the whole point of a town hall – to bring individuals into one large room together? It seems to me that the August town halls got to Members more than they lead on, as they desperately seek to dodge tough questions to which they may not have an answer.  Everyone knows it is significantly easier to communicate online than in-person, but it is not our jobs to lighten the loads of our leaders. Our job is to hold them accountable to the people they serve.  

If all of this was not already unnerving, here comes another whopper: all of this research was funded with taxpayer dollars from the National Science Foundation (NSF). This means that instead of researching potential breakthroughs in cancer, diabetes and Alzheimer’s, the NSF is publically funding research to discover the cure for Congress’ low approval rating. Talk about misplaced priorities.

The CMF briefing will be held tomorrow, October 30, from 2:30-3:30pm in the House Vistors Center, room 201 A & B. I encourage all of you to go, ask questions, and expose this incredible waste of taxpayer dollars.
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:17:36 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4932</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>My Letter to MoveOn.org</title><description><![CDATA[Today, I wrote a letter to our good friends at MoveOn.org.  In a recent television ad starring actress Heather Graham, they state, "Competition is as American as applie pie."  Check it out.  It's a very well done, slick advertisement.  It's really amazing that they were able to put this together with a budget only ten times as large as we corporate fat-cats.



Of course, their method of providing "competition" is by creating a government-run insurance company, rather than allowing hundreds of existing companies to compete with one another across state lines.

But why stop short of a "public option" in health care alone if it would do such a killer job of whipping the health insurance industry into shape?  Why not a public option in everything?  Let's have a government-run soda company!  Let's have a government-run food company!  Let's have a government-run clothing company!  Think of the competition we can provide with a company as big as the federal government!  Exclamation points!!!1one!11

I implored MoveOn to support a public option in everything for consistency's sake.  Let's see if they take me up on my offer.]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:38:53 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4931</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Highlighting Washington Initiative 1033</title><description><![CDATA[In a previous post, I blogged about NTU’s release of the 2009 General Election Ballot guide.  Included in the guide is information on Washington Initiative 1033.  The National Taxpayers Union organized a coalition of taxpayers and policy advocates to launch taxpayersfor1033.com, which contains a variety of information about the measure.  

Initiative 1033 would institute modest limits on government revenue growth, allowing spending to increase at a responsible rate and staving off the future deficits that lead to tax increases and draconian budget cuts.  I-1033 would ensure that Washington voters get the final say on the imposition of new taxes or tax increases.  It also requires any revenue increase about the limit to be approved by Washingtonians, not politicians.  I-1033 would place a limit on the growth of state revenue, equal to a combined annual rate of inflation plus population growth.  It ensures that state government is protected against sudden and severe budget deficits.  Lastly, excess revenues would be returned to Washington families via property tax cuts.  

Click here if you’d like more information about Washington Initiative 1033; here if you’d like insights and updated information from the taxpayersfor1033 blog; here if you would like to see what news sources are saying about I-1033.  
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:29:45 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4930</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Hang out with Nancy Pelosi!</title><description><![CDATA[In a manner of speaking.

Tomorrow, Nancy Pelosi will hold a big fancy press conference to discuss health care at the West Front of the United States Capitol Building (where we helped to organize hundreds of thousands of conservatives for the 9/12 March on Washington).  Being good civic-minded individuals, we wanted to do our level best to ensure that citizens attend en masse to upload some consumer feedback to their Speaker of the House.

Should you want to commit that feedback to a poster, flyer, or t-shirt, it would probably make it easier for Madam Speaker to see.  After all, we want to make sure that her press conference is a big success.  So tell your neighbors, bring the kids, wake up Grandpa!  Tell them to come hang out with Nancy!

Who: Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
What: Press conference on health care
When: Thursday, October 29, 10:00am
Where: West Front, United States Capitol Building
Why: Because it's fun!

So, be there or be square!  And by square, I mean not in attendance.]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:14:49 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4929</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Info on Maine Question 4</title><description><![CDATA[Earlier this week, I blogged about NTU’s release of the 2009 General Election Ballot guide.  Included in the guide is information on Maine Question 4, the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR).  The National Taxpayers Union organized a coalition of taxpayers and policy advocates to launch maine4taxpayers.com, which contains a variety of information about the measure.  

Maine’s government is spending at an unsustainable rate, leading to big government, high taxes, budget deficits and a poor climate for business and economic growth.  TABOR would help fix that.  Maine voters would get a final say on the imposition of any new taxes or tax increases.  TABOR would limit the growth of state spending, equal to the combined annual rate of inflation plus population growth.  Lastly, TABOR would ensure that excess revenues would be returned to Maine families via tax cuts.

Click here if you’d like more information about Question 4; here if you’d like insights and updated information from the ME4Taxpayers blog; and here if you would like to see what news sources are saying about Question 4.  
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:53:47 MDT</pubDate><link>http://blog.ntu.org/main/post.php?post_id=4928</link><category>Blog Entries</category>
		</item>
</channel>
</rss>