The Congressional Aide and the SNAP Challenge

There has been an ongoing debate in the House in regards to the “Farm Bill” which contains additional money to be added to the SNAP program.  Many people in the house who feel that the money should be added have decided to take the “SNAP Challenge”, which is basically living off the amount of money which most people get for benefits on a monthly basis.  Know the SNAP program stands for  Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.  A few key words here, supplemental and nutrition.

adjective

1.

supplementary.

2.

nonscheduled (  def 2 ) .

3.

(of a pleading, an affidavit, etc.) added to furnish what is lacking or missing.

The entire point of the program is give people of limited means additional money towards eating healthier foods.  It is was never meant to be your only source of groceries.

As such the democrats that are taking this challenge are being dishonest because they are basing their claims that this is the only source of food these people have.  So in walks Danny Ferguson, an aide for Steve Stockman (R-TX).  He decides to do a little experiment on his lunch hour.  He goes to a dollar store to buy a weeks worth of groceries with the budget of $31.50 per week.  Here is a list of what he purchased:

Two boxes of Honeycombs cereal

Three cans of red beans and rice

Jar of peanut butter

Bottle of grape jelly

Loaf of whole wheat bread

Two cans of refried beans

Box of spaghetti

Large can of pasta sauce

Two liters of root beer

Large box of popsicles

24 servings of Wyler’s fruit drink mix

Eight cups of applesauce

Bag of pinto beans

Bag of rice

Bag of cookies

This is what he feels that people of limited means should be eating for a week.  He says his total cost came to $27.58, so he came in at $3.92 under budget:

“Not only did I buy a week’s worth of food on what Democrats claim is too little, I have money left over.  Based on my personal experience with SNAP benefit limits we have room to cut about 12 percent more.  “I didn’t use coupons, I didn’t compare prices and was buying for one, instead of a family. I could have bought even more food per person if I were splitting $126 four ways, instead of budgeting $31.50 to eat for one. I could have bought cheaper vegetables instead of prepared red beans and rice, but I like red beans and rice.  Folks aren’t buying fast food instead of vegetables because of benefit limits, they’re buying fast food because fast food tastes great and vegetables taste like vegetables.”

So he will get some protein from the peanut butter, he will get some fiber from the wheat bread, and some vitamins from the apple sauce and milk.  He will also get very large amounts of fat, salt, and cholesterol.  I don’t know how old he is or what his fitness habits are, but it is very possible if that he ate like this on a permanent basis he would gain a great deal of weight and over time develop some health issues.  It would seem from his above statement he isn’t a big fan of healthier foods, but many people are.

Now I recently moved from the D.C. area and where I am living now is actually more expensive when it comes to food.  I spend more than $40 a month on milk alone.  I don’t live on peanut butter and beans & rice.   Where is the meat in this diet?  It is possible that he is a vegetarian, but most vegatarians I know personally spend a great deal of money on food because fresh vegatables and grains can be very expensive.

So I decided to buy his grocery list at my local grocery store.  I went to the online section and purchased the list.  Now, I don’t buy many of these items on a regular basis, but the milk and the peanut butter  was the same price online as it is in the store.  My total came to $45.37.   Now I had to buy a larger jar of peanut butter and the pinto beans and rice could be different sizes, but I got as close as I could.  Now I don’t want to eat some sugary cereal every morning, call me picky, but it isn’t my cup of tea.  So if I had bought the type of cereal I wanted it would have cost me more as it seems when they put less junk in a box of cereal it actually costs more.  So to say that it can be cut across the board for every area of the country is simply untrue. A facebook friend and I were discussing this and she said she ran out of money as well.  As I said I lived that area for years and years, dollar stores are pretty much everywhere.  I left that area about six months ago, and I couldn’t tell you where the nearest dollar store is here.  I am sure there are some, but I don’t know where.  So that type of store isn’t going to be accessible to everyone.

The truth is this, both sides politicalize this issue and end up sounding like idiots.  Democrats forget the fact that people are supposed to be adding their own funds to the grocery bills over the month.  But republicans have the habit of only talking about the fraud in the system and how easy it is to live on Food Stamps and that those that do end up eating better than they do.  Neither is true.  I have heard people say that they see people in the grocery stores all the time buying better cuts of meat then they can afford.  The average payout for the SNAP program is about $6 per person per day.  For that budget you are not eating filet mignon and lobster every night.  It just isn’t possible unless you are putting your own money in as well.

Another thing that happens is the fraud issue is overblown by both sides.  Democrats hold onto the myth that it doesn’t go beyond the 3% estimates given out by the federal government.  That is what they catch.  That isn’t what the fraud is.  Republicans act like the Fraud is about 50% or even higher.  There are those that think the program should be done away with altogether.  I am not among them.  I think the SNAP program is necessary and I have no problem with my tax dollars being used for it.  But I would like to see more crackdown on the fraud.  I worked for years with a homeless day shelter, and I can tell you the fraud is well above what dems say and well below what the GOP says.

Sadly, real people are caught up in the middle of the back and forth.  People who are having a hard time making ends meet.  People who have real reasons why they need some help from time to time.  Food banks around the country say they cannot keep up as the need is great right now.  So to say that it should be only charity that does this isn’t working at the moment.  Especially when you consider that many food banks do get government grants to cover some of their costs.  The day shelter I was involved with got some state money, while many of their expenses are covered by churches (it is a faith based organization) and chartiable contributions, they don’t cover all of the costs.

The economy is improving but not quickly enough for many people.  Many families that never thought they would need assistance have found themselves in the unfortunate situation that they must look for other sources to feed their families.  What this aide really did was demonize those people.  They don’t need no stinkin chicken.  Heck they don’t even get hamburger.  So for those on the right that say they eat better than you do, is this diet you want to eat week after week?

But hey, don’t worry about Ol’ Danny.  His salary is public record, he made $17,211.10 for the first three months of 2013, so I am sure he can afford to buy himself a steak sandwich on occassion.  People on food stamps, hey they can have some pinto beans.  Is it any wonder that conservatives get told they don’t care about the less fortunate?  Sadly, I don’t think he even sees what he did.

We need to make changes to these programs.  We need to cut out the fraud and abuse.  We need to find ways to make these programs a helping hand to people in need and not a lifestyle.  What he did just makes it all the harder to accomplish.  Shame on him.

Advertisement

Mia Love’s Guiding Principle: “Mia, your mother and I never took a handout. You will not be a burden to society. You will give back.”

Mia Love overwhelmingly won her primary last night to compete for the newly formed 4th congressional district with just over 70% of the vote.  I would say they like her in Utah.

She has been a very successful mayor in a rapidly growing city that was once more of an agricultural area.  She has been able to provide the citizens with the services that were needed without bloating the budgets and keeping taxes as low as possible.  See it can be done.  She is living proof of it.

Mia is a first generation American.  Her parents came from Haiti with virtually nothing besides their clothes and worked hard to provide for themselves and their children.

Mia was one of the first women that the newly formed ShePac,  endorsed.

She has a compelling story and will go a long way into getting our country back to its founding principles and help get our bloated budget under control.

Utah doesn’t elect a great many democrats, so she has a very good shot at becoming a freshman congresswoman.

I think she will make a mighty fine addition to the congressional black caucus don’t you?   We need to continue to shake it up.

Visit her webpage here.

I need to find out if we are going to be doing Ten Bucks Friday again this year, she will need to get on the voting list if so.

What you least expect to hear upon calling your Senator to tell him to vote for #cutcapandbalance

This as the hold music. So much irony from which to choose, so little time.

I called Mark Udall and Michael Bennet of Colorado. Will call the rest, too. Here’s a list via Red State:

Here are the Democrats who need to hear from you as soon as possible. Each of these senators voted in favor of a non-binding resolution earlier this year supporting the Balanced Budget Amendment. We will find out today if they were serious.

Mark Begich (D-AK) — (202) 224-3004
Michael Bennet (D-CO) — (202) 224-5852
Sherrod Brown (D-OH) — (202) 224-2315
Tom Carper (D-DE) — (202) 224-2441
Joe Manchin (D-WV) — (202) 224-3954
Claire McCaskill (D-MO) — (202) 224-6154
Bill Nelson (D-FL) — (202) 224-5274
Ben Nelson (D-NE) — (202) 224-6551
Mark Udall (D-CO) — (202) 224-5941

Bennet’s office immediately answered and placed me on hold. I waited less than a minute. Udall’s line provided the serenade for a slightly longer wait. Both staffers were polite. Udall’s sported a heavy British accent, not something I expected to accompany Alan Jackson.

Call.

Bye Bye Speaker Pelosi, Hello the People’s House

Happy new House New Year.

The imperial Pelosi era is over. No more boozing cross-country plane-loads at our expense. No more strutting and bashing We the People with her gavel. No more imbecilic arrogance of we have to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it.

She’s still telling whoppers as she steps down.

Welcome Speaker Boehner.

Power Play has long observed he and his staff to be among the least cynical, most earnest of any on the Hill. It may seem contrived or cheesy to critics, but these folks actually believe in what their talking about.

Whatever the barriers Pelosi broke, John Boehner will certainly be the first brother of 11, German-Catholic, tavern keeper’s son from blue-collar Cincinnati to wield the gavel. Those roots are reflected in the people he has gathered around him and in their priorities.

Welcome, at long last. This is the people’s house.

–crossposted at BackyardConservative

Shorting Stay at Home Moms on Credit

The Credit Card Act was supposed to rein in eeeevil financial institutions. Now that the Federal Reserve is proposing rules based on the legislation mandating consideration of independent income rather than household income as has been the norm, stay at home moms may have to have their spouses co-sign their card applications. TWS on the WSJ article. They go on:

This comes on the heels of another proposal by the Fed (subsequently tweaked), under which “retailers would have had to require customers to provide pay stubs and tax documents when applying for a credit card at the cash register.” Moreover, it’s par for the course. The Obama administration’s and Democratic congressional leaders’ preferred mode of legislating is to vest incredible amounts of quasi-legislative power in the hands of unelected officials (see Obamacare), who then proceed to issue legally binding “rules” that declare what Americans can or cannot do, nationwide.

Pretty archaic and demeaning. This stuff is making me mad.

Another unintended consequence of the Dems and Obama administration legislation–or was it intentional?

We know NOW and their ilk consider at home moms second class citizens. Now their allies are trying to implement it.

Rule-making without representation, another form of tyranny.

P.S. First Lady O receives no salary, perhaps she can take up this issue–if she can tear herself away from her latest vacation. Will she have to travel with her spouse next time?

Guess who is bringing his campaign magic to PA?

I, for one, welcome our President and his special brand of campaign magic to my state. Sestak, however, continues to play up their supposed differences though he welcomes the money I am sure:

President  Barack Obama will hold a fundraiser for Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Joe Sestak on Sept. 20 in Philadelphia, his office confirmed Friday morning.

It’s the first event Obama will have held for Sestak since the candidate defeated incumbent Democrat Senator Arlen Specter, whom the president supported. Sestak challenged Specter against the wishes of the president, who also held a fundraiser in Philadelphia for Specter before the primary, and the rest of the Democratic Party.

“We’re honored that the President would do an event with Joe during his trip to Pennsylvania,” said spokesman Jonathon Dworkin in a statement. “He and Joe may have had their differences, but they can agree that it is critical to elect a Senator who will put Pennsylvania’s working families first.”

The fundraiser will be one of several events Obama holds in Pennsylvania that day.

Let’s hope Sestak fails to catch the connection between Obama campaign help and certain doom at the polls. Obama currently holds a -23 approval in Pennsylvania which is why he probably won’t step a foot out of Philadelphia when he dares to make an appearance here.  It bears repeating though the only real difference between Obama and Sestak was career related;  Sestak votes with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate 98% of the time.

This race shouldn’t even be close in my opinion.  The Obama agenda is the bubonic plague in Pennsylvania and Sestak was a carrier:

Memeorandum has more

Obama rings Rangel’s bell

Turns on him. Because Barack’s so squeaky clean. Sure. So dignified. A new kind of Obama hope:

He’s somebody who’s at the end of his career,” said Obama. “I’m sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity. And my hope is that it happens.”

Bush ad guru and Obama admirer Mark McKinnon is less than impressed these days. It’s been two years and the blame Bush game is getting old. Now Charlie Rangel–how to explain that one.

Is this not the Charlie Rangel our President Barack Obama thought he knew?

The Tea Party bell is ringing. Ask not, Mr. President, for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for you.

More. Ruby Slippers on the Rangel death panel. Nice Deb with nice graphic.

Confidence in Congress at new low

Via Memeorandum
Of the 16 institutions Gallup asked respondents to rate for their levels of confidence, Congress ranked dead last once again:

Note the drop in expressed confidence for the presidency over the past year while the institutions frequently targeted by the President made some gains. Confidence in the medical system received the largest gain among institutions targeted by the President and Congress.  Though big business and HMO’s are still quite low in terms of public confidence, the repeated attacks made against them in order to sell unpopular legislation could have resulted in at least some loss of confidence. Instead the Presidency, Congress and surprisingly the military take the biggest hits. Perhaps the news General McChrystal voted for Obama and naively expected a fair interview from Rolling Stone shook some confidence in the military.  Fortunately most are wise enough to see our military as our most trusted institution.

Note too, the historic expression of confidence in Congress as measured by Gallup:

Since Democrats gained control of Congress in November 2006 confidence has steadily declined.  The minor gain in 2009 is likely explained by the Hope and Change election that many believed also gave Democrats control of Congress as well.   As we now know, many Obama voters mistakenly believed Republicans were in control.   I wonder if Democrats have noticed approval is now seven points lower than the last time they lost control.

Cross posted at Ruby Slippers

Also the latest JournoList revelations – JournoList: Trashing Sarah Palin

Related – Karl Rove: Friendly Fire on Capitol Hill

Krugman Koolade

The Democratically controlled Congress has deemed as passed a 1.12 Trillion dollar budget with no budget attached for 2011 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37893 and Paul Krugman has explained that the only reason we’re not awash in good fortune is the idiots who have bought into the idea that trippling the debt in 18 months is somehow a bad thing are not investing.

No really.

He even calls it the Myth of Austerity.  And I thought all those struggling with jobs or finding their costs of living going up or feeling anxious about the future and taxes and our prosperity was based on facts like the looming tax hikes, the ever-increasing entitlements and debt and ever-increasing size of local, state and federal government.  It was all just in my silly woman’s head. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/02/opinion/02krugman.html?_r=1 

Apparently because we don’t believe Krugman’s theories or Keynesian economics, we’re all just stupid lemmings not to believe that priming the pump a’la  stimulus bills will bring about a recovery, (the fact that it hasn’t is a mere detail).  Given my apparent ignorance, I have to ask this simple question of true believers.  

At what point will the government have spent enough money to have us arrive at Utopia?  At what point will the primed pump gush forth its bounty the way oil is currently surging into the gulf?   At what point will you be able to tell us, “See.  See!  And You thought we were headed towards bankruptcy and massive inflation and ever spiraling worse debt!” 

What are the markers, the indicators of your success?  When will they show up?  Why will they show up?  At the moment, all I see is you scolding us for not believing because in our own simple hum drum lives if we spend three times what we make, we eventually have those bills come due and we wind up in huge trouble.  Do you live your lives this way, floating massive debt and having economic growth as a result?   Show me the money.

Show me the country, the past studies, the past history where this worked, on a micro scale, a macro scale, any scale other than the world of theory that this would all work if only…the government spent more…if only this had not happened…if only the states had done this…if only the businesses had believed in Tinkerbell just a little bit more.   Show me when Keynesian theory has worked and why.  Show me why you have such blind faith in these theories when the people whose business it is to make money and make money for other people, have no such trust in these scenarios: i.e. the investment class that you declare evil because they are unbelievers.  

This type of thinking by the existing congress, existing administration, existing elite economic theorists who write for the New York Times maintains, we just haven’t done enough.   So I ask, what is the number, the magic number at which you must declare that maybe, perhaps, this theory is just that, and not actual economic reality or do you have a number at which you would be willing to consider that possibly, real dollars and cents don’t work the way theoretical ones do.   

Spouting the only thing still tax free, my own two cents.

Democrats Plan to Pass Energy Bill in Lame-Duck Session

Via Jay Cost who writes in a piece titled, “The Pulpit of a Bully,” comes this startling bit of information uncovered in a report at Politico:

EXCLUSIVE: Phil Schiliro, the White House congressional liaison, has told the Senate to aim to take up an energy bill the week of July 12, after the July 4 break (and after the scheduled final passage of Wall Street reform). Kagan confirmation will follow, ahead of the summer break, scheduled to begin Aug. 9. The plan is to conference the new Senate bill with the already-passed House bill IN A LAME-DUCK SESSION AFTER THE ELECTION, so House members don’t have to take another tough vote ahead of midterms.

A White House aide has the official word: “President Obama reiterated his call for comprehensive energy and climate legislation to break our dependence on oil and fossil fuels. In the coming weeks he will be reaching out to Senators on both sides of the aisle to chart a path forward. A number of proposals have been put forward from Members on both sides of the aisle. We’re open to good ideas from all sources, and will be working with Senators on a comprehensive proposal. The tragedy in the Gulf underscores the need to move quickly, and the President is committed to finding the votes for comprehensive energy legislation this year.”

FACTS OF LIFE: How many crises of historic proportions are going to require unprecedented government action? Stimulus, Wall Street, health care, troops, energy: These are all big issues, but at what point will people think the president is just trying to spook people into massive government action?

Cost notes the 51st Congress was known as the Billion Dollar Congress, after the Republican-run legislature “raided the Treasury in an effort to pay off all its supporters.” Cost suggests the 111th deserves the moniker the Trillion Dollar Congress.  After passing an enormously unpopular health care bill despite the protestations of the American people, the Trillion Dollar Congress intends on pulling the same shenanigans by passing a huge energy package in the lame-duck session before the 112th Congress is convened . Wither the will of the people who would have rendered their verdict on this Congress during the November midterm elections.  We all know how they value the will of the American people.

President “Never Waste a Crisis” Obama set the stage for this in his widely-panned speech from the Oval Office Tuesday night.  Though the speech is replete with references to the urgent need to transition from fossil fuel, this section seems excerpted from his many health care speeches with only the subject changed to energy:

Now, there are costs associated with this transition.  And some believe we can’t afford those costs right now.  I say we can’t afford not to change how we produce and use energy – because the long-term costs to our economy, our national security, and our environment are far greater.

Read the rest if you have trouble remembering the formulaic speeches Obama used to set the stage before Congress pulled every single trick imaginable to pass the health care law.   All the pieces are in place just as they were for health care: a House-passed legislation that won’t be deemed dead until a new Congress convenes in January 2011, a Congress led by the likes of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and a band of merry thieves in Congress intent on imposing a New World Order whether the American people like it or not.  Damn the law – let the peasants shout Viva il Duce.

Doug Ross suggests we commit this bit of advice from Jim Geraghty to memory:

Every Republican challenger ought to be demanding that their Democrat incumbent opponent pledge in writing that they will not pass an energy bill in a lame-duck session if they are defeated.

Cost warns such bullying will haunt Obama in the 2012 presidential election.  That is all well and good, but heaven knows the extent of the damage he will have inflicted until he finally usurps Jimmy Carter’s place in the annals of failed One-Term Presidents.

Cross posted at Ruby Slippers

Congress sides with Calderon, against Arizona

You’ve got to wonder if there’s a limit to how far they’ll go with this kind of thing:

Dems stand and cheer as Calderon bashes Arizona law

The concept of Courageous Restraint has merit.  We should give out medals to Congress if it opts not to spend or even just proposes the idea. That alone would be courage indeed.  The Economic theory these days that governs policy creation and government spending operates through the “Think system.”  http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/05/galbraith_the_danger_posed_by.html

I read it.  I read it again.  I read it a third time and the closest I could come to understanding was this is where the economic realities of my life and those of the theories that win Pulitzers are 180 degrees polar opposite.  I can’t see how it works ergo, I must be an idiot.

Galbraith represents this sort of thinking.  One particular strain of Keyesian economics as it were, rules the day. 

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/KeynesianEconomics.html 

Aparently debt plays a neutral part in monetary policy or aggregate demand for public/private money.  The theory goes like this: “inflation, unemployment, real GNP, and real national saving should not be affected by whether the government finances its spending with high taxes and low deficits or with low taxes and high deficits. Because people are rational, he argues, they will correctly perceive that low taxes and high deficits today must mean higher future taxes for them and their heirs. They will cut consumption and increase their saving by one dollar for each dollar increase in future tax liabilities.” 

Starting with the first principle, People are rational, please tell me another bedtime story.  Also, there’s the idea that one must and that cutting consumption so as to pay for more taxes is a good thing as versus spending it on anything else other than the state.

“Because the government needs to run a deficit, it’s the only way to inject financial resources into the economy. If you’re not running a deficit, it’s draining the pockets of the private sector.” 

If money is a zero sum game, then the money is either draining the private or public sector; ergo either the government or the governed shall have money to invest. 

If money is not a zero sum or fixed amount, how is it that not running a deficit by the federal government drains the pockets of the private sector?  To my way  of thinking, i.e. logic,  if you run a deficit, to pay the government so it can service it’s debt while providing the services you demand it provide, you must tax more, draining the pockets of the private sector to maintain or sustain a deficit. 

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64B53W20100512

Further, if the government runs a deficit in perpetuity that only grows, the money to pay those bills comes from somewhere and that is the tax payers –through fees, through state taxes to make up the difference in unfunded mandates, through federal taxes, through the “closing of loopholes” through value added taxes, sin taxes and tolls, interest on federal loans, limitations on profit, additional audits, and limitations on services.  Taxes will “drain the pockets of the private sector” to pay for the public sector.  It’s the only way the public sector exists, if the private sector pays.  

The creature that is Government unchecked, unrestrained, unmeasured and unending will devour everything it can. The hypothetical typical American family will be able to sustain itself at its current state only as long as nothing happens to increase debt or limit income.  Taxes do both at the same time.   If the government will not give up one red cent, then the tax payer must give up the red cents for it.

But I’m a mere Haus Frau so obviously I can’t understand.

Finally, and this is my 2 untaxed cents worth of thought here, how could the effect of the deficit being zero be true in perpetuity?  If people are rational as the orriginal premise of this arguement declares, wouldn’t they think spending one’s self in to further and further debt will eventually yeild diminishing returns by the state and for the self?  

If we spend more than our nation can bear in taxes, no matter how many times you shuffle the deck or redistribute the wealth, there will be people hurt by the government’s need for more money, who are on the line where the government deems too much, not enough and the only solutions are for those people unlucky enough to be targed will be to cut services and things they want or perhaps need, thereby increasing unemployment or lowering demand for goods and services, hurting other businesses. 

The consequence will be  an economic spiral of more demand for government services by those hurt by the cutbacks in business to make up the difference and less revenue, resulting in less generated tax revenue that had been heretofore budgeted to pay for those services.

Greater demand will spur further raise taxes to meet existing debt demands and services, ultimately meaning, still more people will have to surrender their little comforts for the good of the state. And our state will become less good. 

We will become a thin nation by default or because of default; our wallets will weigh considerably less anyway; that people are only angry and showing up at tea parties to voice concerns about the spiraling deficit and the wretched relenteless and seemingly perpetual excesses of Congress despite being labeled racists, homophobes, bigots, rednecks, ignorant yokels and the like, that might be the true definition of Courageous restraint.   After all, according to the smartest theorists running the country, we’re rational.

Wonder if we could get medals for our trouble. 

Just Spent $600? Must Tell IRS. It’s a New “Health Care” Rule

The Cato Institute brings word of yet another “health care” nightmare mandate, this one for small businesses and their customers. Neatly tucked into the ObamaCare bill are “a few wording changes” to the tax code that mean that “businesses will have to issue 1099s whenever they do more than $600 of business with another entity in a year.”

For the $14 trillion U.S. economy, that’s a hell of a lot of 1099s. When a business buys a $1,000 used car, it will have to gather information on the seller and mail 1099s to the seller and the IRS. When a small shop owner pays her rent, she will have to send a 1099 to the landlord and IRS. Recipients of the vast flood of these forms will have to match them with existing accounting records.  [emphasis mine]

[snip]

Tax CPA Chris Hesse of LeMaster Daniels tells me:

. . . Under current law, businesses send Forms 1099 for payments of rent, interest, dividends, and non-employee services when such payments are to entities other than corporations. Under the new law, businesses will be required to send a 1099 to other businesses for virtually all purchases. And for the first time, 1099s are to be sent to corporations. This is a huge new imposition on American business, costing the private economy much more than any additional tax that the IRS might collect as a result.

There appears to have been little discussion before this damaging mandate was slipped into the health bill and rammed through Congress, but a few business groups did raise concerns. Here’s what the Air Conditioner Contractors of America said:

The House bill would extend the Form 1099 filing requirement to ALL vendors (including corporate) to which they pay more than $600 annually for services or property. Consider all the payments a small business makes in the course of business, paying for things such as computers, software, office supplies, and fuel to services, including janitorial services, coffee services, and package delivery services.

In order to file all these 1099s, you’ll need to collect the necessary information from all your service providers. In order to comply with the law, you would have to get a Taxpayer Information Number or TIN from the business. If the vendor does not supply you with a TIN, you are obligated to withhold on your payments.

The author of this Cato post, Chris Edwards, goes on to ask: “For what purpose? So the spendthrift Congress can shake a few extra bucks out of private industry?”

I think not.

Rules like this put so much booking pressure on Mom and Pop businesses that they’ll be making even less income. Congress may not believe it, but entrepreneurs do not go into business for love of paperwork, or even to give the IRS a chance to breathe down their necks quarterly–tempting as that might sound–but to perform the services to society that they are actually good at, have trained for, and like to do, like selling clothing, hardware, or toys; designing houses or technologies; styling hair; raising roses, tomatoes, or dairy cows; or repairing cars or furnaces. Mountains of government-required paperwork severely cut into the time small business people, with loads to do and limited–or no–staff, can spend doing what they went into business to do in the first place, and leaves precious little time left for planning ways to improve the business for growth–or even to hire that unemployed person that Congress wants us to think they care about.

Taking Congress’s actions at face value, there are few other conclusions to draw than that Congress wants to put small businesses out of business.

Too bad for Congress. Even they will miss small businesses when they’re gone.

Hat tip: Cartago Delenda Est.

More at Bread upon the Waters.

Will the Real Cap’n Trade Please Stand Up

Introducing our panelists, only some of whom claim to be the real Cap’n Trade:

• The Chicago Climate Exchange, which figured out a way to make $10 trillion a year making people pay for trading air in the financial markets;

• Barack Hussein Obama, director of the Joyce Foundation, which funded the Chicago Climate Exchange with seed money to get started;

• Goldman Sachs, owner of 10% of the Chicago Climate Exchange;

• Generation Investment Management, fifth largest shareholder of the Chicago Climate Exchange;

• Al Gore, who, together with three Goldman Sachs guys, founded Generation Investment Management;

• Carlton Bartels, deceased, former CEO of CO2e.com, who invented a system to trade residential carbon credits;

• Fannie Mae, who bought Bartels’ system to trade residential carbon credits;

• Franklin Raines, CEO of Fannie Mae at the time of that purchase.

Thanks to Glenn Beck for using his research resources to connect the above dots. From Glenn Beck:  Why Goldman Is Willing to Take the Heat:

Remember when Fannie purchased risky mortgages from banks, bundled them together and sold to investors as mortgage-backed securities? And then the housing market was absolutely destroyed? Well, former Fannie VP Scott Lesmes was responsible for that bundling.

Well, here’s the good news: Not only will this new carbon trading “system” try the exact same bundling method (except with air); they are using the exact same guy: Scott Lesmes.

But, please, don’t worry. The only ones involved in this are the corrupt Franklin Raines, Mr. redistribution of wealth Barack Obama, and all the people who the House and Senate are currently saying are the bad guys. Other than that, this should work out great.

It’s almost like Goldman is willing to take a little heat now, in order to get a little piece of the $10 trillion green pie later. I challenge the media: Will anyone pick this story up? Will anyone question this and the timing of it all?

All of a sudden illegal immigration has leap-frogged global warming? Is it because Goldman has to take hits to get the global government structure done? And then they get the payoff?

To tell the truth, this makes one wonder what’s really going on in those Congressional investigations of Goldman Sachs, doesn’t it?

Cross posted at Bread upon the Waters.

Outrageous: Navy Ship to be Named After John Murtha, Marine Basher

Count me among the outraged. From Fox News:

The Navy’s decision to name a ship for the late Rep. John Murtha has outraged some critics who have not forgiven the Pennsylvania Democrat for accusing U.S. Marines of murdering Iraqi civilians “in cold blood” five years ago.

Nancy Pelosi was in attendance as Navy Secretary Ray Mabius made the official announcement Friday at the John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County Airport in Murtha’s home district in Pennsylvania.

Fittingly, Pelosi and Mabius are among the small number of passengers who have ever used that airport, which offers only three commercial flights and is usually empty. This tiny airport has been the recipient of almost $200 million in earmarked pork funding put together under Murtha’s “leadership.” (And then there was the Abscam bribery scandal . . . .)

San Antonio-class ships support Marines and can carry roughly 700 troops, their equipment and vehicles. They are usually named after cities; the USS Murtha will be a break from that tradition.

As George J. at Monkeys on Horses pointed out:

To name a U.S. Naval warship, whose primary duty is to carry U.S. Marines into “Harm’s Way”, after an elected official that so publicly and unapologetically besmirched the courage and honor of the members of the Corps is unconscionable!

This quote comes from a letter George has composed objecting to the naming of a U.S. Naval vessel after John Murtha, and he recommends others among the outraged send letters to their Congressional delegations. I agree. I don’t think Americans should stand for this.

More at Bread upon the Waters.

Obama hates Wall Street fat cats but loves their money

From a Washington Examiner editorial:

President Obama took his case for vastly increasing federal power over financial institutions to Wall Street yesterday, but he forgot something while packing for the trip. He should have taken with him all those bags of dirty money he received on the campaign trail in 2008 from Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street firms whose greedy ways he claims led the nation’s economy into the Great Recession. Since Obama received nearly a million dollars in contributions from Goldman Sachs executives in 2007 and 2008, maybe all those bags of filthy Wall Street lucre wouldn’t fit on Air Force One. More likely, the dirty money stayed in the White House because Obama and his fellow Democrats want to keep having it both ways on Wall Street.

Audacity, yes. Hope, no. The editorial writer notes that the bill

does nothing about Fannie and Freddie, the government-created mortgage giants whose obsession with subprime mortgages and paying off influential congressmen to look the other way actually led to the economic meltdown.

Read the rest. These guys have got to go.

ObamaCare: White Hot Outrage, Pending Disaster

ObamaCare has created a high-risk game that will likely end in disaster. Richard Epstein, Professor University of Chicago Law School.

The liberal WaPo blog reports:

• @ThePlumLineGS: Poll: Soaring anti incumbent sentiment. Tweet

Call me pretty damn upset this morning.

–crossposted at BackyardConservative

ObamaCare Townhall Reaction Back Home

It begins. Some legislators are ducking them of course, but here are a few so far. The Hill:

Freshman Rep. Mark Schauer (D-Mich.), whose reelection race is considered a toss-up, held two healthcare town hall events in his district earlier this week. One of the dozen seniors in a crowd of 60 who grilled Schauer at a forum in Lansing compared the bill to buying a Gulfstream jet aircraft “and charging it to my grandchildren,” according to the Detroit Free Press.

An apt analogy.

Others have really embarrassed themselves into political oblivion. Keep your camera handy and your spirits up.

P.S. Michael Barone looks at where the stimulus money went, by congressional districts–not to the job-creating private sector. You can guess where it did go. Charged to our grandchildren.

More. Via Memeorandum, ObamaCare opposition may be increasing. And the Washington Post is bored by the President’s pitch.

Big Brother’s Heavy Hand

What happens when the economic realities of ObamaCare collide with the government’s false projections of lower health insurance costs?  Big Brother’s heavy hand is used yet again to intimidate Corporate America.

Companies including AT&T, John Deere, Caterpillar, and AK Steel filed a restatement of earnings this week in compliance with SEC accounting rules.  Those filings reflect the higher cost of health care-related liabilities and corporate taxes – ranging from $20 million to $1 billion dollars – due to the enactment of health care reform.

Incensed that Corporate America isn’t propagating the party line, House Democrats are calling the CEO’s of these corporations before a congressional committee to get their thinking straight.

From today’s Wall Street Journal:

This wholesale destruction of wealth and capital came with more than ample warning. Turning over every couch cushion to make their new entitlement look affordable under Beltway accounting rules, Democrats decided to raise taxes on companies that do the public service of offering prescription drug benefits to their retirees instead of dumping them into Medicare. We and others warned this would lead to AT&T-like results, but like so many other ObamaCare objections, Democrats waved them off as self-serving or “political.”

Perhaps that explains why the Administration is now so touchy…Henry Waxman and House Democrats announced yesterday that they will haul these companies in for an April 21 hearing because their judgment “appears to conflict with independent analyses, which show that the new law will expand coverage and bring down costs.”

In other words, shoot the messenger. Black-letter financial accounting rules require that corporations immediately restate their earnings to reflect the present value of their long-term health liabilities, including a higher tax burden. Should these companies have played chicken with the Securities and Exchange Commission to avoid this politically inconvenient reality? Democrats don’t like what their bill is doing in the real world, so they now want to intimidate CEOs into keeping quiet.

Unlike all the closed door hearings surrounding the passage of ObamaCare, what do you want to bet that these hearings will be broadcast for everyone to watch?

Obama power

Iain Murray says it all in just a few words:

All Hail His Majesty

According to the Washington Post, the President is going to order banks to cut mortgage payments for the jobless. Just where does he get the power to order banks to write off loans?

Still, I must remember not to save for a rainy day in future as, with King Obama, there will never be one.

That’s because every day will be like Christmas!

Meanwhile, our overlords in Congress attempt to intimidate private businessmen who utter inconvenient truths about the damaging effects of Obamacare.