|
By Kyle Prast
Friday, Nov 21 2008, 08:59 AM
How many times do you hear that our children are so much smarter these days or that
our high school and college age students are so advanced compared to our school days?
I hear it a lot, but frankly, I don't see it. Yes, they know how to use technology, but it seems most young to middle
age adults are pretty ignorant when it comes to civics, economics, and history. If you watched any of the interviews on why voters chose their candidates on
Nov. 4th, you will notice how woefully ignorant the masses are when it comes to
civics and politics. RedState posted some of these interviews. Most didn't even know who Barney Frank, Harry
Reid, or Nancy Pelosi were!
The Red State interviews confirmed what USA
Today concluded in Americans don't know civics: (My emphasis throughout)
From high-school dropouts to college graduates to elected officials,
Americans are "alarmingly uninformed"USA's history,
founding principals and economy about the — knowledge needed to participate wisely in
civic life, says a report scheduled to be released Thursday. ..."Without knowledge of your country's history, key texts and
institutions, you don't have a frame of reference to judge the politics and
policies of today," says Richard Brake, head of the institute's American
Civic Literacy Program.
You can take the same Our Fading Heritage
Civics Quiz, and see how you compare to other average Americans. (I took it too--my score is at the bottom of this posting.) There was some correlation between age and higher education, but even there,
the scores were still abysmal: (My emphasis)
[Across all economic and education levels] 71% earn an F; the average score was 49%. Ages 25 to 34
had an average score of 46%; ages 45 to 64 had a 52% average. Of 164
respondents who say they have held elected office, 44% was average.
Those with bachelor's degrees had an average score of
57% vs. 44% for those with a high-school diploma. The average score for
advanced degree-holders inches up to 65%, or a D.
This correlation came as no surprise to me:
Civic knowledge declines in proportion to time spent
using passive media, such as TV. Reading and talking about history and current
events, using the Internet and being involved in political activities has a
positive effect.
I took it and scored 93.94% or 31 out of 33 correct. Most questions I knew without the multiple choice, a few I only answered correctly because of homeschooling (recently taught high school civics), some were educated guesses. Neither of my parents went to college, although my mother went to a one year
secretarial school. My father had to quit school in the 8th grade to go to
work during the great depression. Yet they and others from their generation possessed a core knowledge of these
necessary subjects that most younger American adults lack. They studied our nation's "key texts" in school.
Sadly, most people today do not know anything about our government or
economy. If we ever want elections to be about substance instead of persona and emotion, we will have to teach the basic civics, history and economics classes again. Of course that is only if we want to ensure we have an electorate that votes intelligently.
Are you brave enough to take the basic history quiz too? Questions
and how students scored in '07 Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Vicki Mckenna, Jay Weber, The Right View Wisconsin, Mark Levin, CNS News
|
By Kyle Prast
Thursday, Oct 30 2008, 01:44 PM
Obama wants you to spread your wealth around, but doesn't do it himself. His charitable donations are abysmal, amounting to less than 2% on average.
He wants you to contribute $845 billion to his Global Poverty Act, but he doesn't even help his own half-brother in Kenya. Guess he has no responsibility to half-brothers? At the convention he summed up the ability to prosper in America, "Born into poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, even if you don't have boots. You are on your own." He then contrasted that cynical view with his ideals: (My emphasis)
Our government should work for us, not against us. It should help us,
not hurt us. It should ensure opportunity not just for those with the
most money and influence, but for every American who's willing to work.
That's
the promise of America - the idea that we are responsible for
ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation; the fundamental
belief that I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper.
That's
the promise we need to keep. That's the change we need right now. So
let me spell out exactly what that change would mean if I am President.
Obama repeated his "I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper" clip in last night's infomercial. Well, Obama isn't president yet, but we can see how much he believes in his own words: His own Aunt Zeituni lives in a rundown tenement in Boston. Guess being your sister's keeper doesn't apply to aunties either.
Last night Obama also appeared on Jon Sewart's show. He tried to diffuse the Socialist label by quipping, "That whole socialism argument, that doesn't fly too
well,'' Obama said. "The evidence of this seems pretty thin. I said
today that I think they found proof that when I was in kindergarten I
shared some toys with my friends and that's clearly a sign of
subversive activity.
But there is a big difference between sharing, which is voluntary, and being coerced to share, which is involuntary. Plus, sharing toys in kindergarten doesn't even count. The toys in kindergarten were not personally owned by Obama; they belonged to the school system When we share our own assets, that is charity. When we share our own assets with friends, that is called friendship. When we are coerced to share our bounty through taxation--to spread the wealth around--that is called socialism! Obama summed it up best himself when he was asked about the greatest moral failure in his life and of America at the Saddleback Forum: (My emphasis)
...And what I traced this to [his wild living] is a certain selfishness on my part. I was so
obsessed with me and, you know, the reasons that I might be
dissatisfied that I couldn't focus on other people. And I think the
process for me of growing up was to recognize that it's not about me.
It's about -- WARREN: I like that. I like that. OBAMA:
Absolutely. So -- but look, you know, when I -- when I find myself
taking the wrong step, I think a lot of times it's because I'm trying
to protect myself instead of trying to do god's work. WARREN: Yeah, fundamental selfishness. OBAMA: So that, I think, is my own failure. WARREN: What about America? OBAMA::
I think America's greatest moral failure in my lifetime has been that
we still don't abide by that basic precept in Matthew that whatever you
do for the least of my brothers, you do for me, and that notion of --
that basic principle applies to poverty... There's a pervasive sense, I think, that this country, as
wealthy and powerful as we are, still don't spend enough time thinking
about "the least of these."
Obama's selfishness and socialism is showing. If he does not do for the least of these in his own family, what makes you think he will do for you?
Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Vicki Mckenna, Jay Weber, The Right View Wisconsin, Mark Levin, CNS News
|
By Kyle Prast
Sunday, Oct 19 2008, 02:54 PM
Presidential candidate Barack Obama has used his skin color to his advantage in this election. Anytime anyone brings up his past associations with Rev. Wright, terrorist William Ayers, Father Flager, or FannieMae's Franklin Raines, etc., Obama's campaign squawks, that's racist. (Go figure, 2 of those men are white.) Referencing Obama as a community activist/organizer was deemed a code word for black too.
But in just the past few weeks, more disturbing relationships have come to light: Obama's ties and associations with The New Party socialists and Marxists.
From Gateway Pundit, Photo Discovered Of Obama With Fellow Chicago Socialist Party Members:
Bloggers New Zeal and The Big Feed
discovered this photo of Barack Obama and other New Party socialists
including Danny K Davis (center), from the front page of New Party
News, Spring 1996:
 Click to Enlarge Winners! NP-endorsed candidates Patricia Martin (far left), Danny Davis (center), and Barack Obama (far right), celebrate with Chicago New Party members Ted Thomas and Ruth Schools after their victories in the Democratic Primary last month.
From POWERLINE: "We wrote here
about Barack Obama's ties to the New Party during the 1990s. The New
Party was a far-left organization founded by members of the Democratic
Socialists of America and other extremists. It not only endorsed Obama
in his 1996 state Senate race, but, when Obama won, wrote that he was
an 'NP member.' "
And don't forget Obama's high school mentor, Communist Frank Marshall Davis. How about the fact that the US Communist Party Endorsed Obama and Fidel Castro Endorses Obama--Again. Need I say more? But associations aside, all you have to do is look at Obama's platform to see where his ideology lies. The Obama tax plan is nothing but a redistribution of income, giving checks to workers who don't pay any Federal income taxes! If that doesn't scream socialism, I don't know what does.
If Obama is elected president, it would be a historical first. Not just because he would be the first Black* president in American history, but more significantly, the first Pink one. It is the Pink color that breaks my heart. *Yes, I know the current PC term is African American, but that does not fit into the theme of color. Don't miss Another Communist in Obama's Orb, Meet Michel Klonsky, Obama's "social -justice" education expert.
Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Mark Levin, Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Oct 15 2008, 08:15 AM
One of my favorite Ronald Reagan quotes is, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
I spotted an artful new twist on that same theme on a Drudge Report ad, "GOVERNMENT: If you think the problems we create are bad, just wait until you see our solutions."
If that sentiment made you say, yes, you can get a coffee mug, print, T-shirt, etc. with that statement on it from DESPAIR, INC. :-( Click the link, the photo of the Capitol is spectacular. I know nothing about the site, but from a brief look at their web pages, they had all sorts of products with negative humor, such as a pessimist's mug with a half empty mark on the side, "It makes everything taste bitter."
Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Mark Levin, Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Sep 30 2008, 12:36 PM
I heard both Congressmen Paul Ryan and Jim Sensenbrenner interviewed on Jay Weber's radio show this morning. (Hour 4 Part 2).
Since I trust the opinion of both of these men, I was curious as to why
Ryan voted YES and Sensenbrenner NO on the latest bailout bill.
First Congressman Ryan, who does have a degree in economics.
The following are some notes I took from the interview--they are not
direct quotes. Listen to the podcast if you can.
Ryan said the bill yesterday was the Paulson plan with quite a bit of tweaks.
The original Paulson bill was 3 pages: Give me a blank checkbook with $700billion.
We wrote a [Republican] alternative. Ours said, Let's make the firms buy insurance.
We rewrote the bill, added stock options--warrants to taxpayers,
so the taxpayer is first in line to get money back (if there are
profits--that means ACORN would not be getting funding as the orig.
Paulson bill stated.) Executives won't get a Golden Parachute. This bill was $350 billion: $250b immediately
and $100b later. An additional $350b would need to be voted on in the
future.
In other words, they "Made a prettier pig!" This is why Ryan voted for it.
Over the weekend, credit markets went crazy. The problem is not
just on Wall Street. Credit markets are shutting down. [That means cash
flow for payrolls is unavailable.] There is a fear of recession.
"I'm now sincerely worried this could lead to recession."
Jay Weber: Can we move slowly or do we need to move quickly?
Ryan: Tax money goes out the door either way, this way (bailout) or from FDIC (if banks fail.) Paulson mishandled this so badly. We added 107 pages to his bill. I have never seen things like this [credit freezing up]--ever. Businesses won't be able to cash flow payrolls.
Weber: There is a deep distrust of Congress. Ryan: 2,300 calls [to my office] almost all against the bailout. [That is changing a little now.] We have to corral Wall Street so it doesn't spill to Main Street.
Weber: Why aren't Republicans hammering this? Ryan: I am. Since 2002 I have voted against Freddie and Fannie every time.
I think Paul Ryan voted for this measure because he is genuinely worried about our economy shutting down. He knows that if businesses cannot get credit to meet their payrolls, that means workers do not get paid. With many Americans just a paycheck away from being broke, we cannot afford to let that happen. Businesses also use credit to purchase supplies and equipment for future production.
Then it was Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner's turn: Paulson [Barney Frank] plan fatally flawed from the beginning. That money all came from taxpayers. The word was, $700billion would not be enough. America can't afford this. We are wealthy, but there is a limit. All of this is inflationary. Interest rates will shoot up. [Remember] 20% prime rates during Carter?
We should go back to the regular order [of crafting legislation] with committee meetings, rather than Paulson saying we have to do this.
Weber: We're racing against the clock. Sensenbrenner: When markets opened [today] they were up 200, so hopefully the markets have calmed down. Paulson is pushing for now. It bailed out the people who caused the problem. I'm prepared to go back when Pelosi calls us back. This is a case of Congress serving the people.
Weber: What angers people is Frank and Dodd in charge of the fix. Is there any mechanism to say when you failed the people, get off the committee! Sensenbrenner: The Community Reinvestment Act was a significant factor [to what is going on.] The process worked yesterday. The speeches like from Pelosi need to stop. She also knew there were not the votes to pass. Why did she bring the bill to the floor? [To fix blame on the Republicans]
Weber: Would you change the Community Reinvestment Act? Sensenbrenner: Repeal of that law should be in the new package now. The Security and Exchange Commission dropped the ball--enforcement was not vigorous. The Justice Department should investigate if any fraud was committed. [Imprisonment would serve as a deterrent.]
So there you have the Yea and the Nay. Where is Solomon when you need him? Conservatives would hope the next version of the bailout bill would be better for taxpayers, that it keeps money from ACORN and repeals the Community Reinvestment Act. With this crew I don't have much hope.
My fear is that the next version will included ACORN funding again or worse. The Democrats will vote for it, and President Bush, who is really over a barrel here, will have to sign it. Calls from Americans running 500 against, to 1 in favor, of the bailout might be the only thing that saving us from an UGLY pig of a bill. Post Script: Along the lines of Sensenbrenner's request that they craft this bill carefully, 165 Economists rip bailout plan: The economists say they are well aware of the current financial
situation and agree there's a need for bold action but ask Congress
"not to rush."
They urge lawmakers to hold appropriate hearings and "to carefully consider the right course of action."
Right now the market is up 307 points from yesterday's close. You can check anytime on USAToday. (If you leave it open, it automatically refreshes.) Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Mark Levin, Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Monday, Jul 14 2008, 10:22 AM
I just heard this announcement on the news: Bush to Lift Executive Ban on Offshore Oil Drilling. (This would be the moratorium his father enacted.) He will be talking about this decision from the Rose Garden at 12:30pm today. This move will not make offshore drilling possible in itself, but it will put the pressure on the Congress to act, White House
press secretary Dana Perino says Bush is acting now in hopes of
spurring Congress to act. So far, lawmakers have shown no interest in
doing so.
Last week, Nancy Pelosi was still digging in her heels on domestic drilling ban, but Harry Reid and Richard Durbin showed a glimmer of interest. But that glimmer seems to be dying in the light of Bush's probable ban lifting today, After hearing of Mr. Bush’s proposal on Tuesday night, Mr. Reid
affirmed his opposition, saying, “The Energy Information Administration
says that even if we open the coasts to oil drilling that won’t have a
significant impact on prices.”
This lifting of the executive ban is a step in the right direction, but it's only a step. We aren't there yet by a long shot. UPDATE: Not only did the President lift the offshore ban, but also lifted the ban in ANWR and "on oil shale leasing in the Green River Basin of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming." (From Breitbart.com) Tuesday, July 15: I heard Sen. Jon Kyl state on a news snippet this morning, that if we would start drilling in the oil shale deposits, we could start producing oil from there in 3 to 7 years. So much for the not for 10 years gloomy outlook. (Didn't we put a man on the moon in less than 10 years?)
Click here to sign the DRILL HERE. DRILL NOW. PAY LESS domestic drilling petition and see the latest links to related oil news (updated every day).
Drill Here is now over the 1.3 million mark. The goal is 3 million signatures by the Democratic and Republican Conventions.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin , Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Jul 8 2008, 10:24 PM
Over the July 4th holiday weekend, the AP broke the news that 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium--" the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment"-- was shipped from Iraq to Canada. Considering how many times we heard, Bush lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, you would think that would be BIG news.
I always thought it was possible and probable that Sadaam had, or would
like to have had, nuclear or chemical weapons. After all, he showed no
restraint after the Gulf War on his own people. Seems I wasn't mistaken. Monday's Investor's Business Daily editorial states, It's a little known fact that, after invading Iraq in 2003, the U.S.
found massive amounts of uranium yellowcake, the stuff that can be
refined into nuclear weapons or nuclear fuel, at a facility in Tuwaitha
outside of Baghdad.
...But yellowcake wasn't all they found at Tuwaitha. According to the
AP, the military also discovered "four devices for controlled radiation
exposure . . . that could potentially be used in a weapon."
By the way, this should put to rest the canard peddled by the
American left and by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson that "Bush lied"
about Iraq seeking yellowcake from the African country of Niger.
Given what we know, including comments by officials in Niger's
government, Iraq did make overtures to buy uranium. And it's quite
possible all or part of the 550 tons came from there.
What's more, if Bush hadn't acted, we might today see a nuclear
Iraq, an Iran on the way to having a weapon, Libya with an expanded
nuclear program, and Syria — with its close ties to Saddam — on the way
to having a nuke.
I was busy over the entire 4th holiday weekend, so I really don't know how much news coverage this story received. Evidentially, the uranium move was in the works for some time--about a year. Considering the sensitive nature of the operation (there was concern that the convoy might be attacked), I certainly appreciate this story was kept quiet before and during the transfer. Some might say Saddam had no intention of using the uranium for weapons but just had not gotten rid of it. But since the AP article stated the yellowcake uranium was worth "tens of millions of dollars", it is hard for me to believe he had no further designs on it. IBD speculated that "Saddam held onto it for more than a decade...[because] he hoped to wait out U.N. sanctions on Iraq and start his WMD program anew. This would seem to vindicate Bush's decision to invade." It will be interesting to see politicians reaction to the shipment. "Hear about the 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium found in Iraq? No?
Why should you? It doesn't fit the media's neat story line that Saddam
Hussein's Iraq posed no nuclear threat when we invaded in 2003," The IBD stated. I feel better knowing the yellowcake is now in Canada and will be used for fueling power plants. How about you?
Click here to sign the DRILL HERE. DRILL NOW. PAY LESS. domestic drilling petition and see the latest links to related oil news (updated every day).
Drill Here is now over the 1.3 million mark. The goal is 3 million signatures by the Democratic and Republican Conventions.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin , Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Jul 8 2008, 12:43 PM
Oh, this is a new low (H/T Drudge): Congressional Approval Falls to Single Digits for First Time Ever today: This month, just 9% say Congress is doing a good or excellent job. Most voters (52%) say Congress is doing a poor job, which ties the record high in that dubious category.
...Voters not affiliated with either party are the most critical of
Congressional performance. Just 3% of those voters give Congress
positive ratings, down from 6% last month. Sixty-three percent (63%)
believe Congress is doing a poor job, up from 57% last month.
Just 12% of voters think Congress has passed any legislation to improve
life in this country over the past six months. That number has ranged
from 11% to 13% throughout 2008. The majority of voters (62%) say
Congress has not passed any legislation to improve life in America.
What I find so puzzling is that according to the pundits, an increase in Congressional seats by Democrats is predicted for this November. We are at an all time low in voter approval with the Democrats in control, but polls show Democrats are still favored? From Rasmussen:
Despite these negative attitudes towards Congress, Democrats continue to enjoy a double digit lead on the Generic Congressional Ballot.
The Rasmussen survey hit the nail on the head, Most voters (72%) think most members of Congress are more interested in
furthering their own political careers. Just 14% believe members are
genuinely interested in helping people.
The blame can be spread over both parties, but being a conservative, I find some Republicans more tolerable. It must be very frustrating to be one of the 14%. I think we should just let the Congress take longer vacations. It is the only time I don't have to worry about what they are up to in Washington! If voters don't wake up soon, that may be the best solution. ; )
Click here to sign the DRILL HERE. DRILL NOW. PAY LESS. domestic drilling petition and see the latest links to related oil news (updated every day).
Drill Here is now over the 1.29 million mark. The goal is 3 million signatures by the Democratic and Republican Conventions.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin , Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Jun 4 2008, 09:50 PM
Sunday we returned from a few days in Dearborn Michigan touring the Henry Ford Museum, Greenfield Village, and The Rouge Ford Factory. The Rouge Factory Tour was new to us. There was Bill Ford, the great grandson of Henry, up on the BIG screen telling us how Ford created this new Rouge factory to be friendly to the environment.
Much like our proposed Fountain Brook Crossing, The Rouge Ford Factory* has Gone Green. The roof is a garden roof, planted with sedum plants to absorb the rain water. They are increasing plantings wherever possible on the grounds; nets are strung up on the factory exterior for climbing vines. Even their parking lots are water permeable. No more run-off. The paving material looks like asphalt but is a porous material that has sand and gravel below. The guide said that the water that runs through the pavement is filtered and very clean. It requires vacuuming twice a year to keep pores open and calcium chloride must be used instead of sodium chloride in winter. The porous pavement is more expensive to install and maintain but lasts twice as long as conventional asphalt. Plus, no detention pond is needed...and it's good for the environment. It seemed everything about The Rouge Factory was good for the environment or good for the employees. You could watch some of the assembly line in action. The workers were poetry in motion each doing their specific little jobs. While they are always under the time constraint of the moving line, it did not seem any were really hustling to keep up the pace. Some workers were on the cell phone, playing a hand held game, or even had newspapers there to catch a snippet of an article. I asked a tour guide how much money these people made. She did not know specifically but said from what she read in the paper, it was around $20.00 per hour for new hires. Workers with more seniority were higher. Another guide told us that Ford recently closed 2 other factories in other states, I believe, and now consolidated all of the work here at The Rouge. That sounded efficient. The Rouge's specialty was trucks**. Wonder where the other cars are made? Monday's Investor's Business Daily answered part of that question: Movin' To Mexico!: (My emphasis) Ford's investment of $3 billion in two auto plants near Mexico City
is the largest foreign company investment ever in Mexico. As oil prices
soar and new climate-change rules are readied in Washington, Ford must
shift from its reliance on trucks and SUVs to lighter, more
energy-efficient vehicles.
This should be something that workers in Michigan and other
Midwestern states with decades of automaking experience should excel at
doing. Instead, Ford and other automakers are pushing more and more
investment abroad — especially to Mexico. The editorial cites reasons for an auto sales slump and the US losing jobs--mainly the UAW forcing higher wages and benefits--but increasing climate change rules and higher oil prices aren't helping the industry. Like a coyote caught in a trap, U.S. automakers have been
desperately gnawing off a leg to escape certain death. They're closing
plants and slashing jobs in Michigan, Ohio and other U.S. union havens,
in favor of non-union, foreign places. Like Mexico and China.
Meanwhile, foreign companies have no problem making cars here. They do it in the non-union South, where the UAW is weak.
So foreign companies can get around our high wages by being non-union, but even they and their products are subject to U.S. emission standards for factories and cars.
You would think that with our ailing auto industry our government would be doing all it could to help encourage instead of hinder. Yet Washington continues to hamper oil exploration and increase auto emission standards (i.e. new diesel emissions will be cleaner than intake air.) Add to automakers woes, both U.S. and foreign made here, the latest millstone around the neck: Cap-and-Trade, and I think we have the recipe for outsourcing more industry of all kinds. Ford may have greened up its Dearborn plant and created an ideal work environment, but if more industry follows suit in exporting jobs to countries that don't care about workers or the environment, what good paying jobs will be left in America?
This was written before Tuesday's post Kohl, Feingold, and Doyle's reaction to GM closing Janesville plant Related articles: Toyota workers in Kentucky plant made more than UAW members last year More handwriting on the wall, GM closing Janesville assembly plant by 2010 *The Rouge Factory was named for the Rouge River in Dearborn. The banks of the river were red clay, hence the name Rouge (French for red). **A guide told us this was the last year they would be making Mercury trucks. Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin , Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Jun 3 2008, 01:04 PM
Last night I heard Senator Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) on the Mark Levin Show. They were discussing S. 2191, the Senate "Lieberman/Warner Global Warming Bill and the disastrous effect this would have not on just the country as a whole, but the individual." (My emphasis throughout post.) Wall Street Journal referred to Cap-and-Trade as Cap and Spend
As the Senate opens debate on its mammoth carbon regulation program
this week, the phrase of the hour is "cap and trade." This sounds
innocuous enough. But anyone who looks at the legislative details will
quickly see that a better description is cap and spend. This is easily
the largest income redistribution scheme since the income tax.
The Washington Post said, Just Call It "Cap-and-Tax" "...One of the bad ways [to control greenhouse gas] is cap-and-trade. Unfortunately, it's the darling of environmental groups and their political allies. The
chief political virtue of cap-and-trade -- a complex scheme to reduce
greenhouse gases -- is its complexity. This allows its environmental
supporters to shape public perceptions in essentially deceptive ways.
Cap-and-trade would act as a tax, but it's not described as a tax. It
would regulate economic activity, but it's promoted as a "free market"
mechanism. Finally, it would trigger a tidal wave of
influence-peddling, as lobbyists scrambled to exploit the system for
different industries and localities. This would undermine whatever
abstract advantages the system has. ...Call this "environmental pork," and it would just be a start. The
program's potential to confer subsidies and preferential treatment
would stimulate a lobbying frenzy. Think of today's farm programs --
and multiply by 10.
After listening to Senator Inhofe, I think we could also refer to it as Cap-and-Raid! If it passes, it will raid every worker in America's wallet! Senator Inhofe said, Senator Barbara Boxer insists this is not a tax bill. But if you have looked into the bill itself and at the linked articles, it is difficult to understand how this could not be considered a tax bill. Inhofe then quickly listed some points to ponder. He mentioned the Wall Street Journal referring to it as the most extensive reorganization since the 1930s. He called it worse than the Kyoto Treaty for the economy. Cap-and-Trade will need 45 more Big Government Bureaucracies to enforce the standards. Using Boxer's figures, Inhofe pointed out that Cap-and-Trade would collect $6.7 Trillion dollars from industry (those costs will be passed onto us!). The maximum rebate to customers is $2.5 Trillion dollars. Do the math: That means $4.2 Trillion goes where? That sounds like a tax to me! He went on to remind us that the Democrats have killed every domestic drilling bill. The US relies on coal for 53% of all of its electricity production. Cap-and-Trade will tax coal fired electricity production. Consider that China "cranks out a new coal electric plant" every 3 days (?). (I think he said 3 days, which fits with this - certainly between India and China it would be true.) Manufacturing jobs will go where there is (cheap) energy/power, Inhofe said. This is also what Congressman Sensenbrenner talked about at his Town Hall Meeting when he called Cap-and-Trade "Catastrophic for Wisconsin". I would add that manufacturing jobs will also go where environmental regulations are more lax. Senator Inhofe suggested people take a look at Liberman-Warner Opposition Resource Center; Impacts of Costly Climate Bill Exposed It is chock full of quotes, links and articles.
The Senate is debating this bill this week. While some say the bill will not pass, as you know, once the foot is in the door, the issue will not go away. Considering all 3 Presidential candidates support the concept of Global Warming, I would just say, the bill probably won't pass...yet. Our Senators' response to my emails: Not much hope of a NO vote here--unless they feel the heat from constituents. This is important! Please contact them both: Senator Kohl (Phone: (414) 297-4451, (202) 224-5653) and Senator Feingold (Office
of Senator Russ Feingold | 202/224-5323) and let them know what you think about this bill.
More reading: George Will's Cap-And-Trade: A Devious Tax Plan Good chart of key players and terms explained at end: Senate taking up key climate-change bill The Heritage Foundation's Morning Bell: Carbon Capping in Bizarro World Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin , Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, May 28 2008, 07:31 AM
If you've ever planned a road trip, mapping your route ahead of time makes a big difference: which way will allow you to travel with the least amount of traffic, major city rush hours, or road construction? Often a little planning ahead can save hours being stuck in a traffic jam. Certainly there is no sense to chart a course leading to a bridge closed for repairs. No reasonable person would say, the only bridge ahead is closed, but we'll make such good time before the bridge, we'll pick that route anyway.
Yet this is what our government is doing by ignoring the coming Social Security/Medicare crisis. Politicians don't want to deal with that reality. They know it is going bankrupt, but their attitude is, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. "There is a growing, bipartisan consensus about the greatest threat to our nation's long-term economic prosperity: the explosion of entitlement spending." (Ryan)
Last week, Congressman Paul Ryan proposed his "Roadmap for America"--a very practical and pretty painless way to shore up Social Security, Medicare, and the tax code. Ryan is planning the future path for America that allows us to make good time and still cross that bridge in the future, and he does it without massive tax increases. He said in an interview:
I am raising the same rate of tax revenue as today, but I am preventing them from doubling in the future. I am proposing to tax 18.5 cents out of every dollar to run the government as opposed to 40 cents out of every dollar. Spend the money more intelligently. The 1st $39,000 (after deductions) for family of 4 is tax free. After that, the first $100,000 is taxed at 10%.
Ryan also bravely addresses Health Insurance and Medicaid in addition to Social Security, Medicare, and Tax Reform. Simply ignoring these pending problems will not make them go away. Ignoring these entitlements just increases the problems and costs. Hopefully Ryan's route will Not be A Road Less Traveled:
There is no threat to our nation’s fiscal health greater than the
coming deficits from unrestrained growth in Social Security, Medicare,
and Medicaid. Already Social Security and Medicare consume 7.5% of our GDP. Unless changes are made that figure will jump to 13% by 2030. Bravely stepping in to offer a policy solution, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has introduced a plan he calls “A Roadmap for America’s Future.”
Read through Congressman Paul Ryan's plan in the Wall Street Journal: How to Tackle the Entitlement Crisis for Health Insurance, Medicaid and Medicare, Social Security, and Tax Reform.
We cannot afford to ignore this any longer. Our children are the ones who will pay for our failure to deal with these growing problems. Ryan writes:
According to the Congressional Budget Office, Social Security,
Medicare, Medicaid and the rest of government will consume nearly 40%
of the economy by the time my [Paul's] three young children reach my age (38).
This will require more than doubling the average tax burden of the past
40 years just to keep the government afloat. Continuing down this path
will eventually strangle our economy.
Once we come to that "bridge", there is no easy way to cross it. The time to deal with it is NOW! The question is: Do we have any politicians brave enough to do the right thing?
Congressman Paul Ryan is a member of the Congressional Budget Committee and the Ways and Means Committee.
Don't forget the Music Concert to Benefit Chinese Quake Victims, Saturday, May 31st, 10AM - 1PM, Brookfield Civic Plaza Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Thursday, May 15 2008, 10:19 AM
The Assembly narrowly approved the state budget bill fix, 51 - 46. So now what? Representative Leah "Vukmir said she hoped Doyle would veto the entire bill." Rich Zipperer, in his Statement on the Budget 'Repair' Bill, stated,
"The solution to the current mess is simple. Control spending...With
the state facing a $1.7 billion structural deficit, we can ill afford
to knowingly make the problem worse." Doyle's preference, the AP article stated, was "to take more money from the state's transportation fund, to be replaced
with additional borrowing, to help balance the budget. He also proposed
$111 million in cuts to state spending while the plan that passed had
just $69 million." Mike Huebsch, Assembly Speaker said in response to criticism from both Republicans and Democrats, "Frankly, if any of these were good ideas, we would have done them already. All of us would prefer changes."
I am inclined to agree with Vukmir, Zipperer, and even Spencer Black (D). "All the deal does is push off the state's financial problems into the future, he [Black] said." But our Speaker Huebsch infers the budget repair bill is the best we could do? Certainly we could have come up with a better plant than just to delay payment of pending responsibilities. Until we cut spending, we are just postponing our problems.
So now we wait to see what Gov. Doyle does with his veto pen. Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, May 13 2008, 08:38 PM
I heard the state is close to "balancing" our state $527 million budget deficit. Problem is, there are no real budget cuts, just plenty of bookkeeping tricks. Only 1/5th of 1% of the total budget is considered a cut.
One of the areas of bookkeeping magic that really makes me see red is the hijacking of $22 million from Federal Real ID into state budget coffers. Congressman Sensenbrenner doesn't like it either. "The law authored by Sensenbrenner is designed to create a more secure identification card in all 50 states. A $10 fee was placed on Wisconsin driver's licenses starting this year to start paying for it." The state is raiding this fund. Another budget trick is to delay the $125 million payment of state aid to schools into the next budget session. Much like someone running a little short on funds one month delaying their mortgage payment into their next payday cycle, the state is looking at postponing their yearly obligation into the next budget cycle. This solves nothing and creates a big problem for next time.
One good piece of the budget deal is that the hospital tax is not part of the fix.
Without cutting spending and programs, all this fix does is delay the pain. I am not the only one annoyed by our legislature's failure to cut spending. Take a look at an email one reader fired off to their representatives: Vote NO on BUDGET FIX I continue to be really angry with the actions of our State legislators
and their failure to cut spending in WI. The taxpayers wallet is
almost empty. I urge you to vote NO on the budget fix, to work TO CUT
SPENDING, to take the provision out of the bill that would allow
municipalities to tax assisted living and nursing homes, DO NOT take
federally mandated monies and use them for something else, PUSH FOR
VOTER ID, ignore pressure from special interest groups and listen to
your constituency. How you or anyone else in Madison can justify the huge budget shortfall without cutting spending is beyond me. I am 58 years old and our family is seriously considering leaving WI
when we retire. Honestly, with the actions of the legislature and Gov.
Doyle we may be forced to leave sooner ... I can't afford to live here
much longer.
And this is an email sent to Rep. Huebsch, Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch -- CUT SPENDING, VOTE NO on the Budget Fix, PUSH for
Voter ID, PUSH to take out the right of municipalities to tax nursing
homes and assisted living facilities, do not take federally mandated
monies and use them for something else. I think you are the most
ineffective leader the Republicans have ever put in power. I no longer
will support the Republican Party in WI because of your liberal views
and ineffectiveness in striking a compromise with the Democrats. AGAIN
the way to fix the budget shortfall is not to rob money from other
programs BUT TO CUT SPENDING. [Previous email included.]
Contact your representatives! They will be voting soon.
Senate votes today: State Senator Jim Sullivan, Democrat, 5th District Sen.Sullivan@legis.wisconsin.gov 608-266-2512, 866-817-6061
State Senator Theodore Kanavas, Republican, 33rd District Sen.Kanavas@legis.wisconsin.gov 608-266-9174, 800-863-8883 Sen. Scott Fitzgerald (Senate Minority Leader), from Juneau. Counties: Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Jefferson, and Waukesha Email: Sen.Fitzgerald@legis.wisconsin.gov 608-266-5660
Assembly: State Representative Leah Vukmir, Republican, 14th District Rep.Vukmir@legis.wisconsin.gov 608-266-9180
Representative Rich Zipperer, Republican, 98th District Rep.Zipperer@legis.wisconsin.gov 608-266-5120 Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (Assembly Majority Leader), from Horicon. Counties: Columbia and Dodge Rep.Fitzgerald@legis.wisconsin.gov 608-266-2401 Rep. Michael Huebsch (Assembly Speaker), from West Salem. Counties: LaCrosse and Monroe
Rep.Huebsch@legis.wisconsin.gov 608- 266-3387 Governor Doyle 608-266-1212, 414-227-4344
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Monday, May 12 2008, 08:35 AM
Just a reminder that U.S. Postage for 1st class mail went up 1 cent today from 41 cents to 42 cents for 1 ounce. You you must add an extra 1 cent stamp to your existing 41 cent stamped mail. If you have those Forever stamps with the Liberty Bell, those are still good without adding any additional postage. That is why they are called Forever! Here is the breakdown of 1st class postage: Postcards: 3 1/2" x 5" to 4 1/4" x 6", .007 inches thick (like picture postcards) are 27cents. Over-sized are charged .42. Letters: 1 oz. .42, 2 oz. .59, 3 oz. .76, 3.5 oz. .93 cents.
I believe the Post Office will be reassessing their postage rates every year and making changes in May. Some people just find it easier to purchase only the Forever stamps, then they always have the correct postage rate. Since I like using the commemorative stamps (they are like little works of art*), I try to not have too many extras of the designated postage ones prior to the postage change date. * Like--well as much as anyone can spending .42 cents to send a letter! Once I asked at the post office why they made so many commemorative stamps, since they must be more expensive to make than just 1 or 2 different styles. The worker told me that the production costs are offset by collectors who purchase the stamps but never use the stamps. I don't know how true that is, but that is what I was told.
Links:
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Apr 30 2008, 05:28 PM
Just heard this on Mark Belling, Sensenbrenner co-sponsored a bill to end ethanol mandates: "Congressman F.
James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (R-Menomonee Falls) is a cosponsor of HR 5911,
the Remove Incentives to Produce Ethanol Act of 2008 (RIPE Act),
introduced this week by Representative Jeff Flake of Arizona. This
bill will repeal the legislative provisions responsible for the
artificial demand for ethanol by:
- Repealing the renewable fuel standard;
- Repealing tax credits for ethanol producers;
- Repealing tariffs on importing ethanol.
“...The fact is, the
ethanol industry has been subsidized for twenty-seven years [51 cents/gallon] and claims
to still need the subsidies to survive,” Sensenbrenner added. “If an
industry cannot survive without government support after twenty-seven
years, there are more serious problems in place.” Mark Belling did not give the bill much chance to pass because of the powerful ethanol lobby, but hope always springs eternal in my heart. After all, Belling isn't omniscient; he did not think Gableman had a chance against Butler for State Supreme Court either. Almost every day we are seeing newscasts and articles on how biofuel has caused food shortages and food prices to rise. If the American public puts enough heat on their congressmen, who knows? Contact Congressman Sensenbrenner, Telephone: (262) 784-1111, (202) 225-5101 Links: Update: "Creepy" picture Billy Ray cannot deny
Upcoming events in Brookfield 4th Annual Weed Out, May 3rd, Mary Knoll Park
Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Vicki Mckenna
|
By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Apr 30 2008, 09:47 AM
Yesterday, I had an opportunity to listen to part of the President's Press Conference on Rush Limbaugh. (I had a lot of ironing to do!) He began by stating it was "a tough time for our economy." Then he listed a few areas that affect our wallets, "from gas and food prices to mortgage and tuition bills." Those concerns mentioned don't affect every American, but the first two do--and they are related. I am going to focus on gas prices today. The best news to come out of that conference was President Bush urging drilling in ANWR. Finally. At last. What took so long? Oh, I know he has asked to drill before, but it fell on deaf ears. (There is plenty of blame for both sides of the isle here.) Maybe it will finally happen since the world wide shortage of oil is becoming harder to ignore. The President said: (My emphasis)
I've repeatedly submitted proposals to help address these [energy price] problems. Yet
time after time, Congress chose to block them. One of the main reasons for
high gas prices is that global oil production is not keeping up with
growing demand. Members of Congress have been vocal about foreign
governments increasing their oil production; yet Congress has been just as
vocal in opposition to efforts to expand our production here at home.
They repeatedly blocked environmentally safe exploration in ANWR. The
Department of Energy estimates that ANWR could allow America to produce
about a million additional barrels of oil every day, which translates to
about 27 millions of gallons of gasoline and diesel every day. That would
be about a 20-percent increase of oil -- crude oil production over U.S.
levels, and it would likely mean lower gas prices. And yet such efforts to
explore in ANWR have been consistently blocked.
Another reason for high gas prices is the lack of refining capacity. It's
been more than 30 years since America built its last new refinery. Yet in
this area, too, Congress has repeatedly blocked efforts to expand capacity
and build more refineries. ... Congress is considering bills to raise taxes on domestic energy production,
| |