RELEASE: HATCH, MORAN QUESTION TREASURY’S USE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS IN SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGNS

The U.S. Treasury posted social media messages advocating that more funds be appropriate to other federal agencies.

Who are these people working for!?!  

United States Senate

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT:  Julia Lawless (Hatch) July 24, 2012 (202) 224-4515                                      Garrette Silverman (Moran)                                                            (202) 224-6521 HATCH, MORAN QUESTION TREASURY'S USE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS IN SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGNS In Letter to Treasury Secretary, Senators Write, "Your political rhetoric aside, Treasury's social media links to instances in which you advocate that Congress act on legislative proposals seem contrary to appropriations language." WASHINGTON –Today, U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Ranking Member of the Senate Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, questioned the U.S. Dept. of the Treasury's legal authority to use taxpayer dollars to fund social media campaigns designed to defeat legislation pending before the U.S. Congress. This month, Treasury posted, across several social media outlets, material targeting appropriations bills pending before Congress - H.R. 5973 & H.R. 6020 - and advocating that more funds be appropriated to other federal agencies.  In a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner today, the lawmakers argued such action is contrary to appropriations language, and runs counter to laws and statutes that forbid agencies from spending appropriated funds to lobby for or against legislation.   "Throughout many of your social media postings, there are links to presentations designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the Congress," the Senators wrote. "Your political rhetoric aside, Treasury's social media links to instances in which you advocate that Congress act on legislative proposals seem contrary to appropriations language." To view a signed copy of the letter click HERE. Below is the full text of the letter: July 24, 2012 The Honorable Timothy Geithner Secretary, Department of the Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington, DC 20220 Dear Secretary Geithner: As the Ranking Members of the Senate Committee on Finance and the Senate Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, we share responsibility for oversight of Treasury activities, for authorization of those activities, and for the funding of your Department's operation.  Over the past few years, Treasury activities in the so-called "social media" (e.g., Treasury's: "Treasury Notes" blog; "Twitter" account; "Facebook" page; "YouTube" postings; "Flickr" entries; "slideshare" entries) have been expanded significantly and at some cost to the taxpayers. In recent postings to the Treasury Notes blog, Treasury's Twitter account," Treasury's Facebook page, and to slideshare, the Treasury department broadcast, under Treasury's logo, the attached "infographic" which identifies appropriations legislation pending before the Congress as "Pound Foolish."  Elsewhere throughout many of your social media postings, there are links to presentations designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the Congress.  For example, there are links in your social media postings to a 2011 interview on BloombergTV with you, during which you advocated that Congress adopt what the President labeled his "American Jobs Act" and you stated that "if Congress doesn't act, it'll be because Republicans decided they did not want to do anything to help the economy." Your political rhetoric aside, Treasury's social media links to instances in which you advocate that Congress act on legislative proposals seem contrary to appropriations language (e.g., Sections 716 and 719 of P.L. 112-74).  The infographic referred to above appears clearly to be designed to defeat legislation pending before the Congress.  At a minimum, such activity runs counter to P.L. 112-74 and a statute (P.L. 66-5; 41 Stat. 68; 18 U.S.C. 1913) forbidding agencies from spending appropriated funds to encourage the public to contact Members of Congress.  With respect to the attached infographic, while you continue to promote the so-called "Dodd-Frank" financial reforms, your interest in such promotion does not constitute a rationale for spending funds appropriated to Treasury in an attempt to defeat appropriations legislation pending before Congress.  Moreover, it is unclear why the Treasury Department is spending taxpayer funds advocating that more funds be appropriated to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).  Those agencies stand apart from Treasury.  I request that you respond to the following, by close of business on July 30: 1.      Identify any and all "social media" outlets used by Treasury. 2.      Identify your understanding of the laws, regulations, guidelines, and precedent governing what you may or may not broadcast on your social media outlets. 3.      Provide all internal (to the Treasury Department) policies and procedures governing what you may or may not broadcast on your social media outlets, including the date(s) on which those policies and procedures were adopted and modified. 4.      Provide an accounting of the Treasury personnel, in terms of full-time equivalents and outlays for their work time, devoted to feeding, monitoring, updating, and maintaining your social media outlet presence. 5.      Provide an accounting of any public relations or public affairs firms with which Treasury contracts for services related to your social media outlets, and associated outlays. 6.      Provide Treasury's policies on social media "linking," including the date(s) on which those policies were adopted and modified. 7.      Provide Treasury's policies on "retweeting" posts, such as the "retweets" of "tweets" of the White House, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau or other independent agencies. 8.      Identify what your objective was in broadcasting, across many social media outlets, the attached infographic, and why your Department is lobbying on behalf of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission with respect to appropriations. 9.      Provide any communications that your Department had with the SEC and CFTC with respect to the attached infographic. 10.  Identify what you believe are limits on what your social media outlets may broadcast to express your Department's interest in supporting or defeating legislation pending before the Congress.  We will appreciate your prompt response to these requests. Sincerely, HATCH MORAN ###

Teen Eagles Host - World View Conference - St. Louis - July 21-22

In our world today, three worldviews demand total allegiance from their adherents. Islam, Marxism and Christianity each claim to possess absolute truth. What world view do you hold? What is the effect of these three dominant world forces? Come discover the truth about each world view as we hear from a  series of dynamic speakers at the World Views, Collision Course Conference! 

Location:  The Conference will be held at The Pillar Foundation 

15820 Clayton Rd. 

Ellisville, Mo. 63011

Time:  Friday, July 20th, 7:00-9:30pm. Saturday, July 21st, 9:30am- 3:30pm

Cost:  $10 per person, $25 per family, to be paid at the door.

Attire: Business Casual

We would love to have you come and be apart of this wonderful event! RSVP, by July 9th. To claim your spot, please call the pillar foundation at (636) 386-7722, send an email to Teeneagles@gmail.com or visit the St. Louis Teen Eagles web-site at stlteeneagles.wordpress.com and click on the tab to the top right of the page titled "Worldviews, Collision Course Conference!" Space is limited so sign up your whole family as soon as possible! 

Nixon VETOED SB 749 -- Fails to protect Religious Freedom

Update: http://stlouisreview.com/article/2012-07-12/gov-nixon-vetoes

Gov. Nixon vetoes religious liberty bill
SB 749: Provides protection for the religious beliefs as to the imposition of certain health care services such as abortion, contraception, or sterlization

STEP 1: Click here to read Sam Lee's Top Ten Reasons Why Governor Nixon Should Sign SB 749.

STEP 2: Call Governor Nixon tonight AND tomorrow morning at (573) 751-3222 or visit http://governor.mo.gov/contact. Ask him to "Take a stand for our religious liberties and SIGN SB 749 into law!"

STEP 3: Pass this email on to 10 friends and update your Facebook status. Here's what one of my friends is doing. Feel free to use it if you like it.

Violating someone's religious and moral liberties by forcing them to pay for abortions or contraceptives in their health insurance plans is just wrong. Call Missouri Governor Jay Nixon NOW at (573) 751-3222 or visit http://governor.mo.gov/contact and ask him to sign the Conscience Rights bill, SB 749!

Goal: If we each do our part, Governor Nixon's office will be flooded with an additional 2,000 calls and emails tonight and tomorrow morning in support of SB 749!

Senate to Vote on Pro-Choice Federal Judicial Nominee Andrew Hurwitz

Eagle Forum Alert - Vote on Pro-Choice Federal Judicial Nominee Andrew Hurwitz

As early as this Monday, June 11, the Senate will vote on a cloture motion to move to final confirmation on Andrew David Hurwitz, the self-identified architect of Roe v. Wade.  We need you to call your Senators and tell them to vote NO on Hurwitz!

Hurwitz has bragged about helping to write two decisions that formed the basis for Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. The 1972 decisions by Hurwitz' then boss, Federal Judge Jon O. Newman, have been called a "crucial influence" on Justice Harry Blackmun as he was drafting Roe v. Wade.

Roe v. Wade is not only the most deadly Supreme Court decision in history, legalizing the killing of millions of unborn children, it is one of the most constitutionally questionable.  Even Justice Blackmun’s pro-abortion law clerk Edward Lazarus, who considered Blackmun a father figure, said of the decision, “As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible.”

Legal scholar Ed Whelan notes, “No serious judge would want to take credit for a decision that amounts to one of the worst instances of judicial usurpation of legislative power.”

Barack Obama’s supremacist judges will continue to implement his radical agenda long after he leaves the White House.  We must take action now to stop them!  Please call your Senators now and urge them to vote NO on both cloture and final confirmation on Andrew David Hurwitz.

Capitol Switchboard:  (202) 224-3121

• Judicial Action Group Brief on Andrew David Hurwitz
• Roe’s Lone Remaining Defender, by Ed Whelan

Why I'm not surprised Prop Y passed and plans for the future

MSD put up Prop Y in 2004 and 2008, and both of those passed by over 70%. This time the "Clean Water STL" group raised $385,000 to push a YES to get approval for MSD to issue bonds for sewer improvements.

With a complicated back story and money to frame the narrative as "if you want clean water vote YES," can I blame my neighbors for voting to spend an extra $945 million to finance the sewer improvements?

I'm frustrated, but I'm not giving up. There are many public agencies that need people "watching" to give the entire community more time to investigate and talk about issues before voting. For now, my plan is to figure out exactly how the MSD rate commission works, and why the Missouri Coalition for the Environment has both a seat on the rate commission and joined the suit with the EPA against MSD.

I also want to find a mail house, and figure out the cost of doing one mailer to all the April voters. I think mailing to all registered voters would be costly, but targeting only the April voters with information, in the future is key. The only info voters got was from the "Clean Water STL."

"The People" had no heads up.

But what's new?

Senate Rejects Feminist Wage Control! - Why is it that Women Make Less than men?

Kay Hymowitz explains this very well in her Wall Street Journal article, Why Women Make Less than Men. Basically, men work more hours than women--on average.

The Labor Department defines full-time as 35 hours a week or more, and the "or more" is far more likely to refer to male workers than to female ones. According to the department, almost 55% of workers logging more than 35 hours a week are men. In 2007, 25% of men working full-time jobs had workweeks of 41 or more hours, compared with 14% of female full-time workers. In other words, the famous gender-wage gap is to a considerable degree a gender-hours gap.

Eagle Forum's recent alert highlights how the Senate voted against discussing the so-called “Paycheck Fairness Act.”

We applaud the Senators who stood up against phony allegations of a “war on women” and voted against a Motion to Proceed to discussion of this terrible bill.  Here is the roll call vote.  Please contact your Senators and either thank them or hold them to task for today’s vote.

Please note that Harry Reid voted NO on this bill as a procedural maneuver to reserve himself the right to bring the bill to the floor again. Reid once again moved to pass the so-called “Paycheck Fairness Act.”

Read entire alert.

VOTE NO on Prop Y (Includes Interview with MSD Spokesperson)

On Tuesday, June 6, voters be asked to approve another $945 million in BONDs for the St. Louis Metropolitan Sewer District, which is essentially approving nearly $1.9 BILLION in spending because the interest payments are costly. For every $1 MSD borrows, there is $1 interest payment over the term of the loan. (Hear the MSD spokesperson explain.)

Voters are probably getting tons of mail telling them how high the MSD bills will be if Prop. Y fails.
Yet, Voting NO on Prop. Y means huge savings in the long run because it starts financing the entire $4.7 Billion EPA settlement now, and we do not have make interest payments.

Voting NO on Prop. Y means saving at least $945 million because if the bonds approved for in Prop Y equal $945 million that mean $945 in interest (a total of ~1.8 BILLION in spending)!

Voting NO means your rates stay in the mid-$60s, but with the bonds your rate goes into the $80s by late 2010s/early 2020 --and that doesn't even include the rest of $4 BILLION EPA require improvements!

This is not complicated: the rates are going up. You either will pay double because of interest, or you can vote NO, and pay for "it" once.

What can you do?

Vote NO on Tuesday.
Share an image or post from the the "Prop Y. - Vote NO" FB Page.

Here's a helpful graph by rebootcongress.blogspot.com. Red line is with bonds; blue line is VOTE NO on Prop. Y.

Vote NO on Prop Y - SAVES MONEY

You are probably getting tons of mail telling you how high your MSD bill will be if Prop. Y fails.

Yet, Voting NO on Prop. Y means huge savings in the long run. Voting NO on Prop. Y means saving nearly $1 Billion!

How can that be you ask? Well, Voting NO means saving the interest owed on the bonds.

Even more, Voting NO on Prop. Y could mean paying the entire $4 BILLION that MSD needs with out paying a single dime in interest payments!

When MSD issues bonds, it generally pays $1 in interest for every $1 it borrows.

If the bonds approved for in Prop Y equal $945 million that mean $945 in interest!

Voting NO means your rates stay in the mid-$60s, but with the bonds your rate goes into the $80s by late 2010s/early 2020.

This is not complicated: the rates are going up. You either will pay double because of interest, or you can vote NO, and pay for "it" once.

What can you do?
Vote NO on Tuesday.
Share an image or post from the the "Prop Y. - Vote NO" FB Page.

History Lesson - Prop Y - Tue. June 5 - VOTE NO

I googled "Tom Sullivan Prop Y" and discovered that the Prop Y that St. Louis City and County voters will vote on is not the first Prop Y MSD has put on the ballot.

Here's the timeline:

Clean Water Act was amended in 1972. Tom Sullivan has asked, why did MSD wait so long to meet it's requirements??? Why did it wait till the EPA sued?

Voters approved by 70% Prop Y in 2004: $670 million in bonds for upgrades

The EPA sued MSD, and it put Prop. Y on in 2008 to approve another $275 million in bonds

Voters approved by 75% Prop Y in 2008.

EPA sues MSD again. This time, the improvements needed/settlement is over $4 BILLION

On June 6, voters be asked to approve another $945 million, which is essentially nearly $1.9 BILLION because the interest is about $1 interest for $1 principle.

What will you do to stop Prop Y on Tue., June 6, 2012??

Please like the Prop Y - Vote NO Facebook page, and share the image.

Prop. Y - Question - Why does "pay as you go" sound more costly?

It sounds more costly because we start paying right away whereas the bonds will be issued by MSD one at a time--which back loads the interest payments. Make no mistake, passing Prop Y means paying an extra $1 for every $1 MSD borrows--essentially paying twice--but not until like 2020.

Here are the questions I got on twitter.

egrant24 Erin Grant

@ruthcarlson does MO have funds to pay up front? If not, would interest rates on loans for an up-front payment be lower than pay-as-you-go?

May 30, 11:16 AM via txt

  

 

egrant24 Erin Grant

@ruthcarlson okay; I get that we pay up-front in taxes. I also agree w/you on prop Y. Just wondering specifics on why the alt is more costly 

 

Here's my responses.  

 

Prop. Y is for St. Louis City and County voters because it raises money for the Metropolitan Sewer District used by St. Louis City and County residents.

 

No, interest rates are no lower for up-front payments. There are no interest payments for the pay-as-you-go route--that I'm aware of. 

MSD is limited by law as to how much cash it can have "on hand." If Prop. Y passes, MSD will issue bond one at a time to raise the total of $945 million. MSD estimates that by the end of the 2010s/beginning of the 2020s, rates will exceed $80 due to the interest expense that must be sustained as the bonds are repaid.

Remember, this is not about taxes but MSD rates. The "Clean Water STL" wants it to sound like it's more costly to pay-as-you-go because the payments is front loaded. However, the total amount paid is more because of interest payments.

Even more, paying off these bonds is not like taking out a mortgage where the payment is stays the same over 30 years because they bonds are taken out one at a time. The interest payments will cause MSD rates to continue to climb up past $80 whereas pay-as-you-go will push up the rate to the mid $60s, and it's like to stay there. 

Frankly, it sounds like there are a lot of "what ifs" for the actually rate amounts but there is no "what if" about the fact that at current interest rates and the MSD bond rating, that for ever $1 MSD borrows, we will pay an extra $1 in interest--essentially paying double. But why? We can vote "NO" and pay once.

*I got this info from MSD. You can call too if you want. Lance LeComb 314-768-6237

Prop. Y - Vote NO - (St. Louis City and County)

Please forward!

Indoor plumbing is first-rate!
To pay for it once is great.
To pay for it twice is cruel
for the poor and the fool!

For every $1 MSD borrows, we will pay them $2.

Vote "NO" on Prop Y on June 5, 2012.

Like the Facebook Page, and "share" the picture.

Voters gave MSD approval to take issue bonds in 2004 and 2008.

Remember, these bonds mean we will pay 1.9 BILLION for $945 million in improvements (and whatever else).


*Jackie Coleman helped me with this project.

ARCHITECT OF COMMON CORE STANDARDS TO ALIGN SAT AND AP

Update by Donna Garner

5.16.12 -- David Coleman, architect of Common Core Standards, has been chosen as the next president of the College Board (producer of SAT and Advanced Placement tests). I am very concerned about this cozy relationship that Coleman means to create between the Common Core Standards and the SAT/AP. 

 

Even people who send their children to private schools and/or homeschool them will be impacted by this decision to align the SAT/AP tests with the Common Core Standards.

 

The SAT/AP are generally tests that follow knowledge-based, academic knowledge – more aligned with Type #1 Philosophy of Education. 

 

The Common Core Standards are definitely an attempt to drive our public schools completely into Type #2 Philosophy of Education.

 

Type #1's end goal is academic achievement. Type #2's end goal is the indoctrination and manipulation of students' minds.

 

For more clarity about these two terms, please read:

 

3.26.12 -- "Two Education Philosophies with Two Different Goals" -- by Donna Garner

http://libertylinked.com/posts/9703/2-education-philosophies-with/View.aspx

 

 

========================

 

Excerpt from today's EducationWeek article:

 

Robert Scott, the commissioner of education in Texas, who has known Mr. Coleman for more than a decade, described him as "one of the brightest minds out there, an absolute genius" in thinking about what skills and knowledge schoolchildren need to thrive in college and in good jobs. But the two men differ sharply on how to advance those changes; Texas pointedly opted out of the common standards because it objected to the use of federal incentives, such as Race to the Top dollars, to promote adoption.

Some education activists saw in Mr. Coleman's appointment the risk of creating too much uniformity in curriculum and tests.

 

 

 

http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/05/16/32collegeboard.h31.html?tkn=ULCCP2MuxQir9%2BtWsOAUfPlxsYZledPmfB0u&cmp=clp-sb-ascd

 

Published Online: May 16, 2012

 

Incoming College Board Head Wants SAT to Reflect Common Core

By Catherine Gewertz

 

Catholic Bishops Clarify Desire for Religious Liberty While Achieving Ideal Society

Let's think about this statement by Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I. in his recent article, "Clarifying what's at stake in the health care debate":

Since 1919, the Catholic bishops of the United States have taught that universal access to basic health care is a component of the common good in a fair society.

There is a difference between "universal health care" provided by the government, and "universal health care" provided through volunteer organizations and churches.

I think the confusion for these Bishops (USCCB) is forgetting that when someone else is paying, whether we like it or not, someone else is making the decisions.

Before supporting the idea that the federal government has the moral authority to force people to support the ideal of "universal health care," they should have considered the problem they are now trying to clarify:

Will universal health care cost us our religious freedom?

But there is no such thing as a free lunch.

When someone else is paying, whether we like it or not, someone else is making the decisions.

I can see how the Catholic Church could be for "universal health care"--as all of the early hospitals were started by Catholic Churches!!! They did not turn people away. They were in charge.

The lynchpin for all of noble goals always seems to be forced "giving." God forbids "stealing."

Which begs the questions: at what point is a tax moral? When 50% plus 1 say so?

Frederic Bastiat answers this question in "The Law" in the chapter, "What is Law."

Local event update - Champion the Vote, Debates

Friends - events and happenings mentioned last night (Proposition Language below)

Jason mentioned Champion the Vote - learn more tomorrow night:

Thur., May 17 @ 7pm - After Party
Topic:  "Champion the Vote"

Pio's Restaurant and Cocktail Lounge
401 First Capitol Drive, Saint Charles, MO 63301
more info:

https://www.facebook.com/events/305017712907675/ 

The BFRW has their monthly meeting Featuring Steelman, Brunner, Ed Martin
When: this Friday, May 18, 2012 @ 1:00pm
Where: the Commerce Bank in Kirkwood at the corner of So.Lindbergh and Adams in the lower level at 1pm.

This weekend - ThriVe (PRC) Fun Run - more info
& Paul Curtman fundraiser see Facebook ($25 at the door)
When: Sat. night from 6 - 9pm
Where: Ed Martin/Cole McNary Campaign Headquarters, 932 Meramec Station Rd, Fenton, MO

Next week - Airport Township Meeting featuring MSD official on the over $900,000,000.00 bond issue.
When: Thursday, May 17 @ 7

at the Pattonville Education Center, St Charles Rock Rd

JUNE 5, 2012 SPECIAL ELECTION- Propositions - Check here for the June 5, 2012 Special Election Propositions.(PDF)

Monday, June 11 at 7:30pm
GOP Primary Senatorial Debate at Lindenwood  University - Moderated by Jamie Allman with 97.1′s very own Dana Loesch on the panel. more info

Location: The Bezemes Family Theater in the J. Scheidegger Center For The Arts Lindenwood University

Address: 2300 West Clay St. Saint Charles, MO 63301

RESERVE YOUR TICKETS by calling the Box Office at (636) 949-4433. Seating is not guaranteed unless you reserve a ticket

Surprising Side Effects of Rising College Costs (Image)

Courtesy of: Online College News - http://www.onlinecollege.org/rising-college-costs

Senate Chairman Conrad’s Budget Proposal: More Taxes Than President’s Budget, No Spending Cuts, No Structural Reform

First - the Twitter version:

Senate Budget GOP ‏ @BudgetGOP

Unanimous Republican participation at our Budget Committee 'mark-up'. Not as much on the Democrat side... http://pic.twitter.com/P7z5MnRh

Failure to vote on budget a "national embarrassment," Sen. Sessions says: http://budget.senate.gov/republican/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=6d650809-85b0-4b62-8e7a-14283f9b66a7

Politico: "Conrad's budget "markup" Wed. won't even be a real mrkup b/c Sen's won't actually offer amendments or vote" http://ow.ly/amfi2

Note: Relative to the House fiscal commission plan that failed 38-382, Chairman Conrad's plan spends $671bn more and taxes $899bn more.

The Hill: Budget Chairman Kent Conrad bowed to pressure from fellow Dems on Tuesday & postponed a committee vote on a 2013 budget resolution

NYT: Conrad said cmte Dems had tried to produce a marker for the budget debate, but decided to fall back on... the Bowles-Simpson blueprint.

---Here's the email version:

NOTE: The Budget Committee had been scheduled to hold an official mark-up today, but that was cancelled yesterday. Senators will now only be allowed to give opening statements; no amendments will be offered and no votes will be cast.

 

April 18, 2012

For Immediate Release

Contact:  Stephen Miller,

               Andrew Logan: 202.228.0575

 

Chairman Conrad's Budget Proposal: More Taxes Than President's Budget, No Spending Cuts, No Structural Reform

 

All of the deficit reduction in Senator Conrad's budget comes from tax increases. The proposal will increase taxes by $2.6 trillion and provides no net change in spending relative to the current policy baseline after enactment of the Budget Control Act. Taxes in 2022 would be double the level that would be realized under a revenue baseline that accounts for the extension of current tax policies. Over the 10-year period, the tax increases in the Chairman's proposal exceed those proposed by the President by $600 billion.

 

The Chairman misses the opportunity to reduce spending. Over the 10 years covered by his proposal, net spending is unchanged. Any spending reductions, such as claimed savings from health care, are used to pay for spending increases elsewhere. While this is better than the budget proposed by the President—who calls for spending increases of $1.4 trillion relative to the baseline—it is far worse than the budget passed by the House, which cuts spending by $3.9 trillion over 10 years. Spending will grow twice as fast as the rate of inflation. Spending in 2022 will be 49 percent higher than in 2012, while inflation over that period is expected to be only 22 percent.

 

Relative to the Fiscal Commission plan rejected by the House on a 38–382 vote, Chairman Conrad's proposal spends $700 billion more and increases taxes by an additional $900 billion.

 

Chairman Conrad's Budget Plan
(2013–2022 total, in trillions)
	Chairman's Mark	Change from Current Policy	% Change 2012–2022
Taxes	$39.6	+$2.6	106%
Spending	$44.0	$0.0	49%
Gross Debt, End of 2022	$22.9	-$2.6	43%
Interest Expense	$4.5	-$0.3	196%

 

Gross federal debt under the Chairman's budget will reach almost $23 trillion at the end of 2022. That is an increase of $8.2 trillion from the level at the close of the last fiscal year. Debt in 2022 will be 43 percent higher than the end of this fiscal year.

 

The increase in debt drives large increases in the government's net interest expense. Interest costs in 2022 of $662 billion will be three times what they are today—and will more than exceed the base cost of the national defense in that year. In fact, interest costs will exceed the cost of defense in 2020, and remain there throughout the projection period.

 

Chairman Conrad's Budget Plan
(2013–2022 total, in trillions)
	Chairman's Mark	Change from Current Policy	% Change 2012–2022
Medicare (Function 570)	$6.6	$0.0	74%
Other Health (Function 550)	$6.3	-$0.1	131%
Education (Function 500)	$1.0	$0.0	28%

 

While the Chairman's proposal vitiates the Budget Control Act fallback sequester mechanism, it retains the defense cuts ($300 billion) in the sequester (which are in addition to defense cuts in the BCA caps). Defense spending in 2022 would be 9 percent higher than 2012, or about 13 percent less than would be needed to keep pace with inflation.

 

Mandatory spending grows at three times the rate of inflation under the Chairman's proposal. Net Medicare spending is virtually unchanged (-$31 billion) relative to current law. The Medicare physician pay freeze assumed in the proposal is offset by other changes in the program. Other health spending shows a slight decrease, but is largely unchanged. In particular, the health insurance subsidies and Medicaid expansions of the president's health law are preserved, resulting in spending for the health function that more than doubles between 2012 and 2022. While those unfunded obligations are set in place, there is no structural reform to prevent existing entitlements from insolvency.

 

Education spending is largely unchanged. The Chairman proposes to eliminate subsidized student loans for undergraduates, which provides $45 billion in savings over 10 years. Education spending will continue to grow faster than the rate of inflation.

 

To view this analysis as a PDF, please click here.

 

 

Eagle Forum discussion on Property Rights; Extra Links and Topics Discussed

To follow up from discussion last night at the Eagle Forum Education Center:

We can do something about private property rights being diminished. The major way is to be prepared to help gather signatures for a future initiative petition drive led by Ron Calzone. Here is a link to his speech explaining the specifics in Missouri regarding our Constitution and property rights.

How does the Missouri Constitution protect you? Know your Missouri Bill of Rights!

Here are two links regarding Rombach Farms Pumpkin Patch and possible property rights abuse:

1. Here's the FOX article about the drainage ditch in Rombach Farms Pumpkin Patch
http://fox2now.com/2012/04/16/chesterfield-outlet-mall-plan-could-wipe-out-popular-farm/

2. discusses raising taxes to finance the outlets and competition with Chesterfield Mall
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/print-edition/2012/04/06/outlet-malls-battle-for-priority-in.html?page=all

NOTE: I can't find the "Save the Rombach Pumpkin Patch" Facebook page. I'm wondering if the FOX story pushed the developers to find somewhere else to put in the ditch?

We lightened it up last night: Cartoon illustration with featuring Reagan and Obama that we all enjoyed last night: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h8O7V-WxWQ

OTHER ODDS AND ENDS:

Eminent Domain Event on April 23, 2012 from 7:30 pm to 9:30pm at the Luminary Center for the Arts hosted by the Show Me Institute.

Please join us for a free advance screening of the Battle for Brooklyn, a documentary about the abuse of eminent domain to make way for luxury housing and a stadium.

Afterwards, we will host a panel discussion about the threat of eminent domain in the Saint Louis area. Homer Tourkakis, owner of Eminent Dental, will discuss his four-year long battle for his business with the City of Arnold.

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

Project Appleseed is an activity of The Revolutionary War Veterans Association, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, dedicated to teaching every American our shared heritage and history as well as traditional rifle marksmanship skills.

Next weekend in Missouri:
Osage Beach, MO - Oct 21-28

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

What is the role of government? Kimberly-Clark paper mill shuts down in Washington state.

"The federal government announced last week that it approved $1.79 million in emergency assistance for 570 Kimberly-Clark workers in Everett to help them find new jobs. At this point, it's unclear exactly how the money will be used, but local officials said the money will be put to good use."

http://www.king5.com

(video) Phyllis Schlafly calls for an apology

St. Louis Northside rising against political corruption - EVENT

NORTHSIDE RISING: ANTI-POLITICAL CORRUPTION,... ABUSE OF POWERS & RETALIATION PRESS CONFERENCE & RALLY
By Romona Taylor Williams

Thursday March 22, 2012, 5:00pm @ Alderman Antonio French's 21st ward office 4200 Natural Bridge, St. Louis MO.

NORTHSIDE RISING: “COURAGE TO DISSENT”
Rally & Press Conference Against Northside Political Corruption, Abuse of Powers & Retaliation

PREAMBLE: WE THE PEOPLE stand united to call for an end to POLITICAL CORRUPTION, ABUSE OF POWERS AND RETALIATION in the City of St. Louis... and in particular the NORTHSIDE!!!

WHY: In 5 short years Northside residents have been humiliated by
5 elected officials’ convictions of criminal and ethics violations.
Northside residents expect and deserve a higher code of ethics from our elected officials.

WHO:

Alderman Antonio FRENCH, 21st Ward, was recently found guilty of campaign finance violations by the MO Ethics Commission and fined over $38,000. This is the most recent of other occurences.

State Senators EL-AMIN and Jeff SMITH were charged and convicted of bribery and obstructing justice.

State Senator Robin WRIGHT-JONES was charged and fined over $190,000 by the Missouri Ethics Commissions for campaign finance violations.

State Representative Rodney HUBBARD was charged and fined over
$300,000 by the MO Ethics Commission for campaign finance violations.

Rally & Press Conference: Thursday March 22, 2012, 5:00 p.m.
Alderman Antonio French 21st Ward Office
4200 Natural Bridge, St. Louis, MO

!!!MEDIA INVITED!!!

You're Invited: Book Discussion on Phyllis Schlafly's Supremacists on Tuesday Nights in Clayton

RSVP by posting a comment.

 

START Book discussion on Phyllis Schlafly's "The Supremacists"

March. 27 - 7:00 p.m. (Tuesday) - Topical Study - The Tyranny of Judges and How to Stop it
Where: Eagle Forum Education Center, 7800 Bonhomme Ave. (Clayton, MO)
You can download the chapters and questions by clicking on the chapter title:

   * Judges Rewrite the Constitution
   * Religion

April 3 - 7:00 p.m. (Tuesday) - Topical Study - The Tyranny of Judges and How to Stop it
Where: Eagle Forum Education Center, 7800 Bonhomme Ave. (Clayton, MO)

   * Marriage
   * Sovereignty and Foreign Law

April 10 - 7:00 p.m. (Tuesday) - Topical Study - The Tyranny of Judges and How to Stop it
Where: Eagle Forum Education Center, 7800 Bonhomme Ave. (Clayton, MO)


   * Property Rights
   * Property Rights Battle in MIssouri

April 17  - 7:00 p.m. (Tuesday) - Topical Study - The Tyranny of Judges and How to Stop it
Where: Eagle Forum Education Center, 7800 Bonhomme Ave. (Clayton, MO)

   * Pornography
   * Life & Feminism
   * Law Enforcement

April 24  - 7:00 p.m. (Tuesday) - Topical Study - The Tyranny of Judges and How to Stop it
Where: Eagle Forum Education Center, 7800 Bonhomme Ave. (Clayton, MO)

   * Immigration
   * Elections
   * Parents' Rights

May 1  - 7:00 p.m. (Tuesday) - Topical Study - The Tyranny of Judges and How to Stop it
Where: Eagle Forum Education Center, 7800 Bonhomme Ave. (Clayton, MO)


   * Taxes
   * How Supremacy Began & How It Grew
   *
May 8 - 7:00 p.m. (Tuesday) - Topical Study - The Tyranny of Judges and How to Stop it
Where: Eagle Forum Education Center, 7800 Bonhomme Ave. (Clayton, MO)


   * How to Stop Judicial Supremacy
   * Wrap up

May 15

---Make up for anything we've missed -- Maybe do a dinner?

Palestinian woman can't advance because of Israel? What about the men?

The [U.N.] resolution calls Israel's occupation of disputed territory "the major obstacle for Palestinian women with regard to their advancement, self-reliance and integration in the development of their society."

Read more on Newsmax.com: UN Panel Slams Israel, Ignores Syria; Obama Gives Wind Firms $2.6 Billion

Now really? No one at the U.N. can see the ongoing conflict in Syria, with hundreds of women dead, as something worth passing a resolution against?


Even more, women and men are made in God's image, and all the violence around the world horrific. It's too bad that so much taxpayer money goes for passing worthless feel-good-for-the-feminists resolutions interlaced with internationalist-special-interest agendas.   

Study Shows Head Start Preschool Programs Don't Measure Up--to what?

My question is: to what do Head Start Preschool Programs not measure up to? Is it really possible that these kids are less prepared after these programs? I think that should cause us to really start re-thinking how our little ones need more than programing to reach their unique potential throughout their lives.

"In January 2010, after four years of “analysis,” the HHS Department finally released the results on Head Start’s impact on first graders. The study found that, compared to their control group peers, Head Start failed to boost students’ cognitive abilities across 41 measures. Moreover, first grade teachers reported that former Head Start students were actually less prepared in math than the non-Head Start students."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/03/05/parents-deserve-to-know-the-facts-about-head-start/

State Senate Lines - calls and email needed

I've gotten a few emails on this, and with your help, it's possible to put pressure on this committee by Urging them to vote "no" and to go back and adopt the second Judicial Commission map that was constitutional, fairer and only thrown out on a technicality.


Here's the back story: 


Many of you already are aware of the confusion of the re-districting process since the first maps were vetoed by the governor and then sent to the state supreme court.  Most maps have now been resolved except for the state Senatorial boundaries which I am contacting you about.  A new commission (of 4 Dems. & 4 Repubs) was appointed by the governor.  That commission drew yet another map that moved Sen. Cunningham's 7th district to the Kansas City area where she could not move to and is a majority Democrat Party locale. The four Republican members of the Commission caved like marshmallows to the four Democrat members and gave them whatever they wanted in other areas as well.  Was this an act of vengeance within their own party for the St.Louis area China hub, or resistance to Obamacare from Prop. C sponsored by Sen.Cunningham?  Or was it just poor leadership?

Whatever the motivation, please contact these commission members and let them know that they can do better and say no their map and yes to the previous judicial map.

Jean Paul Bradshaw II    jpbradshaw@lathropage.com
Steve Ehlmann                 sehlmann@att.blackberry.net
Marc Ellinger                     mellinger@blitzbardgett.com
Nick Myers                         myerscpa@swbell.net
Lowell Pearson                 lowell.pearson@huschblackwell.com
Lloyd Smith                       lloyd@mogop.org

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

The senate redistricting commission recently drew a map that many believe is unconstitutional for reasons listed below.  It also totally eliminates a district for Senator Jane Cunningham to run in.  Not only is the Republican Party hurt by the map, but conservatives are especially targeted. 

Seven concerned plaintiffs around the state have filed a federal lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the egregious map.  Many have been asking what they can do.

The only avenue for you 

to stop the damage is to send an email no later than 4:30pm on Friday, March 9th to the bipartisan Senate Apportionment Commission at matt.hesser@oa.mo.gov.  Below are some problems with the map that you may want to pick and choose to include in your comments as well as your own thoughts.  It is important to comment in your own words even if you use the ideas below.  It is also important to comment because the more comments there are the better chance there is of either convincing the commissioners to drop the unconstitutional map or for the federal lawsuit to win.  We don't want to get to court and the Commissioners say no one cared enough to comment.

The commissioners have a final vote on this bad map after the public comment deadline of May 9th.  Urge them to vote "no" and to go back and adopt the second Judicial Commission map that was constitutional, fairer and only thrown out on a technicality.  This is what everyone expected in both parties.  Everyone was shocked.

**The map is unconstitutional because it advantages urban regions over rural regions in the state.  Since the map contains much lower populations in the urban districts, it produces more senators from the urban areas.  This regional advantage is discriminatory and not permissible under the U.S. Constitution. 

**Since the rural senate districts are more populated on the redrawn map, that means there are more constituents for a senator to service and therefore less attention to his/her constituents.

**The populations are moving out of the urban areas to the suburban and rural areas, so to overpopulate those rural districts will only exacerbate the population differences in a short number of years.  The map redrawing happens once every ten years after the census and seeks to make all the districts as equally populated as possible. 

**The senate map the judicial commission drew is fair in this regard and has only a deviation of 7.79% between the highest and lowest populated districts while the Democrat and Republican Commission has a larger deviation of 9.6%.  The judges did a far better job than the Ds and Rs. 

**Senate District 7 (Cunningham-Republican, Chesterfield) in St. Louis County which is up for election this year was arbitrarily moved across the state to a very urban, Democrat district in Kansas City that previously had an even number and was therefore not up for election.  This appears purposeful to increase the Democrat vote in a very liberal area for the upcoming critical national and state elections not to mention provide an extra Democrat senator for the next two legislative sessions. 

**That urban Kansas City Senator's District (#10-Jolie Justice) was flip flopped the opposite direction to a very rural area in the central eastern part of the state.  These constituents of the new 10th will have no say in whom their senator is for two more legislative sessions and Sen. Justice will certainly not move to that area. 
 YOU SHOULD ALSO CALL OR EMAIL YOUR CONCERNS TO THE REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION LISTED BELOW.  IN ADDITION TO THE POINTS ABOVE, YOU MAY WANT TO POINT OUT MORE SPECIFIC PARTY INTERESTS.
**The population numbers in St. Louis City and County were changed enough to yield only one Republican Senator from the area in the near future rather than the present four.  Without having vigorous Republican senate campaigns in St. Louis County, the needed 150,000 votes needed to win statewide elections for Republicans is lost.  This map is clearly a Democrat's and a liberal's dream map and unfortunately the Republicans on the Commission gave away the store. 

**St. Louis, the economic engine of the state loses it's influence in the senate with this most recent map.  Not only did St. Louis City and County lose an entire senate district when they lost less than 1/4 of a senate district in population, they increased the likelihood of the representation soon being six Democrats to one Republican senator rather than the present four and four.  Because the Republicans are in the majority and therefore set the agenda and direction of the legislature, St. Louis has even less influence having to depend on the minority party to represent them.  The population decrease of 40,000 (less than 1/4 of a senate seat) did not necessitate the loss of a senate district.  All the Republican and Democrat senators in the St. Louis region submitted a map they had agreed to.  It was not even considered by this second bipartisan commission. 

**The clear advantage given away to the Democrats for the national and statewide campaigns (Obama, McCaskill, Nixon) by transferring District 7 into downtown Kansas City to energize that liberal population not only for the Democrat primary but the general election.  It is hard to imagine Republicans would vote to so benefit the Democrats in such a critical election year.  
The Republican Commissioners are:Jean Paul Bradshaw II jpbradshaw@lathropgage.com 816-460-5507.  Lathrop & Gage in KC

Steve Ehlmann sehlmann@att.blackberry.net 636-949-7520.  The only Republican "no" vote but that needs to be shored up so he doesn't flip to a yes.

 

Marc Ellinger mellinger@blitzbardgett.com 573-230-1192, Vice Chair of the Commission and head of Republican delegation.  No one knows why GOP Chair Lloyd Smith put him on a list from which the Governor chose since Ellinger testified for the plaintiffs against the Republican Congressional maps.

Nick Myers myerscpa@swbell.net 417-623-2214, SW part of state.

Lowell Pearson lowell.pearson@huschblackwell.com 573-761-1115,

Lloyd Smith lloyd@mogop.org, 573-636-3146, Executive Director, MO Republican Party.  This is where the buck stops since he is well payed to lead the Republican Party in our state.  If any of the commissioners did not understand the repercussions of their decision, it is Lloyd's job to strongly inform them or not put their name on a list of potential commissioners to begin with.