Showing posts with label budget cuts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label budget cuts. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Brent Bozell calls out GOP leadership on Fiscal Cliff
ForAmerica's Brent Bozell writes the Republican Leadership of the U.S. House and U.S. Senate challenging them on putting tax raises on the table. The question he asks is, "If you now claim a tax increase on small business is the correct course of action, were you lying all along when you claimed this tax increase would decimate the economy?" See full letter at ForAmerica...
Read More......
Labels:
budget cuts,
CBO,
Congress,
economy,
fiscal cliff,
leadership,
Obamacare,
repeal,
Republican,
savings,
taxes
Friday, June 15, 2012
Panetta: Cyberattacks could paralyze this country
(Hat tip: Carolyn Webb) -- Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned a Senate panel today [Wed., June 13] that America faces "the potential for another Pearl Harbor" launched by enemies who have the capability to wield a cyberattack that would “paralyze this country." Read more at CNS News...
Read More......
Labels:
budget cuts,
Defense Dept.,
Leon Panetta
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Sat., April 16: Tea Party in Corvallis
Benton County Americans for Prosperity (AFP) will hold a Tea Party on Saturday, April 16th from 10:00 a.m. to Noon in front of the Benton County Courthouse, 120 NW Fourth St., in Corvallis.Click image to view full-sized flyer. Read More......
Monday, April 11, 2011
Rep. Richardson: Oregon's Political War Has Begun
REP. DENNIS RICHARDSON (R-Central Point), 4/7/2011 NEWSLETTER - The “Co-Chairs Budget” was the subject of last week’s newsletter. It was signed by my two Democrat Ways & Means Co-Chairs, Senator Richard Devlin (D-Tualatin), Representative Peter Buckley (D-Ashland) and me. ∴ This Co-Chairs Budget was agreed upon after weeks of daily meetings and negotiations between the Democrat and Republican Co-Chairs. ∴ While Oregon’s fiscal problems are being addressed in a bipartisan manner requiring thoughtful and well-reasoned compromise, it was disappointing to learn that three of Oregon’s most powerful political groups, the Oregon Education Association (OEA), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), are now trying to disrupt this bipartisan work through deception, intimidation and demagoguery. ∴ Consider the deceit in their political attack ad now being aired from Portland to Ashland: Click Here. Unfortunately it has caused anxiety and fear for vulnerable and confused seniors who have been deceived by it.We three Co-Chairs and the rest of your Democrat and Republican legislators on the Ways and Means Committee are working together to face the reality of a difficult state economy. Such is not the case with three of Oregon’s most powerful unions, the OEA, AFSCME and SEIU. Instead, they collaborate and propagate lies. Their ad says: “Richardson wants to make drastic cuts to services we depend on … so Richardson can keep more than $440 million in unspent funds for his political priorities.”
This statement is false. The ending balance belongs to all Oregonians for protection from further recessionary pain.
As far as I am concerned, the airing of this fear-mongering statewide political attack ad is intended as a warning to other Legislators. They want to scare them into dancing to the unions’ tune, or risk being the subject of the next attack ad. The goal is to motivate the “unions’ legislators” to abandon fiscal prudence and perpetuate Oregon’s history of unsustainable spending. It was this kind of denial of economic reality that has grown Oregon’s all-funds budget by 50% in just the last four years.
Meanwhile, these very same public employee unions stand against every government reform intended to stabilize Oregon’s out-of-control spending, including the reforms suggested by former Governor Kulongoski’s Reset Cabinet and those proposed in Governor Kitzhaber’s recommended budget.
People in Oregon are tired of such negative political smear campaigns, and long for truth, transparency and meaningful reform. For the past decade Oregon unemployment has been above the national average. Yet during this same period, Oregonians have watched state government spending balloon by more than 100% in only ten years.
While hundreds of thousands of Oregon workers have taken pay cuts or lost their jobs, these public employee unions have negotiated sweetheart benefit deals, automatic pay increases and lucrative retirement packages. Even Wisconsin’s employee unions have allowed something to be paid by their members toward their retirement plans and health benefits. But not Oregon.
The attack ad states, “Richardson wants to make drastic cuts to services we depend on….” It implies the “we” are seniors, kids and vulnerable Oregonians. In fact, the opposite is true. The unions are angry because I suggest that their union members pay something toward their retirement and group insurance plans, which would free-up hundreds of millions of precious dollars that could provide services vital for Oregon’s most vulnerable seniors, disabled and children.
Oregon has great teachers who are members of the OEA, and dedicated public servants who are members of AFSCME and SEIU. These teachers and public workers should be embarrassed. While they work hard and earn their pay, their union bosses and lobbyists wield political power like aristocrats and take home six-figure paychecks, while acting as if they have actually contributed something to society.
The public sector unions get their employers to collect their union dues for them, which they use to recruit, fund and elect “their legislators.” These legislators pass pro-union legislation that gives the union members favored pensions, positions and pay. Such “sweetheart” union power brokering is incestuous and is threatening the financial stability of our local, state and federal government.
Political war has been declared against me and other fiscal conservatives by the OEA, AFSCME and SEIU. I am unimpressed. I will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats to pass a balanced budget that will meet the needs of Oregon’s most vulnerable citizens with the revenue we have available.
If we win, we pass the best balanced budget possible, end this legislative session and go home. In short, if we win, Oregon wins.
Sincerely,

Dennis Richardson
State Representative Read More......
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Last-Minute Deal Averts Shutdown
WALL STREET JOURNAL, 4/9/2011 - Last-Minute Deal Averts Shutdown
Reactions:
COMING UP: The Clash over the national debt ceiling and the 2012 budget.
FREEDOM LINE BLOG Sen. Hutchison: Debt Ceiling Debate ‘Armageddon’ - Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) calls the next fiscal fight – raising the statutory debt limit when it’s reached in May – “Armageddon” and the most important policy decision of most members’ careers. See video at RealClear Politics
Hang tough Republicans! --bc Read More......
Reactions:
- DICK MORRIS.COM/4/9/2011 - It's No Deal, It's a Sellout!
KARL ROVE: Boehner "Is The Winner" (video at RealClear Politics)
COMING UP: The Clash over the national debt ceiling and the 2012 budget.
FREEDOM LINE BLOG Sen. Hutchison: Debt Ceiling Debate ‘Armageddon’ - Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) calls the next fiscal fight – raising the statutory debt limit when it’s reached in May – “Armageddon” and the most important policy decision of most members’ careers. See video at RealClear Politics
Hang tough Republicans! --bc Read More......
Labels:
budget,
budget cuts,
government,
shutdown,
U.S. House of Representatives
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
House Rules Revisited: An early defeat for the spending cutters.
WALL STREET JOURNAL/REVIEW & OUTLOOK, 1/11/2011, (Hat tip: Linda Bartcher, ONE WEEK INTO THE 112TH CONGRESS...) - "A week ago we praised the House rules offered by the new Republican majority to make it harder to tax and spend. There's a less hopeful coda to that story that is worth reporting to keep the spending-cut pressure on the GOP.
We praised new 'spending reduction accounts' designed to hold money from specific spending cuts rather than let that cash be spent on something else. The idea is that if, say, the House killed a $100 million earmark for a bridge to nowhere from a spending bill, the $100 million would go to reduce the deficit rather than return to the spending pool.
In last week's House GOP conference, however, a group of fiscal hawks led by Arizona Congressman Jeff Flake tried to strengthen the enforcement on those accounts so they'd be harder for Members of the Appropriations Committee to raid. The current rule puts the accounts under the control of Appropriators˜the spenders in chief˜and requires only that they inform the House of what they do with the money.
Mr. Flake˜and allies Jim Jordan of Ohio, Tom Graves of Georgia and Paul Ryan of Wisconsin˜offered an amendment to sequester the accounts until the end of the budget year and then allow the money to be spent elsewhere only with a vote of the entire House.
Notably, the reformers were opposed by Speaker John Boehner and the leadership and lost on a voice vote. Mr. Ryan, the House Budget Chairman who has credibility with new Members, was just about to speak on behalf of the amendment when Mr. Boehner abruptly intervened and called for the vote."
Mr. Boehner asked Republicans to trust him and his fellow leaders, saying that they and the Appropriators have got the message and are determined to cut spending. As a sign of his good faith, new Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers even cut his committee's budget by 9%, or four percentage points more than the 5% ordered by the GOP. But Mr. Rogers also lobbied Mr. Boehner against the Flake-Ryan amendment as an affront to his committee's authority.
We realize this is inside baseball, but of such details is the spending problem made. As Mr. Flake notes, the reason to support strict anti-spending rules is because the communal pressure in Congress to spend is so great. Appropriators try to limit access to specific budget information, all the while asserting that cutting this or that program isn't worth the effort because the money will be spent elsewhere in any case. Mr. Flake's rule would have made that harder.
Messrs. Boehner and Rogers will no doubt abide by the spirit of the new rule in the short run. But as public pressure and media scrutiny ebb, the temptation to return to spending as usual will be enormous. We report all this so readers know what happened, and also so Messrs. Boehner and Rogers realize that some of us will keep paying attention." Read More......
We praised new 'spending reduction accounts' designed to hold money from specific spending cuts rather than let that cash be spent on something else. The idea is that if, say, the House killed a $100 million earmark for a bridge to nowhere from a spending bill, the $100 million would go to reduce the deficit rather than return to the spending pool.
In last week's House GOP conference, however, a group of fiscal hawks led by Arizona Congressman Jeff Flake tried to strengthen the enforcement on those accounts so they'd be harder for Members of the Appropriations Committee to raid. The current rule puts the accounts under the control of Appropriators˜the spenders in chief˜and requires only that they inform the House of what they do with the money.
Mr. Flake˜and allies Jim Jordan of Ohio, Tom Graves of Georgia and Paul Ryan of Wisconsin˜offered an amendment to sequester the accounts until the end of the budget year and then allow the money to be spent elsewhere only with a vote of the entire House.
Notably, the reformers were opposed by Speaker John Boehner and the leadership and lost on a voice vote. Mr. Ryan, the House Budget Chairman who has credibility with new Members, was just about to speak on behalf of the amendment when Mr. Boehner abruptly intervened and called for the vote."
Mr. Boehner asked Republicans to trust him and his fellow leaders, saying that they and the Appropriators have got the message and are determined to cut spending. As a sign of his good faith, new Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers even cut his committee's budget by 9%, or four percentage points more than the 5% ordered by the GOP. But Mr. Rogers also lobbied Mr. Boehner against the Flake-Ryan amendment as an affront to his committee's authority.
We realize this is inside baseball, but of such details is the spending problem made. As Mr. Flake notes, the reason to support strict anti-spending rules is because the communal pressure in Congress to spend is so great. Appropriators try to limit access to specific budget information, all the while asserting that cutting this or that program isn't worth the effort because the money will be spent elsewhere in any case. Mr. Flake's rule would have made that harder.
Messrs. Boehner and Rogers will no doubt abide by the spirit of the new rule in the short run. But as public pressure and media scrutiny ebb, the temptation to return to spending as usual will be enormous. We report all this so readers know what happened, and also so Messrs. Boehner and Rogers realize that some of us will keep paying attention." Read More......
Friday, January 7, 2011
Hecker: Six Steps to the Right
THE CORNER, 1/5/2011 by Ryan Hecker - "Based on Speaker Boehner’s performance today, I am very hopeful that the Republican leadership will stick by the principles of limited government and economic conservatism in the coming term. Speaker Boehner and the new Congress listened to the American people and enforced a rule today that requires each bill introduced to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress authority to do what the bill does. This idea was the top vote-getter (82 percent support) in the grassroots, crowd-sourced Contract from America. What this reflects is that the Speaker recognizes that the election victory in November was not a mandate for Republican rule, but rather a last chance to stand up for conservative ideals and fix the tax-and-spend Capitol Hill mindset.
Going forward, the new majority must remain bold in passing legislation that will fundamentally change Washington D.C. culture. The tea party movement does not want weak attempts at deficit reduction with minor spending cuts. We want a balanced-budget amendment and enforced spending cap limits. We want Republicans to arduously fight to defund Obamacare and to take real steps to curb lobbyist power that ultimately harms the American consumer.
President Obama has moved our country five steps to the left. Speaker Boehner needs to lead a charge that moves our country six steps to the right, not just one or two."
— Ryan Hecker is a lawyer in Houston and organized the Contract from America. Read More......
Going forward, the new majority must remain bold in passing legislation that will fundamentally change Washington D.C. culture. The tea party movement does not want weak attempts at deficit reduction with minor spending cuts. We want a balanced-budget amendment and enforced spending cap limits. We want Republicans to arduously fight to defund Obamacare and to take real steps to curb lobbyist power that ultimately harms the American consumer.
President Obama has moved our country five steps to the left. Speaker Boehner needs to lead a charge that moves our country six steps to the right, not just one or two."
— Ryan Hecker is a lawyer in Houston and organized the Contract from America. Read More......
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
New mantra for incoming House GOP majority is ‘cut and grow’
House Republicans pledged to run “a cut-and-grow majority” in the 112th Congress that begins Wednesday, arguing they can expand the economy while reducing government spending. Read more at The Hill...
Read More......
Thursday, October 28, 2010
GOP, Poised for Gains, Plan $100B in Cuts
Republican leaders, ever more confident of their chances of winning control of the House, begin devising an agenda topped by a push for more than $100 billion in spending cuts. Read more at Fox News...
Read More......
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Asteroids, NASA and budget cuts
- BIG THINK, 9/10/2010 by Michio Kaku - Two Asteroids Buzzed the Earth This Week [9/5] --Should We Be Afraid? - BIG THINK, 9/7-8/2010 by Michio Kaku - NASA Is Running Out of Money to Monitor Earth-Destroying Asteroids (Part 1 of 2) and (Part 2 of 2)
Plans for sending humans to visit an asteroid are heating up, with at least one company already scoping out the technological essentials for a deep space expedition within a decade, given the go-ahead. ∴ The asteroid space trek is seen as both scientifically valuable and as a dress rehearsal for a Mars mission, NASA officials have said. It could also hone ideas for planetary defense to guard Earth from a messy head-on clash with a space rock. ∴ Launching a manned asteroid mission by 2025 is NASA's new goal set by President Barack Obama, who announced the plan in April. The deep space mission would serve as a stepping stone to a crewed mission to Mars in the mid-2030s, he said. ∴ Lockheed Martin, which has been building NASA's Orion space capsule to replace the agency's retiring shuttle fleet, has already completed a study on how an asteroid mission might work. Read more at Fox News... Read More......
Labels:
American Exceptionalism,
budget cuts,
defense,
Earth,
Lockheed Martin,
monitoring,
NASA,
planetary,
space
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Letter: Advocates for M66 and 67 are playing games with priorities
CORVALLIS GAZETTE-TIMES/Opinion, 1/7/2009 by John H. Detweiler - The Oregon Legislature is playing "Washington Monument" with the voters. ∴ There is an old tale that circulates in federal budgeting circles that when the U.S. Park Service doesn't receive enough money from the Congress, the Park Service closes the Washington Monument and tells the tourists to go to Capital Hill and complain to their senators and representatives who will hopefully - from the Park Service point of view - give money to the Park Service. ∴ We keep hearing that if measures 66 and 67 do not pass, the Legislature will have to make some very painful adjustments to the budget in February. ∴ Had the most important items been funded by taxes in place and the least important items funded by the new taxes imposed with HB3406 and HB2649 - measures 66 and 67, there would be no adjustments to make. The least important items would just not be funded, and the Legislature wouldn't have a problem.
John H. Detweiler
Corvallis Read More......
John H. Detweiler
Corvallis Read More......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)







.jpg)
