As Democrats prepare to let the Bush tax cuts expire, the budgetary ramifications of those cuts will be a topic I will return to as the debate continues. This is an article I wrote back in February for another website. However, it’s still very valid and I will continue to hammer the main points made in this piece over the next few months as elections approach.

Originally written February 2, 2010

After spending the last few weeks trying to bolster his reputation as a deficit hawk, President Obama destroyed any hope of fiscal sanity by releasing his $3.8 trillion 2010 budget proposal that will result in a $1.6 trillion deficit while also implementing a slew of tax hikes. Last week’s announcement that the economy grew by 5.7% last quarter coupled with the previous miniscule drop in the unemployment rate has increased the White House’s confidence that their excessive spending is restoring economic growth. Echoing the administration’s intentions to throw taxpayer dollars into the economy until it recovers, House minority whip James Clyburn told Fox News that “We’ve got to spend our way out of this recession, and I think economists know that.” However, economist Arthur Laffer, Ph.D. recently told his clients in his latest economic outlook that the economy is heading for a “train wreck” in 2011 that will make the last downturn look mild. According to his projections, the economy will experience a “false recovery” where GDP will grow around 4% in 2010 and unemployment could drop as low as 7%. But President Obama’s planned tax increases and unprecedented deficits will quickly reclaim any economic progress made this year. After 2010, Laffer predicts, “All the factors that will make 2010 (and have already made the last half of 2009) look so good will reverse direction, and 2011 will be a train wreck.” Chief cause for concern is Obama’s plan to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire while also implementing other new tax increases for businesses and wealthy individuals. From reading the president’s “Budget Message”, it’s clear that this administration either doesn’t understand the true effects of the 2003 Bush tax cuts or (what’s probably much more likely) is so ideologically blinded by social-engineering-wealth-redistribution schemes that they willfully misrepresent the true record. Whatever the reason, the president and his lackeys in Congress are laying the foundation for a monumental economic catastrophe. 

We are already witnessing the beginnings of a false recovery like Laffer described. The administration was rewarded last week with the news that US GDP grew at a rate of 5.7% last quarter. However, Investor’s Business Daily explained that “most of the gain – nearly two-thirds, in fact – was a result of an end to the panicked inventory liquidation that took place at US firms last year. Remove that, and a different picture emerges – a 2.2% rise in GDP.” The same article points out that “most economists agree that GDP growth of 3% or so is needed to boost employment. That may in part explain why GDP could grow 2.2% in the third quarter and 5.7% in the fourth quarter, while businesses slashed 735,000 jobs over the same six months.” When GDP growth is looked at year-over-year, a whole new picture is drawn. IDB said, “By that measure, we barely grew – real GDP rose just 0.1% in the fourth quarter from last year, virtually flat. Worse, real nonresidential fixed investment – a proxy for business investment in future output – plunged 14.6% from last year. That’s a shocking vote of “no confidence” in Obamanomics by America’s entrepreneurs and businesses.” Even the recent drop in the unemployment rate from 10.2% to 10% wasn’t the positive event it was made out to be. Writing in American Spectator, financial journalist James Srodes said, “The recent headlined dip in the jobless rate turns out to have been caused by more than 50,000 already jobless people simply giving up and dropping out of the workforce. This has the statistically absurd result that the percentage of people deemed to be unsuccessfully seeking work is judged to have improved.” Obviously, there is plenty of reason to be wary, not celebratory, about the economy’s condition. The president’s budget proposal will only make a bad situation worse.

Seeing how the current “good news” isn’t all it’s being cracked up to be, Laffer’s concerns become more clear. As businesses and individuals react to looming tax increases, Laffer predicts “GDP growth in 2010 will be some 3 to 4% higher than it otherwise should be, thus green shoots. The transfer of income from 2011 to 2010 will not only make 2010 [economic growth] higher than it otherwise would be, it will also make 2011 growth 3 and 4% lower than it otherwise should be because people have shifted income out of 2011 into 2010.” What tax increases are expected to cause this disaster? “In 2010 the US will have a payroll tax rate increase, an estate tax increase, and income tax increases. There’s also a tax increase coming in 2010 on carried interest. This rate will rise from its current level of 15% to 35%, and then it will rise again in 2011.” Stanford economist John Cogan concurred with Laffer’s assessment of looming danger in Obama’s planned tax increases, especially in light of the unprecedented peace-time deficits this administration is proposing. “The primary sources of [deficit] risk come from uncertainty about US government economic policy. In the area of taxation, personal income taxes, especially those on savings and capital formation are set to rise substantially in a year,” Corgan told Human Events.

President Obama’s plans to raise taxes are not only ill-advised because the economy has not fully entered a recovery, but also because his analysis of the Bush tax cuts’ effects on the deficit are wildly false. In his “Budget Message”, Obama asserts that a large portion of the national debt is the “result of the failure to pay for two large tax cuts, primarily for the wealthiest Americans.” This claim willfully misrepresents both the true “costs” of the 2003 Bush tax cuts and their true effects on both the wealthy and middle class.

In their book, “The End of Prosperity”, authors Arthur Laffer, Stephen Moore, and Peter Tanous found, “From 2004 to 2007 federal tax revenue increased by an enormous $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in revenue in American history.” After the Bush tax cuts spurred economic growth that led to more jobs and increased corporate profits, personal and corporate income tax receipts rose 40% in the following three years. The largest gains in tax receipts from the Bush tax cuts came from the cuts in dividend and capital gains tax rates. When “The End of Prosperity” went to press in 2008, the latest data from the Congressional Budget Office reported a “70% increase in capital gains receipts and a 31% hike in dividend tax payments since 2003.” How could the Bush tax cuts have increased federal tax receipts by nearly $1 trillion and still increased the budget deficit?

President Obama’s assertion that the wealthy received disproportionate benefits from the Bush tax cuts is as implausible as his claims that they increased the deficit. When the amount of taxes collected under the Bush plan were compared to those paid under the previous system, it was evident that the Bush tax cuts shifted more of the federal income tax burden onto the wealthiest tax filers. The number of tax filers claiming over $1 million in taxable income rose from 181,000 to 354,000 from 2003 to 2005. Over that period, the total taxes paid by millionaire households “rose 107% in two years, to $273 billion from $132 billion.” The Bush tax cuts led to a thriving economy that almost doubled the number of millionaires in the nation while doubling the revenue collected from these filers. While the wealthiest were paying more, the lowest tax rate was lowered and child credits increased. The resulting tax rates made the tax system more progressive under the Bush cuts. The top 1% of earners paid more income taxes than the bottom 90% combined even though the bottom 90% earned three times the income of the top 1%.

However, as successful as the Bush tax cuts were in fostering economic growth and increasing revenue, they were not enough to offset the effects of the real deficit culprit –  “drunken sailor spending.” Out-of-control spending out-paced federal revenues each year of the Bush administration. This trend increased further after 2006 when Democrats assumed control of Congress and the nation’s purse strings. (If you recall, President Obama was a senator in 2006 and he voted for every spending increase George W. Bush signed into law.) Excessive spending seems to be the only aspect of the Bush economic program that President B. Hussein Obama is not only dedicated to continuing but is taking to a whole new level. Unfortunately, as they continue their failed efforts to spend the nation back to prosperity, the administration is only laying the foundation for an even deeper economic downturn.

Charlie Rangel needs to resign to save his party's credibility.

The Washington Post (not known for being right-of-center) called for Democrat Congressman Charlie Rangel to step down today as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee amid the discovery that Rangel failed to report almost half of his assets. Rangel is currently facing an ethics investigation since it has been discovered that he did not disclose significant portions of his assets including a checking account at the Federal Credit Union worth somewhere between $250,000 and $500,000 and another checking account of similar size at Merrill Lynch. He also did not disclose tens of thousands of dollars of income from dividends and other investments along with money made from the sale of a Harlem townhouse.

Even as Rangel’s dishonesty has been widely reported, Rangel recently announced that he is calling for increased enforcement of tax evaders. The chairman of the committee that oversees writing the nation’s tax code sought to end leniency for errors on tax returns, even when the IRS fully believes they were honest mistakes, made in good faith. Curiously, Rangel didn’t mention whether there would be a specific exception to the harsher enforcement for both himself and Treasury Secretary, Tim “Chronic Tax Cheat” Geithner.

Democrats need to act quickly to remove Rangel from his post if they seek to retain any image of credibility. They cannot impose drastically higher tax rates and penalties for mistakes while allowing their own members to play as fast and loose with the tax code as they wish, especially when the member is the person in charge of writing the tax codes. Rangel has been under investigation for quite awhile now and there is no word from Speaker Nancy Pelosi whether any action will be taken. Voters need to keep Rangel in mind when they head to the polls in November 2010. It would seem that Pelosi’s promise to run “the most ethical Congress in history” has fallen well short of its stated goal.

The AIG bonuses sparked enough anger that liberal attack-dog ACORN took a busload of protestors to executives' homes to scare their families, including the executives' children.

The Washington Times published an article Wednesday disclosing a new bonus that the US House of Representatives snuck in for top aides. Stephen Dinan wrote in his article that one month after voting to punish executives at AIG who received bonuses with a confiscatory 90% tax, the House quietly expanded a program to repay student loans for House staffers. Under the expanded program, top congressional aides earning $168,411 a year are eligible to receive up to $10,000 each year towards repayment of student loans. (I guess we should consider that they do work for the House which probably means they can spend a measly $168,411 on their lunch hour.) Kyle Anderson, a spokesman for the House Administration Committee which has jurisdiction over internal House employment, salaries, and expenses explained, “There’s still a tremendous demand for high-end Hill talent even in this current job market. Expanding eligibility for the benefit allows us to retain valued and seasoned personnel who might otherwise be lured away to more financially lucrative pursuits.” The college loan payments are expected to cost taxpayers $12.6 million this year. The Senate and Executive branch offers similar benefits but neither branch allows employees earning as much as the House to be eligible.

If his excuse sounds familiar, it should because company spokesmen for AIG gave the exact same excuse for the bonuses they paid to executives which drew the anger from top Democrats in Congress who were up-at-arms for the AIG bonuses which had been specifically protected in an amendment to the stimulus bill. The offensive amendment was written by Democrat Senator and large AIG campaign donation recipient, Chris Dodd at the direction of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. Even after the details were revealed, Democrats never toned down their indignation. In response, House Democrats rushed to pass a retroactive 90% tax on the AIG executives’ bonuses in order to reclaim the money. Just one month later, the House upped bonuses for their top staffers already earning $168,411 a year.

This is the same Congress that voted themselves a raise in the midst of skyrocketing unemployment and the subprime meltdown that led to the current deep recession. Just a couple of weeks ago, public outrage caused House Democrats to remove from an appropriations bill a request for several luxurious private jets for their own use. Members of Congress are completely out of touch with reality. They are spending our tax dollars freely and not giving second thought to any provision to reward themselves more. This does help explain how Democrats are so surprised at the outrage they are facing at town hall meetings across the nation. They can’t wait to get back to Capitol Hill where they don’t have to interact with the ignorant unwashed masses who are funding their spending orgy.

Democrat Charlie Rangel who chairs committee that writes tax code, "forgot" half of his assest in his official financial disclosure forms.

Democrat Charlie Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee which writes the US federal tax code, released an amended financial disclosure for 2007. The amended disclosure included over $500,000 worth of assets in his net worth that he claims to have “forgot” in filing the original version. Richard Rubin and Alex Knott reported on the assets that slipped Rangel’s mind in an article for Congressional Quarterly. According to Rubin and Knott, Rangel couldn’t remember that he had a checking account at the Congressional Federal Credit Union worth at least $250,000, an investment account holding at least $250,000, land in southern New Jersey and stock in PepsiCo and fast-food chain owner Yum! Brands. (Honestly, who could keep up with minute details such as these. Who among us has never forgot about that little bit of land we own in southern New Jersey?) All of these assets were omitted from the original net worth statement Rangel filled out by hand and submitted in May of 2008.

The original report showed Rangel’s net worth was in the range of $516,015 to $1,316,000. The amended report moved his net worth to at least $1,028,024 to as much as $2,495,000. Once again, who hasn’t “forgotten” about half of their assets at one time or another?

Rangel also amended his statement of investment income for 2007. His original statement, once again filled out by hand, said the House Ways and Means Committee Chairman received between $6,511 and $17,900. The amended statement reports investment income in the range of $45,423 to $134,700. Once again, Rangel’s original report accounted for less than half of his real assets and that’s considering income remained in the very lowest amount of the range provided.

We have been waiting for quite awhile to see Rangel’s restated disclosures. The House is supposed to be investigating him for earlier revelations that he did not report on his taxes $75,000 in income from a rental property he owns in Central America and inconsistencies regarding his rent-controlled apartments in New York. Something tells me that we shouldn’t hold our breath waiting for Pelosi to order the investigation, much less waiting for him to receive any punishment.

It is outrageous that Rangel remains in his chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee whose primary responsibility is writing the nation’s tax code. Rangel has already been caught cheating on his taxes and now he’s been caught red-handed hiding half of his assets on his financial disclosure statements. (Gee, more problems of transparency in the “Age of Obama” coming out of Nancy Pelosi’s Congress which she promised would be the “most ethical in history” to end the “culture of corruption under the Republicans.) How much would anyone like to bet that the restated assets also weren’t fully disclosed on his tax forms either?

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner who is now in charge of the IRS was the first in a long line of tax cheats nominated by Obama.

So currently, we have Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, a chronic tax cheat, in charge of the IRS. Now, it’s further confirmed that the man who oversees writing of the nation’s tax code also cheated on his taxes while lying to the American public. Yet, it seems that the top Democrats are completely copasetic with everything. Not only do Democrats condone cheating on taxes, they tax evaders to positions controlling the enforcement and creation of the tax code. Our vice president insisted that paying higher taxes is “patriotic” and B. Hussein Obama explained that everyone is going to have to “have some skin in the game” to turn the economy around. Perhaps if Democrats started paying their taxes, others wouldn’t have to kick in so much more of their own skin into the Democrats’ game. This is the “change we can believe in?”

The Huffington Post is carrying a statement made by AFL-CIO Richard Trumka from a labor convention in Pittsburg. Speaking to the group, Trumka explained the union’s opposition to a health care plan with a public option that would tax pricey health care policies. He explained, “We’ll oppose it. It’s actually a stupid concept because if you tax those that have it to pay for those that don’t, eventually those that have [benefits] won’t. Then who do you ultimately tax?”

Gee, where have we heard anything like that? Apparently, the AFL-CIO sees the validity of arguments against confiscatory taxes when they’re incomes and benefits are targeted by the tax man. Too bad, it’s doubtful that Trumka or any other labor heads will apply this logic to the rest of us. However, we should congratulate Trumka for discovering the basic economic fact that tax money doesn’t magically appear out of thin air. It must be taken from somewhere in the private sector which means those funds taken by the government cannot go towards paying employees more or expanding their benefits. ACORN had a similar discovery a couple of years ago when they sued the state of California to keep from paying their employees the higher minimum wage that ACORN played an integral part in getting passed. ACORN explained that the higher wages would prevent them from hiring more workers and providing as many benefits. Just as the AFL-CIO’s revelation will probably work out, ACORN believed the minimum wage law that they pushed for affected them uniquely.

It’s amazing how liberals love to push policies that they don’t want to follow themselves. B. Hussein Obama is a prime example of this tendency. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner has said that he is going to increase prosecutions for tax evasion. Hopefully, he will faithfully begin paying his own taxes. It’s hard to figure out how he would audit himself. Since taking office, Obama has expanded the powers of government to intercept phone calls and emails from US citizens to overseas terrorist suspects. During the election, Obama slammed the Bush administration over this policy but quickly expanded the program after taking office. The same trend has also developed regarding presidential signing statements. After condemning Bush over them, Obama has become quite fond of utilizing them regularly. The examples are endless. From transparency promises to stacking his administration with lobbyists, President Obama seems to openly embrace the same Bush administration policies that he claimed to abhor.

The latest revelation out of the AFL-CIO isn’t anything new. It’s a common occurrence as liberals become acquainted with the real world and learn the negative effects that their policies create. Their awakenings never cause them to change their minds about policies. Instead they just look to pull the strings of power to ensure they are exempted while the rest of us are left to live with the results of leftist ideas.

Just as Orwell wrote in Animal Farm, "Some animals are more equal than others." This is playing out in Obama's key proposals.

 As the debate unfolds over how to fund Obama’s plans to hijack America’s health care industry, it’s hard not to recall the last rule that was left painted on the side of the barn by the end of George Orwell’s Animal Farm, which was “All animals are equal. Some animals are more equal than others.” Currently, one of the methods being considered to fund the president’s health care “reforms” which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will cost over $1.6 trillion (that’s trillion with a ‘t’) over the next decade is to tax all health benefits that exceed the value of the current government plans. This is perhaps one of the most hypocritical proposals that have been made thus far considering that B. Hussein Obama criticized John McCain’s health care proposals that included taxing employee health care benefits during the campaign. Obama focused on this aspect of McCain’s plan and repeatedly issued very sharp attacks. During one campaign speech, when referencing the idea, Obama plainly stated, “I don’t think that’s right.” Apparently, he didn’t think it was right at the time because his position at the time was politically convenient to his campaign. However, just like almost every other campaign promise from tax cuts for 95% of Americans to running the transparent administration in history, Obama and the Democrats are tossing any campaign rhetoric aside when crafting this bill. As several Obama supporters have noted since he took office, candidates don’t literally mean what they say on the campaign trail. They have to say things they don’t mean in order to get elected, everyone should except this and move on. Despite anything common voters may think about this course of action, it seems as if taxing Americans’ employer-provided health care benefits is basically guaranteed to be included in any Democrat health care bill. There is a group, however, that will be exempted from this new tax; union members will not have to pay benefits awarded during collective bargaining agreements. Yes, indeed, “All animals are equal. Some animals are more equal than others.”

On Friday, Bloomberg News published an article detailing the tax proposal which included statements from union officials about the need to protect their employees from new taxes. Gerald Shea, an AFL-CIO lobbying official explained, “Once a collective bargaining agreement is set, employer’s budgets are set, workers’ expectations are set. It doesn’t make sense to go back in the middle of the contract and change it.” Shea fails to realize that every employee participates in a bargaining process when agreeing to compensation and benefits with their employer. Just because these workers don’t pay union dues that benefit the Democrat election machine, though, their expectations aren’t as important to protect as the union employees that played a crucial role in supporting Obama’s campaign last year. Anna Barger, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) explained that union workers often accept lower wages in return for increased benefits. She said that “taxes shouldn’t be taken from the backs of workers who have bargained away wages and other things for their benefits over the years.” There are two very large problems with Barger’s assertion. First, she should be asked to name one industry where the non-union employees earn more than the union employees. Just to save her the time and effort, there isn’t one. For example, the unionized American auto manufacturers pay almost twice as much in wages and benefits than their non-unionized counterparts. Guess which group currently works for companies that don’t require federal bailouts and special government protection in order to operate. Here’s a hint, it’s not anyone affiliated with Ford, Chrysler, or GM. The other fallacy in Barger’s statement is similar to that of Shea, every employee negotiates their wages and benefits when accepting a position. Just as unionized employees, these workers also have their expectations set. Why, then, are non-unionized workers who have less job security and make less than their unionized counterparts considered safe targets to bear the increased tax burdens? The answer is simple, these American workers don’t belong to organizations which contribute millions upon millions of dollars to Democrat elections year in and year out.

When SEIU is involved, ACORN is also usually close by. Currently they are uniting to help Obama push through his health care plan.

 It is also worth noting that the SEUI works hand-in-hand with the very corrupt Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN). ACORN and SEUI have been adamant supporters of just about every policy proposed by Obama and have collaborated to create public spectacles, such as the protests at AIG executives’ homes over their bonuses which were specifically protected in the “stimulus” package through an amendment by Democrat Senator Chris Dodd. Dodd claims he only inserted it at the behest of the Obama administration. However, after the AIG spectacle, the protestors were silent as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paid out larger amounts in executive bonuses. The nurses union which is heavily quoted by the administration as “professional” support of his health care plans is actually an offshoot of ACORN that only represents 1.6% of the nation’s nurses. These organizations are beyond corrupt, yet they are present any time that the president needs to generate some quotes or events in support of his lame-brained plans to spend unprecedented amounts of American taxpayer money and expand the control of the federal government to frightening levels.

The Bloomberg article then quotes Sandra Carter who is a retired Pacific Bell Telephone worker and member of the Communication Workers of America union stated, “I can’t afford the taxes I pay now. Why should I get taxed on a benefit that keeps me a functioning person?” We should all be asking Ms. Carter; why should any of us have to pay additional taxes if you aren’t willing to chip in your “fair share?”

The current proposal would tax any employer-funded health care benefits that are more valuable than the plan currently offered to federal employees. According to Bloomberg, this tax would affect about 40% of Americans. Montana Democrat Representative Max Baucus claims that he is targeting “gold-plated” health care benefits of corporate executives such as the plan valued at $40,543 received by Lloyd Blankfein, the CEO of Goldman Sachs. However, the plan would also raise taxes on workers such as employees of Zappos.com where workers earning $11 an hour receive health benefits valued at $7,500, which is considerably less than the federal workers’ health plans valued at $4,200 for individuals and $7,500 for families. The current tax proposal would leave Zappos.com employees with an additional $3,300 tax bill even though they are only making $11 an hour, or roughly $23,000 per year.

The Zappos.com example shows how the Democrat cronyism works. If Zappos.com employees were to unionize, they would no doubt see increases in their salaries. However, the company would not be able to afford all of them at the higher wage levels so many would risk losing their jobs. While these employees have obviously “bargained away wages and other things for better benefits,” to quote SEIU’s Barger, because they don’t pay dues to a labor organization that ends up financing Democrat politicians campaigns, the Zappos.com employees’ expectations of salary and benefits aren’t worth protecting. Therefore, higher paid union workers will be sheltered from paying the same tax that everyone else will be exposed to because their union dues have bought them protection from the Democrats’ extortion racket. This is the “change we can believe in”?

This health care bill is shaping up to be one of the worst ideas ever considered by the federal government in modern times. While constantly claiming that everyone needs to be willing to chip in “their fair share” in order to take care of others, Democrats consistently exempt their largest constituents from bearing the same burdens that will be placed on every other American. The insinuation that union workers’ wages are somehow worked harder for and therefore should be given special protections is insulting to every American worker that doesn’t belong to a union and often receives lower wages than their union colleagues. This is cronyism at its worst as the administration is proving that they certainly agree that “Some animals are more equal than others.”

Pelosi and the Democrats are pushing a "green energy" bill that will destroy American economy. Once again, no legislator was given time to read entire bill.

The House of Representatives is preparing to pass yet another huge, wasteful, bill that will damage the US economy in unprecedented ways without even giving the legislators voting on it the opportunity to thoroughly read and understand it. The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill is over 1,300 pages long and the last 300 page amendment was added after 3:00 AM the morning before the House was scheduled to vote on it. After seeing the disaster that was the economic stimulus bill which was rushed through by Democrats before a single legislator had read the entire bill, the Democrats are seeking to double-down on this disturbing trend. February’s “stimulus bill” spent close to $1 trillion on programs that had nothing to do with economic recovery. Congress was told by the administration that without the stimulus, unemployment would rise to over 8 percent. However, the stimulus package was supposed to stem the rising flood of unemployed Americans to less than 8 percent. A few months later, unemployment has risen well beyond 9% and is certain to rise above 10% throughout 2009 and even higher in 2010. However, while average Americans didn’t receive any assistance, AIG executives were guaranteed multi-million bonuses through an amendment to the stimulus and billions of dollars are being provided to corrupt groups favored by Democrats such as ACORN. As late as Friday afternoon as Democrats were preparing for a vote on the cap-and-trade bill, House Republicans were informed that they wouldn’t even have access to the entire bill because there wasn’t a copy on the floor.

This bill will devastate the nation’s economy. The average American family can expect their energy bills to “necessarily skyrocket” as Obama explained before the election when discussing his cap-and-trade aspirations. Gasoline prices will rise above last year’s damaging prices of more than $4.00 per gallon and companies will be forced to drastically raise prices for all products in order to remain solvent under the government’s plan for an unprecedented tax increase. The Waxman-Markey bill expands government power over just about every aspect of average American’s lives and is guaranteed to kill millions of jobs in the process. Spain, which already has a similar program, has unemployment over 18% and rising and they have found that for every “green” job created, 2.2 jobs are lost elsewhere in the economy.

Prominent Democrats also have several conflicts of interest concerning this bill. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has $50,000 to $100,000 invested in green energy companies just as the bill’s cosponsor, Rep. Markey. Prominent Democrat and global warming loon, Al Gore’s venture capital firm is currently designing software for corporations to use to track their carbon credits. Gore also owns one of the largest carbon credit firms which is the newest form of indulgences where people can send money to his company to “offset” their carbon footprint. It would definitely seem that Gore, Pelosi, and Markey will profit handsomely off of this legislation. President Obama also has ties to a group in Chicago who would run the carbon exchange where American corporations would buy and sell their carbon credits which will basically be a new form of derivatives. Also supporting the bill are large companies such as GE, Goldman Sachs, and several large energy companies who stand to make fortunes off of the new derivatives market that would be established by the government. All Americans should be especially concerned given that Enron was among the first companies to promote the creation of a credit exchange. This bill is nothing but a huge payoff for friends of Democrats and a massive unconstitutional expansion of government power all at the expense of average American families who will be devastated by this plan.

Even more appalling is that the bill won’t have the slightest effect on the supposed “global warming” problem. Climate experts have stated that the average temperature will decrease by, maybe, .02 degrees by 2050, if we are lucky. Through the usual politicking that takes place required to foist fraudulent bills upon the American people, Democrats have given away over 85% of the carbon credits which will be allocated to businesses. Therefore, any of the supposed benefits of the bill are null and void. There will be absolutely no change in global temperatures, no new energy solutions are available to fill the gap created by removing fossil fuels from the economy which will mean that Americans will have to pay more for less energy, and the government will be granted reprehensible amounts of power of the American people. In a fledgling economy, it is almost criminal to place such a massive tax increase on every American during a deep recession. This is a severe injustice being committed on the American people by the officials elected to represent them.

If this bill passes the House, everyone needs to make a concerted effort to convince their senators to vote against it. Call your senators early and often to demand that they vote against passing this awful bill. Inform them that you will be thinking about this legislation when you head to the polls.

Obama's out-of-control spending means that the promise of tax cuts for 95% of Americans was never possible.

In an interview with Neil Cavuto on Monday June 22, CEO of Swiss America, Craig Smith, explained that Obama’s plans are going to massively raise the tax bills for many more families than he promised during the election. Smith believes that the spending will require increased taxes on anyone making $50,000 a year, far below the original $250,000 income promise that convinced millions of voters to favor him last November. Montana Democrat Max Baucus who is currently working to prepare the health care reform to be considered in Congress has already admitted that the plan will require significant tax increases on many Americans under the magical upper 5% of wage earners promised during the campaign. Two of the four solutions drafted by Baucus include increasing taxes on individuals making $100,000 a year and taxing health benefits with values exceeding $6,182 for individuals and $15,700 for family benefits. This is especially egregious considering that Obama constantly skewered McCain’s health care proposals that would tax health care benefits. During the campaign, Obama stated that he didn’t “think that was right.” However, after winning the election, campaign promises don’t seem to hold much weight in the Obama administration.

While average Americans will see their benefits taxed, employees included in the unions which donated millions to Obama’s campaign victory won’t be affected by the tax increase. Any union contract before 2013 will be grandfathered into a clause that exempts them from the new taxes. Even after 2013, benefits will continue to enjoy exempt status as long as the original packages are only updated and not completely discarded. As we’ve seen throughout the five months of Obama’s presidency, donations to Obama’s campaign were dollars well spent.

As the economy continues to crumble, America’s enemies are increasing their arsenals, and the administration has involved itself in several scandals and abuses of power, it’s apparent that Obama’s campaign promises were just words intended to dupe voters into placing him in power. After not living up to a single campaign promise, B. Hussein Obama needs to be prepared to not let the door hit him on the way out in 2012. Democrats who are currently assisting in Obama’s deceptions should prepare to have their offices packed and ready to move after November of 2010. Obama’s critics during the election were right when they pointed out that his massive spending plans would lead to drastic tax increases. Americans don’t like to be fooled. Now we just hope the nation survives long enough to allow voters to correct the mistakes of 2008.

After spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on their European family vacation and over $25,000 on travel expenses alone for a date night in New York for the president and first lady, the Obama’s are apparently planning their next vacation to Martha’s Vineyard this summer.

While the White House is refusing to confirm the travel plans, Martha’s Vineyard’s locals have confirmed that the president has rented a home in the East Chop neighborhood in Oak Bluffs which is a vacation destination for Oprah Winfrey, Spike Jones, and other prominent African American politicians and celebrities.

All of these vacation plans are insulting to the American people. Throughout the Bush administration, Democrats constantly complained about George W. Bush’s time spent at his Texas ranch. Now that the economy is tanking and Obama is crafting plans to cavalierly spend record amounts of taxpayer money, he has no problem in taking lavish trips. Many American families are concerned about whether they will be able to even take a small vacation this summer. Many are worried about job security and several of Obama’s major plans such as cap-and-trade and his universal health care proposals could result in significant tax increases on already struggling families and the Congressional Budget Office has even projected that these proposals will cause millions of more job losses.

America can’t have their ruling family living in rags. While Americans struggle and face economic uncertaintly, Obama continues to spend their tax dollars for his own benefit. Each time B. Hussein Obama fuels up Air Force One, it takes hundreds of thousands of dollars away from American workers. At least parents can tell their kids to cheer up. They may not be going to Disney Land this year, but their sacrifice is helping to ensure that Obama won’t have to worry about becoming bored in the White House.

It seems Colin Powell doesn't speak for as many Americans as he thought he did.

Just last week, Colin Powell explained, “Americans do want to pay taxes for services. Americans are looking for more government in their life, not less.” The former Secretary of State made these statements as proof of the decline of the Republican Party and their lack of connection with the American electorate. Many have pointed to Powell’s defection during the election when he supported to President B. Hussein Obama over the moderate Republican John McCain as proof positive that Republicans no longer share the concerns of Americans. However, despite Powell’s insistence that Americans actually want to pay higher taxes such as what would be required to fund Obama’s reckless explosion of government powers, the voters of California gave a resounding rebuttal to this idea when they voted against massive tax increases over cuts in state programs to fix the state’s fiscal insolvency. While defeating a bill that would have allowed raises for the salaries of state lawmakers and elected officers, the state also resoundingly rejected efforts to impose another $12 billion in taxes upon Californians who are already paying some of the highest tax bills in the nation. (more…)