ProPublica — IRS Scandal — Targeted Enemies List Includes Tea Party, Patriots, Religious and Conservative Groups — Obama’s Tyranny –Videos
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/TIGTA-201310053fr-revised-redacted-1.pdf
Glenn Beck Ties Together Benghazi, IRS, & AP Scandals ‘Fundamental Transformation’
Glenn Beck – IRS targeted conservatives
IRS Admits Targeting Conservatives – TheBlazeTV – The Glenn Beck Radio Program – 2013.05.10
Lou Dobbs Rips ‘Nixonian’ Obama For Lying ‘Through His Teeth’ About IRS ‘President Who Has Lost His
Paul Steiger: The ProPublica Story
ProPublica founder and CEO, Paul Steiger, on the creation of this foundation-funded investigative newsroom, the challenges they faced and their plans for the future. ProPublica is the first online-only organization to win a Pulitzer Prize.
Paul Steiger: The ProPublica Story part 2
Paul Steiger: The ProPublica Story part 3
Paul Steiger: The ProPublica Story part 4 Q&A
Paul Steiger: The ProPublica Story part 5 Q&A
Jon Stewart Totally DESTROYS Obama Administration Over IRS Scandal | A MUST WATCH
IRS scandal widens
Ex-commissioner on tea party scandal: IRS did “the wrong thing”
Tea Party IRS Investigations Not Politically Motivated? ‘How Stupid Do They Think We Are’
IRS in the spotlight: What’s a 501(c)(4)? By Martina Stewart, CNN
Deceptive Dollars Tied To 501(c)(4) Groups
Mark Levin Dissects Obama, The IRS & The Republican Party in Scandal – Sean Hannity – 5-13-13
Mark Levin Attacks Obama & ‘Impotent’ House GOP Over IRS Scandal ‘Absolutely Unacceptable’
Glenn Beck: Failure to Impeach Over IRS Scandal Means America ‘Already Operating Under Tyranny’
CU President David Bossie on Fox News (02/19/2013)
President Obama Calls IRS Targeting of Conservative, Tea Party Groups ‘Outrageous’
Obama Administration – The I.R.S. Targets Teaparty and Patriot Groups for Review
IRS Gave Higher Scruity to Tea Party, Conservatives According to Document Draft
Political Firestorm Erupts in IRS ‘Tea Party’ Scandal
Tea Party Patriots Jenny Beth Martin Talks ‘IRS Scandal’ with Lou Dobbs – 5-13-13
IRS Caught in the Act – Jenny Beth Martin CBS This Morning 051113
Senator Rand Paul Discusses IRS Scandal & Enemies List with Sean Hannity – 5-13-13
IRS Issues Apology For Targeting Tea Party & PATRIOT Groups! “Definitely 1st Amendment Concerns Here
IRS Targets Tea Party Groups During 2012 Election
Rep. Issa Rips Obama Over IRS Scandal: ‘How Dare The Admin Imply’ They’ll ‘Get To The Bottom Of It’
Progressive Group: IRS Gave Us Conservative Groups’ Confidential Docs
by Wynton Hall
The progressive-leaning investigative journalism group ProPublica says the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) office that targeted and harassed conservative tax-exempt groups during the 2012 election cycle gave the progressive group nine confidential applications of conservative groups whose tax-exempt status was pending.
The commendable admission lends further evidence to the lengths the IRS went during an election cycle to silence tea party and limited government voices.
ProPublica says the documents the IRS gave them were “not supposed to be made public”:
The same IRS office that deliberately targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status in the run-up to the 2012 election released nine pending confidential applications of conservative groups to ProPublica late last year… In response to a request for the applications for 67 different nonprofits last November, the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent ProPublica applications or documentation for 31 groups. Nine of those applications had not yet been approved—meaning they were not supposed to be made public. (We made six of those public, after redacting their financial information, deeming that they were newsworthy.)
The group says that “no unapproved applications from liberal groups were sent to ProPublica.”
According to Media Research Center Vice President for Business and Culture Dan Gainor, ProPublica’s financial backers include top progressive donors:
ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure”–“progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is http://www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.
On Friday, the House Ways and Means Committee is scheduled to hold a formal hearing on the IRS conservative targeting scandal. IRS Commissioner Steve Miller and Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George are slated to testify.
IRS Also Leaked Info About Conservative Groups
Targeting scandal widens
More trouble for the IRS: The same office that singled out conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status also leaked confidential information about conservative groups last year, ProPublica reports. How does ProPublica know? Well, because the nine pending applications were leaked to ProPublica in the first place. The investigative site had asked to see the applications for 67 nonprofits and the IRS’ Cincinnati office sent over 31, nine of which had not been approved yet, meaning they were supposed to be confidential.
ProPublica was interested in the applications because it was revealing how social-welfare nonprofits, which don’t have to identify their donors and can spend money on elections as long as social welfare is their primary goal, misled the IRS when applying for tax-exempt status. Among the applications released to ProPublica: Karl Rove’s Crossroads group, which had promised to spend only “limited” money on 2012 elections and ended up spending more than $70 million. Also included were five other groups that all claimed they would not spend any money to sway the elections and spent more than $5 million. ProPublica reported on all six (here and here). Interestingly, the New York Times reported today that Crossroads and other larger groups were not subjected to the same intense scrutiny the IRS applied to small Tea Party groups; click for more on that.
http://www.newser.com/story/167882/irs-also-leaked-info-about-conservative-groups.html
ProPublica
ProPublica is a non-profit corporation based in New York City. It describes itself as an independent non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest.[2] In 2010 it became the first online news source to win a Pulitzer Prize, for a piece[3] written by one of its journalists[4][5] and published in The New York Times Magazine[6] as well as on ProPublica.org.[7] ProPublica’s investigations are conducted by its staff of full-time investigative reporters and the resulting stories are given away to news ‘partners’ for publication or broadcast. In some cases, reporters from both ProPublica and the news partners work together on a story. ProPublica has partnered with more than 90 different news organizations, including 60 Minutes, ABC World News, Business Week, CNN, Frontline, Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, Newsweek, USA Today, The Washington Post, Huffington Post, MSN Money, MSNBC.com, Politico, Reader’s Digest, Salon.com, Slate, This American Life, and NPR, among many others.
History
ProPublica is the brainchild of Herbert and Marion Sandler, the former chief executives of the Golden West Financial Corporation, who have committed $10 million a year to the project.[8] The Sandlers hired Paul Steiger, former managing editor of the Wall Street Journal, to create and run the organization as editor in chief. At the time ProPublica was set up, Steiger responded to concerns about the role of the Sandlers’ political views, saying on The Newshour with Jim Lehrer:
Coming into this, when I talked to Herb and Marion Sandler, one of my concerns was precisely this question of independence and nonpartisanship… My history has been doing ‘down the middle’ reporting. And so when I talked to Herb and Marion I said ‘are you comfortable with that?’ They said ‘absolutely’. I said ‘well suppose we did an expose of some of the left leaning organizations that you have supported or that are friendly to what you’ve supported in the past’. They said ‘no problem’. And when we set up our organizational structure, the board of directors, on which I sit and which Herb is the chairman, does not know in advance what we’re going to report on.[9]
ProPublica had an initial news staff of 28 reporters and editors, including Pulitzer Prize winners, Charles Ornstein, Tracy Weber, Jeff Gerth, and Marcus Stern, but has since grown to 34 full-time working journalists. Steiger claimed that he received as many as 850 applications upon ProPublica’s start. The organization also appointed a 12-member journalism advisory board consisting of professional journalists.
The newsgroup shares its work under the Creative Commons no-derivative, non-commercial license.
Funding
While the Sandler Foundation provided ProPublica with significant financial support, it has also received funding from the Knight Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts, Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation and others. ProPublica and the Knight Foundation have various connections. For example, Paul Steiger, President of ProPublica, is a trustee of the Knight Foundation.[10] In like manner, Alberto Ibarguen, the President and CEO of the Knight Foundation is on the board of ProPublica.[11] In 2010, it received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from George Soros‘ Open Society Foundations.
ProPublica has attracted attention for the salaries it pays its top executives.[12][13] The head of ProPublica, Paul Steiger, was paid $571,687 in 2008, according to the company’s tax filings.[14] The managing editor, Stephen Engelberg, was paid $343,463.[15][16] The large salaries have been widely criticized by other journalists and even some in the non-profit world as excessive.[17][17][18] Steiger is the former managing editor at the Wall Street Journal. Engelberg is a former New York Times editor who co-wrote the non-fiction book Germs: Biological Weapons and America’s Secret War, with Times reporter Judith Miller. He was recently elected to the Pulitzer Prize Board.
Awards
In 2010, ProPublica jointly won the Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting (it was also awarded to another new organization for a different story), for “a story that chronicles the urgent life-and-death decisions made by one hospital’s exhausted doctors when they were cut off by the floodwaters of Hurricane Katrina.”[19] It was written by ProPublica’s Sheri Fink and published in the New York Times Magazine[6] as well as on ProPublica.org.[7] This was the first Pulitzer awarded to an online news source.[4][5] That investigation also won a National Magazine Award for reporting.
In 2011, ProPublica won its second Pulitzer Prize.[20] Reporters Jesse Eisinger and Jake Bernstein won the Pulitzer for National Reporting for their series, The Wall Street Money Machine. This was the first time a Pulitzer was awarded to a group of stories not published in print.
ProPublica’s reporters have also received the Selden Ring, George Polk, National Magazine, Society of Professional Journalists, James Aronson, ABA Silver Gavel, Overseas Press Club, Online Journalism, Investigative Editors and Reporters, Society of News Design, Society of American Business Editors and Writers, and Dart Center awards (among others) for their work.
Reception
Praise
ProPublica is also renowned for conducting a large-scale, circumscribed investigation on Psychiatric Solutions, a company based in Tennessee that buys failing hospitals, cuts staff, and accumulates profit.[21] The report covered patient deaths at numerous Psychiatric Solutions facilities, the failing physical plant at many of their facilities, and covered the State of Florida‘s first closure of Manatee Palms Youth Services, which has since been shut down[22] by Florida officials once again.[23] Their report was published in conjunction with The Los Angeles Times.
Criticism
Dave Kopel, a policy analyst for the libertarian Cato Institute and a former columnist for the now-defunct Rocky Mountain News, criticized a ProPublica report on hydraulic fracturing as a “one-sided series of facts arrayed to support a point of view”. He argued that a common theme in ProPublica’s work is that “the government is not doing a good enough job in controlling things, particularly things involving big business”.[24] ProPublica later responded to his article, countering those claims and saying quote, “using carefully culled quotations and selected statistics, Kopel asserts ‘indisputably false facts’ in ProPublica’s reporting.” [25]
After fallout from the IRS publicly admitting to targeting conservative tax exempt groups for added scrutiny, ProPublica broke the news that it had requested and received confidential pending applications for groups requesting tax exempt status.
Board members
Investigations
- Lost in Translation: Alhurra—America’s Troubled Effort to Win Middle East Hearts and Minds by Dafna Linzer with reporting by Robert Lewis of ProPublica. Partnered with 60 Minutes (video).
- New York’s Gas Rush Poses Environmental Threat by Abrahm Lustgarten with reporting by Jonathan Sidhu and Allison Battey of ProPublica. Partnered with WNYC (transcript | audio) and Albany Times-Union.
- Fractured Relations — New York City Sees Drilling as Threat to Its Water Supply by Abrahm Lustgarten with WNYC, Albany Times-Union, and New York Sun.
- In the Eye of the Storm by Sheri Fink with Salon.com.
- U.S. Targets Overseas Bribery; KBR Exec’s Plea Widens Probe by T. Christian Miller with reporting by Marlena Telvick, Oriana Zill de Granados, Lowell Bergman, and Jake Bernstein. Partnered with MSN Money and Frontline.
- Acting Tough: When Cameras Leave, OSHA Penalties Wither by Robert Lewis with Salon.com.
- Palin Administration Oversaw $26 million ROAD to ‘Nowhere’ by Paul Kiel with research by Lisa Schwartz. Partnered with Newsweek.
- Palin Defended ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ to ‘Spinmeisters’ by Marcus Stern with reporting by Paul Kiel and Lisa Schwartz. Partnered with Politico.
- Anatomy of a Bank Failure by Jake Bernstein with MSN Money.
- Criminal Past Is No Bar to Nursing in California by Charles Ornstein and Tracy Weber with Los Angeles Times
- California Takes Steps to Probe Nurses’ Criminal Backgrounds by Charles Ornstein and Tracy Weber with Los Angeles Times
- Why CDC Responded with ‘Lack of Urgency’ to Formaldehyde Warnings by Joaquin Sapien with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution
- Government Study on Children Living in Katrina Trailers Muddled By Delays, Confusion by Joaquin Sapien with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution
- GOP offers scant proof of voter fraud by Chisun Lee with reporting by Kristin Jones. Partnered with Politico.
- As Rape Victims Wait, Money for DNA Testing Goes Unused by Ben Protess with Joel Rubin of the Los Angeles Times
- Goldman Sachs urged bets against California bonds it helped sell by Sharona Coutts with Marc Lifsher and Michael A. Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times.
- Crimes by Air Marshals Raise Questions About Hiring by Michael Grabell with Jamie Wilson. Published in USA Today.
References
 |
This article uses bare URLs for citations. Please consider adding full citations so that the article remains verifiable. Several templates and the Reflinks tool are available to assist in formatting. (Reflinks documentation) (December 2011) |
- ^ “ProPublicaSite Info”. Alexa Internet. Retrieved 2012-09-01.
- ^ “About Us”. Retrieved 2009-01-11. ProPublica is a Dog Latin term literally meaning “for the public woman”; cf. publica.
- ^ “a story that chronicles the urgent life-and-death decisions made by one hospital’s exhausted doctors when they were cut off by the floodwaters of Hurricane Katrina.” – Pulitzer.org The 2010 Pulitzer Prize Winners: Investigative Reporting, accessed 13 April 2010
- ^ a b The Guardian, 13 April 2010, Pulitzer progress for non-profit news
- ^ a b ProPublica, Pulitzer Prize in Investigative Reporting: Deadly Choices at Memorial
- ^ a b Sheri Fink, New York Times Magazine, 25 August 2009, THE DEADLY CHOICES AT MEMORIAL
- ^ a b ProPublica, 27 August 2009, The Deadly Choices at Memorial
- ^ Pérez-Peña, Richard (2007-10-15). “Group Plans to Provide Investigative Journalism”. New York Times. Retrieved 2007-10-15.
- ^ PBS Newshour, 24 June 2008, “Financing Independent Journalism”
- ^ Board of Trustees, Knight Foundation
- ^ Alberto Ibargüen, President and CEO, Knight Foundation
- ^ Turner, Zeke. “Shelling Out the Big Bucks at ProPublica | The New York Observer”. Observer.com. Retrieved 2012-02-23.
- ^ Taylor, Mike (2010-08-10). “ProPublica’s Top-Paid Employees All Made Six Figures in 2009 – FishbowlNY”. Mediabistro.com. Retrieved 2012-02-23.
- ^ Salmon, Felix Philanthrocrat of the day, ProPublica edition, Reuters Blogs, Sept. 30, 2009
- ^ Turner, Zeke. “Shelling Out the Big Bucks at ProPublica”. Observer. Retrieved 2013-01-04.
- ^ “ProPublica’s Top-Paid Employees All Made Six Figures in 2009 – FishbowlNY”. Mediabistro.com. 2010-08-10. Retrieved 2013-01-04.
- ^ a b “Philanthrocrat of the day, ProPublica edition”. Reuters. 30 September 2009.
- ^ “Diamonds in the Rough”. CJR. Retrieved 2012-02-23.
- ^ Pulitzer.org The 2010 Pulitzer Prize Winners: Investigative Reporting, accessed 13 April 2010
- ^ “A Note on ProPublica’s Second Pulitzer Prize”. ProPublica. 2011-04-18. Retrieved 2012-02-23.
- ^ LA Times – November 2008- Psychiatric care’s perils and profits
- ^ Bradenton Herald – May 2010 – Manatee Palms hospital Slammed
- ^ “MANATEE PALMS YOUTH SERVICES Facility Profile”. FloridaHealthFinder.gov. Retrieved 2012-02-23.
- ^ Kopel, Dave (2008-12-27). “Opinion pays its own way”. Rocky Mountain News. Unknown parameter
|curly=ignored (help) - ^ response
Claim: Obama Campaign Co-Chair Attacked Romney with Leaked IRS Docs
One of President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign co-chairmen used a leaked document from the IRS to attack GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney during the 2012 election, according to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).
NOM, a pro-traditional marriage organization, claims the IRS leaked their 2008 confidential financial documents to the rival Human Rights Campaign. Those NOM documents were published on the Huffington Post on March 30, 2012. At that time, Joe Solmonese, a left-wing activist and Huffington Post contributor, was the president of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC). Solmonese was also a 2012 Obama campaign co-chairman.
Both the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein and HRC described the leak as coming from a “whistleblower.” The Huffington Post used the document to write a story questioning former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s support for traditional marriage. The document showed Romney donated $10,000 to NOM. HRC went a step further than the Huffington Post in its criticism of Romney and accused him of using “racially divisive tactics” in a press release.
Solmonese, then still the HRC’s president, said in the release he felt Romney’s “funding of a hate-filled campaign designed to drive a wedge between Americans is beyond despicable.”
“Not only has Romney signed NOM’s radical marriage pledge, now we know he’s one of the donors that NOM has been so desperate to keep secret all these years,” Solmonese added.
Solmonese resigned his position at HRC the next day and took up a position as an Obama campaign co-chair. He had announced the then-pending resignation from HRC the previous autumn.
NOM announced Tuesday that it will sue the IRS for this alleged leak. Under immense political pressure, Attorney General Eric Holder launched a criminal investigation into the IRS’s actions. Congress will conduct ts own investigation.
In early April 2012, NOM published documents which it said showed this leaked confidential information did not come from a “whistleblower” but “came directly from the Internal Revenue Service and was provided to NOM’s political opponents, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC).”
NOM discovered that when HRC published its confidential financial documents, it failed to conceal the source of the documents. “After software removed the layers obscuring the document, it is shown that the document came from the Internal Revenue Service,” NOM asserted in its April 2012 release.
“The top of each page says, ‘THIS IS A COPY OF A LIVE RETURN FROM SMIPS. OFFICIAL USE ONLY,’” the statement continues. “On each page of the return is stamped a document ID of ‘100560209.’ Only the IRS would have the Form 990 with ‘Official Use’ information.”
NOM president Brian Brown argued in that April 2012 release that the leak was made to benefit President Obama’s re-election campaign against Romney, his GOP challenger. “The American people are entitled to know how a confidential tax return containing private donor information filed exclusively with the Internal Revenue Service has been given to our political opponents whose leader also happens to be co-chairing President Obama’s reelection committee,” Brown said.
“It is shocking that a political ally of President Obama’s would come to possess and then publicly release a confidential tax return that came directly from the Internal Revenue Service,” he declared. “We demand to know who is responsible for this criminal act and what the Administration is going to do to get to the bottom of it.”
Here Comes The Judge–Here Comes The Judge–Napolitano–and The Tea Party–Videos
Here comes the Judge!
Judge Andrew P. Napolitano discusses the Libertarian Party w/ Glenn Beck & The Fr
Rand Paul The Future 2016 Presidential Nominee of The Tea Party–Videos
Rand Paul Gives The Tea Party Response To The President’s State of the Union Address
Rand Paul’s Plan To Grow The Economy – Glenn Beck Radio 2/13/2013
Senator Rand Paul: Restoring the Founders’ Vision of Foreign Policy – Heritage Foundation
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Spending Addiction Disorder (SAD) Rampant in Democratic and Republican Parties–The Collapse of The American Dream–Videos
| The bar chart comes directly from the Monthly Treasury Statement published by the U. S. Treasury Department. <<< Click on the chart for more info. The “Debt Total” bar chart is generated from the Treasury Department’s “Debt Report” found on the Treasury Direct web site. It has links to search the debt for any given date range, and access to debt interest information. It is a direct source to government provided budget information.
|
|
— “Deficit” vs. “Debt”—Suppose you spend more money this month than your income. This situation is called a “budget deficit”. So you borrow (ie; use your credit card). The amount you borrowed (and now owe) is called your debt. You have to pay interest on your debt. If next month you spend more than your income, another deficit, you must borrow some more, and you’ll still have to pay the interest on your debt (now larger). If you have a deficit every month, you keep borrowing and your debt grows. Soon the interest payment on your loan is bigger than any other item in your budget. Eventually, all you can do is pay the interest payment, and you don’t have any money left over for anything else. This situation is known as bankruptcy.
Each year since 1969, Congress has spent more money than its income. The Treasury Department has to borrow money to meet Congress’s appropriations. Here is a direct link to the Congressional Budget Office web site’s deficit analysis. We have to pay interest* on that huge, growing debt; and it cuts into our budget big time. |
http://www.federalbudget.com/
The table below summarizes the failed 10 year record of both political parties in controlling government spending that have produced massive fiscal-year deficits and an ever increasing national debt.
| Summary of Tax Receipts and Spending Outlays of the United States Government for Fiscal Years 2002-2012[in million of dollars] | |||
| Fiscal Year | Tax Receipts | Spending Outlays | Deficits (+) or Surplus (-) |
| 2002 | 1,853,225 | 2,011,016 | 157,791 |
| 2003 | 1,782,108 | 2,159,246 | 377,139 |
| 2004 | 1,879,783 | 2,292,628 | 412,845 |
| 2005 | 2,153,350 | 2,472,095 | 318,746 |
| 2006 | 2,406,675 | 2,654,873 | 248,197 |
| 2007 | 2,567,672 | 2,729,199 | 161,527 |
| 2008 | 2,523,642 | 2,978,440 | 454,798 |
| 2009 | 2,104,358 | 3,520,082 | 1,415,724 |
| 2010 | 2,161,728 | 3,455,931 | 1,294,204 |
| 2011 | 2,302,495 | 3,601,109 | 1,298,614 |
| 2012 | 2,449,093 | 3,538,286 | 1,089,193 |
| Source: Department of the Treasury, Final Monthly Treasury Statements of Receipts and Outlays of the United States Government for Fiscal Years 2002-2012, table 1. | |||
U.S. National Debt Tax
Government Explained
Congress Sells America Down the River to Avoid the Fiscal Cliff
Funding Government by the Minute
The Fiscal Cliff – Federal Spending Per Capita from 1900-2012.
Government Debt and You
Brother, Can You Spare A Trillion?: Government Gone Wild!
Got a Government Jones? The 12 Steps for Overcoming Addiction to Government
HOW The PHONY FIAT FEDERAL RESERVE Bankster SYSTEM “MONEY” Is CREATED
FIAT EMPIRE: Why the Federal Reserve Violates the U.S. Constitution
Milton Friedman on the Federal Reserve and the Great Depression
Hyperinflation: The Fall of the American Dollar
The Dollar Collapse Revisited and a Bull Market in US Treasuries w/Peter Schiff!
Federal Reserve Balance Sheet Illustrated
The Collapse of The American Dream Explained in Animation
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Dick Armey Leaves FreedomWorks and Impact On The Tea Party–Videos
Tea Party Turmoil: FreedomWorks’ Dick Armey Takes $8 Million Exit Buyout After Failed
DemocracyNow.org – Former House majority leader Dick Armey attempted a coup within his own Tea Party-linked nonprofit FreedomWorks earlier this year. When that failed, he took an $8 million payout from a millionaire Republican donor to leave. The incident highlighted what is believed to be growing turmoil inside the Tea Party movement after it rose to prominence ahead of the 2010 election. We’re joined by Politico reporter Ken Vogel. “[Armey] did in fact take a hit when he decided to go all in with FreedomWorks and refashion himself as the Tea Party leader,” Vogel says. “There has always been this tug of war in the Tea Party between national groups that have deep-pocketed contributors and benefactors and the actual grassroots.”
To watch the entire weekday independent news hour, read the transcript, download the podcast, search our vast archive, or to find more information about Democracy Now! and Amy Goodman, visit http://www.democracynow.org.
Former Tea Party Leader Ridicules GOP Candidates
Dick Armey’s Armed Tea Party Coup
[yourtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU5P6V5bQx0]
Dick Armey Breaks Ranks With FreedomWorks
Did Koch Brothers’ Tea Party Group Pay Republican Leader to Leave?
FreedomWorks’ Matt Kibbe on CSPAN discussing the fiscal cliff
FreedomWorks “My 2012 GOP Platform” discussion with Glenn Beck 7.25.12
Glenn Beck – What do conservatives do next?
Dick Armey: Tea Party Debt Commission on CNN’s American Morning
Book TV: Dick Armey “Give Us Liberty: A Tea Party Manifesto”
Matt Kibbe of Freedomworks Discusses the Tea Party Movement
Tea Time with Max Pappas: Matt Kibbe on Hostile Takeover, Part 1
Freedomworks’ Matt Kibbe on the Hostile Takeover of The GOP
Give Us Liberty? Q&A with Dick Armey & Matt Kibbe of Freedom Works
Inside the Dick Armey, FreedomWorks split
“…Dick Armey left the deep-pocketed tea party group he helped build over a clash with a top lieutenant who Armey and others in the organization believed was using the group’s resources to pad his pockets, POLITICO has learned.
Armey received an $8 million buyout to step down as chairman of FreedomWorks at the end of last month, but the dispute between him and the group’s president, Matt Kibbe, is still straining the organization.
And the turmoil could have far-reaching implications, since FreedomWorks has been among the leading Washington, D.C., groups pressuring Republicans to take a more conservative tact on the fiscal cliff negotiations and other fiscal matters.
(Also on POLITICO: Report: Armey quits FreedomWorks)
The tensions at FreedomWorks, brewing for months, boiled over this summer when Armey balked at a deal that Kibbe struck with HarperCollins to write a book called “Hostile Takeover: Resisting Centralized Government’s Stranglehold on America,” which was released in June.
Armey was concerned that Kibbe structured the deal to personally profit from the book despite relying on FreedomWorks staff and resources to research, help write and promote it — an arrangement he and others at the group believed could jeopardize its tax-exempt status. (In 2010, Kibbe and Armey co-authored a book through HarperCollins, “Give Us Liberty: A Tea Party Manifesto,” that was written with significant help from FreedomWorks staff and all proceeds had gone to the organization.)
So Armey declined to sign a memorandum presented to him in his capacity as a member of the board of trustees stating that the book was written without significant FreedomWorks resources and clearing the way for Kibbe to personally own the rights to the book and any royalties from it, multiple sources familiar with the arrangement told POLITICO.
Asked about his refusal to sign the memorandum, Armey, a former House Republican leader, said, “What bothered me most about that was that he was asking me to lie, and it was a lie that I thought brought the organization in harm’s way.”
After Armey’s concerns came to the attention of the organization’s board at a late August meeting in Jackson Hole, Wyo., Kibbe and the group’s executive vice president, Adam Brandon, were placed on administrative leave in early September and had their cell phones taken away.
Brandon said the board was made aware of the book project months earlier, and Kibbe maintains that the leave didn’t stem from questions about the book deal.
Rather, he said “there was a dispute” with Armey over “competing visions for what FreedomWorks should become and ultimately, the board decided that we fit the vision of the organization.” …”
Tea Party Impact on Republican Party Platform–Videos
FreedomWorks “My 2012 GOP Platform” discussion with Glenn Beck 7.25.12
As the 2012 election shifts into high gear and the Republican party continues to develop its official platform, the voice of the right and center-right grassroots activists must be included.
FreedomWorks has created the “My 2012 GOP Platform” poll that gauges such support using a unique “run-off” matchup model. It is designed to elicit deeper preferences from voters and make it much more difficult for well-organized campaigns to “game” the system. The results below are for the last 30 days and reflect the percentage of times an issue was preferred in a head-to-head “run-off” against other issues. We also suspect they more accurately reflect the true pulse of the this community than those cited by the GOP establishment or the mainstream media.
http://results.my2012platform.com/
GOP Platform Supports Voter ID Laws
GOP Platform: Monetary Policy
GOP Platform Debate: Foreign Aid
Mitt Romney Rejects the Republican Party Platform
Full Show 8/21/12: FDR Calls Out Romney & Ryan
RNC’s Platform Cmte. Preps for Upcoming Convention
“…The Republican National Convention (RNC) Platform Committee met Monday and Tuesday to decide the policy issues that will be addressed during the GOP’s National Convention.
The committee drafted and recommended a proposed national platform to the RNC to be voted on by all of the RNC delegates on the first day of the convention, Monday August 27th.
The Republican National Convention (RNC) adopts a new national platform every four years, which is an official statement of the Republican Party’s position on a variety of issues.
Sections on the Economy; Jobs and Debt; and Energy, Agriculture and the Environment were amended and approved by the committee on Monday. On Tuesday, delegates amended and approved the Foreign Policy and Defense, Government Reform, Restoring Constitutional Government and Healthcare, Education and Crime subcommittees’ reports.
The Platform Committee is responsible for drafting and recommending a proposed national platform to the RNC for approval by its delegates.
The meetings were chaired by Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell. Sen. John Hoeven of North Dakota and Representative Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee served as Co-Chairmen. …”
http://www.c-span.org/Events/RNCs-Platform-Meetings-Prep-for-Upcoming-Convention/10737433193/
Tea party influences GOP platform talks in Tampa
By Michael Van Sickler, Times Staff Writer
Michael Van SicklerTampa Bay Times In Print: Tuesday, August 21, 2012
“…
TAMPA — When Republicans nominated John McCain for president in 2008, conservative groups associated with the tea party had yet to form.
Four years later, these groups say they are practically writing the party platform ahead of the Republican National Convention here next week.
“We’re extremely happy that the tea party can have this type of influence,” said Ryan Hecker, a legal adviser for FreedomWorks, the conservative advocacy group founded by Dick Armey. “We’ve definitely taken over the Republican Party.”
More than 100 delegates met Monday at the Marriott Waterside to draft the Republican platform in a sneak peek of the Aug. 27-30 convention. The platform is a 50-page document that provides policy statements that will guide Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign from here on out.
Weeks ago, FreedomWorks had 30 ideas posted on its website so members could log on and vote for the ones they wanted Republicans to include in the platform. Hecker said that after 1.2 million votes, 12 ideas were selected.
The ideas include repealing Obamacare, scrapping the tax code and replacing it with a flat tax, reining in federal regulation while eliminating government jobs and auditing the Federal Reserve. He said Republicans were lobbied by his group to include these ideas.
Although the platform hasn’t been released, Hecker said that he has seen much of the draft and that 10 of the 12 ideas have been included nearly word-for-word from how they were written by FreedomWorks. Parts of the remaining two are in there, as well, he said.
“Everyone is expecting Romney to move to the center,” said Debbie Wilson, an Apollo Beach resident who is a member of Tampa 912 and a state coordinator for FreedomWorks. “But I’m pleased to see that so far, the platform is very much to the right.”
GOP platforms since at least 1996 have been conservative in nature, said Al Cardenas, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, a volunteer post.
By now, about 80 percent of the work on the platform is done. This week will be a matter of tweaking language here and there, inserting or deleting clauses. The 112 delegates voting on the platform will approve a draft tonight that will be submitted for a vote on Monday by the full convention.
But Cardenas said he was impressed so far with how well the platform is getting done, calling it unusually well-written with little disagreement.
“I’m delighted; it’s one of the best drafts I’ve seen,” Cardenas said.
Monday’s discussion about the platform revealed an interesting quirk about the tea party. Although members of their groups say they hail from the working class, many support policies that could hurt them.
Take the one tax cut that isn’t guaranteed in a Romney presidency: the mortgage interest deduction. It makes ownership affordable to millions of middle-class Americans. A motion was made Monday to include its protection in the platform.
“This is the last vestige of why people want to buy a home,” said April Newland, a Virgin Islands delegate and a Realtor. “It sends a message not just to Realtors, but also to homeowners. It should be included because it would be so widespread.”
But it was defeated after pushback from delegates like Kevin Erickson, a pastor from Minnesota who calls himself a “Ron Paul Republican,” after the maverick Texas congressman.
Including the protection of the mortgage deduction would ruin tax-reform efforts, Erickson said.
“(The mortgage deduction) is why we can’t talk about tax reform,” Erickson said. “Everyone has their pet deduction.”
This year’s platform was the result of greater participation among voters than ever, said one of the platform committee’s co-chairs. U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said the GOP website got 30,000 votes on various policies to be included.
Asked if the tea party played any special role, Blackburn said only that people in general had better access to party officials as they wrote the platform during the past two months.
“We’ve heard from thousands of people and we’ve had meetings with groups all across the country,” she said. “I don’t think any one group has had a special say. Everybody has had special access, through snail mail and social media like Facebook and Twitter.”
Platform chairman Bob McDonnell, the governor of Virginia, said the tea party didn’t have an exaggerated influence on the rightward tilt.
“We’re a conservative party,” he said.
But many of the delegates credited the tea party with setting the tone of the platform.
“They started the main conversation that we’re having now about the economy and the deficit,” said Cam Ward, an Alabama state senator who said tea party groups are very powerful in his district. “It’s a good debate, and I’m glad they’ve had the impact that they’ve had.” …”
Republican Party approves strict anti-abortion platform, earning rebuke from Scott Brown
By Glen Johnson and Noah Bierman, Globe Staff
“…The 110-member platform panel, meeting today in Tampa, Fla., passed a so-called Human Life Amendment that calls for a ban on abortion, without mention of the more common exceptions for victims of rape or incest.
“Faithful to the ‘self-evident’ truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed,” said platform language obtained by CNN. “We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.”
It is similar to language included in the GOP platform in both 2004 and 2008 but it has become even more politically loaded since Akin, a US House member from Missouri, was criticized for the answer he gave when asked if abortion were legitimate in cases of rape.
“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down,” Akin said during a television interview aired on Sunday.
The differentiation between forms of rape prompted a swift rebuke not just from his Democratic opponent, Senator Claire McCaskill, but presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan. Romney initially urged Akin to spend 24 hours reconsidering his continued candidacy.
In a statement today, Romney said he now agreed with former Missouri Senators John Ashcroft, Kit Bond, John Danforth, and Jim Talent that Akin should quit the race.
“As I said [Monday], Todd Akin’s comments were offensive and wrong and he should very seriously consider what course would be in the best interest of our country. Today, his fellow Missourians urged him to step aside, and I think he should accept their counsel and exit the Senate race,” Romney said.
Brown was among the first Republicans to call for Akin to drop out of the race, doing so in a statement on Monday morning.
Brown supports abortion rights, while Romney and Ryan oppose them. Romney would make an exception for rape and incest, but Ryan would do so only when the health of a mother would be jeopardized by a continued pregnancy.
The reelection committee for Obama, an abortion rights supporter, pounced on the platform vote.
“Several Romney supporters and advisers were present and stood silently while this vote took place. This should come as no surprise, as Mitt Romney supported this exact language in the 2004 and 2008 Republican platforms and Paul Ryan fought to ban abortion even in cases of rape,” Obama spokeswoman Lis Smith said in a statement.
“Women across this country should take note of the Republican Party’s position, and not trust any of the false promises made by Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan on the campaign trail,” Smith added.
Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, chairman of the RNC’s platform committee and an abortion opponent, thanked the committee for “affirming our respect for human life” today before moving onto other platform issues.
The platform will come up for a vote of the convention delegates on Monday
AP sources: GOP platform draft at odds with Romney
“…Republican Party leaders decided to include that position during a party meeting Tuesday, two GOP officials confirmed to The Associated Press. The language is the same as it’s been since 1984, and the platform is set to be officially adopted Monday. But this year, it comes as GOP officials are calling on Missouri Rep. Todd Akin to quit his Senate bid after he made inflammatory comments about rape. Akin, asked in a local TV interview aired Sunday if he opposes abortion in cases of rape, said a woman’s body is able to prevent pregnancy in what he called “a legitimate rape.”
In a Sunday statement condemning Akin’s remarks, Romney said his administration would not oppose abortion in cases of rape. That puts him at odds with his party’s official line.
Romney is set to be nominated for president at the Republican National Convention that kicks off Aug. 27.
“The details of some of these things, like an exception for rape or life of the mother, these are not uncommon differences that candidates have and don’t share some of the detail on those exceptions,” RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said Tuesday on MSNBC. “But as far as our platform is concerned, I mean, this is the platform of the Republican Party. It is not the platform of Mitt Romney.”
The party’s platform says members of the GOP “assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution.”
Romney’s position on the question is also at odds with his running mate, Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, who opposes abortion except in instances where the life of the mother is at risk. That’s closer in line with the Republican Party’s official position.
A Ryan aide downplayed the difference. “He knows he is joining the Romney ticket and the Romney administration will reflect the views of the nominee,” Ryan spokesman Michael Steel told reporters traveling with Romney’s no. 2 from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia.
Ryan has voted for legislation that has included exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother, another spokesman said.
The decision might have passed with little notice if not for Akin, whose weekend comments drew intense criticism and quick calls for him to step aside.
“It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Akin said when asked about abortion in cases of rape. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Romney did not call for Akin to leave the race until about two hours before a state-imposed deadline for him to drop out without going to court. Akin was still in the race at 6 p.m. EDT Tuesday, and now has until Sept. 25 to seek a court order to take his name off the ballot. After that date, there is no way for Akin to leave the race.
Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, who RNC’s Platform Committee, called it a “document that transcends time.”
“Current events regarding who said what at any given time don’t affect this document,” McDonnell said.
Tea Party Alert–Tax Revolt–March On Washington D.C.–Tea Party–July 4, 2012–Protest The Supreme Court Obamacare Decision–Repeal Obamacare’s Massive Tax Increase!–Economy Goes Into Recession–Unemployment Skyrockets–Obama Lied–The Economy Died–Videos
EXPANDED UPDATED: July 5, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 80: June 28, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 79: June 27, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 78: June 20, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 77: June 13, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 76: June 6, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 75: May 30, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 74: May 21, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 73: May 9, 2012
Pronk Pops Show 72: May 2, 2012
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-80
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22-26
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9
Segment 0: Tea Party Alert–Tax Revolt–March On Washington D.C.–Tea Party–July 4, 2012–Protest The Supreme Court Obamacare Decision–Repeal Obamacare’s Massive Tax Increase!–Economy Goes Into Recession–Unemployment Skyrockets–Obama Lied–The Economy Died–Videos
“There is really no essential difference between the unlimited power of the democratic state and the unlimited power of the autocrat.”
Ludwig von Mises, Socialism, pages 64-65
The Welfare State is merely a method for transforming the market economy step by step into socialism.”
Ludwig von Mises, Planning for Freedom, page 219
“Upon the supposition, that the bank is constitutionally created, this is the only question; and this question seems answered, as soon as it is stated. If the states may tax the bank, to what extent shall they tax it, and where shall they stop? An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy; because there is a limit beyond which no institution and no property can bear taxation. A question of constitutional power can hardly be made to depend on a question of more or less. If the states may tax, they have no limit but their discretion; and the bank, therefore, must depend on the discretion of the state governments for its existence. This consequence is inevitable. The object in laying this tax, may have been revenue to the state. In the next case, the object may be to expel the bank from the state; but how is this object to be ascertained, or who is to judge of the motives of legislative acts?”
McCulloch v. Maryland, (1819),Chief Justice John Marshall
Full Text of Supreme Court Decision
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/scotus_opinion_on_ACA_from_msnbc.com.pdf
“
Chief Justice John Roberts Comes Out of The Progressive Closet
ONE FOR THE TEAM
A progressive Republican President George W. Bush appointed another progressive Republican to be Chief Justice– John Roberts.
The result of this decision is the Affordable Care Act is declared Constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States!
A progressive Democratic President Barack Obama lead the Democratic Party in passing the Affordable Care Act better known as Obamacare. The Constitutional authority cited for the passage of the bill was the commerce clause, which gives Congress the power to regulate commerce. Both Obama and the Democratic Party deliberately did not use their taxing powers under the Constitution as their authority for passing the bill.
Obama Goes Toe-To-Toe With Stephanopoulos On “Tax Increases”
The reason for not using the Congress’ taxing authority was Obamacare would never had passed for it would have been viewed as one of the biggest increases in taxes in the history of the United States. Just remember candidate Obama’s promise, now a big lie, to never increase the taxes of Americans earning less than $250,000:
President Obama’s Pledge Never to Raise Taxes on Anyone Making Less Than $250,000 a Year
Both the majority and dissenting decisions clearly state that the commerce clause cannot be used to justify Obamacare or more specifically the mandate that requires individuals to purchase health insurance. The mandate is clearly unconstitutional.
Chief Justice Roberts was joined by the four progressive or liberal justices in declaring Obamacare Constitutional because it was a tax and Congress has the power to tax under the Constitution.
Instead of simply declaring the act unconstitutional for exceeding their powers under the Commerce clause, the majority of the justices said correctly that the act is a tax, even though the bill was not written as a tax.
While it is clearly the function of the Supreme Court to review acts of Congress and decide whether an act is Constitutional or unconstitutional, it is decidedly not the function of the Supreme Court to legislate by in effect rewriting the act and giving it the correct justification.
The act should have been declared unconstitutional and sent back to Congress for them to rewrite the act and use their taxing powers as justification.
If this had been done, Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act would never had been passed–it would have been repealed.
The majority of the American people never asked for Obamacare.
Today at least 2 out of 3 Americans want the repeal of Obamacare.
Chief Justice Roberts should have joined the dissenting justices in a 5 to 4 decision to rule that Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional because Congress exceeded its authority or powers under the commerce clause.
This would have ended Obamacare, a bill that at least 2 out of 3 Americans do not want and cannot afford.
Instead, Chief Justice has come out of the closet and revealed that he is really a progressive Republican that talks conservative but acts progressive.
Shame on Justice Roberts and the justices that joined him for exceeding their own authority and the will of the American people.
While the majority of the American people consider themselves conservative, both the Democratic and Republican parties are controlled by progressives that want the government to intervene in the economy at home and other nations abroad.
Beware of progressives Republicans that talk conservative to get elected and once elected act like progressives.
Mitt Romney reacts to the health care ruling
Since both Obama and Romney have a record of flip flopping, I suggest American follow the advice of the late President Reagan.
Trust but verify
Not a Dime in Tax Increase for Those Earning Less than $250,000
Health Care: Mitt Romney flip-flops on Health Care
Romney: Mass. Health Law Differs From Obama’s
ObamaCare is RomneyCare 2.0
Remember, it was another Progressive Republican President, George H.W. Bush, who said, “Read my lips, no new taxes.”
George H. W. Bush
Trust but verify.
Obamacare is a tax and as such should have originated in the House of Representatives, the people’s house, and it did not.
The reason is simple, the bill that eventually become Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act, would have been one of the largest taxes increases in United States history and would have clearly broken Obama’s promise not to increase taxes on anyone making less than $250,00.
Hence Obama’s repeated assertion of the big lie that Obamacare orthe Affordable Care Act is not a tax.
Busted: Audio of Obama Lawyer Arguing Obamacare Is a Tax
Rush Limbaugh on fighting to defeat Obamacare
Coburn on how ACA “sovietizes” health care
The American people know a liar when they hear him.
The American people knew all along that Obamacare was a massive tax increase, especially on young.
They did not need a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court with a Harvard Law degree to point out the obvious.
Obamacare generates signficant uncertainty for businesses–the wealth, income and job creators of America.
Businesses do not know what the cost of their employee group health care insurance will be in future years.
Nor do businesses know what taxes they will paying in the future years.
This massive uncertainty as to the cost of doing business results in lower economic growth and reducing hiring of new employees.
The economic consequences of the passage of Obamacare have been unemployment rates exceeding 8 percent for 42 months and most likely the entire Obama administration.
As the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall said in McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819, “An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy.”
Chief Justice John Roberts is simply not in the same league as Chief Justice Marshall.
Roberts originally was going to vote with the dissenting justices and if he did, Obamacare would have been declared unconstitutional.
Inside Justice Roberts’ health care decision
This would have dramatically reduce business uncertainty.
Instead, he came out of the progressive closet and sided with the four progressive justices.
Obamacare is wrecking the economy, destroying jobs and killing the American dream.
Outrage Over Judicial Activism and Obamacare
The vast majority of the American people never wanted Obamacare.
Yet a small elite of progressive Harvard Law graduates are telling the American people that they must buy something that do not want and many cannot afford.
The time for action is now.
Obamacare is a massively huge tax increase and an assault on the consumer sovereignty of the American people
Rush Limbaugh on fighting to defeat Obamacare
March on Washington, D.C. on July 4, 2012!
Washington Tea Party!
The time is now for Americans all across this nation to have tea parties in protest of Obamacare and massive unbalance budgets that will add more than $5 trillion or $5,000 billion in the four-year of the Obama administration.
WHY DON’T YOU MIND MY OWN BUSINESS?
Repeal Obamacare!
Background Articles and Videos
3 Reasons to End Obamacare Before it Begins!
Mark Meckler on the Tea Party Movement
Judge Napolitano: “Individual Mandate Most Bizarre Tax in the History of the Country”
Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare – Conservative Reaction Absurd
Obama reacts to health care supreme court ruling. 6/28/12
Obama Tax Promises
Obama on single payer health insurance
Obama will cut deficit in half FEB 2009
If You Like Your Health Care Plan You Can’t Keep It!
Healthcare Summit Reveals Industry Movement Independent of Reform
Boehner: We Must Repeal ObamaCare In Its Entirety #4jobs
Who knew individual mandate was a tax? NOT Obama!
CNBC: Senator Rubio Comments on Supreme Court’s Decision on ObamaCare
The Meaning of Independence Day – Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights
Obamacare and the Supreme Court with Richard Epstein and John Yoo
Richard Epstein on Barack Obama, his former Chicago Law Colleague
Obamacare Ruling May Be Bad News For Stressed Tax Code
Howard Gleckman, Contributor
“…Because the High Court found that the penalty for not having coverage is a tax and not a fee or a banana, it ruled Congress has the constitutional authority to impose such a levy. In effect, the 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Roberts concluded that Congress can tax you for failing to acquire insurance. Thus, the mandate as created by the ACA is constitutional.
But the Court rejected the White House’s main legal argument—that Congress has the authority under the Commerce Clause to require people to get insurance. It will be interesting to see how legal scholars read this in the coming weeks: Is the Court saying that tax policy is the only tool Congress has to enact certain social welfare programs? If so, it would put an already-stressed tax code under even greater pressure.
The ACA includes a number of tax provisions—only a few of which are related to insurance reform.
Among them:
The tax on those who don’t have health insurance. The key to the individual mandate, this provision would penalize those who do not have insurance starting in 2014. The penalty begins at $95 and phases up to a maximum of $695 or 2.5 percent of income by 2016.
Subsidies for buyers. These subsidies are aimed at helping low-income households purchase individual insurance through the health exchanges created by the law. The subsidies are effectively refundable tax credits managed by the Internal Revenue Service.
Small business tax credits. These subsidies, initially up to 35 percent of an employer’s premium contribution, are already in effect. The subsidy gradually phases out as the firm’s average wage and the number of its employees increase.
Medicare payroll tax. Starting in 2013, the ACA raises the Medicare Part A payroll tax by 0.9 percent for those making $200,000 or more (couples making $250,000).
Taxes on unearned income. The law also imposes a new 3.8 percent tax on investment income and other unearned income for wealthy households, also starting in 2013.
Increasing the threshold for itemized medical expenses. Today, taxpayers can deduct medical expenses that exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The ACA raises that threshold to 10 percent beginning next year.
Taxing high-value employer-sponsored health plans. Technically imposed on insurers, the law sets an excise tax on individual coverage that exceeds $10,200 or family coverage of more than $27,500. The levy, effective beginning in 2018, is equal to 40 percent of the premiums that exceed these thresholds. Because it is indexed by the rate of the consumer price index (which rises more slowly than medical costs), the tax will gradually apply to less generous policies.
Other revenue raisers. The law includes a number of other minor taxes intended to help pay for the health coverage expansion. These include new penalties on Health Savings Accounts, limits on Flexible Savings Accounts, and an excise tax on indoor tanning salons.
The Court upheld all of these taxes with the rest of the law (except for a requirement that states expand their Medicaid coverage for the working poor).
The political fate of the ACA remains to be seen, of course. But the Supreme Court has at least settled the dispute over whether it is constitutional. …”
A Vast New Taxing Power
The Chief Justice’s ObamaCare ruling is far from the check on Congress of right-left myth.
“…The commentary on John Roberts’s solo walk into the Affordable Care Act wilderness is converging on a common theme: The Chief Justice is a genius. All of a sudden he is a chessmaster, a statesman, a Burkean minimalist, a battle-loser but war-winner, a Daniel Webster for our times.
Now that we’ve had more time to take in Chief Justice Roberts’s reasoning, we have a better summary: politician. In fact, his 5-4 ruling validating the constitutional arguments against purchase mandates and 5-4 ruling endorsing them as taxes is far more dangerous, and far more political, even than it first appeared last week.
This is a minority view. By right-left acclaim, at least among elites, the Chief Justice has engineered a Marbury v. Madison-like verdict that camouflages new limits on federal power as a reprieve for President Obama’s entitlement legacy and in a stroke enhanced the Supreme Court’s reputation—and his own. This purported “long game” appeals to conservatives who can console themselves with a moral victory, while the liberals who like to assail the Chief Justice as a radical foe of democracy can continue their tantrum.
It’s an elegant theory whose only flaw is that it is repudiated by Chief Justice Roberts’s own language and logic. His gambit substitutes one unconstitutional expansion of government power for another and rearranges the constitutional architecture of the U.S. political system.
His first error is the act of rewriting the plain text of a law, instead of practicing the disinterested interpretation that is the task of the judiciary, regardless of the partisan outcome. The second error is converting the health insurance mandate’s penalty into a tax. Ninety years of precedents have honed precise and widely divergent legal meanings for taxes and penalties for violating laws or regulations, and they are not interchangeable.
The Chief Justice did not simply change a label—as if Congress said something was a penalty when it was really a tax. Rather, these categories are defined by their purposes and effects, by how they operate in practice. Taxes are “exactions” whose main goal is raising revenue, while penalties punish individuals for breaking the law. The boundaries can blur—legitimate taxes may also have strong punitive aims—but scarcely so in this case. ObamaCare’s mandate was designed to regulate individual conduct to help achieve universal coverage. If it succeeds perfectly, it should collect $0.
Even if Democrats had passed the mandate tax as rewritten by the Chief Justice, and they did not, the Supreme Court until Thursday has never held that Congress can call anything it wants a tax. The taxing power like the Commerce Clause is broad, and the courts are generally deferential. But all powers the Constitution enumerates are also limited, and these limits—unique to each power—must be meaningful and enforceable by the legal system.
The Chief Justice’s compounding errors deprive the taxing power of any viable limiting principles. Article I, section 8 gives Congress an independent grant of power to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.” Taxes must originate in the House, the political body designed to be most responsive to voters. There are also important additional safeguards on the type of exactions known as “direct taxes.”
Indirect taxes—”duties, imposts and excises”—are taxes on activities and products. They are passed on by a seller, triggered by a transaction and more or less optional: Consumers don’t have to buy taxed goods and services. Direct taxes, on the other hand, are those that the federal government is empowered to impose on individuals as citizens. They cannot be avoided because they are levied on the existence of people.
America has its origins in a rebellion against arbitrary and pernicious taxation and the Framers wanted to make it extremely difficult to impose or raise direct taxes. These can easily morph into plenary police powers, the regulation of private behavior and conduct that the Constitution vests in the states. For this reason, while the taxing power in addition to raising revenue can achieve regulatory results, those regulatory results must be constitutional themselves. …”
“…Chief Justice Roberts’s ruling is careless about these bedrock tax questions, and they are barely addressed by either the Court’s liberal or conservative wings. His ruling, with its multiple contradictions and inconsistencies, reads as if it were written by someone affronted by the government’s core constitutional claims but who wanted to uphold the law anyway to avoid political blowback and thus found a pretext for doing so in the taxing power.
If this understanding is correct, then Chief Justice Roberts behaved like a politician, which is more corrosive to the rule of law and the Court’s legitimacy than any abuse it would have taken from a ruling that President Obama disliked. The irony is that the Chief Justice’s cheering section is praising his political skills, not his reasoning. Judges are not supposed to invent political compromises.
“It is not our job,” the Chief Justice writes, “to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” But the Court’s most important role is to protect liberty when the political branches exceed the Constitution’s bounds, not to bless their excesses in the interests of political or personal expediency or both. On one of the most consequential cases he will ever hear, Chief Justice Roberts failed this most basic responsibility.”
A version of this article appeared July 2, 2012, on page A10 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: A Vast New Taxing Power.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303561504577496603068605864.html
The Roberts Rules
The Chief Justice rewrites ObamaCare in order to save it.
“…The Chief Justice ruled that ObamaCare’s mandate violated the Commerce Clause, joined by the Court’s conservative bloc, but he also said that the mandate fell within Congress’s power to tax, joined by the Court’s liberal bloc. In practice this is a restraint on federal power without real restraint—and, worse, the Chief Justice had to rewrite the statute Congress passed in order to salvage it. The ruling will stand as one of the great what-might-have-beens of American constitutional law.
The novel question raised by ObamaCare’s command to buy health insurance or else pay a penalty—the first-ever purchase mandate in U.S. history—was whether Congress could create commerce in order to regulate it. In his 1-4-4 opinion, Chief Justice Roberts writes that construing the Commerce Clause as the Obama Administration argued “would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. . . . The Framers gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it, and for over 200 years both our decisions and Congress’s actions have reflected this understanding.”
Note that this rejection of federal compulsion, which the four conservatives supported albeit in dissent, is the same one that the liberal legal establishment spent years deriding as frivolous and beyond debate: Of course Washington has carte blanche to do whatever it wants to do. “That is not the country the Framers of our Constitution envisioned,” the Chief Justice writes, before going on to envision it himself by grounding the mandate in Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.”
According to Chief Justice Roberts, the penalty is merely a tax on not owning health insurance, no different from “buying gasoline or earning income,” and it thus complies with the Constitution. This a large loophole. The result is that Washington has unlimited power to impose new purchase mandates and the courts will find them constitutional if Congress calls them taxes, or even if it calls them something else and judges call them taxes.
That was true with ObamaCare. The Pelosi Democrats explicitly structured the mandate as a regulatory “penalty.” Congress voted down a direct tax in 2009. Supreme Court precedents going back to the 1920s and 1930s define penalties and taxes as mutually exclusive and critically different.
Every lower court that heard the health-care cases rejected the taxing argument. Administration lawyers devoted only 21 lines of their reply brief to this argument and it barely came up at oral arguments. The Chief Justice in effect revised the statute in order to find it constitutional. …”
“…One telling note is that the dissent refers repeatedly to “Justice Ginsburg’s dissent” and “the dissent” on the mandate, but of course they should be referring to Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s concurrence. This wording and other sources suggest that there was originally a 5-4 majority striking down at least part of ObamaCare, but then the Chief Justice changed his mind.
The Justices may never confirm this informed speculation. But if it is true, this is far more damaging to the Court’s institutional integrity that the Chief Justice is known to revere than any ruling against ObamaCare. The political class and legal left conducted an extraordinary campaign to define such a decision as partisan and illegitimate. If the Chief Justice capitulated to this pressure, it shows the Court can be intimidated and swayed from its constitutional duties. If this was a play to compete with John Marshall’s legacy, the result is closer to William Brennan’s.
The Court did rule 7-2 against ObamaCare’s expansion of Medicaid, the supposedly voluntary federal-state program that once covered only the poor. The majority included liberal Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, who held this expansion to be unconstitutional because the feds commandeered state resources.
The problem is that this also involved rewriting the law. The majority merely created an opt-out that Governors and states could elect to preserve some measure of independent control, instead of telling Congress to start over. Still, this is the first time the Court has found a law enacted under Congress’s spending power to be unconstitutionally coercive.
But this and even the five votes limiting Congress under the Commerce Clause pale against the Chief Justice’s infinitely elastic and dangerous interpretation of the taxing power. Nancy Pelosi famously said we need to pass ObamaCare to find out what’s in it. It turns out we also needed John Roberts to write his appendix.”
A version of this article appeared June 29, 2012, on page A12 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Roberts Rules.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304058404577494400059173634.html
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT
BUSINESS ET AL. v. SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 11–393. Argued March 26, 27, 28, 2012—Decided June 28, 2012*
In 2010, Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in order to increase the number of Americans covered by health insurance and decrease the cost of health care. One key provision is the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to maintain“minimum essential” health insurance coverage. 26 U. S. C. §5000A.For individuals who are not exempt, and who do not receive health insurance through an employer or government program, the means of satisfying the requirement is to purchase insurance from a private company. Beginning in 2014, those who do not comply with the mandate must make a “[s]hared responsibility payment” to the Federal Government. §5000A(b)(1). The Act provides that this “penalty”will be paid to the Internal Revenue Service with an individual’s taxes, and “shall be assessed and collected in the same manner” as tax penalties. §§5000A(c), (g)(1).Another key provision of the Act is the Medicaid expansion. The current Medicaid program offers federal funding to States to assist pregnant women, children, needy families, the blind, the elderly, and the disabled in obtaining medical care. 42 U. S. C. §1396d(a). The Affordable Care Act expands the scope of the Medicaid program and increases the number of individuals the States must cover. For ex——————
*Together with No. 11–398, Department of Health and Human Services et al. v. Florida et al., and No. 11–400, Florida et al. v. Department of Health and Human Services et al., also on certiorari to the same court.
2 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT
BUSINESS v. SEBELIUS
Syllabus
ample, the Act requires state programs to provide Medicaid coverage by 2014 to adults with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level, whereas many States now cover adults with children only if their income is considerably lower, and do not cover childless adults at all. §1396a(a)(10)(A)(i)(VIII). The Act increases federal funding to cover the States’ costs in expanding Medicaid coverage. §1396d(y)(1).But if a State does not comply with the Act’s new coverage requirements, it may lose not only the federal funding for those requirements, but all of its federal Medicaid funds. §1396c.
Twenty-six States, several individuals, and the National Federation of Independent Business brought suit in Federal District Court,challenging the constitutionality of the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld the Medicaid expansion as a valid exercise of Congress’s spending power, but concluded that Congress lacked authority to enact the individual mandate. Finding the mandate severable from the Act’s other provisions, the Eleventh Circuit left the rest of the Act intact.
Held: The judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part.
648 F. 3d 1235, affirmed in part and reversed in part.
1. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Part II, concluding that the Anti-Injunction Act does not bar this suit.
The Anti-Injunction Act provides that “no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person,” 26 U. S. C. §7421(a), so that those subject to a tax must first pay it and then sue for a refund. The present challenge seeks to restrain the collection of the shared responsibility payment from those who do not comply with the individual mandate. But Congress did not intend the payment to be treated asa “tax” for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act. The Affordable Care Act describes the payment as a “penalty,” not a “tax.” That label cannot control whether the payment is a tax for purposes of the Constitution, but it does determine the application of the Anti-Injunction Act. The Anti-Injunction Act therefore does not bar this suit. Pp. 11–
15.
2. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS concluded in Part III–A that the individual mandate is not a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. Pp. 16–30.
(a) The Constitution grants Congress the power to “regulate Commerce.” Art. I, §8, cl. 3 (emphasis added). The power to regulate commerce presupposes the existence of commercial activity to be regulated. This Court’s precedent reflects this understanding: As expansive as this Court’s cases construing the scope of the commerce
Cite as: 567 U. S. ____ (2012) 3
Syllabus
power have been, they uniformly describe the power as reaching “activity.” E.g., United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549, 560. The individual mandate, however, does not regulate existing commercial activity. It instead compels individuals to become active in commerce by purchasing a product, on the ground that their failure to do so affects interstate commerce.
Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress
3. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS concluded in Part III–B that the individual mandate must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance, if such a construction is reasonable.
The most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is that it commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power.It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.” Art. I, §8, cl. 1. In pressing its taxing power argument, the Government asks the Court to view the mandate as imposing a tax on those who do not buy that product. Because “every reasonable construction must be resorted to, in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality,” Hooper v. California, 155
U. S. 648, 657, the question is whether it is “fairly possible” to inter4
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT
BUSINESS v. SEBELIUS
Syllabus
pret the mandate as imposing such a tax, Crowell v. Benson, 285
U. S. 22, 62. Pp. 31–32.
4. CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Part III–C, concluding that the individual mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power under the Taxing Clause. Pp. 33–
44.
(a) The Affordable Care Act describes the “[s]hared responsibility payment” as a “penalty,” not a “tax.” That label is fatal to the application of the Anti-Injunction Act. It does not, however, control whether an exaction is within Congress’s power to tax. In answering that constitutional question, this Court follows a functional approach,“[d]isregarding the designation of the exaction, and viewing its substance and application.” United States v. Constantine, 296 U. S. 287,
294. Pp. 33–35.
(b)
Such an analysis suggests that the shared responsibility payment may for constitutional purposes be considered a tax. The payment is not so high that there is really no choice but to buy health insurance; the payment is not limited to willful violations, as penalties for unlawful acts often are; and the payment is collected solely by the IRS through the normal means of taxation. Cf. Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., 259 U. S. 20, 36–37. None of this is to say that payment is not intended to induce the purchase of health insurance. But the mandate need not be read to declare that failing to do so is unlawful. Neither the Affordable Care Act nor any other law attaches negative legal consequences to not buying health insurance, beyond requiring a payment to the IRS. And Congress’s choice of language—stating that individuals “shall” obtain insurance or pay a “penalty”—does not require reading §5000A as punishing unlawful conduct. It may also be read as imposing a tax on those who go without insurance. See New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144, 169–174. Pp. 35–40.
(c)
Even if the mandate may reasonably be characterized as a tax, it must still comply with the Direct Tax Clause, which provides:“No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Art. I, §9, cl. 4. A tax on going without health insurance is not like a capitation or other direct tax under this Court’s precedents. It therefore need not be apportioned so that each State pays in proportion to its population. Pp. 40–41.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/scotus_opinion_on_ACA_from_msnbc.com.pdf
Bachmann Got It Right Two Years Ago!
Bachmann: Obamacare Likely Largest Middle Class Tax Hike Ever
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Matt Kibbe: Hostile Takoever: Resisting Centralized Government’s Stranglehold on America–Videos
GBR: Matt Kibbe
Matt Kibbe – Hostile Takeover
Matt Kibbe: Hayek and the Tea Party
Background Articles and Videos
Give Us Liberty? Q&A with Dick Armey & Matt Kibbe of Freedom Works
Matt Kibbe on GBTV:The Tea Party and The 2012 Elections – Part 1
Matt Kibbe on GBTV:The Tea Party and The 2012 Elections – Part 2
Kibbe Previews “Hostile Takeover” Tea Party Book
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Young Voters Know Ron Paul Is The 1–The American People Know 2–Videos
The Phenomenon known as Paul: why the oldest candidate in the race, attracts the youngest voters
Ron Paul: When the People Change, Romney and Gingrich Will Change
Ron Paul’s Full Speech in Denver, Colorado
What If “They” Are Lying to Us about Ron Paul?
SA@TheDC – Conservatism’s Future: Young Americans for Liberty
“We Like Ron Paul” – Fox News Focus Group and Fox Five Panel
Ron Paul – Watch this presentation to see why so many people believe in Ron Paul
Armed Chinese Troops in Texas!
SA@TheDC – “I Like Ron Paul Except on Foreign Policy”
Ron Paul Ad – Secure
Ron Paul Ad – Plan
Ron VS Mitt
Ron Paul – Three of a Kind
SA@TAC – Ron Paul People
Ron Paul – “The one who can beat Obama”
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Stephen Davies–We Demand Freedom: Popular Movements for Liberty in U.S. History–Videos
We Demand Freedom: Popular Movements for Liberty in U.S. History
“…According to Dr. Stephen Davies, the tea party movement in the United States is not an isolated occurrence in American history. Rather, it’s part of a recurring movement in American history that ebbs and flows. These movements are peculiar, however, as they are unique to the United States. Dr. Stephen Davies offers several ideas as to why these movements exist in America. …”
Background Articles and Videos
Stephen Davies’ Intellectual Development
What Does It Mean To Be Libertarian?
Liberty Movements in American History
Why Should Conservatives Like Libertarian Ideas?
Why Should Liberals Like Libertarian Ideas?
When Governments Cut Spending
How Should Governments Deal With Debt?
A History of Economic Booms and Busts
Top 3 Myths About the Great Depression and the New Deal
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Stephen Davies–The Decline and Triumph of Classical Liberalism–Institute of Humane Studies–Videos
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )Glenn Beck Is Back–Warning–Danger–The Marxist Roots of Occupy Wall Street–Obama’s Progressive Radical Socialists & SEIU–Executing The Cloward Piven Strategy–Videos
Glenn Beck Back On Fox News To Demonize And Hate Monger About Occupy Wall Street
Glenn Beck with stephen Lerner audio
Freedom Watch – Judge Napolitano’s Open Letter to Occupy Wall Street Oct 13, 2011
Freedom Watch – Oct 7, 2011 
aid Protesters at Occupy Wall Street? Libertarians Dominating?
SEIU / ACORN: Organized “Occupy Wall Street” From Day One via The Working Family Party
OCCUPY WALL STREET = BRAINWASHED SHEEP HIPPIES SOCIALISTS COMMUNISTS
Ben Shapiro explains corporate Marxists on Wall Street
Obama Takes Side of Wall Street: ‘It Wasn’t Necessarily Illegal What Bankers Did’
OBAMA CAUGHT SAYING ACORN AND FRIENDS WILL SHAPE HIS PRESIDENTIAL AGENDA
Lou Dobbs – ACORN Fraud & Obama Ties
Andy Stern SEIU Pres states where they are leading our country
SEIU’s Andy Stern on FNS: Power Player of the Week
Obama SEIU’s Agenda is My Agenda
Barack Obama and Andy Stern
SEIU Stephen Lerner Caught trying to Incite Riots
Stephen Lerner, former SEIU memeber, plan for strike (Occupy Wall Street): FULL Uncut Version
Andy Stern, SEIU President and Communist
George Soros backs anti-Wall Street protests
PART 1: Glenn Beck: Tides Foundation [Soros] Propaganda in your Church
PART 2: Glenn Beck: Tides Foundation [Soros] Propaganda in your Church
PART 3: Glenn Beck: Tides Foundation [Soros] Propaganda in your Church
The Cloward/Piven Strategy 1
The Cloward/Piven Strategy 2
The Cloward/Piven Strategy 3
The Cloward/Piven Strategy 4
The Cloward/Piven Strategy 5
The Cloward/Piven Strategy 6
Frances Fox Piven Indoctrinating College Students: Be Ready Violent Streets Battles
Related Post On Pronk Palisades
George Soros: Barack Obama’s Money Man and Agenda Puppeter
SEIU Stephen Lerner’s Plan to Sabotage American Economy and Stock Market and To Destroy Capitalism–Videos
Collectivists vs. Individualists: Occupy Wall Street Compared To Tea Party–Videos
Public Sector Unions vs. The America People: Replacing The American Dream With The Socialist Union Nightmare–Videos
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
United States of America: Problem: A Triple A Country With A Triple F President–Solution: Fire The President And Democratic Senators And Representatives–Vote For Tea Party Candidates–Videos
Obama: America ‘Always Will Be A Triple A Country’
Krauthammer: Obama Blames Tea Party, God, Middle East.. “Everybody Except Him”
Tea Party Trashing: Dems Blame Tea Party For Credit Downgrade
Sen. Rand Paul on balancing the budget
03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan
Rubio Joins Floor Debate: No Spending Bills Without A Budget
Lee Joins Floor Debate: No Spending Bills Without A Budget
“Defending the Tea Party Against Sen. John Kerry”
Michele Bachmann Calls on President to Demand Geithner’s Resignation
Ron Paul on Bloomberg: Out of Control Spending Responsible for Downgrade
The Tea Party demands that the Democratic and Republican Party establishments live within the means of the American people by balancing the budget every year.
If either political party had done this when they were in power, Standard & Poor’s would not have downgraded the Treasury Securities of the United States.
The Democratic Party controlled both the Senate and House of Representatives from January 2007 through January 2011 and ran up massive budgetary deficits and together with a $787 billion stimulus package increased the National Debt by nearly $7,000 billion.
The S&P downgrade was a direct result of this massive spending and huge increases in the National Debt that have now exceeded 100% of Gross Domestic Product.
Now the President, his propagandists and fellow Democrats blame the tea party for the downgrade–the big lie repeated over and over again.
The truth is the Tea Party pointed out that both political parties were not fiscally responsible and future budgets needed to be balanced or in surplus.
This requires massive cuts in the budget baseline itself and not just reductions in the rate of growth of the budget baseline.
Democratic Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,819 | 2,174 | -1,645 | 10,856 |
| 2012 | 3,729 | 2,627 | -1,101 | 11,881 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 3,003 | -768 | 12,784 |
| 2014 | 3,977 | 3,333 | -646 | 13,562 |
| 2015 | 4,190 | 3,583 | -607 | 14,301 |
| 2016 | 4,468 | 3,819 | -649 | 15,064 |
| 2017 | 4,669 | 4,042 | -627 | 15,795 |
| 2018 | 4,876 | 4,257 | -619 | 16,513 |
| 2019 | 5,154 | 4,473 | -681 | 17,284 |
| 2020 | 5,442 | 4,686 | -735 | 18,103 |
| 2021 | 5,697 | 4,923 | -774 | 18,967 |
| 2012-2021 | 45,952 | 38,747 | -7,205 | n.a. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
Republican Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,618 | 2,230 | -1,388 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,529 | 2,533 | -995 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,559 | 2,860 | -699 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,586 | 3,094 | -492 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,671 | 3,237 | -434 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,858 | 3,377 | -481 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,998 | 3,589 | -408 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 4,123 | 3,745 | -379 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,352 | 3,939 | -414 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,544 | 4,142 | -402 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,739 | 4,354 | -385 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 39,958 | 34,870 | -5,088 | n.a. |
http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf
Sen. Toomey Unveils his FY 2012 Budget
Senator Pat Toomey Talks with Michael Medved about his Budget
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Pat Toomey(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurplus | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,625 | 2,230 | -1,351 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,477 | 2,538 | -919 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,485 | 2,964 | -521 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,509 | 3,216 | -291 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,623 | 3,391 | -233 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,765 | 3,524 | -241 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,853 | 3,736 | -117 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 3,955 | 3,916 | -39 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,140 | 4,108 | -32 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,302 | 4,325 | 23 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,493 | 4,566 | 73 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 38,602 | 36,304 | -2298 | n.a. |
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55116239/Restoring-Balance-Final
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Rand Paul(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,708 | 2,228 | -1,480 | 10,430 |
| 2012 | 3,100 | 2,547 | -553 | 11,051 |
| 2013 | 3,152 | 2,755 | -397 | 11,532 |
| 2014 | 3,227 | 3,088 | -139 | 11,748 |
| 2015 | 3,360 | 3,244 | -116 | 11,942 |
| 2016 | 3,430 | 3,349 | 19 | 11,997 |
| 2012-2016 | 16,269 | 15,083 | -1,188 | n.a. |
http://campaignforliberty.com/materials/RandBudget.pdf
Tea Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Surpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2012 | 2,500 | 2,500 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2013 | 2,800 | 2,800 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2014 | 3,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2015 | 3,200 | 3,200 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2016 | 3,300 | 3,300 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2017 | 3,400 | 3,500 | 100 | 10,800 |
| 2018 | 3,500 | 3,700 | 200 | 10,600 |
| 2019 | 3,600 | 3,900 | 300 | 10,300 |
| 2020 | 3,700 | 4,000 | 300 | 10,000 |
| 2021 | 3,800 | 4,300 | 500 | 9,500 |
| 2012-2021 | 32,800 | 34,200 | 1,400 | n.a. |
The political elites are aware that the American people know they are being lied to and many of the current Senators and Representatives will be replaced by candidates who truly believe in fiscal responsibility and a constitutional republic.
While it may take several elections to accomplish this, President Obama will be fired by the American people for his failure of leadership in deliverying a peace and prosperity economy.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Will Tea Party Caucus Vote As A Block Against Democratic and Republican Establishment Compromise Bill On Raising National Debt Ceiling By $900 Billion, Adding Over $7,000 Billion To National Debt In The Next Ten Years Plus A Huge Tax Hike in 2013?–The American People Would Like To Know!–Videos
Judge Napolitano – U.S. Debt Limit (Law’s of Economics)
Schiff Happens
Sen. Rand Paul on CNBC’s The Kudlow Report – 08/01/11
Ron Paul Texas Straight Talk: Freeze the Budget and Stop Plundering the American People! Aug 1, 2011
Deficits are Bad, but the Real Problem is Spending
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
Did President Manufacture Debt Crisis?
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) Discusses Congressman Connie Mack’s (R-FL) Penny Plan
Senator Marco Rubio: “Save The Whole House Or It Will All Burn Down”
Ron Paul Ad – Conviction
This Is Why We Need Ron Paul 2012 – Wake up Americans and fight!
Harry Reid Eric Cantor Revenue
Debt deal must have balanced budget amendment: Sen. Mike Lee
Ron Paul to Congress: If Debt Is the Problem, Why Do You Want More of It?
“Cut, Cap and Balance,” the Debt Ceiling and Federal Spending
Underwhelming Spending Cuts from Congress and Obama
Klavan, Whittle & Ferreira: Is a Spending Freeze the Answer to US Budgetary Problems
Debt Ceiling Theatrics, U.S. Economy Back in Recession
Andrew Napolitano – The Story of Money
House Roll Call: How they voted on debt-limit bill
“…The 269-161 roll call Monday by which the House passed the compromise bill to raise the debt ceiling and prevent a government default.
A “yes” vote is a vote to pass the measure.
Voting yes were 95 Democrats and 174 Republicans.
Voting no were 95 Democrats and 66 Republicans.
X denotes those not voting.
There are 2 vacancies in the 435-member House. …”
FLORIDA
Democrats — Brown, N; Castor, Y; Deutch, Y; Hastings, N; Wasserman Schultz, Y; Wilson, Y.
Republicans — Adams, Y; Bilirakis, Y; Buchanan, Y; Crenshaw, Y; Diaz-Balart, Y; Mack, N; Mica, Y; Miller, Y; Nugent, Y; Posey, N; Rivera, Y; Rooney, Y; Ros-Lehtinen, Y; Ross, N; Southerland, N; Stearns, N; Webster, Y; West, Y; Young, Y.
MINNESOTA
Democrats — Ellison, N; McCollum, N; Peterson, Y; Walz, Y.
Republicans — Bachmann, N; Cravaack, N; Kline, Y; Paulsen, Y.
OHIO
Democrats — Fudge, N; Kaptur, N; Kucinich, N; Ryan, N; Sutton, N.
Republicans — Austria, Y; Boehner, Y; Chabot, Y; Gibbs, Y; Johnson, Y; Jordan, N; LaTourette, Y; Latta, Y; Renacci, Y; Schmidt, Y; Stivers, Y; Tiberi, Y; Turner, N.
TEXAS
Democrats — Cuellar, Y; Doggett, Y; Gonzalez, N; Green, Al, N; Green, Gene, Y; Hinojosa, Y; Jackson Lee, Y; Johnson, E. B., Y; Reyes, N.
Republicans — Barton, Y; Brady, Y; Burgess, Y; Canseco, Y; Carter, Y; Conaway, Y; Culberson, Y; Farenthold, Y; Flores, Y; Gohmert, N; Granger, Y; Hall, N; Hensarling, Y; Johnson, Sam, Y; Marchant, Y; McCaul, Y; Neugebauer, N; Olson, Y; Paul, N; Poe, N; Sessions, Y; Smith, Y; Thornberry, Y.
Read more: http://thegardenisland.com/news/national/article_28736ea6-a777-59fe-9244-2ef3c128679e.html#ixzz1TpZcm4LP
The American people want balanced budgets.
The American people oppose adding between $7,000 billion to $8,000 billion to the National debt over the next ten years.
The American people oppose the tax hike of repealing Bush tax rate cuts and locking in tax hikes for Obamacare that this bill would enable.
The American people are not fooled by the so-call spending cuts that are in fact only cuts in the rate of growth of the budget baseline and not actual cuts in the budget baseline itself.
The American people oppose yet another increase the national debt ceiling without either a balanced budget amendment being passed by two-thirds majorities in the House and Senate or a balanced budget within three years.
Now is the time for all good tea party members to come to the aid of their country and vote against the Democratic and Republican Party establishment’s compromise bill to raise the National debt ceiling by over $900 billion for Fiscal Year 2011 and add over $7,000 in additional deficit spending and more national debt over the next ten-year.
For the proposed Fiscal Year 2012 and 2013 budgets the total effect on deficits is only a reduction of $21 billion and $42 billion respectively excluding any future reductions of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/123xx/doc12357/BudgetControlActAug1.pdf
The American people are watching to see if the Tea Party caucus votes as a block to defeat this bill.
Those tea party members who vote in favor of the bill will be challenged in the primaries next year and defeated.
The tea party patriots are not pleased with those Tea Party member who apparently sold out and betrayed the tea party.
The tea party and the American people will be watching.
Should this bill pass the Federal Reserve will start printing money with quantitative easing 3 or creating money to purchase Treasury securities or more debt.
Quantitative Easing 3 or creating more money to buy U.S. Treasury securities will begin in the fall after the National Bureau of Economic Research’s Business Cycle Dating Committee officially determines that the U.S. Economy has been in a recession since the middle of 2010.
http://papers.nber.org/cycles/cyclesmain.html
Once it is announced the U.S. economy is again in a recession, the Federal Reserve will use this fact to justify another massive money printing program of over $1,000 billion to finance the deficit spending in Fiscal Year 2012 of over $1,000 billion.
This in turn will lead to inflation or a general rise in the price level.
The economy is currently in a another recession that started in July 2010–the dreaded double dip recession.
The result will be even higher unemployment rates and inflation–stagflation.
This bill is not only not perfect, it is an economic disaster in the making.
Vote for this bill and you will be wrecking the economy, destroying jobs and killing the American dream.
The American people will not forget those who voted for this bill–both Democrats and Republicans.
You do not compromise your principles to vote for this bill especially given the damage this bill will cause to the American people and economy.
In 2012 the tea party will double its numbers in the Congress and the Senate with over 100 Representatives and over 12 Senators who have signed the Fiscal Responsibility Pledge.
Judge: You Can’t Get Out of Debt By Spending
American Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility
“A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government.”
~Thomas Jefferson
Fiscal Responsibility Pledge
I, ________________________________________, pledge to the taxpayers of the state
of ____________________________, and to the American people that I will:
1. Support and vote for only balanced budgets or surplus budgets where total estimated Federal government tax revenues for each fiscal year equals or exceeds total estimated Federal government spending outlays.
2. Support and vote for only decreases in the national debt ceiling.
3. Support and vote for the FairTax. The FairTax abolishes all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax on new goods and services, and administered primarily by existing state sales tax authorities. Once enacted any changes in the FairTax or increases in the FairTax rate will require two-thirds roll call vote of the House of Representatives and Senate.
4. Support and vote for the repeal of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
5. Support and vote for a balanced budget Amendment to the Constitution of the United State which allows budget surpluses or requires the balancing of tax revenues and spending outlays each fiscal year, limits Federal Government spending to eight-teen percent (18%) of Gross Domestic Product or less, requires a two-thirds majority roll call vote for any proposed tax increase in the House of Representatives and Senate and where the only exception to a surplus budget or balanced budget is the passage of a declaration of war that would require unbalanced budgets and increases in the national debt.
___________________________________________ _____________________________________
Signature Date Signed
___________________________________________ _____________________________________
Witness Witness
Pledge must be signed, dated, witnessed and returned to the:
American Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility
10455 N. Central Expressway-#109-228
Dallas, Texas 75231
Background Articles and Videos
The Secret of Oz (by Mr Bill Still)
Michael Savage-August 1, 2011 part 3
Dan Mitchell Exposing DC’s Fake Spending-Cut Scam with Judge Napolitano
Baseline Budgeting Explained
US Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions
http://papers.nber.org/cycles/cyclesmain.html
The NBER’s Business Cycle Dating Committee
“…The NBER’s Business Cycle Dating Committee maintains a chronology of the U.S. business cycle. The chronology comprises alternating dates of peaks and troughs in economic activity. A recession is a period between a peak and a trough, and an expansion is a period between a trough and a peak. During a recession, a significant decline in economic activity spreads across the economy and can last from a few months to more than a year. Similarly, during an expansion, economic activity rises substantially, spreads across the economy, and usually lasts for several years.
In both recessions and expansions, brief reversals in economic activity may occur-a recession may include a short period of expansion followed by further decline; an expansion may include a short period of contraction followed by further growth. The Committee applies its judgment based on the above definitions of recessions and expansions and has no fixed rule to determine whether a contraction is only a short interruption of an expansion, or an expansion is only a short interruption of a contraction. The most recent example of such a judgment that was less than obvious was in 1980-1982, when the Committee determined that the contraction that began in 1981 was not a continuation of the one that began in 1980, but rather a separate full recession.
The Committee does not have a fixed definition of economic activity. It examines and compares the behavior of various measures of broad activity: real GDP measured on the product and income sides, economy-wide employment, and real income. The Committee also may consider indicators that do not cover the entire economy, such as real sales and the Federal Reserve’s index of industrial production (IP). The Committee’s use of these indicators in conjunction with the broad measures recognizes the issue of double-counting of sectors included in both those indicators and the broad measures. Still, a well-defined peak or trough in real sales or IP might help to determine the overall peak or trough dates, particularly if the economy-wide indicators are in conflict or do not have well-defined peaks or troughs.
FAQs – Frequently asked Questions and additional information on how the NBER’s Business Cycle Dating Committee chooses turning points in the Economy …”
http://papers.nber.org/cycles/recessions.html
Ron Paul: Freeze The Budget And Stop Plundering American People! – OpEd
Written by: Ron Paul
“…In spite of the rhetoric being thrown around, the real debate is over how much government spending will increase. No plan under serious consideration cuts spending in the way you and I think about it. Instead, the cuts being discussed are illusory and are not cuts from current amounts being spent, but cuts in prospective spending increases. This is akin to a family saving $100,000 in expenses by deciding not to buy a Lamborghini and instead getting a fully loaded Mercedes when really their budget dictates that they need to stick with their perfectly serviceable Honda.
But this is the type of math Washington uses to mask the incriminating truth about the unrepentant plundering of the American people. The truth is that frightening rhetoric about default and full faith in the credit of the United States being carelessly thrown around to ram through a bigger budget than ever in spite of stagnant revenues. If your family’s income did not change year over year, would it be wise financial management to accelerate spending so you would feel richer? That is what our government is doing, with one side merely suggesting a different list of purchases than the other.
In reality, bringing our fiscal house into order is not that complicated or excruciatingly painful at all. If we simply kept spending at current levels, by their definition of cuts that would save nearly $400 billion in the next few years, versus the $25 billion the Budget Control Act claims to cut. It would only take us five years to cut $1 trillion in Washington math just by holding the line on spending. That is hardly austere or catastrophic.
A balanced budget is similarly simple and within reach if Washington had just a tiny amount of fiscal common sense. Our revenues currently stand at approximately $2.2 trillion a year and are likely to remain stagnant as the recession continues. Our outlays are $3.7 trillion and projected to grow every year. Yet we only have to go back to 2004 for federal outlays of $2.2 trillion, and the government was far from small that year. If we simply referred to that year’s spending levels, which would hardly do us fear, we would have a balanced budget right now. If we held the line on spending and the economy actually did grow as estimated, the budget would balance on its own by 2015 with no cuts whatsoever. …”
Congress moving quickly on debt and spending deal
“…Tea party favorite and presidential candidate Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., countered that the deal “spends too much and doesn’t cut enough. … Someone has to say no. I will.”
The government presently borrows more than 40 cents of every dollar it spends, and without an infusion of borrowing authority, the government would face an unprecedented default on U.S. loans and obligations — like $23 billion worth of Social Security pension payments to retirees due Aug. 3.
The increased borrowing authority includes $400 billion that would take effect immediately and $500 billion that Obama could order unless specifically denied by Congress. That $900 billion increase in the debt cap would be matched by savings produced over the coming decade by capping spending on day-to-day agency budgets passed by Congress each year.
A special bipartisan committee would be established to find up to $1.5 trillion in deficit cuts, probably taken from benefit programs like farm subsidies, Medicare and the Medicaid health care program for the poor and disabled. Republicans dismissed the idea that the panel would approve tax increases.
Any agreement by the panel would be voted on by both House and Senate — and if the panel deadlocked, automatic spending cuts would slash across much of the federal budget. Social Security, Medicaid and food stamps would be exempt from the automatic cuts, but payments to doctors, nursing homes and other Medicare providers could be trimmed, as could subsidies to insurance companies that offer an alternative to government-run Medicare.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he’d have to “swallow hard” and vote for the legislation even though he is worried about cuts in defense spending. …”
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/politics&id=8281927
Tea Party Caucus
The Tea Party Caucus is a caucus of the United States House of Representatives and Senate launched and chaired by Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann on July 16, 2010.[1] The caucus is dedicated to promoting fiscal responsibility, adherence to the movement’s interpretation of the Constitution, and limited government. The idea of a Tea Party Caucus originated from Kentucky Senator Rand Paul when he was campaigning for his current seat.[2]
The caucus was approved as an official congressional member organization by the House Administration Committee on July 19, 2010[3] and held its first meeting on July 21. Its first public event was a press conference on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol, also on July 21.[4] Four Senators joined the caucus on January 27, 2011.[5]
Members, 112th Congress
The caucus chairman is Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. As of March 31, 2011 the committee has 60 members, all Republicans.[15]
- Sandy Adams, Florida
- Robert Aderholt, Alabama
- Todd Akin, Missouri
- Rodney Alexander, Louisiana
- Michele Bachmann, Minnesota, Chairman
- Roscoe Bartlett, Maryland
- Joe Barton, Texas
- Gus Bilirakis, Florida
- Rob Bishop, Utah
- Diane Black, Tennessee
- Michael C. Burgess, Texas
- Paul Broun, Georgia
- Dan Burton, Indiana
- John Carter, Texas
- Bill Cassidy, Louisiana
- Howard Coble, North Carolina
- Mike Coffman, Colorado
- Chip Cravaack, Minnesota
- Ander Crenshaw, Florida
- John Culberson, Texas
- Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
- Blake Farenthold, Texas
- Stephen Fincher, Tennessee
- John Fleming, Louisiana
- Trent Franks, Arizona
- Phil Gingrey, Georgia
- Louie Gohmert, Texas
- Vicky Hartzler, Missouri
- Wally Herger, California
- Tim Huelskamp, Kansas
- Lynn Jenkins, Kansas
- Steve King, Iowa
- Doug Lamborn, Colorado
- Jeff Landry, Louisiana
- Blaine Luetkemeyer, Missouri
- Kenny Marchant, Texas
- Tom McClintock, California
- David McKinley, West Virginia
- Gary Miller, California
- Mick Mulvaney, South Carolina
- Randy Neugebauer, Texas
- Rich Nugent, Florida
- Steve Pearce, New Mexico
- Mike Pence, Indiana
- Ted Poe, Texas
- Tom Price, Georgia
- Denny Rehberg, Montana
- Phil Roe, Tennessee
- Dennis Ross, Florida
- Ed Royce, California
- Steve Scalise, Louisiana
- Tim Scott, South Carolina
- Pete Sessions, Texas
- Adrian Smith, Nebraska
- Lamar Smith, Texas
- Cliff Stearns, Florida
- Tim Walberg, Michigan
- Joe Walsh, Illinois
- Allen West, Florida
- Lynn Westmoreland, Georgia
- Joe Wilson, South Carolina
Members of Senate Caucus
- Jim DeMint (South Carolina)[5]
- Mike Lee (Utah)[5]
- Jerry Moran (Kansas)
- Rand Paul (Kentucky)[5]
Aronoff: Media’s Disgraceful Coverage of Debt-Ceiling Debate
“…The general performance of the media during the debt ceiling debate has been atrocious. The currency of journalists consists of words, and by completely debasing that currency, they are undermining their profession. They are also making it that much more difficult for the public to understand the choices and the consequences they are facing.
The constant reference to August 2nd being the date we default on our debt is utterly false. ABC has shown a “Countdown to Default” clock, ticking away to August 2nd. CNN has run similar graphics, as have all the networks, including the Fox News Channel. Even today MSNBC is showing a graphic that says, “Four Days to Default.” They have continued right through this week. Default occurs only if and when the U.S. fails to make interest payments to the bondholders on the debt it owes. Not only is August 2nd not the day the U.S. defaults on its debt, but the issue could easily be taken off the table, and President Obama could calm the markets by announcing that under no circumstances will he allow the U.S. to default, and he could assure that by saying he will definitely make that payment the highest priority until a deal is reached in Congress. Instead, he chose to have the debt ceiling “used as a gun against the heads” of Americans, which is exactly what he accused the Republicans of doing earlier this month, in language that was supposed to be no longer acceptable after the tragic shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson last January.
Charles Gasparino of Fox Business News reported this week that the Obama administration has begun calling major Wall Street banks to assure them that the U.S. won’t default on its debt. Sources have told me that the administration is also trying to get the banks to lobby on its behalf.
The other egregious falsehood reveals an astounding lack of knowledge, or willingness to deceive, about the difference between the deficit and the national debt. Here, for example, from Jake Tapper of ABC News: “The president continues to push for a ‘grand bargain,’ buoyed by the bipartisan ‘Gang of Six’ proposal that would reduce the deficit by $3.7 trillion over the next decade through spending cuts and tax increases.”
And here, from Stephanie Condon of CBS News: “The deal would reduce the deficit by nearly $4 trillion…”
President Obama in his July 25th prime time address to the country said, “This balanced approach asks everyone to give a little without requiring anyone to sacrifice too much. It would reduce the deficit (emphasis added) by around $4 trillion and put us on a path to pay down our debt.
This misuse of the language has been the rule, not the exception. As explained on the Treasury Department’s own website, “The deficit is the difference between the money Government takes in, called receipts, and what the Government spends, called outlays, each year.” (emphasis added) The same website says that “One way to think about the debt is as accumulated deficits.” This is basic economics, but astonishingly, the President and most of the media constantly get it wrong. Is it on purpose, to mislead, or do they not understand the difference? …”
Which Budgets Are Balanced And Living Within The Means of The American People?
4/5/11 Republican Leadership Press Conference
Democratic Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,819 | 2,174 | -1,645 | 10,856 |
| 2012 | 3,729 | 2,627 | -1,101 | 11,881 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 3,003 | -768 | 12,784 |
| 2014 | 3,977 | 3,333 | -646 | 13,562 |
| 2015 | 4,190 | 3,583 | -607 | 14,301 |
| 2016 | 4,468 | 3,819 | -649 | 15,064 |
| 2017 | 4,669 | 4,042 | -627 | 15,795 |
| 2018 | 4,876 | 4,257 | -619 | 16,513 |
| 2019 | 5,154 | 4,473 | -681 | 17,284 |
| 2020 | 5,442 | 4,686 | -735 | 18,103 |
| 2021 | 5,697 | 4,923 | -774 | 18,967 |
| 2012-2021 | 45,952 | 38,747 | -7,205 | n.a. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
Republican Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,618 | 2,230 | -1,388 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,529 | 2,533 | -995 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,559 | 2,860 | -699 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,586 | 3,094 | -492 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,671 | 3,237 | -434 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,858 | 3,377 | -481 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,998 | 3,589 | -408 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 4,123 | 3,745 | -379 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,352 | 3,939 | -414 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,544 | 4,142 | -402 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,739 | 4,354 | -385 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 39,958 | 34,870 | -5,088 | n.a. |
http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf
Sen. Toomey Unveils his FY 2012 Budget
Senator Pat Toomey Talks with Michael Medved about his Budget
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Pat Toomey(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurplus | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,625 | 2,230 | -1,351 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,477 | 2,538 | -919 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,485 | 2,964 | -521 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,509 | 3,216 | -291 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,623 | 3,391 | -233 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,765 | 3,524 | -241 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,853 | 3,736 | -117 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 3,955 | 3,916 | -39 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,140 | 4,108 | -32 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,302 | 4,325 | 23 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,493 | 4,566 | 73 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 38,602 | 36,304 | -2298 | n.a. |
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55116239/Restoring-Balance-Final
SA@TAC – The GOP, War and the Debt
3/09/11: Sen. Rand Paul on balancing the budget
03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Rand Paul(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,708 | 2,228 | -1,480 | 10,430 |
| 2012 | 3,100 | 2,547 | -553 | 11,051 |
| 2013 | 3,152 | 2,755 | -397 | 11,532 |
| 2014 | 3,227 | 3,088 | -139 | 11,748 |
| 2015 | 3,360 | 3,244 | -116 | 11,942 |
| 2016 | 3,430 | 3,349 | 19 | 11,997 |
| 2012-2016 | 16,269 | 15,083 | -1,188 | n.a. |
http://campaignforliberty.com/materials/RandBudget.pdf
Tea Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Surpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2012 | 2,500 | 2,500 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2013 | 2,800 | 2,800 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2014 | 3,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2015 | 3,200 | 3,200 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2016 | 3,300 | 3,300 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2017 | 3,400 | 3,500 | 100 | 10,800 |
| 2018 | 3,500 | 3,700 | 200 | 10,600 |
| 2019 | 3,600 | 3,900 | 300 | 10,300 |
| 2020 | 3,700 | 4,000 | 300 | 10,000 |
| 2021 | 3,800 | 4,300 | 500 | 9,500 |
| 2012-2021 | 32,800 | 34,200 | 1,400 | n.a. |
Baseline (budgeting)
“…Baseline budgeting is a method of developing a budget which uses existing spending levels as the basis for establishing future funding requirements. The concept assumes that the organization is generally headed in the right direction and only minor changes in spending levels will be required. The baseline is normally enhanced by adding adjustment factors based on issues such as inflation, new programs, and anticipated changes to existing programs.
The genesis of baseline budget projections can be found in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. That act required the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to prepare projections of federal spending for the upcoming fiscal year based on a continuation of the existing level of governmental services. It also required the newly established Congressional Budget Office to prepare five-year projections of budget authority, outlays, revenues, and the surplus or deficit. OMB published its initial current-services budget projections in November 1974, and CBO’s five-year projections first appeared in January 1976. Today’s baseline budget projections are very much like those prepared more than two decades ago, although they now span 10 years instead of five.
The Budget Act was silent on whether to adjust estimates of discretionary appropriations for anticipated changes in inflation. Until 1980, OMB’s projections excluded inflation adjustments for discretionary programs. CBO’s projections, however, assumed that appropriations would keep pace with inflation, although CBO has also published projections without these so-called discretionary inflation adjustments.
CBO’s budget projections took on added importance in 1980 and 1981, when they served as the baseline for computing spending reductions to be achieved in the budget reconciliation process. The reconciliation instructions contained in the fiscal year 1982 budget resolution (the so-called Gramm-Latta budget) required House and Senate committees to reduce outlays by a total of $36 billion below baseline levels, but each committee could determine how those savings were to be achieved. The CBO baseline has been used in every year since 1981 for developing budget resolutions and measuring compliance with reconciliation instructions.
The Deficit Control Act of 1985 provided the first legal definition of baseline. For the most part, the act defined the baseline in conformity with previous usage. If appropriations had not been enacted for the upcoming fiscal year, the baseline was to assume the previous year’s level without any adjustment for inflation. In 1987, however, the Congress amended the definition of the baseline so that discretionary appropriations would be adjusted to keep pace with inflation. Other technical changes to the definition of the baseline were enacted in 1990, 1993, and 1997.
Baseline budget projections increasingly became the subject of political debate and controversy during the late 1980s and early 1990s, and more recently during the 2011 debt limit debate. Some critics contend that baseline projections create a bias in favor of spending by assuming that federal spending keeps pace with inflation and other factors driving the growth of entitlement programs. Changes that merely slow the growth of federal spending programs have often been described as cuts in spending, when in reality they are actually reductions in the rate of spending growth.
There have been attempts to eliminate the baseline budget concept and replace it with zero based budgeting, which is the opposite of baseline budgeting. Zero based budgeting requires that all spending must be re-justified each year or it will be eliminated from the budget regardless of previous spending levels.
According to the Government Accountability Office, a Baseline is as follows:
Baseline
“An estimate of spending, revenue, the deficit or surplus, and the public debt expected during a fiscal year under current laws and current policy. The baseline is a benchmark for measuring the budgetary effects of proposed changes in revenues and spending. It assumes that receipts and mandatory spending will continue or expire in the future as required by law and that the future funding for discretionary programs will equal the most recently enacted appropriation, adjusted for inflation. Under the Budget Enforcement Act (BEA), which will expire at the end of fiscal year 2006, the baseline is defined as the projection of current-year levels of new budget authority, outlays, revenues, and the surplus or deficit into the budget year and outyears based on laws enacted through the applicable date.
CBO Baseline
Projected levels of governmental receipts (revenues), budget authority, and outlays for the budget year and subsequent fiscal years, assuming generally that current policies remain the same, except as directed by law. The baseline is described in the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) annual report for the House and Senate Budget Committees, The Budget and Economic Outlook, which is published in January. The baseline, by law, includes projections for 5 years, but at the request of the Budget Committees, CBO has provided such projections for 10 years. In most years the CBO baseline is revised in conjunction with CBO’s analysis of the President’s budget, which is usually issued in March, and again during the summer. The “March” baseline is the benchmark for measuring the budgetary effects of proposed legislation under consideration by Congress.” …”
External links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseline_(budgeting)
Rasmussen Reports
Most Voters Are Unhappy With Both Sides in the Debt Ceiling Debate
“…Most voters don’t care much for the way either political party is performing in the federal debt ceiling debate.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 58% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat disapprove of the way President Obama and congressional Democrats are handling the debate over the debt ceiling, with 38% who Strongly Disapprove. But 53% also disapprove of how congressional Republicans are handling the debate, including 32% who Strongly Disapprove.
Just 36% approve of how Obama and Democrats are doing, with 10% who Strongly Approve. Forty percent (40%) approve of the GOP’s performance, including 13% who Strongly Approve. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
While the two sides continue to wrangle over how to avoid defaulting on the government’s massive debt load, most voters nationwide are worried the final deal will raise taxes too much and cut spending too little.
Whatever spending cuts are in the final deal, 49% of all voters don’t think the government will actually cut the spending agreed upon. A commentary by Scott Rasmussen, published in Politico, put it this way: “Based on the history of the past few decades, voters have learned that politicians promising unspecified spending cuts should be treated with all the credibility of a six-year old boy caught with his hand in the cookie jar promising to be good for the rest of his life.” …”
Rasmussen Reports
55% Oppose Tax Hike In Debt Ceiling Deal
“…As the Beltway politicians try to figure out how they will raise the debt ceiling and for how long, most voters oppose including tax hikes in the deal.
Just 34% think a tax hike should be included in any legislation to raise the debt ceiling. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% disagree and say it should not. …”
“…There is a huge partisan divide on the question. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Democrats want a tax hike in the deal while 82% of Republicans do not. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 35% favor a tax hike and 51% are opposed.
Americans who earn more than $75,000 a year are evenly divided as to whether a tax hike should be included in the debt ceiling deal. Those who earn less are opposed to including tax hikes.
Voters remain very concerned about the debt ceiling issue. Sixty-nine percent (69%) believe that it would be bad for the economy if a failure to raise the debt ceiling led to government defaults. Only 6% believe it would be good for theeconomy. Fourteen percent (14%) believe it would have no impact and 11% are notsure. These figures are little changed from a few weeks ago. …”
House passes Ryan’s ’12 budget; conservatives want more cuts
“…The House on Friday approved a fiscal year 2012 budget resolution from Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that seeks to drastically limit government spending next year and in years to follow.
But the vote on the measure — which imposes $5.8 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade — came after a clear sign that at least half of the Republican Caucus supports even tougher spending cuts.
The final tally was 235-193, with four Republicans opposing it. They were Reps. Ron Paul (Texas), Denny Rehberg (Mont.), Walter Jones (N.C.) and David McKinley (W.Va.).
Rehberg, the appropriator in charge of health spending, is running for Montana’s Senate seat.
Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said listening sessions with Republican members made it the strongest vote of the year.
“This is the process we should follow on all votes,” he said.
Every Democrat voted “no.” …”
House passes cut, cap and balance — and a deal is in sight
By Jennifer Rubin
“…The Republican-controlled House defied a presidential veto threat Tuesday night in approving a bill to amend the Constitution to require a balanced federal budget. But Speaker John A. Boehner acknowledged that a backup plan is needed, and a Senate GOP leader said he expects such an alternative to win his chamber’s approval.
The House voted 234 to 190 in favor of the “Cut, Cap and Balance Act,” which the White House has said will be vetoed in the unlikely event it passes the Senate and reaches President Obama’s desk. Faced with those prospects, Boehner told reporters that it would also be responsible to consider a backup plan for raising the federal debt ceiling and thus averting a potentially disastrous default on U.S. obligations.
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Tea Party Candidates And Elected Officials New Gold Standard For Balanced And Surplus Budgets, Lower Debt Ceilings and Tax Reform: Fiscal Responsibility Pledge To The American People–Videos
The Second Obama Recession Starts Or The Great Obama Depression Continues–The Growth Rate of Gross Domestic Product Declines For Four Consecutive Quarters–The Economy Has Peaked And Entered A Period Of Stagflation–Rising Prices, Unemployment And Obama Misery Index!–Ron Paul To The Rescue?–Videos
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )The Tea Party’s Compromise Offer Of A $2 Hike In The National Debt Ceiling For Every $1 Cut In Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Spending Outlays–$2,400 Billion Hike In National Debt Ceiling For $1,200 Billion Cut In Fiscal Year 2012 Budget –The Great Deal–A Balanced Budget!–Videos
The Tea Party movement Representatives, Senators and supporters in the spirit of compromise, a balanced approach and fiscal responsibility offers both the Democratic and Republican Party establishments and their leadership a Great Deal that the American people fully support–A Balanced Budget!
The Tea Party movement will agree to a $2,400 billion immediate increase in the National Debt ceiling in exchange for balancing the Fiscal Year 2012 budget by an immediate decrease in estimated spending outlays of $1,200 billion which will balance the Fiscal Year 2012 with estimated tax revenues of about $2,500 billion.
Do the right thing for your children, grandchildren and future generations by announcing your acceptance of The Great Deal today.
This would restore consumer and business confidence, grow the economy and dramatically reduce the unemployment rates.
This may even get you re-elected in November 2012!
Ron Paul on Debt limit and Boehner’s bill
Ron Paul on Freedom Watch: We Are Defaulting Either Way
Ron Paul on FED Manipulation of US Dollar & Debt Ceiling
7-28-11 – Sen. Rand Paul on Fox News with Greta Van Susteran – 07-27-11
Rand Paul Blasts Reid, Boehner Plans [FOX 7-27-2011]
Dan Mitchell Explaining the Debt Limit Fight for Bloomberg Asia
Underwhelming Spending Cuts from Congress and Obama
Cut, Cap and Balance,” the Debt Ceiling and Federal Spending
Rush Limbaugh – Ok Here Is The History Of The Base Line Budget
Debt Ceiling Crisis: Boehner vs. Tea Party
Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending
Ron Paul to Congress: If Debt Is the Problem, Why Do You Want More of It?
House GOP’s $61 Billion Spending Cuts in Perspective
Smoke and Mirrors on Spending Cuts
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
Neither the Republican Party nor Democratic Party Fiscal Year 2012 budget proposals are the road to peace and prosperity but a Tea Party budget with balanced budgets most definitely is:
Which Budgets Are Balanced And Living Within The Means of The American People?
4/5/11 Republican Leadership Press Conference
Democratic Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,819 | 2,174 | -1,645 | 10,856 |
| 2012 | 3,729 | 2,627 | -1,101 | 11,881 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 3,003 | -768 | 12,784 |
| 2014 | 3,977 | 3,333 | -646 | 13,562 |
| 2015 | 4,190 | 3,583 | -607 | 14,301 |
| 2016 | 4,468 | 3,819 | -649 | 15,064 |
| 2017 | 4,669 | 4,042 | -627 | 15,795 |
| 2018 | 4,876 | 4,257 | -619 | 16,513 |
| 2019 | 5,154 | 4,473 | -681 | 17,284 |
| 2020 | 5,442 | 4,686 | -735 | 18,103 |
| 2021 | 5,697 | 4,923 | -774 | 18,967 |
| 2012-2021 | 45,952 | 38,747 | -7,205 | n.a. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
Republican Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,618 | 2,230 | -1,388 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,529 | 2,533 | -995 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,559 | 2,860 | -699 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,586 | 3,094 | -492 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,671 | 3,237 | -434 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,858 | 3,377 | -481 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,998 | 3,589 | -408 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 4,123 | 3,745 | -379 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,352 | 3,939 | -414 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,544 | 4,142 | -402 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,739 | 4,354 | -385 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 39,958 | 34,870 | -5,088 | n.a. |
http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf
Sen. Toomey Unveils his FY 2012 Budget
Senator Pat Toomey Talks with Michael Medved about his Budget
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Pat Toomey(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurplus | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,625 | 2,230 | -1,351 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,477 | 2,538 | -919 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,485 | 2,964 | -521 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,509 | 3,216 | -291 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,623 | 3,391 | -233 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,765 | 3,524 | -241 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,853 | 3,736 | -117 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 3,955 | 3,916 | -39 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,140 | 4,108 | -32 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,302 | 4,325 | 23 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,493 | 4,566 | 73 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 38,602 | 36,304 | -2298 | n.a. |
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55116239/Restoring-Balance-Final
SA@TAC – The GOP, War and the Debt
3/09/11: Sen. Rand Paul on balancing the budget
03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Rand Paul(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,708 | 2,228 | -1,480 | 10,430 |
| 2012 | 3,100 | 2,547 | -553 | 11,051 |
| 2013 | 3,152 | 2,755 | -397 | 11,532 |
| 2014 | 3,227 | 3,088 | -139 | 11,748 |
| 2015 | 3,360 | 3,244 | -116 | 11,942 |
| 2016 | 3,430 | 3,349 | 19 | 11,997 |
| 2012-2016 | 16,269 | 15,083 | -1,188 | n.a. |
http://campaignforliberty.com/materials/RandBudget.pdf
Tea Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Surpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2012 | 2,500 | 2,500 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2013 | 2,800 | 2,800 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2014 | 3,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2015 | 3,200 | 3,200 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2016 | 3,300 | 3,300 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2017 | 3,400 | 3,500 | 100 | 10,800 |
| 2018 | 3,500 | 3,700 | 200 | 10,600 |
| 2019 | 3,600 | 3,900 | 300 | 10,300 |
| 2020 | 3,700 | 4,000 | 300 | 10,000 |
| 2021 | 3,800 | 4,300 | 500 | 9,500 |
| 2012-2021 | 32,800 | 34,200 | 1,400 | n.a. |
Baseline (budgeting)
“…Baseline budgeting is a method of developing a budget which uses existing spending levels as the basis for establishing future funding requirements. The concept assumes that the organization is generally headed in the right direction and only minor changes in spending levels will be required. The baseline is normally enhanced by adding adjustment factors based on issues such as inflation, new programs, and anticipated changes to existing programs.
The genesis of baseline budget projections can be found in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. That act required the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to prepare projections of federal spending for the upcoming fiscal year based on a continuation of the existing level of governmental services. It also required the newly established Congressional Budget Office to prepare five-year projections of budget authority, outlays, revenues, and the surplus or deficit. OMB published its initial current-services budget projections in November 1974, and CBO’s five-year projections first appeared in January 1976. Today’s baseline budget projections are very much like those prepared more than two decades ago, although they now span 10 years instead of five.
The Budget Act was silent on whether to adjust estimates of discretionary appropriations for anticipated changes in inflation. Until 1980, OMB’s projections excluded inflation adjustments for discretionary programs. CBO’s projections, however, assumed that appropriations would keep pace with inflation, although CBO has also published projections without these so-called discretionary inflation adjustments.
CBO’s budget projections took on added importance in 1980 and 1981, when they served as the baseline for computing spending reductions to be achieved in the budget reconciliation process. The reconciliation instructions contained in the fiscal year 1982 budget resolution (the so-called Gramm-Latta budget) required House and Senate committees to reduce outlays by a total of $36 billion below baseline levels, but each committee could determine how those savings were to be achieved. The CBO baseline has been used in every year since 1981 for developing budget resolutions and measuring compliance with reconciliation instructions.
The Deficit Control Act of 1985 provided the first legal definition of baseline. For the most part, the act defined the baseline in conformity with previous usage. If appropriations had not been enacted for the upcoming fiscal year, the baseline was to assume the previous year’s level without any adjustment for inflation. In 1987, however, the Congress amended the definition of the baseline so that discretionary appropriations would be adjusted to keep pace with inflation. Other technical changes to the definition of the baseline were enacted in 1990, 1993, and 1997.
Baseline budget projections increasingly became the subject of political debate and controversy during the late 1980s and early 1990s, and more recently during the 2011 debt limit debate. Some critics contend that baseline projections create a bias in favor of spending by assuming that federal spending keeps pace with inflation and other factors driving the growth of entitlement programs. Changes that merely slow the growth of federal spending programs have often been described as cuts in spending, when in reality they are actually reductions in the rate of spending growth.
There have been attempts to eliminate the baseline budget concept and replace it with zero based budgeting, which is the opposite of baseline budgeting. Zero based budgeting requires that all spending must be re-justified each year or it will be eliminated from the budget regardless of previous spending levels.
According to the Government Accountability Office, a Baseline is as follows:
Baseline
“An estimate of spending, revenue, the deficit or surplus, and the public debt expected during a fiscal year under current laws and current policy. The baseline is a benchmark for measuring the budgetary effects of proposed changes in revenues and spending. It assumes that receipts and mandatory spending will continue or expire in the future as required by law and that the future funding for discretionary programs will equal the most recently enacted appropriation, adjusted for inflation. Under the Budget Enforcement Act (BEA), which will expire at the end of fiscal year 2006, the baseline is defined as the projection of current-year levels of new budget authority, outlays, revenues, and the surplus or deficit into the budget year and outyears based on laws enacted through the applicable date.
CBO Baseline
Projected levels of governmental receipts (revenues), budget authority, and outlays for the budget year and subsequent fiscal years, assuming generally that current policies remain the same, except as directed by law. The baseline is described in the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) annual report for the House and Senate Budget Committees, The Budget and Economic Outlook, which is published in January. The baseline, by law, includes projections for 5 years, but at the request of the Budget Committees, CBO has provided such projections for 10 years. In most years the CBO baseline is revised in conjunction with CBO’s analysis of the President’s budget, which is usually issued in March, and again during the summer. The “March” baseline is the benchmark for measuring the budgetary effects of proposed legislation under consideration by Congress.” …”
External links
- Congressional Budget Act
- Office of Management and Budget
- Government Accountability Office
- House Budget Committee (Republican Site)
- House Budget Committee (Democratic Site)
- Senate Budget Committee (Republican Site)
- Senate Budget Committee (Democratic Site)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseline_(budgeting)
Background Articles and Video
Sen. Toomey Gives a Speech on the Debt Limit at AEI
Smoke and Mirrors on Spending Cuts
Ron Paul on the U.S. Government’s Debt Crisis
The Debt Limit: Made Simple
Ron Paul 2012 Amazing!!!
Rasmussen Reports
Most Voters Are Unhappy With Both Sides in the Debt Ceiling Debate
“…Most voters don’t care much for the way either political party is performing in the federal debt ceiling debate.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 58% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat disapprove of the way President Obama and congressional Democrats are handling the debate over the debt ceiling, with 38% who Strongly Disapprove. But 53% also disapprove of how congressional Republicans are handling the debate, including 32% who Strongly Disapprove.
Just 36% approve of how Obama and Democrats are doing, with 10% who Strongly Approve. Forty percent (40%) approve of the GOP’s performance, including 13% who Strongly Approve. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
While the two sides continue to wrangle over how to avoid defaulting on the government’s massive debt load, most voters nationwide are worried the final deal will raise taxes too much and cut spending too little.
Whatever spending cuts are in the final deal, 49% of all voters don’t think the government will actually cut the spending agreed upon. A commentary by Scott Rasmussen, published in Politico, put it this way: “Based on the history of the past few decades, voters have learned that politicians promising unspecified spending cuts should be treated with all the credibility of a six-year old boy caught with his hand in the cookie jar promising to be good for the rest of his life.” …”
Rasmussen Reports
55% Oppose Tax Hike In Debt Ceiling Deal
“…As the Beltway politicians try to figure out how they will raise the debt ceiling and for how long, most voters oppose including tax hikes in the deal.
Just 34% think a tax hike should be included in any legislation to raise the debt ceiling. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% disagree and say it should not. …”
“…There is a huge partisan divide on the question. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Democrats want a tax hike in the deal while 82% of Republicans do not. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 35% favor a tax hike and 51% are opposed.
Americans who earn more than $75,000 a year are evenly divided as to whether a tax hike should be included in the debt ceiling deal. Those who earn less are opposed to including tax hikes.
Voters remain very concerned about the debt ceiling issue. Sixty-nine percent (69%) believe that it would be bad for the economy if a failure to raise the debt ceiling led to government defaults. Only 6% believe it would be good for theeconomy. Fourteen percent (14%) believe it would have no impact and 11% are notsure. These figures are little changed from a few weeks ago. …”
House passes Ryan’s ’12 budget; conservatives want more cuts
“…The House on Friday approved a fiscal year 2012 budget resolution from Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) that seeks to drastically limit government spending next year and in years to follow.
But the vote on the measure — which imposes $5.8 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade — came after a clear sign that at least half of the Republican Caucus supports even tougher spending cuts.
The final tally was 235-193, with four Republicans opposing it. They were Reps. Ron Paul (Texas), Denny Rehberg (Mont.), Walter Jones (N.C.) and David McKinley (W.Va.).
Rehberg, the appropriator in charge of health spending, is running for Montana’s Senate seat.
Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said listening sessions with Republican members made it the strongest vote of the year.
“This is the process we should follow on all votes,” he said.
Every Democrat voted “no.” …”
House passes cut, cap and balance — and a deal is in sight
By Jennifer Rubin
“…The Republican-controlled House defied a presidential veto threat Tuesday night in approving a bill to amend the Constitution to require a balanced federal budget. But Speaker John A. Boehner acknowledged that a backup plan is needed, and a Senate GOP leader said he expects such an alternative to win his chamber’s approval.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )The House voted 234 to 190 in favor of the “Cut, Cap and Balance Act,” which the White House has said will be vetoed in the unlikely event it passes the Senate and reaches President Obama’s desk. Faced with those prospects, Boehner told reporters that it would also be responsible to consider a backup plan for raising the federal debt ceiling and thus averting a potentially disastrous default on U.S. obligations.
Tea Party Democrats, Republicans, and Independents Betrayed–Tell The Democratic and Republican Establishments To Balance The Budget and Cut The Debt Ceiling–Just Say No To Obama, Reid, Boehner and Ryan Unbalanced Budgets–Videos
Lying Politicians And Words
“By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth.”
~George Carlin
“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Freedom is the Only Solution
Ron Paul on Debt limit and Boehner’s bill
Ron Paul on Freedom Watch: We Are Defaulting Either Way
7-28-11 – Sen. Rand Paul on Fox News with Greta Van Susteran – 07-27-11
Rand Paul Blasts Reid, Boehner Plans [FOX 7-27-2011]
Ron Paul on Freedom Watch 07/27/11
Ron Paul to Congress: If Debt Is the Problem, Why Do You Want More of It?
The Laura Ingraham Show – Speaker John Boehner answers tea party criticism
Office of the Majority Whip | Balanced Budget Amendment Video
Debt Ceiling Crisis: Boehner vs. Tea Party
SA@TAC – Ron Paul’s Pledge to America
Smoke and Mirrors on Spending Cuts
House GOP’s $61 Billion Spending Cuts in Perspective
John Boehner Goes Back On The Head Of The Republican Parties Radio Show Rush Limbaugh
McCain to Republicans: Pushing Balanced Budget Amendment is “Bizarro”
FOX: DeMint Slams Reid & Boehner Plans
Mark Levin Interviews Jim Demint – I’m Not Encouraged By Whats Going On In Washington Right Now
Ron Paul Ad – Conviction
The tea party movement has been betrayed by the Republican Party establishment leadership including John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan.
The big dirty secret the ruling class in Washington D.C. do not want the American people to know is the Fiscal Year 2012 budget will be in deficit by about $1,000 billion.
The Boehner bill will add over $7,000 billion in additional debt over the next ten years and would not balance in any of the next ten years!
This is not fiscally responsible nor is it a “balanced approach”.
This is business as usual and a betrayal of the American people and the conservative, libertarian and tea party movements.
The Democratic and Republican Establishments aka the “ruling class” are addicted to spending money the American people do not have on things the American people do not need.
The Democratic and Republican Establishments try to fool the American people with phony cuts in the growth of the current services baseline budget by emphasizing trillion-dollar ”cuts” over a ten-year budget timeframe.
There are never any cuts in the current service baseline budget only cuts in the growth rates over ten years of the budget baseline.
Underwhelming Spending Cuts from Congress and Obama
“Cut, Cap and Balance,” the Debt Ceiling and Federal Spending
The American people are not fooled by this nonsense and rubbish.
The only year that counts is Fiscal Year 2012 that starts October 1, 2011 and ends September 30, 2012.
The only cuts that are real are actual cuts in the budget baseline itself and not cuts in the rate of growth of that baseline.
Dan Mitchell Exposing DC’s Fake Spending-Cut Scam with Judge Napolitano
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
Ron Paul to Congress: Freeze Big Government!
Ron Paul knew everything
Stop budgeting to the current services budget baseline and budget to estimated tax revenue collections.
Stop closed-door deals, commissions, select committees and gangs.
Stop lying and misleading the American people.
Vote against any budget that is not balanced.
Vote against any increase in the National Debt ceiling.
Vote for closing permanently Government Departments, agencies and hundreds of programs.
Vote for cutting the Budget Baseline not for cutting the rate of growth of the Budget Baseline!
Vote for the FairTax.
The political ruling class is bought and paid for and are wrecking the economy, destroying jobs and killing the American Dream.
The American people will eventually learn the secret and that both political parties have been lying to them.
A plague on both political parties.
Both political parties are responsible for the bloated budgets and massive deficits.
Let the party establishments clean their own mess up.
The Democratic and Republican Party establishments simply do not give a flip about the American people.
The conservative, libertarian and tea party movements will need to challenge Republican office holders in the primaries and the Democrats in the general election.
Suggest you listen to the late George Carlin.
George Carlin -”Who Really Controls America”
“Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist.”
“Always do whatever’s next.”
~George Carlin
Background Articles and Videos
Neither the Republican Party nor Democratic Party Fiscal Year 2012 budget proposals are the road to peace and prosperity but a Tea Party budget with balanced budgets most definitely is:
Which Budgets Are Balanced And Living Within The Means of The American People?
4/5/11 Republican Leadership Press Conference
O’Reilly — Does Obama Care About the Economy?
Democrats’ Budget Plan – “Blank Check”
Democratic Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,819 | 2,174 | -1,645 | 10,856 |
| 2012 | 3,729 | 2,627 | -1,101 | 11,881 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 3,003 | -768 | 12,784 |
| 2014 | 3,977 | 3,333 | -646 | 13,562 |
| 2015 | 4,190 | 3,583 | -607 | 14,301 |
| 2016 | 4,468 | 3,819 | -649 | 15,064 |
| 2017 | 4,669 | 4,042 | -627 | 15,795 |
| 2018 | 4,876 | 4,257 | -619 | 16,513 |
| 2019 | 5,154 | 4,473 | -681 | 17,284 |
| 2020 | 5,442 | 4,686 | -735 | 18,103 |
| 2021 | 5,697 | 4,923 | -774 | 18,967 |
| 2012-2021 | 45,952 | 38,747 | -7,205 | n.a. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
Republican Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,618 | 2,230 | -1,388 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,529 | 2,533 | -995 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,559 | 2,860 | -699 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,586 | 3,094 | -492 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,671 | 3,237 | -434 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,858 | 3,377 | -481 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,998 | 3,589 | -408 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 4,123 | 3,745 | -379 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,352 | 3,939 | -414 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,544 | 4,142 | -402 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,739 | 4,354 | -385 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 39,958 | 34,870 | -5,088 | n.a. |
http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf
Sen. Toomey Unveils his FY 2012 Budget
Senator Pat Toomey Talks with Michael Medved about his Budget
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Pat Toomey(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurplus | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,625 | 2,230 | -1,351 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,477 | 2,538 | -919 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,485 | 2,964 | -521 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,509 | 3,216 | -291 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,623 | 3,391 | -233 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,765 | 3,524 | -241 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,853 | 3,736 | -117 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 3,955 | 3,916 | -39 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,140 | 4,108 | -32 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,302 | 4,325 | 23 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,493 | 4,566 | 73 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 38,602 | 36,304 | -2298 | n.a. |
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55116239/Restoring-Balance-Final
SA@TAC – The GOP, War and the Debt
3/09/11: Sen. Rand Paul on balancing the budget
03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Rand Paul(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,708 | 2,228 | -1,480 | 10,430 |
| 2012 | 3,100 | 2,547 | -553 | 11,051 |
| 2013 | 3,152 | 2,755 | -397 | 11,532 |
| 2014 | 3,227 | 3,088 | -139 | 11,748 |
| 2015 | 3,360 | 3,244 | -116 | 11,942 |
| 2016 | 3,430 | 3,349 | 19 | 11,997 |
| 2012-2016 | 16,269 | 15,083 | -1,188 | n.a. |
http://campaignforliberty.com/materials/RandBudget.pdf
Tea Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Surpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2012 | 2,500 | 2,500 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2013 | 2,800 | 2,800 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2014 | 3,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2015 | 3,200 | 3,200 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2016 | 3,300 | 3,300 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2017 | 3,400 | 3,500 | 100 | 10,800 |
| 2018 | 3,500 | 3,700 | 200 | 10,600 |
| 2019 | 3,600 | 3,900 | 300 | 10,300 |
| 2020 | 3,700 | 4,000 | 300 | 10,000 |
| 2021 | 3,800 | 4,300 | 500 | 9,500 |
| 2012-2021 | 32,800 | 34,200 | 1,400 | n.a. |
Peter Ferrara’s Too-Nice Attack on Phony Washington Budget Deals
Posted by Daniel J. Mitchell
“…Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Peter Ferrara of the Institute for Policy Innovation explains that Washington budget deals don’t work because politicians never follow through on promised spending cuts. This is a very relevant argument, since President Obama’s so-called Deficit Reduction Commission supposedly is considering a deal featuring $3 of spending cuts for every $1 of tax increases (disturbingly reminiscent of what was promised — but never delivered — as part of the infamous 1982 TEFRA budget scam).
Washington’s traditional approach to balancing the budget is to negotiate an agreement on a package of benefit cuts and tax increases. President Obama’s deficit commission seems likely to recommend just this strategy in December. The problem is that it never works. What happens is the tax increases get permanently adopted into law. But the spending cuts are almost never fully adopted and, even if they are, they are soon swept away in the next spendthrift budget. Then — because taxes weaken incentives to produce — the tax increases don’t raise the revenue that Congress initially projected and budgeted to spend. So the deficit reappears.
In 1982, congressional Democrats promised President Ronald Reagan $3 in spending cuts for every dollar in tax increases. Reagan went to his grave waiting for those spending cuts. Then there was the budget deal in 1990, when President George H.W. Bush agreed to violate his famous campaign pledge — “Read my lips, no new taxes,” he had said in 1988 — in pursuit of a balanced budget. But after the deal, the deficit increased substantially: to $290 billion in 1992 from $221 billion in 1990.
As the excerpt indicates, Peter’s column is solid and everything he writes is correct, but it suffers from one major sin of omission. He should have exposed the dishonest practice of using “current services” or “baseline” budgeting. This is the clever Washington practice of assuming that all previously planned spending increases should go into effect and categorizing any budget that increases spending by a lower amount as a spending cut. In other words, if the hypothetical “baseline” budget increases by 7 percent, and a budget is proposed that increases spending by 4 percent, that 4 percent spending increase magically gets transformed into a 3 percent spending cut.
Politicians love “current services” or “baseline” budgeting for two reasons. First, it allows them to have their cake and eat it too. They can simultaneously shovel more money to interest groups while telling voters they are “cutting” spending. Second, it rigs the process in favor of bigger government. This is because lawmakers who actually propose to restrain the growth of spending can be lambasted for wanting “savage” and “draconian” budget cuts totaling “trillions of dollars” when all they’re actually proposing is to have spending grow by less than the so-called baseline. But since people in the real world use honest math rather than “current services” math, they assume that spending is being reduced next year by some large amount compared to what is being spent this year. And if the phony budget cut numbers sound too big (especially for specific programs such as Medicare or Medicaid), they sometimes conclude that it would be better to raise taxes.
Speaking of which, the same misleading process works on the revenue side of the budget. The politicians automatically get to keep whatever additional revenue is generated by population growth and higher incomes, which is not trivial since revenue in a typical year grows faster than nominal GDP. But when they do a budget deal featuring X dollars of tax increases for every Y dollars of spending cuts, the additional taxes are always on top of the revenue increases that already are occurring. And since the supposed spending cuts invariably are nothing more than reductions in planned increases, it should come as no surprise that the burden of spending always seems to increase. …”
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/peter-ferraras-too-nice-attack-on-phony-washington-budget-deals/
Tim Russert Interviews George Carlin
George Carlin interview (1996) – Late Show with Tom Snyder, part 1
George Carlin interview (1996) – Late Show with Tom Snyder, part 2
George Carlin interview (1996) – Late Show with Tom Snyder, part 3
George Carlin On His Time In The Military
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
The President Obama Exposed As An Empty Suit That Negotiates In Bad Faith With No Democratic Party or Presidential Plan–All Talk and No Walk–Videos
The Pronk Plan for A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos
Related Posts On Pronk Pops
Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011–Segment 0: President Obama Lies and Scares People On Social Security–Stop Spending and Balance The Budget!–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 1: The American People’s Solution To Economic Stagnation: Increase National Debt Ceiling By $2,000 Billion To $16,300 Billion In Exchange For Passage of A Balanced Budget Amendment And The FairTax Bills And Repealing The Income Tax 16th Amendment To U.S. Constitution–A Balanced, Fair And Transparent Approach To Creating Jobs and Growing A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 2: It’s Time For A Permanent, Prevasive and Predictable Stimulus Package–The FairTax–Launching A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 3: Senator Tom Coburn’s
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )Tea Party Candidates And Elected Officials New Gold Standard For Balanced And Surplus Budgets, Lower Debt Ceilings and Tax Reform: Fiscal Responsibility Pledge To The American People–Videos
American Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility
“A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government.”
~Thomas Jefferson
Fiscal Responsibility Pledge
I, ________________________________________, pledge to the taxpayers of the state
of ____________________________, and to the American people that I will:
1. Support and vote for only balanced budgets or surplus budgets where total estimated Federal government tax revenues for each fiscal year equals or exceeds total estimated Federal government spending outlays.
2. Support and vote for only decreases in the national debt ceiling.
3. Support and vote for the FairTax. The FairTax abolishes all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax on new goods and services, and administered primarily by existing state sales tax authorities. Once enacted any changes in the FairTax or increases in the FairTax rate will require two-thirds roll call vote of the House of Representatives and Senate.
4. Support and vote for the repeal of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
5. Support and vote for a balanced budget Amendment to the Constitution of the United State which allows budget surpluses or requires the balancing of tax revenues and spending outlays each fiscal year, limits Federal Government spending to eight-teen percent (18%) of Gross Domestic Product or less, requires a two-thirds majority roll call vote for any proposed tax increase in the House of Representatives and Senate and where the only exception to a surplus budget or balanced budget is the passage of a declaration of war that would require unbalanced budgets and increases in the national debt.
___________________________________________ ___________________________________
Signature Date Signed
__________________________________________ ___________________________________
Witness Witness
Pledge must be signed, dated, witnessed and returned to the:
American Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility
10455 N. Central Expressway-#109-228
Dallas, Texas 75231
Background Articles and Videos
Dan Mitchell Exposing DC’s Fake Spending-Cut Scam with Judge Napolitano
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
US bankruptcy, fiscal ‘child abuse’ and six-decade Ponzi scheme
Next Generation To Suffer From Fiscal Gap…Kotlikoff Says!
Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending
“Cut, Cap and Balance,” the Debt Ceiling and Federal Spending
Underwhelming Spending Cuts from Congress and Obama
Obama/Boehner’s Phony Spending Cuts
House GOP’s $61 Billion Spending Cuts in Perspective
Senator Rand Paul Speaks Out Against the Continuing Resolution
Our Troubling Tax System
What is the FairTax legislation?
Lugar Cosponsors the FairTax
The FairTax: It’s Time
FairTax.org
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_main
Ron Paul Ad – Conviction
DEBT CEILING | Ron Paul | Debt Crisis
Michele Bachmann: Courage
Raising the Debt Ceiling: It Just Makes Sense. Not.
U.S. Senator Mike Lee Proposes a Constitutional Amendment to Limit Congress’ Spending
America is bankrupt
Laurence Kotlikof
“…THE US has a fiscal gap—the present value of all its future spending (including servicing its official debt) less all its future taxes of $202 trillion—almost 14 times GDP. Greece, by comparison, has a fiscal gap of about 11 times GDP. To close the US fiscal gap would require raising all federal taxes, immediately and permanently by almost two thirds!
The Economist as well as all other financial media as well as virtually all economists (academic and business) and policymakers are focusing on the official debt. For the US, the official debt is $9 trillion. This is minor compared to the fiscal gap, which includes all liabilities, official and unofficial. The fiscal gap is huge compare to the official debt because Uncle Sam has spent six decades accumulating massive obligations to make social insurance payments, which it carefully kept off the books. …”
http://www.economist.com/economics/by-invitation/guest-contributions/america_bankrupt
U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions
By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY
“…The government added $5.3 trillion in new financial obligations in 2010, largely for retirement programs such as Medicare and Social Security. That brings to a record $61.6 trillion the total of financial promises not paid for.
This gap between spending commitments and revenue last year equals more than one-third of the nation’s gross domestic product.
Medicare alone took on $1.8 trillion in new liabilities, more than the record deficit prompting heated debate between Congress and the White House over lifting the debt ceiling.
Social Security added $1.4 trillion in obligations, partly reflecting longer life expectancies. Federal and military retirement programs added more to the financial hole, too.
Corporations would be required to count these new liabilities when they are taken on — and report a big loss to shareholders. Unlike businesses, however, Congress postpones recording spending commitments until it writes a check.
The $61.6 trillion in unfunded obligations amounts to $528,000 per household. That’s more than five times what Americans have borrowed for everything else — mortgages, car loans and other debt. It reflects the challenge as the number of retirees soars over the next 20 years and seniors try to collect on those spending promises.
“The (federal) debt only tells us what the government owes to the public. It doesn’t take into account what’s owed to seniors, veterans and retired employees,” says accountant Sheila Weinberg, founder of the Institute for Truth in Accounting, a Chicago-based group that advocates better financial reporting. “Without accurate accounting, we can’t make good decisions.” …”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-06-06-us-owes-62-trillion-in-debt_n.htm
A SUMMARY OF THE 2011 ANNUAL REPORTS
Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees
A MESSAGE TO THE PUBLIC:
Each year the Trustees of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds report on the current and projected financial status of the two programs. This message summarizes our 2011 Annual Reports.
The financial conditions of the Social Security and Medicare programs remain challenging. Projected long-run program costs for both Medicare and Social Security are not sustainable under currently scheduled financing, and will require legislative modifications if disruptive consequences for beneficiaries and taxpayers are to be avoided.
The long-run financial challenges facing Social Security and Medicare should be addressed soon. If action is taken sooner rather than later, more options and more time will be available to phase in changes so that those affected have adequate time to prepare. Earlier action will also afford elected officials with a greater opportunity to minimize adverse impacts on vulnerable populations, including lower-income workers and those who are already substantially dependent on program benefits.
Both Social Security and Medicare, the two largest federal programs, face substantial cost growth in the upcoming decades due to factors that include population aging as well as the growth in expenditures per beneficiary. Through the mid-2030s, due to the large baby-boom generation entering retirement and lower-birth-rate generations entering employment, population aging is the largest single factor contributing to cost growth in the two programs. Thereafter, the continued rapid growth in health care cost per beneficiary becomes the larger factor.
Neither the Republican Party nor Democratic Party Fiscal Year 2012 budget proposals are the road to peace and prosperity but a Tea Party budget with balanced budgets most definitely is:
Which Budgets Are Balanced And Living Within The Means of The American People?
4/5/11 Republican Leadership Press Conference
O’Reilly — Does Obama Care About the Economy?
Democrats’ Budget Plan – “Blank Check”
Democratic Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,819 | 2,174 | -1,645 | 10,856 |
| 2012 | 3,729 | 2,627 | -1,101 | 11,881 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 3,003 | -768 | 12,784 |
| 2014 | 3,977 | 3,333 | -646 | 13,562 |
| 2015 | 4,190 | 3,583 | -607 | 14,301 |
| 2016 | 4,468 | 3,819 | -649 | 15,064 |
| 2017 | 4,669 | 4,042 | -627 | 15,795 |
| 2018 | 4,876 | 4,257 | -619 | 16,513 |
| 2019 | 5,154 | 4,473 | -681 | 17,284 |
| 2020 | 5,442 | 4,686 | -735 | 18,103 |
| 2021 | 5,697 | 4,923 | -774 | 18,967 |
| 2012-2021 | 45,952 | 38,747 | -7,205 | n.a. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
Republican Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,618 | 2,230 | -1,388 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,529 | 2,533 | -995 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,559 | 2,860 | -699 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,586 | 3,094 | -492 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,671 | 3,237 | -434 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,858 | 3,377 | -481 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,998 | 3,589 | -408 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 4,123 | 3,745 | -379 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,352 | 3,939 | -414 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,544 | 4,142 | -402 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,739 | 4,354 | -385 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 39,958 | 34,870 | -5,088 | n.a. |
http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf
Sen. Toomey Unveils his FY 2012 Budget
Senator Pat Toomey Talks with Michael Medved about his Budget
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Pat Toomey(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurplus | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,625 | 2,230 | -1,351 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,477 | 2,538 | -919 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,485 | 2,964 | -521 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,509 | 3,216 | -291 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,623 | 3,391 | -233 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,765 | 3,524 | -241 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,853 | 3,736 | -117 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 3,955 | 3,916 | -39 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,140 | 4,108 | -32 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,302 | 4,325 | 23 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,493 | 4,566 | 73 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 38,602 | 36,304 | -2298 | n.a. |
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55116239/Restoring-Balance-Final
SA@TAC – The GOP, War and the Debt
3/09/11: Sen. Rand Paul on balancing the budget
03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan
| S-1 FY2012 Senator Rand Paul(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | DeficitsSurpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,708 | 2,228 | -1,480 | 10,430 |
| 2012 | 3,100 | 2,547 | -553 | 11,051 |
| 2013 | 3,152 | 2,755 | -397 | 11,532 |
| 2014 | 3,227 | 3,088 | -139 | 11,748 |
| 2015 | 3,360 | 3,244 | -116 | 11,942 |
| 2016 | 3,430 | 3,349 | 19 | 11,997 |
| 2012-2016 | 16,269 | 15,083 | -1,188 | n.a. |
http://campaignforliberty.com/materials/RandBudget.pdf
Tea Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Surpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2012 | 2,500 | 2,500 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2013 | 2,800 | 2,800 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2014 | 3,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2015 | 3,200 | 3,200 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2016 | 3,300 | 3,300 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2017 | 3,400 | 3,500 | 100 | 10,800 |
| 2018 | 3,500 | 3,700 | 200 | 10,600 |
| 2019 | 3,600 | 3,900 | 300 | 10,300 |
| 2020 | 3,700 | 4,000 | 300 | 10,000 |
| 2021 | 3,800 | 4,300 | 500 | 9,500 |
| 2012-2021 | 32,800 | 34,200 | 1,400 | n.a. |
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
The President Obama Exposed As An Empty Suit That Negotiates In Bad Faith With No Democratic Party or Presidential Plan–All Talk and No Walk–Videos
The Pronk Plan for A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos
Related Posts On Pronk Pops
Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011–Segment 0: President Obama Lies and Scares People On Social Security–Stop Spending and Balance The Budget!–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 1: The American People’s Solution To Economic Stagnation: Increase National Debt Ceiling By $2,000 Billion To $16,300 Billion In Exchange For Passage of A Balanced Budget Amendment And The FairTax Bills And Repealing The Income Tax 16th Amendment To U.S. Constitution–A Balanced, Fair And Transparent Approach To Creating Jobs and Growing A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 2: It’s Time For A Permanent, Prevasive and Predictable Stimulus Package–The FairTax–Launching A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 3: Senator Tom Coburn’s
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )Conservative, Libertarian and Tea Party Movements Sold Out and Betrayed By Gang of Six and Progressive Republicans In Senate–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 37:July 20, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 36:July 13, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 35:July 6, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 34:June 29, 2011
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22 (Part 2)-26
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22 (Part 1)
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9
Segment 4: Conservative, Libertarian and Tea Party Movements Sold Out and Betrayed By Gang of Six and Progressive Republicans In Senate–Videos
Gang of 6 Plan Could Offer GOP Path to Debt Deal
The CBS Evening News w…: Clock ticking on debt reform plans
2011 07 19 Crapo on Bloomberg
Senator Warner calls for a bipartisan solution to the deficit
Face The Nation with B…: Coburn, Durbin agree debt compromise will be
Solving the Debt Ceiling Crisis
Obama Applauds ‘Gang Of Six’
Meet the Senate’s “Gang of Six”
Dr. Coburn on CNBC Kudlow Report: “Came to an impasse in Gang of Six negotiations”
Michael Bennet: Gang of Six ‘Not Dead’
Crapo on Fox News’ Special Report with Brett Baier
Grover Norquist Responds to Sen. Tom Coburn- MSNBC
Debt Ceiling: Chris Mathews Dukes it Out With ‘NO’ Mastermind, Republican Grover Norquist
Sen. Toomey Talks Debt Limit on Fox and Friends
Senator Pat Toomey Explains That Failing To Raise Debt Limit Doesn’t Cause Default
Sen. Toomey Gives a Speech on the Debt Limit at AEI
“Cut, Cap and Balance,” the Debt Ceiling and Federal Spending
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
Conviction, Not Compromise!
Ron Paul to Congress If Debt Is the Problem, Why Do You Want More of It
The estimated total tax revenues in Fiscal Year 2012 are estimated to be between $2,500 billion and $2,600 billion.
The gang of six Fiscal Year 2012 budget will have outlays or spending between $3,500 billion to $3,700 billion
The Fiscal Year 2012 will result in a deficit of over $1,000 billion under the gang of six’s plan.
The Fiscal Year 2012 budget for outlays or spending needs to be reduced by $500 billion to $3,000 billion or less.
This would result in a deficit of about $500 billion.
Any politician who votes for the gang of six so-called compromise balanced approach of more taxes now and spending cuts in the out years will not be getting my vote.
Both President Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush fell for a similar compromise of tax increases now for future spending cuts that never happened.
Reagan; Taxes and Budget Deficit: Revenue 19% of GDP; Spending is 23%; Revenue is sufficient
Cut spending and balance the budget in Fiscal Year 2012 and 2013.
Pass the FairTax bill.
Tax increases will put the economy into another recession or depression.
Monetization of the debt by the Federal Reserve only leads to defaulting on the debt by debasing or devaluing of the currency which results in rising prices or inflation and a decrease in the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar.
Explanation of Fed Monetizing US Debt
Quantitative Easing Explained
The gang of six compromise is a betrayal of the American people.
No deal.
Background Articles and Videos
Debt hope: Obama praises ‘Gang of Six’ plan
Obama, some Republicans laud Senate ‘Gang of Six’ deficits plan as a way ahead on debt limit
“…President Barack Obama and a startling number of Republican senators lauded a bipartisan deficit-reduction plan Tuesday that includes $1 trillion in higher taxes, raising hopes of a last-minute compromise to repair the nation’s finances while averting a government default. Wall Street saluted as well. …”
“…Unlike Obama, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. was harshly critical, calling McConnell’s approach “smoke and mirrors.”
“If Republicans do not show the political will to stop the spending, and use the debt limit to make our case, the party is gone,” he was quoted as saying on National Review Online.
The Gang of Six envisioned a two-stage process in which $500 billion in savings would be enacted swiftly, with the more complicated changes in programs like Medicare and Medicaid to follow.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Debt-hope-Obama-praises-Gang-apf-120819518.html?x=0
Obama Backs New Senate Debt Plan
“…The proposal would cut spending, overhaul entitlement programs such as Medicare, rework the tax code, and make significant changes to Social Security. He said he still hadn’t read all the details of the plan, and said it will be difficult for all parties to reach agreement.
The plan is sweeping in its scope but was thought for months to be both overly ambitious and slightly ambiguous, which nearly led the effort to collapse in recent weeks. But the plan was revived, in part by its lead authors—Sens. Mark Warner (D., Va.) and Saxby Chambliss (R., Ga.)—and the flood of bipartisan support coming out of the meeting surprised them both, the lawmakers said.
Senate Democratic leaders reacted cautiously, saying the Gang of Six plan had come too late to be incorporated into legislation increasing the debt ceiling.
Sen. Richard Durbin (D., Ill), one of six senators who helped crafted the plan, said it wouldn’t form part of a debt-ceiling package that must be passed by Congress before Aug. 2. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said he thought there could be elements of the plan that might be wrapped into the legislation increasing the debt ceiling.
Aides said the plan still lacked many crucial details. Its release, instead, would influence the budget landscape after Aug. 2, aides said. …”
“…Central parts of the plan would:
• Impose immediate spending cuts and caps that reduce the deficit by $500 billion over 10 years.
• Make changes to Social Security to make the program solvent over 75 years.
• Direct key congressional committees to find specific levels of deficit reduction within their areas of jurisdiction. If the committees fail, then five Democratic and five Republican senators would be able to offeKr their own deficit-reduction plan as a replacement.
Messrs. Warner and Chambliss said they asked the other lawmakers at the meeting to report back to them within 24 hours with any feedback, and several lawmakers said the group had already begun drafting legislation. …”
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Senator Tom Coburn–A Real Conservative and An Excellent Vice-President Candidate
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )National Debt Ceiling Hit–No More Increases In The National Debt Ceiling–Live Within Your Means By Balanced Budgets–Spending=Tax Revenues–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 28:May 18, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 27:May 9, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 26:May 5, 2011
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-28
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22 (Part 2)-26
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22 (Part 1)
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703421204576325583050561022.html
U.S. Debt Clock
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
The National Debt Crisis
Obama/Boehner’s Phony Spending Cuts
Dan Mitchell, Cato Institute, Debt Ceiling
The Federal Debt Limit and Credible Commitment
Ron Paul On Raising the Debt Ceiling
Charles Krauthammer With Hannity: “Debt Ceiling Disaster!”
Debt Ceiling Debate [NBC: 5-09-2011]
Boehner: Ready to cut a deal on debt limit
Peter Schiff: “Refuse to allow the debt ceiling to be raised”
U.S. Senator Mike Lee Proposes a Constitutional Amendment to Limit Congress’ Spending
Spend, Spend, Spend
The Tea Party vs. John Boehner
US Debt Ceiling is $14.3 Trillion
The Debt Limit: Made Simple
Rep. Ryan on Debt Ceiling: “You Can’t Tax Your Way Out of This Problem”
Ron Paul: I’ll Vote Against Raising the Debt Limit
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
STAR – TREASURY FINANCIAL DATABASE
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS)
ACCOUNTING DATE: 04/11
PERIOD RECEIPTS OUTLAYS DEFICIT/SURPLUS (-)
+ ____________________________________________________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________
PRIOR YEAR
OCTOBER 135,293 311,656 176,363
NOVEMBER 133,563 253,850 120,287
DECEMBER 218,919 310,329 91,410
JANUARY 205,239 247,873 42,634
FEBRUARY 107,520 328,429 220,909
MARCH 153,358 218,745 65,387
APRIL 245,260 327,950 82,689
MAY 146,794 282,721 135,927
JUNE 251,048 319,470 68,422
JULY 155,546 320,588 165,043
AUGUST 163,998 254,524 90,526
SEPTEMBER 245,207 279,813 34,607
YEAR-TO-DATE 2,161,746 3,455,949 1,294,204
CURRENT YEAR
OCTOBER 145,951 286,384 140,432
NOVEMBER 148,970 299,364 150,394
DECEMBER 236,875 315,009 78,134
JANUARY 226,550 276,346 49,796
FEBRUARY 110,656 333,156 222,500
MARCH 150,894 339,047 188,153
APRIL 289,543 330,030 40,488
YEAR-TO-DATE 1,309,439 2,179,337 869,898
http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0411.txt
| Summary of Outlays, Revenues (Receipts), Deficits, Surpluses Fiscal Years 1980-2010(Nominal Dollars in Millions) | |||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues (Receipts) | Deficits (-), Surpluses |
| 1980 | 590,941 | 517,112 | -73,830 |
| 1981 | 678,241 | 599,272 | -78,968 |
| 1982 | 745,743 | 617,766 | -127,977 |
| 1983 | 808,364 | 600,562 | -207,802 |
| 1984 | 851,805 | 666,488 | -185,367 |
| 1985 | 946,344 | 734,037 | -212,308 |
| 1986 | 990,382 | 769,155 | -221,277 |
| 1987 | 1,004,017 | 854,288 | -149,730 |
| 1988 | 1,064,417 | 854,288 | -155,178 |
| 1989 | 1,143,744 | 991,105 | -152,639 |
| 1990 | 1,252,994 | 1,031,958 | -221,036 |
| 1991 | 1,324,226 | 1,054,988 | -269,238 |
| 1992 | 1,381,529 | 1,091,208 | -290,321 |
| 1993 | 1,409,386 | 1,154,335 | -255,051 |
| 1994 | 1,461,753 | 1,258,566 | -203,186 |
| 1995 | 1,515,742 | 1,351,790 | -163,392 |
| 1996 | 1,560,484 | 1,453,053 | -107,431 |
| 1997 | 1,601,116 | 1,579,232 | -21,884 |
| 1998 | 1,652,458 | 1,721,728 | 69,270 |
| 1999 | 1,701,842 | 1,827,452 | 125,610 |
| 2000 | 1,788,950 | 2,025,191 | 236,241 |
| 2001 | 1,862,846 | 1,991,082 | 128,236 |
| 2002 | 2,010,894 | 1,853,136 | -157,758 |
| 2003 | 2,159,899 | 1,782,314 | -377,585 |
| 2004 | 2,292,841 | 1,880,114 | -412,727 |
| 2005 | 2,471,957 | 2,153,611 | -318,346 |
| 2006 | 2,655,050 | 2,406,869 | -248,181 |
| 2007 | 2,728,686 | 2,567,985 | -160,701 |
| 2008 | 2,982,544 | 2,523,991 | -458,553 |
| 2009 | 3,517,677 | 2,104,989 | -1,412,688 |
| 2010 | 3,456,213 | 2,162,724 | -1,293,489 |
For a history of the Federal Government’s Receipts (Revenues), Outlays, and Deficits and Surpluses
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals
Ryan Unveils Much Anticipated 2012 Budget Plan
Freeze Federal Government spending outlays at $2,500 billion and the National Debt Ceiling at $15,000 billion for the next five to seven years until the Constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment is passed by the states.
Pass the Balanced Budget Amendment.
Pass the FairTax.
Which Budgets Are Balanced And Living Within The Means of The American People?
Republican Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,618 | 2,230 | -1,388 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,529 | 2,533 | -995 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,559 | 2,860 | -699 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,586 | 3,094 | -492 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,671 | 3,237 | -434 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,858 | 3,377 | -481 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,998 | 3,589 | -408 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 4,123 | 3,745 | -379 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,352 | 3,939 | -414 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,544 | 4,142 | -402 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,739 | 4,354 | -385 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 39,958 | 34,870 | -5,088 | n.a. |
http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf
Democratic Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,819 | 2,174 | -1,645 | 10,856 |
| 2012 | 3,729 | 2,627 | -1,101 | 11,881 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 3,003 | -768 | 12,784 |
| 2014 | 3,977 | 3,333 | -646 | 13,562 |
| 2015 | 4,190 | 3,583 | -607 | 14,301 |
| 2016 | 4,468 | 3,819 | -649 | 15,064 |
| 2017 | 4,669 | 4,042 | -627 | 15,795 |
| 2018 | 4,876 | 4,257 | -619 | 16,513 |
| 2019 | 5,154 | 4,473 | -681 | 17,284 |
| 2020 | 5,442 | 4,686 | -735 | 18,103 |
| 2021 | 5,697 | 4,923 | -774 | 18,967 |
| 2012-2021 | 45,952 | 38,747 | -7,205 | n.a. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
Tea Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Surpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2012 | 2,500 | 2,500 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2013 | 2,800 | 2,800 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2014 | 3,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2015 | 3,200 | 3,200 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2016 | 3,300 | 3,300 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2017 | 3,400 | 3,500 | 100 | 10,800 |
| 2018 | 3,500 | 3,700 | 200 | 10,600 |
| 2019 | 3,600 | 3,900 | 300 | 10,300 |
| 2020 | 3,700 | 4,000 | 300 | 10,000 |
| 2021 | 3,800 | 4,300 | 500 | 9,500 |
| 2012-2021 | 32,800 | 34,200 | 1,400 | n.a. |
Background Articles and Videos
Poll: Most Oppose Debt Limit Rise
“…House Republicans say that their budget, put together by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the Budget Committee chairman, will save Medicare and keep it secure for future retirees. Democrats say the opposite is true, that the GOP plan will end the entitlement program in its current form and force seniors to pay much more for their health care coverage.
The House passed the Republican plan last month, but it faces serious opposition in the Democratically controlled Senate.
The poll indicates that 60% of the public opposes raising the debt ceiling.
“One reason may be that while many Americans predict major problems if the debt ceiling were not increased, only one in six think it would create a crisis in the U.S. And only a quarter think that the debt ceiling affects their personal financial situation a great deal,” says Holland. …”
http://www.frumforum.com/poll-majority-oppose-debt-limit-rise
The Truth About the Debt Ceiling and Default
By Sen. Pat Toomey
“…But Secretary Geithner knows that congressional delay in raising the debt limit will in no way cause a default on our national debt. If Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling, the federal government will still have more than enough money to fully service our debt. Next year, about 7 percent of all projected federal government expenditures will go to interest on our debt. Tax revenue is projected to cover at least 70 percent of all government expenditures. So, under any circumstances, there will be plenty of money to pay our creditors.
Moreover, as the Congressional Research Service has noted, the Treasury secretary himself has the discretion to decide which bills to pay first in the event that a cash flow shortage occurs. Thus, it is he who would have to consciously, and needlessly, choose to default on our debt if the debt ceiling is not promptly raised upon reaching it. It takes a lot of chutzpah to preemptively blame congressional Republicans for a default only he could cause.
To be sure, absent an increase in the debt limit, the resulting sudden, drastic spending cuts would be very disruptive and undesirable. That is why I have always argued that we should raise the debt limit once we have adopted the needed spending cuts and budgeting reforms. But disruptive and undesirable spending cuts are not the same thing as a catastrophic default on our debt. …”
As Debt Limit Reached, Agreement Still Far Off
“…The U.S. government is expected to hit the $14.294 trillion debt ceiling Monday, setting in motion an uncertain, 11-week political scramble to avoid a default.
The Treasury Department said Monday it will stop issuing and reinvesting government securities in certain government pension plans, part of a series of steps designed to delay a default until Aug. 2.
The Treasury’s moves buy time for the White House and congressional leaders to reach a deficit-reduction agreement that could clear the way for enough lawmakers to vote to raise the amount of money Congress allows the nation to borrow.
Gene Sperling, director of the National Economic Council, said reaching the debt ceiling “should be a warning bell to the political system that it’s time to get serious about preserving our full faith and credit.” The Obama administration says a default would tip the U.S. back into a financial crisis.
But the pathway to a deal remains unclear, even to those doing the negotiating. The White House and Republicans are giving conflicting signals about how close they are to a deal. Vice President Joe Biden said last week the contours of an agreement were taking shape. House Speaker John Boehner painted a different picture Sunday, saying on CBS’s Face the Nation “I’m not seeing any real action.”
Many Republicans and some Democrats have said they won’t vote to increase the debt ceiling without an accompanying deal to cut spending or tackle such longer-term fiscal problems as health-care costs. They argue the debt ceiling is a good venue to force changes needed to help secure the nation’s solvency. …”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703421204576325583050561022.html
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Speaker Boehner’s Address to the Economic Club of New York on Jobs, Debt, Gas Prices–Videos
Fed Policy of Quantative Easing 2 (Creating Money) and Very Low Interest Rates Results In U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Growth Rates Falling–U.S. Consumer Prices Rising–Unemployment Rates Remain High–Stagflation!–Videos
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )Glenn Beck’s Last 5 O’Clock Show On Fox–Exposes The New World Order Conspiracy of The Soros Shadow Democratic Party Of Progressive Radical Socialists–What’s Next–Hillary Clinton!–Videos
“…America is under attack. Its institutions and values are under daily assault. But the principal culprits are not foreign terrorists. They are influential and powerful Americans secretly stirring up disunion and disloyalty in the shifting shadows of the Democratic Party. New York Times best-selling authors David Horowitz and Richard Poe (both former radicals) weave together riveting history, investigative reporting, and cutting political analysis to help expose and explain:
- The Shadow Party’s plan to rewrite the US Constitution.
- How the Shadow Party overthrows foreign governments – and why it may attempt to use the same methods here.
- The vast network of private think tanks, foundations, unions, stealth PACs, and other front groups through which the Shadow Party operates in America.
- The network’s voluminous contributions to the Democrats, which totaled more than $300 million in the 2004 elections, and its growing influence over the party’s message and policy.
- The politicians on both sides of the aisle who have exchanged political favors with George Soros and his “government-in-the-wings.”
- The Shadow Party’s efforts to conceal its radical agenda behind the “moderate” pose of Hillary Clinton and other public figures.
- The radical network’s plan to seize power in 2008.
Beck-04/22/11-A
Glenn Beck-04/22/11-B
Glenn Beck-04/22/11-C
Both Fox and Glenn Beck are making a big mistake that both will regret by shutting down this show.
The Progressive Radical Socialists have accomplished their goal of gettting Glenn Beck off the television and youtube.
The only way to stop the Progressive Radical Socialist is to keep attacking them and giving them no quarter.
Who will replace Beck?
I hope it is Judge Andrew Napolitano.
Judge Andrew Napolitano on Lies The Gov’t Told You & His New Fox Business Show
Judge Andrew Napolitano on Lies The Gov’t Told You & His New Fox Business Show (2 of 2)
Here is song for Glenn:
American Tune – (Eva Cassidy)
Paul Simon – American Tune (1975)
Good luck Glenn.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Republican Party Establishment Ruling Class Betrays The Tea Party Movement and American People With A Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Resolution With A Deficit of $995 Billion And Budgets Not Balanced In Next Ten Years–Replace Republican Party Leadership–Videos
Pronk Pops Show 24: April 19, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 23: April 12, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 22 (Part 2): April 7, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 22 (Part 1): April 7, 2011
“The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
~Marcus Tullius Cicero
“A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government.”
~Thomas Jefferson
U.S. Debt Clock
Reagan on Balanced Budget
Shelby Introduces Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution
Mark Udall Co-sponsors the Balanced Budget Amendment
Mark Levin “I feel that we can do great things.”
| Summary of Outlays, Revenues (Receipts), Deficits, Surpluses Fiscal Years 1980-2010(Nominal Dollars in Millions) | |||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues (Receipts) | Deficits (-), Surpluses |
| 1980 | 590,941 | 517,112 | -73,830 |
| 1981 | 678,241 | 599,272 | -78,968 |
| 1982 | 745,743 | 617,766 | -127,977 |
| 1983 | 808,364 | 600,562 | -207,802 |
| 1984 | 851,805 | 666,488 | -185,367 |
| 1985 | 946,344 | 734,037 | -212,308 |
| 1986 | 990,382 | 769,155 | -221,277 |
| 1987 | 1,004,017 | 854,288 | -149,730 |
| 1988 | 1,064,417 | 854,288 | -155,178 |
| 1989 | 1,143,744 | 991,105 | -152,639 |
| 1990 | 1,252,994 | 1,031,958 | -221,036 |
| 1991 | 1,324,226 | 1,054,988 | -269,238 |
| 1992 | 1,381,529 | 1,091,208 | -290,321 |
| 1993 | 1,409,386 | 1,154,335 | -255,051 |
| 1994 | 1,461,753 | 1,258,566 | -203,186 |
| 1995 | 1,515,742 | 1,351,790 | -163,392 |
| 1996 | 1,560,484 | 1,453,053 | -107,431 |
| 1997 | 1,601,116 | 1,579,232 | -21,884 |
| 1998 | 1,652,458 | 1,721,728 | 69,270 |
| 1999 | 1,701,842 | 1,827,452 | 125,610 |
| 2000 | 1,788,950 | 2,025,191 | 236,241 |
| 2001 | 1,862,846 | 1,991,082 | 128,236 |
| 2002 | 2,010,894 | 1,853,136 | -157,758 |
| 2003 | 2,159,899 | 1,782,314 | -377,585 |
| 2004 | 2,292,841 | 1,880,114 | -412,727 |
| 2005 | 2,471,957 | 2,153,611 | -318,346 |
| 2006 | 2,655,050 | 2,406,869 | -248,181 |
| 2007 | 2,728,686 | 2,567,985 | -160,701 |
| 2008 | 2,982,544 | 2,523,991 | -458,553 |
| 2009 | 3,517,677 | 2,104,989 | -1,412,688 |
| 2010 | 3,456,213 | 2,162,724 | -1,293,489 |
For a history of the Federal Government’s Receipts (Revenues), Outlays, and Deficits and Surpluses
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals
4/5/11 Republican Leadership Press Conference
Ryan Unveils Much Anticipated 2012 Budget Plan
Republicans roll out “Pledge to America”
Eric Cantor: Mr. President, America Is Broke; Are You Going To Help Us Fix It?
Neil Cavuto Interviews Mark Levin – This Budget Compromise Is A Historic Scam
Which Budgets Are Fiscally Responsible?
Republican Party Budget Proposals
|
S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,618 | 2,230 | -1,388 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,529 | 2,533 | -995 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,559 | 2,860 | -699 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,586 | 3,094 | -492 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,671 | 3,237 | -434 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,858 | 3,377 | -481 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,998 | 3,589 | -408 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 4,123 | 3,745 | -379 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,352 | 3,939 | -414 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,544 | 4,142 | -402 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,739 | 4,354 | -385 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 39,958 | 34,870 | -5,088 | n.a. |
http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf
Democratic Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,819 | 2,174 | -1,645 | 10,856 |
| 2012 | 3,729 | 2,627 | -1,101 | 11,881 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 3,003 | -768 | 12,784 |
| 2014 | 3,977 | 3,333 | -646 | 13,562 |
| 2015 | 4,190 | 3,583 | -607 | 14,301 |
| 2016 | 4,468 | 3,819 | -649 | 15,064 |
| 2017 | 4,669 | 4,042 | -627 | 15,795 |
| 2018 | 4,876 | 4,257 | -619 | 16,513 |
| 2019 | 5,154 | 4,473 | -681 | 17,284 |
| 2020 | 5,442 | 4,686 | -735 | 18,103 |
| 2021 | 5,697 | 4,923 | -774 | 18,967 |
| 2012-2021 | 45,952 | 38,747 | -7,205 | n.a. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
Tea Party Budget Proposals
| S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Surpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2012 | 2,500 | 2,500 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2013 | 2,800 | 2,800 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2014 | 3,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2015 | 3,200 | 3,200 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2016 | 3,300 | 3,300 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2017 | 3,400 | 3,500 | 100 | 10,800 |
| 2018 | 3,500 | 3,700 | 200 | 10,600 |
| 2019 | 3,600 | 3,900 | 300 | 10,300 |
| 2020 | 3,700 | 4,000 | 300 | 10,000 |
| 2021 | 3,800 | 4,300 | 500 | 9,500 |
| 2012-2021 | 32,800 | 34,200 | 1,400 | n.a. |
The tea party movement’s budget would require the Federal Government to have a balanced or surplus budget in every fiscal year starting in 2012 with a declining national debt starting in Fiscal Year 2017.
Neither the Republican nor Democratic Party is capable of living within the means of the American people.
The Republicans are proposing a budget for Fiscal Year 2012 of $3,618 billion compared with the President Obama’s $3,729 billion.
This results in a deficit of $995 billion for the Republican budget and $1,101 billion for President Obama’s budget.
As the above tables clearly show, neither party is capable of balancing the budget in the next ten years.
The above budgets are needed to support a warfare and welfare economy with a collectivist state.
The above budgets are not a pathway to a peace and prosperity economy with a constitutional republic.
The budget needs to be balanced starting in fiscal year 2012 at $2,500 billion or less.
The tea party movement demands that from here on out that all budgets be either balanced or in surplus with no tax increases.
Before either political party attempts to reform so-called entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid, the tea party movement demands that ten Federal Departments be permanently closed and the budgets of remaining Federal Departments be reduced by 25%.
03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
There Are too Many Bureaucrats and They Are Paid too Much
Eight Reasons Why Big Government Hurts Economic Growth
The Empirical Evidence Against Big Government
Free Markets and Small Government Produce Prosperity
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
~Dwight D. Eisenhower
“A bureaucrat is the most despicable of men, though he is needed as vultures are needed, but one hardly admires vultures whom bureaucrats so strangely resemble. I have yet to meet a bureaucrat who was not petty, dull, almost witless, crafty or stupid, an oppressor or a thief, a holder of little autthority in which he delights, as a boy delights in possessing a vicious dog. Who can trust such a creature.”
~Marcus Tullius Cicero
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )Just One More Thing Congressman Ryan: When Does The Republican’s Path To Prosperity Balance The Budget?–The Twelth of Never!
Give it a listen!
Pronk Pops Show 24: April 19, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 23: April 12, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 22 (Part 2): April 7, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 22 (Part 1): April 7, 2011
Pronk Pops Show 22, April 7, 2011
Segment 1: 3,500,000 Million Americans Unemployed in March 2011 Still Exceeds Great Depression High of 13,000,000 In March 1933–The Obama Depressions Continues–Bureau of Labor Statistics: 8.8% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) vs. Gallup Unemployment Rate of 10.0%–Nonfarm Payroll Increased By 216,000–The Government Makes The Depression Worse!–Videos
Segment 2: Obama’s Anti-American, Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Growth, Anti-Jobs, and Anti-Security Energy Policy–Videos
Segment 3: Republican Establishment Will Propose A Ten Year $6,200 Billion Cut In Spending Over Ten Years–The Problem Is It Does Not Balance The Budget For Another Five Years At The Earliest–Tea Party Movement Demands Balanced Budgets Starting In 2012 For The Next Ten Years!–A Jet Plane To Prosperity Not A Path To Prosperity–Videos
Segment 4: Just One More Thing Congressman Ryan: When Does The Republican’s Path To Prosperity Balance The Budget?–The Twelth of Never!–Videos
For additional information and videos on the above segments:
Johnny Mathis – The Twelfth Of Never
Ryan Unveils Much Anticipated 2012 Budget Plan
Sean Interviews Paul Ryan
|
S-1 FY2012 Chairman’s Markup (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,618 | 2,230 | -1,388 | 10,351 |
| 2012 | 3,529 | 2,533 | -995 | 11,418 |
| 2013 | 3,559 | 2,860 | -699 | 12,217 |
| 2014 | 3,586 | 3,094 | -492 | 12,801 |
| 2015 | 3,671 | 3,237 | -434 | 13,326 |
| 2016 | 3,858 | 3,377 | -481 | 13,886 |
| 2017 | 3,998 | 3,589 | -408 | 14,363 |
| 2018 | 4,123 | 3,745 | -379 | 14,800 |
| 2019 | 4,352 | 3,939 | -414 | 15,254 |
| 2020 | 4,544 | 4,142 | -402 | 15,681 |
| 2021 | 4,739 | 4,354 | -385 | 16,071 |
| 2012-2021 | 39,958 | 34,870 | -5,088 | n.a. |
http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf
|
S-1 FY2012 President’s Budget (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Deficits | Debt Held By Public |
| 2011 | 3,819 | 2,174 | -1,645 | 10,856 |
| 2012 | 3,729 | 2,627 | -1,101 | 11,881 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 3,003 | -768 | 12,784 |
| 2014 | 3,977 | 3,333 | -646 | 13,562 |
| 2015 | 4,190 | 3,583 | -607 | 14,301 |
| 2016 | 4,468 | 3,819 | -649 | 15,064 |
| 2017 | 4,669 | 4,042 | -627 | 15,795 |
| 2018 | 4,876 | 4,257 | -619 | 16,513 |
| 2019 | 5,154 | 4,473 | -681 | 17,284 |
| 2020 | 5,442 | 4,686 | -735 | 18,103 |
| 2021 | 5,697 | 4,923 | -774 | 18,967 |
| 2012-2021 | 45,952 | 38,747 | -7,205 | n.a. |
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf
The tea party movement’s budget would require the Federal Government to have a balanced or surplus budget in every fiscal year starting in 2012 with a declining national debt starting in Fiscal Year 2017.
|
S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget (Nominal Dollars in Billions) |
||||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues | Surpluses | Debt Held By Public |
| 2012 | 2,500 | 2,500 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2013 | 2,800 | 2,800 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2014 | 3,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2015 | 3,200 | 3,200 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2016 | 3,300 | 3,300 | 0 | 10,900 |
| 2017 | 3,400 | 3,500 | 100 | 10,800 |
| 2018 | 3,500 | 3,700 | 200 | 10,600 |
| 2019 | 3,600 | 3,900 | 300 | 10,300 |
| 2020 | 3,700 | 4,000 | 300 | 10,000 |
| 2021 | 3,800 | 4,300 | 500 | 9,500 |
| 2012-2021 | 32,800 | 34,200 | 1,400 | n.a. |
|
Summary of Outlays, Revenues (Receipts), Deficits, Surpluses Fiscal Years 1980-2010 (Nominal Dollars in Millions) |
|||
| Fiscal Year | Outlays | Revenues (Receipts) | Deficits (-), Surpluses |
| 1980 | 590,941 | 517,112 | -73,830 |
| 1981 | 678,241 | 599,272 | -78,968 |
| 1982 | 745,743 | 617,766 | -127,977 |
| 1983 | 808,364 | 600,562 | -207,802 |
| 1984 | 851,805 | 666,488 | -185,367 |
| 1985 | 946,344 | 734,037 | -212,308 |
| 1986 | 990,382 | 769,155 | -221,277 |
| 1987 | 1,004,017 | 854,288 | -149,730 |
| 1988 | 1,064,417 | 854,288 | -155,178 |
| 1989 | 1,143,744 | 991,105 | -152,639 |
| 1990 | 1,252,994 | 1,031,958 | -221,036 |
| 1991 | 1,324,226 | 1,054,988 | -269,238 |
| 1992 | 1,381,529 | 1,091,208 | -290,321 |
| 1993 | 1,409,386 | 1,154,335 | -255,051 |
| 1994 | 1,461,753 | 1,258,566 | -203,186 |
| 1995 | 1,515,742 | 1,351,790 | -163,392 |
| 1996 | 1,560,484 | 1,453,053 | -107,431 |
| 1997 | 1,601,116 | 1,579,232 | -21,884 |
| 1998 | 1,652,458 | 1,721,728 | 69,270 |
| 1999 | 1,701,842 | 1,827,452 | 125,610 |
| 2000 | 1,788,950 | 2,025,191 | 236,241 |
| 2001 | 1,862,846 | 1,991,082 | 128,236 |
| 2002 | 2,010,894 | 1,853,136 | -157,758 |
| 2003 | 2,159,899 | 1,782,314 | -377,585 |
| 2004 | 2,292,841 | 1,880,114 | -412,727 |
| 2005 | 2,471,957 | 2,153,611 | -318,346 |
| 2006 | 2,655,050 | 2,406,869 | -248,181 |
| 2007 | 2,728,686 | 2,567,985 | -160,701 |
| 2008 | 2,982,544 | 2,523,991 | -458,553 |
| 2009 | 3,517,677 | 2,104,989 | -1,412,688 |
| 2010 | 3,456,213 | 2,162,724 | -1,293,489 |
For a history of the Federal Government’s Receipts (Revenues), Outlays, and Deficits and Surpluses
Table 1.1—Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits (-): 1789–2016
“…Historical Tables provides data on budget receipts, outlays, surpluses or deficits, Federal debt, and Federal employment over an extended time period, generally from 1940 or earlier to 2012 or 2016.
To the extent feasible, the data have been adjusted to provide consistency with the 2012 Budget and to provide comparability over time.
To download the Historical Tables as a single PDF, click here (360 pages, 3.2 MB) …”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals
Neither the Republican nor Democratic Party is capable of living within the means of the American people.
The political class or elites are not serious and do not understand the problem.
If they did they would have a sense of urgency which is lacking in both the Democratic and Republican proposed budgets.
The Republicans are proposing a budget for Fiscal Year 2012 of $3,618 billion compared with the President Obama’s $3,729.
This results in a deficit of $995 billion for the Republican budget and $1,101 billion for President Obama’s budget.
As the above tables clearly show, neither party is capable of balancing the budget in the next ten years.
The above budgets are needed to support a warfare and welfare economy with a collectivist state.
The above budgets are not a pathway to a peace and prosperity economy with a constitutional republic.
The budget needs to be balanced starting in fiscal year 2012 at $2,500 billion or less.
The tea party movement demands that from here on out that all budgets be either balanced or in surplus with no tax increases.
Please do not tell me Congressman Ryan that the budget will me in primary balance by 2015.
Primary balance means you exclude interest on the national debt from expenditures or outlays.
A budget in primary balance is just a rather lame-duck president’s attempt to confuse the American people.
I am not confused or amused by President Obama totally irresponsible Fiscal Year 2012 budget proposal.
Nor am I impressed with the so-called path to a balanced budget and a path to prosperity for the United States economy.
The tea party movement does not want a path to prosperity but a jet plane ride to a balanced budget in Fiscal Year 2012 without any new taxes.
Start permanently shutting down ten Federal Departments before you even begin to think about cutting mandatory spending or entitlements including Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
The American people want the FairTax not the continuation of an overly complicated Federal Income taxation system even with a lower rate of 25% for individuals and corporations.
The FairTax: It’s Time
President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 budget gets a F and it will cost him his re-election.
The American people have no intention of getting in the Democratic Party’s car driven by Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama:
The American people have no intention of getting on the Republican Party’s path to prosperity either.
The Republican Fiscal Year 2012 budget gets a D+.
Milton Friedman would give you a D-:
The American people demand fiscal responsibility or living within ones means for the Federal Government starting with the Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Government Budget.
The American people were listening when the Republican establishment’s leadership said they heard the American people.
Republicans roll out “Pledge to America”
Pledge to America Preamble
“Pledge to America” Unveiled by Republicans (Full Text)
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20017335-503544.html
The Republican Pledge to America clearly stated that:
“We have a plan to impose fiscal discipline and cut government down to size.”
The Republican Pathway to Prosperity is that plan and it does not impose fiscal discipline nor does it cut down the size of the Federal Government.
Over the next ten fiscal years, there is not one single year in which the fiscal discipline of a balanced budget is met.
The Republican Pledge to America clearly stated that:
“With common-sense exceptions for seniors, veterans, and our troops, we will roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to balance the budget and pay down the debt. We will also establish strict budget caps to limit federal spending from this point forward.”
For Fiscal Year 2008 the total actual outlays were $2,982 billion and total actual revenues or receipts from taxation were $2,523 billion for the U.S. Federal Government with a deficit of $458 billion.
The Republican Pathway to Prosperity proposes in Fiscal Year 2012 total estimated outlays of $3,529 billion and total estimated revenues of $2,533 billion resulting in a deficit of $997 billion.
“Extreme Spending”
The Republican establishment’s leadership in Washington D.C. needs to be replaced for they have refused to learn the lessons of the 2006 and 2008 elections and apparently need to learn another lesson in 2012.
If you are a tea party movement patriot challenge all House and Senate seats currently held by Republicans if they vote for this fiscally irresponsible and unbalanced budget for Fiscal Year 2012.
The tea party movement has been betrayed by the Republican Party leadership and establishment in Washington, D.C.
Dan Mitchell gets a A+.
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
Controlling Leviathan: The Battle for Limited Government
Question and Answer Session: The Fight Against Big Government
I didn’t leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me.
The independents and the tea party movement have given up on both political parties.
The Pathway to Prosperity is the Republican Party’s timid attempt to capture the independents and tea party movement.
No sale.
The tea party movement will not be pleased.
They will be leaving on a jet plane.
I will be voting for Ron Paul for President in 2012 and Michele Bachmann for Vice-President.
SA@TAC – Ron Paul’s Pledge to America
P.S. You really disappointed me Congressman Ryan, your proposal is neither bold nor timid, it is fiscally irresponsible and gutless.
Suggest Paul Ryan talk to some Senators who understand the problem and what needs to be done now.
Rand Paul and Mike Lee on “Glenn Beck” with Judge Napolitano 03/07/11
ELVIS PRESLEY TWELVE OF NEVER
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Ron Paul Tells The Truth–The Political Elites Are Not Serious About Cutting The Budget–The Coming Collapse Of The Dollar And Inflation–Videos
Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann And Rand Paul–Stop Spending Money You Don’t Have!–Balance The Budget–Tea Party Budget Gets It Right–Videos
Republican Party Establishment Ruling Class Betrays The Tea Party Movement and American People With A Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Resolution With A Deficit of $995 Billion And Budgets Not Balanced In Next Ten Years–Replace Republican Party Leadership–Videos
Republican Establishment Will Propose A Ten Year $6,200 Billion Cut In Spending Over Ten Years–The Problem Is It Does Not Balance The Budget For Another Five Years At The Earliest–Tea Party Movement Demands Balanced Budgets Starting In 2012 For The Next Ten Years!–Videos
Tea Party Movement Demands Passage of Balanced Budget Amendment and The FairTax As The Price For Raising The National Statutory Debt Limit of $ 14,294,000,000 One Last Time By $1,000,000,000,000!–Videos
The Washington Political Elites of Both Parties Are Not Serious About Balancing The Federal Budget And Funding Entitlement Liabilities–Send In The Clowns–Don’t Bother There Here–Videos
The FairTax (National Consumption Sales Tax) vs. The Flat Tax (One Rate Federal Income Tax)–Who Pays The Most Federal Individual Income Tax? Videos
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )Can The American People Afford Two More Years Of President Barack Obama?–No–Tea Party Time–April 15, 2011–Washington D.C.–Videos
“…Two years ago, Barack Obama was inaugurated as president of the United States . Are you better off today than you were two years ago? Numbers don’t lie, and here are the data on the impact he has had on the lives of Americans:
|
January 2009 |
TODAY |
% chg | Source | |
|
Avg. retail price/gallon gas in U.S. |
$1.83 |
$3.104 |
69.6% |
1 |
|
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel) |
$43.48 |
$99.02 |
127.7% |
2 |
|
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel) |
$38.74 |
$91.38 |
135.9% |
2 |
|
Gold: London (per troy oz.) |
$853.25 |
$1,369.50 |
60.5% |
2 |
|
Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL |
$3.56 |
$6.33 |
78.1% |
2 |
|
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL |
$9.66 |
$13.75 |
42.3% |
2 |
|
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. fob |
$13.37 |
$35.39 |
164.7% |
2 |
|
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall |
7.6% |
9.4% |
23.7% |
3 |
|
Unemployment rate, blacks |
12.6% |
15.8% |
25.4% |
3 |
|
Number of unemployed |
11,616,000 |
14,485,000 |
24.7% |
3 |
|
Number of fed. employees, ex. military (curr = 12/10 prelim) |
2,779,000 |
2,840,000 |
2.2% |
3 |
|
Real median household income (2008 v 2009) |
$50,112 |
$49,777 |
-0.7% |
4 |
|
Number of food stamp recipients (curr = 10/10) |
31,983,716 |
43,200,878 |
35.1% |
5 |
|
Number of unemployment benefit recipients (curr = 12/10) |
7,526,598 |
9,193,838 |
22.2% |
6 |
|
Number of long-term unemployed |
2,600,000 |
6,400,000 |
146.2% |
3 |
|
Poverty rate, individuals (2008 v 2009) |
13.2% |
14.3% |
8.3% |
4 |
|
People in poverty in U.S. (2008 v 2009) |
39,800,000 |
43,600,000 |
9.5% |
4 |
|
U.S. rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings |
5 |
9 |
n/a |
10 |
|
Present Situation Index (curr = 12/10) |
29.9 |
23.5 |
-21.4% |
11 |
|
Failed banks (curr = 2010 + 2011 to date) |
140 |
164 |
17.1% |
12 |
|
U.S. dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate |
89.76 |
82.03 |
-8.6% |
2 |
|
U.S. money supply, M1, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) |
1,575.1 |
1,865.7 |
18.4% |
13 |
|
U.S. money supply, M2, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) |
8,310.9 |
8,852.3 |
6.5% |
13 |
|
National debt, in trillions |
$10.627 |
$14.052 |
32.2% |
14 |
Just take this last item: In the last two years we have accumulated national debt at a rate more than 27 times as fast as during the rest of our entire nation’s history. Over 27 times as fast! Metaphorically, speaking, if you are driving in the right lane doing 65 MPH and a car rockets past you in the left lane 27 times faster . . . it would be doing 1,755 MPH! This is a disaster!
Sources:
(1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. of Labor; (7) FHFA; (8) Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC; (13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. Treasury …”
No, the American people cannot afford two more years of President Obama.
Time for a tea party in Washington D.C. on April 15, 2011 to pressure both the Democratic and Republican political establishment to balance the budget and pass the FairTax.
Happy Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre–Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget of $4,000 Billion: Driving America Off The Cliff–Videos
Thelma & Louise
Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis
After listening to President Obama’s State of the Union’s address last week I was curious as to the total Fiscal Federal Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 would be in terms of outlays, receipt and deficits.
At first I expected that the President would submit a budget between $3,700 billion to $4,000 billion.
For fiscal year 2011 President Obama budget estimated outlays at $3,834 billion, tax receipts at $2,567 billion and the deficit at $1,267 billion.
Table S-1. Budget Totals
(in billions of dollars)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/tables.pdf
The more I thought about the various investments or “stimulus” spending the President proposed in this speech, I concluded the President would pull out all constraints and stops and propose a budget over $4,000 billion.
The reason is simple.
The Republican establishment is calling for a Fiscal Year 2008 level budget or about $3,000 billion in outlays.
The tea party, conservative and libertarian movements are all calling for massive cuts in Federal government spending, balanced budgets and no increase in the debt ceiling.
A balanced budget would require a $2,500 billion budget for Fiscal Year 2012 which is slightly above the level of Fiscal Year 2005 outlays of $2,471 billion when tax receipts were $2,153 billion and the deficit was $318 billion.
A balance budget assumes tax receipts would be $2,500 billion for Fiscal Year 2012 which could be optimistic.
Historical Tables Budget of the U.S. Government
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/hist.pdf
President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget will most likely be $4,000 billion in outlays, $2,500 billion in receipts, and a deficit of $1,500 billion. However, he might fudge the tax receipts number and estimate it to be $3,000 billion with a deficit of $1,000 billion.
For Fiscal Year 2010 that ended on September 30, 2010, the actual outlays were $3,455 billion, actual receipts $2,161 billion and the deficit was $1,294 billion.
Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the United States Government
http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts1210.pdf
One day after President Obama’s speech the Congressional Budget Office revised its estimate of the Fiscal Year 2011 Federal Budget to $1,500 billion.
Budget Deficit Projected to Grow to $1.5 trillion; Obama Pledges Spending Freeze
President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget will be dead on arrival when it reaches the House of Representatives.
President Obama’s state of the union address was really the launch of his 2012 run for a second term as president.
The American people will soon become aware of President Obama’s Valentine present of a $4,000 billion budget.
With the official unemployment rate remaining above 9% and the total unemployment rate running above 16% for the next 24 months, President Obama is now a lame duck one term president.
President Obama’s budget will be a Saint Valentine’s Day massacre of the Democratic Party.
The American people have stop listening to President Obama and the Democratic Party for the simple reason that they have ignored their primary concerns–high unemployment, out of control government spending and massive increases in the national debt.
St Valentine’s Day Massacre
May they rest in peace.
How sweet it is!
Jackie Gleason – How Sweet it Is
Background Articles and Videos
FY 2012 budget readied for Valentine’s Day release
By Suzanne Kubota
“…Although the President’s fiscal 2012 budget is confirmed to be released on February 14th, don’t expect there to be hearts and flowers flowing up and down Pennsylvania Avenue.
The president has already said he wants a 5-year, non-security discretionary spending freeze, while promoting other investment spending.
Republicans, however, pledge deeper cutbacks in view of Congressional Budget Office estimates the deficit will hit $1.48 trillion in fiscal 2011. …”
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=35&sid=2254253
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )Senator Rand Paul’s $500 Billion Spending Cuts Are Only One Third of The $1,500 Billion Needed To Balance The Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget!–Videos
Rand Paul on FOX Business News 01 28 11
Sen. Rand Paul: State of the Union Response
Freedom Watch-01/27/11-A
Freedom Watch-01/27/11-B
Freedom Watch-01/27/11-C
Senator Rand Paul is correct.
To balance the Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget requires spending cuts of about $1,500 billion assuming President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 Budget is about $4,000 billion and tax receipts and outlays are $2,500 billion.
Federal tax receipts for Fiscal Year 2012 will be between $2,000 to $2,500 billion.
President Obama will most likely propose a Fiscal Year 2012 budget of approximately $3,800 billion to $4,000 billion.
President Obama’s is expected to submit his Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget on or about Monday, February 14, 2011.
The only way to get to a balanced budget in Fiscal Year 2012 is to permanently close or eliminate Federal Departments and agencies and cut entitlement spending including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and welfare programs.
Neither political party has the leadership, vision, will or courage to do this.
The tea party movement candidates will be replacing both Democratic and Republican Senators and Representative who do not vote for a balanced budget in Fiscal Year 2012 in 2013.
The tea party movement is watching closely both the Democratic and Republican Party establishments.
Background Articles and Videos
A detailed look at the Rand Paul spending bill
“…Want to save $500 billion this year? Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., has a way to do it.
Is it realistic? Maybe not every part of it, but have a look below and judge for yourself. I don’t think his total removal of rental subsidies is unreasonable — the fact that Section 8 is a total failure doesn’t justify dumping its beneficiaries into oblivion. But there’s also no reason every agency has to see its budget increase every year, and a lot of these cuts really do make sense. Most of them simply represent a return to 2008 levels of spending — remember that a 30 percent cut is less than it seems when an agency’s budget been increasing by 40 percent over the last few years.
Why fund NASA at traditional levels if President Obama has scaled back its mission? Why not let Indian tribes manage their own trust funds, especially considering the federal mismanagement? Why not realign our military bases abroad, sell unused federal buildings (something Obama has already begun doing), transfer some national parks to the states, and end the wasteful corporate subsidies that come out of the Departments of Energy and Commerce?
Of course, even this bill would only cut this year’s record deficit by one-third. But if you can bring discretionary spending down a notch with something like it, then cut Defense further as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq wind down, you’ve gotten to the point where you can look Americans in the eye and tell them you’ve done everything you can, and it’s time to do something about Social Security and Medicare to save the nation from long-term financial collapse.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/detailed-look-rand-paul-spending-bill#ixzz1CRYopD2j
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/detailed-look-rand-paul-spending-bill#ixzz1CRXytGp5
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Ron Paul–Perpetual War–Videos
Perpetual War – No Thanks!
Floor Speech on Foreign Policy Jan 26 2011
Committee Hearing Jan 26 2011
Ron Paul is America’s leading voice for limited, constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, a return to sound monetary policies, and a sensible foreign policy that puts America first.
Ron Paul: A New Hope
For more information visit the following websites:
http://www.RonPaul.com
http://www.RonPaul2012.net
http://www.RonPaulNews.com
http://www.CampaignForLiberty.com
http://www.house.gov/paul
http://www.DailyPaul.com
http://www.RonPaulForums.com
http://ronpaul2012.podbean.com/
The American people want to change from a warfare and welfare economy and state to a peace and prosperity economy and constitutional government.
A Ron Paul/Michele Bachmann 2012 Presidential ticket and its election would be a first step toward this goal.
Rep Bachmann’s Intro To Ron Paul
Ron Paul’s speech, with Michele Bachmann
Please Sign the Ron Paul 2012 Petition:
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
The Tea Party’s Dream Ticket For 2012–Ron Paul/Michele Bachmann–Campaign For Liberty–Videos
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )« Previous Entries
