THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 51 - PROPAGANDA AND BLACK HEARTED POLITICS

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

Lynn Jenkins is once again spewing the party line. This time she waves the budget cutting scalpel at National Public Radio. Over the years I have noticed that some, but not all, Republicans tend to have a dislike of publically owned broadcast media.

Jenkins argued from the floor of the House for a bare bones and ultra limited government. Government should only protect our citizens, maintain a strong infrastructure, and uphold our rights as outlined by the Constitution. Then Jenkins makes a wild course change apparently challenging some unnamed "political radio show" on NPR which has a "litmus test" on something which she does not identify. Her speech was so vague as to be baffling.

Lynn Jenkins ignores the fact that NPR is  tax-exempt, being organized under secion 501 (c) (3) of the Tax Code.  Therefore, NPR is prohibited from engaging in the political conduct she describes. Since Jenkins is a CPA one can only guess she is engaging in demagoguery.

Jenkins says that the federal government is leaking money left and right and that it is time to plug some holes. You betcha as long as those holes don't put the kibosh on those she serves, the wealthy, the damn wealthiest folks in America.

Jenkins voted against extending unemployment insurance compensation to un-employed Americans yesterday. Jenkins continues to urge extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for her damn wealthiest supporters. The Fat Cat Tax Boondoggle that Jenkins wants extended will add $700 Billion of borrowed money to the nation's debt.

The unemployment benefits will immediately stimulate the economy because virtually all of that money gets spent as soon as it arrives in the hands of the beneficiary. It is spent on rent, food, and the necessities of life. The Bush-era tax cuts for the Jenkins' damn wealthiest supporters haven't paid any dividends. Borrowing money to give these rich folks more money is insane.

Now what was it Lynn Jenkins just said, the federal government should uphold our rights as outlined by the Constitution. Apparently Lynn Jenkins is ignorant of the First Amendment, the history of radio, the history of National Public Radio, and the history of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Jenkins may or may not know that the radio spectrum belongs to We the People. Licensees of broadcast stations hold their use of the spectrum in trust for the people. Misuse of that trust can result in license revocation.

In the early days of radio the Federal Communications Commission let the lower end of the radio dial be used by colleges and universities so that student run stations could help develop technology, skill, and talent. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting was formed by an Act of Congress in the 1960's. Commercial radio declined as the new technology of television soared. One mandate of that Act was for CPR to encourage the growth and development of non-commercial radio and to develop programming responsive to the interests of the American people.

National Public Radio was formed in the 1970's. NPR has been on the bleeding edge of broadcast programming when it comes to the public interest. From its start with live broadcasts of Senate hearings on the Vietnam War to Supreme Court nominees testifying before the Senate, NPR provides Americans with ready real-time access to live action from Washington. NPR developed All Things Considered and Morning Edition as it matured in its mission.

If Jenkins' rant was in some way related to the firing of Juan Williams then she should have said so. NPR has strict standards and Mr. Williams crossed the line. In my opinion the cable network pretending to be a legitimate news organization, calling itself FOX News, has no standards. FOX Propaganda serves no useful public interest. Demagoguery is not in the public interest, whether it stems from the floor of the House or that Republican propaganda machine called FOX.

Perhaps Jenkins was stoked by FOX Misinformation's owner Roger Ailes. The head distortionist for the Republican Party's Publicity Department was raging against National Public Radio making an attack often made by that entertainment company. Ailes compared NPR to Nazis. If that is what got Jenkins in a huff then she should turn FOX Fantasy off and turn on NPR. In Jenkins' case NPR can stand for Not Propaganda Radio.

Whatever Jenkins meant by her rambling discourse she needs to get a good case of being serious in quick fashion. Jenkins and the naysayers no longer have the luxury of not governing. Don't tell Kansans that NPR should be de-funded while you are advocating a $700 Billion increase to the deficit over the next decade.

Lynn Jenkins is going to find it difficult to govern without facts. Maybe that's why we got her tirade against NPR when the bill being debated was H.R. 1722. Had Jenkins checked she could have found out that NPR doesn't have a line in the federal budget to directly attack. That's right, NPR doesn't get direct contributions from the federal budget. Here is what NPR has to say on their website, www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/2008/01/frequently_asked_questions_1.html:

NPR receives no direct funding from the federal government. Less than two percent of the budget is derived from competitive grants from federally funded organizations such as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Science Foundation, and National Endowment for the Arts. (Emphasis added.)

Approximately half of NPR's funding comes from NPR member stations. In an average year, NPR funds about 45 percent of its operations with membership dues and program fees from member stations. The balance of NPR's annual revenue is derived from private foundations, individuals and corporations, in the form of grants, gifts, investment proceeds, and corporate sponsorships. NPR receives some revenue from distribution fees and fees from tapes and transcripts. Financial statements, based on annual audits, are available in NPR's most recent Annual Report (5.7 MB - Requires Adobe Acrobat).

Jenkins and the Party of No continued their onslaught against advancing any positive ideas when they voted against H.R. 1722. The Teleworks Enhancement Bill now moves on to the President for his signature. H.R. 1722 is projected to cost $30 million over the next five years in administrative costs, if those funds are appropriated. H.R. 1722 is an important piece of legislation designed to keep certain governmental offices open during times of natural disaster or worse. One ice storm in the District of Columbia can shut down many government functions for days at a cost far exceeding these projected administrative costs.

Yesterday marked the first time in the modern history of the Republic when the servants of the Fat Cats openly thumbed their noses at the rest of America during a period of excessively high unemployment.

Yesterday, Lynn Jenkins and the Party of No, said no to extending unemployment benefits. The jobs are gone, the Fat Cats are sitting on the sidelines with their cash and their tax exemptions intact, and the Republicans said no to making sure middle class families can remain in the middle class. Happy Thanksgiving indeed.

The betrayal of trust with the middle class occurred on roll call vote 579. The bill H.R. 6419 got a majority of the votes from the Members of Congress. It failed because it was brought up under a Suspension of the Rules which required a ⅔ majority. The vote was 258 to 154, that means it needed 275 for passage. Seventeen lousy votes is what keeps the most economically stimulative measure from moving forward. Shameful!

The final order of business in the House was S.3774, a bill extending the deadline for filing for Social Services Block Grant expenditures of supplemental funds appropriated following disasters occurring in 2008. (Emphasis added). The bill extends, through FY2011, the deadline for state expenditure of certain emergency supplemental appropriations to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for the Administration for Children and Families provided for recovery from Hurricanes Ike and Rita and other 2008 natural disasters.

That's right the black hearted naysayers want to recoup those dollars from Children and Families to offset the Fat Cat Tax Boondoggle. Things are going to get very bad for the lower 98% of Americans if the Republicans give $700 billion to the Fat Cats!

S. 3774 passed on roll call vote 580, having garnered the required ⅔ majority vote with a margin of 366 to 40.



LAME DUCK SESSION POISED TO PASS FIRST SUBSTANTIVE BILL SINCE RETURNING TO WORK - H.R. 1722 THE TELEWORK ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2010

The first substantive legislation to be considered by the House in the lame duck session of this 111th Congress appears to be H.R. 1722, the Telework Enhancements Act of 2010. This bill passed the House back on July 14th, on roll call 441. Just before the Congress recessed for the elections the Senate passed a version of H.R. 1722 by unanimous consent.

The Senate proposed an amendment, S. Amendment No. 4689. Unlike other Senate Amendments, this time the changes were germane to the underlying bill. The Amendment was introduced by Hawaii's Democratic Senator Daniel Akaka and Ohio's Republican Senator George Voinovich.

The Rules Committee has scheduled a meeting, which is being postponed until after a series of votes are concluded today. No doubt the postponement was precipitated by the Leadership Elections by the House Democratic Caucus that are taking place today.

Lynn Jenkins and the Party of No voted against passage back in July. Confronted with the prospect of governing and not merely obstructing it will be interesting to see what she and the other naysayers will do when H.R. 1722 returns to the floor.

THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 28 - H.R. 1722 REMINDS US THAT SILENCE IS NOT GOLDEN

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

As reported, the House took up H.R. 1722 under a Rule requiring only a simple majority for passage.  The Teleworks legislation will now head to the Senate.

Back in May, when this legislation was first considered by the House Virginia's Democratic Representative concisely summed up H.R. 1722, the Teleworks improvement Act. From the floor of the House he said, "The Teleworks Improvements Act is an important piece of legislation because it will help us meet five critical policy goals: reduction of dependence on foreign oil; reduction in traffic congestion; improvement in air quality; improvement in Federal recruitment and retention; and improvement in the continuity of operations plan for the Federal Government."

In May Maryland's Democratic Representative John Sarbanes expressed confidence that the bill enjoyed bipartisan approach. He was correct. Yesterday, forty-five Republicans voted to pass this bill. The margin for roll call 441 was 290 to 131. One Democrat, Marion Berry of Arkansas, voted against the bill, as did Lynn Jenkins. Back in May the bill needed a two thirds majority to pass, it didn't get it.  Yesterday the bill needed a simple majority to pass.  It got more a than two thirds majority.  Go figure.

The Congressional Record has not posted the floor debate which preceded roll call 441.

Debate on the bill was less than competitive when the proposal came up the first time. Massachusetts' Democratic Representative Stephen Lynch and Utah's Republican Representative Jason Chaffetz controlled the time as floor managers for the two parties. They both voted for the bill.

Representative Chaffetz yielded time to West Virginia Republican Shelley Capito who voted for the bill. Chaffetz then yielded time to Virginia's Republican Representative Frank Wolf, who voted for the measure. No one spoke against the bill.

Those who voted against H.R. 1722 didn't have what it took to muster a debate and explain to America why they were opposed to the Teleworks Improvement Act. That includes Lynn Jenkins. That was roll call 251.

Representative Sarbanes was right, there was so much bipartisan support that those who voted no wouldn't show themselves during debate. That reminds me of Buddy Ebsen's character from the Beverly Hillbillies. He'd say "Pitiful , just pitiful."

"Pitiful, just pitiful" 

TELEWORKING AND FLOOD INSURANCE UP NEXT ON THE HOUSE'S AGENDA

Congress heads back to work this week with two bills emerging from the Rules Committee. H.R. 1722, the Teleworks Improvement Act of 2010, was introduced by Maryland's Democratic Representative John Sarbanes.

This bill expands the options for Federal workers to work from home. Currently, the Washington Post reports, only 10% of government employees use the option. Rather than shut down government when severe weather strikes, and that's not rare in D.C., offices can stay open remotely. According to Sarbanes, the Washington Post said, the government saved about $30 Million dollars a day last year when remote workers were able to do their jobs, despite D.C. being paralyzed by a February blizzard. Lynn Jenkins voted against the bill.

The Rules Committee is scheduled to take up H.R. 1722 at 5:00 p.m. today. When the bill emerges from the Rules Committee it takes its second journey to the floor of the House of Representatives. It failed to garner a 2/3 majority vote back on May 6th, although it clearly had a majority. The tally on roll call 251 was 268 yeas to 147 nays. The supermajority of 66% was required because H.R. 1722 advanced via Rule XV:

RULE XV

BUSINESS IN ORDER ON SPECIAL DAYS

Suspensions

1. (a) A rule may not be suspended except by a vote of two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum being present. The Speaker may not entertain a motion that the House suspend the rules except on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays and during the last six days of a session of Congress.

When H.R. 1722 returns to the floor it will be under a Rule which will require only a simple majority. H.R. 1722 can and will save taxpayers far more than it will cost, it keeps the wheels moving when offices would otherwise have to close, and it will attract more workers to civil service. This bill makes sense.

H.R. 5114, is the Flood Insurance Priorities Act of 2010. This bill was introduced by California's Democratic Representative Maxine Waters. This bill amends the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 [NIFA] extending the National Flood Insurance Program and the Pilot Program for Mitigation of Severe Repetitive Loss Properties.

H.R. 5114 increases the maximum aggregate amount of insurance coverage for residential and nonresidential building. The bill amends the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (FDPA) to delay, for a five-year period, the effective date for the mandatory purchase of flood insurance for certain new flood hazard areas not previously designated as having special flood hazards (with "100-year floodplains").

NIFA is amended to set forth a five-year phase-in of flood insurance rates for newly mapped areas not previously designated as having special flood hazards.

Employing sound business like practices H.R. 5114 directs the FEMA Administrator to implement this Act in a manner that will not materially weaken the financial position of the national flood insurance program or increase the risk of financial liability to federal taxpayers.

It helps people get covered immediately by waiving the 30-day delay (waiting period) for the effective date of flood insurance contracts when the initial purchase of flood insurance coverage is connected with the purchase or other transfer of the property to be covered, regardless of whether a loan is involved in the purchase or transfer transaction. Limits such waiver, however, to instances when the initial purchase of coverage is made within 30 days after the purchase or other transfer of the property.

Revises the current waiver of the 30-day waiting period for the initial purchase of flood insurance coverage in connection with the making, increasing, extension, or renewal of a loan to limit it to instances when the purchase is made within 30 days after the loan transaction.

Not only the wealthy need apply, this is a plan available to the poor. It requires flood insurance regulations to permit certain low-income policyholders (families whose income level is at or below 200% of the poverty line) to pay insurance premiums in monthly installments.

The bill has teeth. FDPA is amended to subject lenders to civil monetary penalties for requiring, in connection with any loan, the purchase of flood insurance coverage under NIFA, or for purchasing such coverage, in an amount exceeding the minimum mandatory amount.

Increases from $350 to $2,000 the maximum civil monetary penalty per violation against a regulated lending institution or enterprise. Increases from $100,000 to $1 million the total amount of such penalties assessed against any single regulated lending institution or enterprise during any calendar year, unless the total of such penalties in any three (or more) of the immediately preceding five calendar years was $1 million (in which case there is no limit).

Yet it is fair because it prohibits imposition of any civil penalty on a regulated lending institution or enterprise that has made a good faith effort to comply with FDPA requirements or for any non-material violation of such requirements.

Finally, this legislation is forward looking. H.R. 5114 amends FDPA to subject lenders to civil monetary penalties for requiring, in connection with any loan, the purchase of flood insurance coverage under NIFA, or for purchasing such coverage, in an amount exceeding the minimum mandatory amount.

Increases from $350 to $2,000 the maximum civil monetary penalty per violation against a regulated lending institution or enterprise. Increases from $100,000 to $1 million the total amount of such penalties assessed against any single regulated lending institution or enterprise during any calendar year, unless the total of such penalties in any three (or more) of the immediately preceding five calendar years was $1 million (in which case there is no limit).

Prohibits imposition of any civil penalty on a regulated lending institution or enterprise that has made a good faith effort to comply with FDPA requirements or for any non-material violation of such requirements.

The Rules Committee meets tomorrow to consider H.R. 5114.