AN OBSERVATION ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BOWLES-SIMPSON CAT-FOOD COMMISSION

Help Lynn Jenkins help seniors break the horrible culture of dependence.  Collect coupons for products like these and mail them to Lynn Jenkins at the address below.  

AND

For crying out loud Lynn Jenkins tells us that America doesn't want old folks engaged in a culture of dependence.  So please send your coupons to  Lynn Jenkins! 

Do it now.  Clip those coupons from your paper.  Save, peruse, and use the coupons the grocers send to you in the mail.  Obliterating Social Security won't be easy, and we don't want to bother the wealthiest 2% by asking them to pay their fair share. 

Do It Now!  Help Lynn transition to the pre-Truman days when people just got old, sick, and died, without becoming a bother to Republicans.  Send the coupons to:

Representative Lynn Jenkins

Room 1122

Longworth House Office Building

Independence Avenue and South Capitol Street

Washington, DC 20003

There's no one as Irish as Barack O'Bama

CFrom the Corrigan Brothers C

THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS - CHAPTER 58: I don't know what Lynn Jenkins is smoking, but it can't be legal!

I don't know what Lynn Jenkins is smoking, but it can't be legal.  The Second District Congresswoman just sent me an e-mail confirming that she doesn't have a clue about history.  She excels at making propaganda points and is a spin doctor's star pupil.  To see how far afield she is from fact based truth I'll start with her conclusion.

Jenkins, speaking somewhat mindlessly about federal spending said:  "This plan is not perfect, but it took us more than 230 years to get into our current fiscal mess and with a Democrat Senate and President Obama in the White House it is an important step as we continue to fight to reform Washington and get our nation on a course toward financial accountability."

As reported previously on this blog (http://ideas-observations--mentalmachinati.blogspot.com/2011/07/reckless-republicans-poised-to-ruin.html), during the Clinton Administration, employing those Clinton Era Tax Rates,  we had a Budget Surplus ($237 billion), the single largest three year pay down of the Public Debt ($363 billion), paid for Social Security, and reduced the interest payment on the debt by $125 billion.

 

Reality to Lynn Jenkins:  This problem is clearly rooted with a Republican President not using his veto pen while the Republicans in Congress were spending like crazy, plus the predictable negative effects of deregulation of Wall Street - which critically wounded the economy,  and George Bush waging two wars off the books.  America got into the current fiscal crisis for these reasons and not because of our 230 year history.  Rather than demagogue the issues why can't Lynn Jenkins just tell the truth?  Because she can't handle the truth!

Even MicroSoft Word found Representative Jenkins' grammar questionable.  But I can live with bad grammar better than with bad logic.  Jenkins' rambles in the beginning of her letter.  "This change we seek, from a Washington, D.C. culture of spending and increased government dependence toward a culture more consistent with Eastern Kansans that encourages opportunity, not dependence, takes time."   

I think what Jenkins is trying to say is that those who rely on funds from the government are dependent on the government.  That dependence, Jenkins believes, runs counter to the values of Eastern Kansas.

Gee, that sure sounds good.  But Lynn, when America is borrowing money to pay for the Bush Era tax cuts (and we are), then doesn't that throw a rod in the engine of your argument?   And who is it that Lynn thinks is too dependent on the government?   Well, I bet she doesn't think its these folk.  Ending the "Bush Era" rates will cost the Koch Brothers $2 billion, the Wal-Mart Walton family $7 billion, the Campbell Soup Dorrance Family more than a half a billion dollars, and the family at the center of the Mars Candy Co. fortune will lose a $2.5 billion savings on their estate taxes. 

And she doesn't think that Defense Contractors are dependent on the government dole.  Jenkins voted for H.R. 1473, the Department of Defense and Full‐Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011.  That measure outspends Budget Authority on Defense spending by $72,116,000.  That's just the nonemergency spending! To be fair every category got outspent from its Budget Authority.

Jenkins then turns our attention to the Draconian budget passed by the Republicans in the House,  H.Con.Res. 34.  The first confusing thing we see about the Republican Budget is that despite cuts it still perpetuates deficits.  Jenkins voted for these Budget Deficits: 

Fiscal year 2012: $1,081,462,000,000,

Fiscal year 2013: $787,260,000,000.

Fiscal year 2014: $578,441,000,000.

Fiscal year 2015: $523,938,000,000.

Fiscal year 2016: $574,365,000,000.

Fiscal year 2017: $499,984,000,000.

Fiscal year 2018: $463,988,000,000.

Fiscal year 2019: $492,064,000,000.

Fiscal year 2020: $467,907,000,000.

Fiscal year 2021: $439,622,000,000.

When Bill Clinton left office we had a Budget Surplus.  The Republicans can't get us back to zero with a ten year plan.

The Republicans want to spend more on Defense.  They plan, despite the winding down of the Middle East Wars, to ramp up spending for the Military-Industrial Complex.  Here are those numbers:

Fiscal year 2012:

(A) New budget authority, $582,626,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $593,580,000,000.

Fiscal year 2013:

(A) New budget authority, $600,283,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $597,211,000,000.

Fiscal year 2014:

(A) New budget authority, $616,451,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $606,903,000,000.

Fiscal year 2015:

(A) New budget authority, $628,847,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $618,837,000,000.

Fiscal year 2016:

(A) New budget authority, $641,976,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $635,475,000,000.

Fiscal year 2017:

(A) New budget authority, $653,695,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $643,275,000,000.

Fiscal year 2018:

(A) New budget authority, $665,679,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $650,246,000,000.

Fiscal year 2019:

(A) New budget authority, $677,884,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $666,959,000,000.

Fiscal year 2020:

(A) New budget authority, $690,273,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $679,088,000,000.

Fiscal year 2021:

(A) New budget authority, $702,903,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $691,494,000,000.

The Department of Energy, where we pay for our nuclear weapons, gets consistent overspending treatment for the next five years by the Republican Budget.

Fiscal year 2012:

(A) New budget authority, $6,996,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $16,174,000,000.

Fiscal year 2013:

(A) New budget authority, $3,850,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $10,053,000,000.

Fiscal year 2014:

(A) New budget authority, $1,215,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $4,547,000,000.

Fiscal year 2015:

(A) New budget authority, $1,101,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $1,360,000,000.

Fiscal year 2016:

(A) New budget authority, $1,021,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $340,000,000.

Fiscal year 2017:

(A) New budget authority, $1,010,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $460,000,000.

Fiscal year 2018:

(A) New budget authority, $1,075,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $539,000,000.

Fiscal year 2019:

(A) New budget authority, $1,211,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $497,000,000.

Fiscal year 2020:

(A) New budget authority, $1,179,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $470,000,000.

Fiscal year 2021:

(A) New budget authority, $1,195,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $476,000,000.

The Republicans begin to show their true colors when you look at the deep cuts they plan for Commerce and Housing Credit.

Fiscal year 2012:

(A) New budget authority, $14,317,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $16,275,000,000.

Fiscal year 2013:

(A) New budget authority, $4,040,000,000.

(B) Outlays, $2,611,000,000.

Fiscal year 2014:

(A) New budget authority, $508,000,000.

(B) Outlays, -$13,986,000,000.

Fiscal year 2015:

(A) New budget authority, -$2,609,000,000.

(B) Outlays, -$19,417,000,000.

Fiscal year 2016:

(A) New budget authority, -$3,260,000,000.

(B) Outlays, -$23,459,000,000.

Fiscal year 2017:

(A) New budget authority, -$293,000,000.

(B) Outlays, -$23,592,000,000.

Fiscal year 2018:

(A) New budget authority, -$261,000,000.

(B) Outlays, -$25,981,000,000.

Fiscal year 2019:

(A) New budget authority, -$222,000,000.

(B) Outlays, -$17,547,000,000.

Fiscal year 2020:

(A) New budget authority, -$128,000,000.

(B) Outlays, -$17,992,000,000.

Fiscal year 2021:

(A) New budget authority, -$196,000,000.

(B) Outlays, -$19,650,000,000.

The silent killer in this budget is found at §502 of  H.Con.Res. 34.  Social Security is not funded out of General Revenues.  Social Security has  its own revenue stream and is not, by law, allowed to borrow money.  The Republican Budget wants to micro-manage Social Security, on an annual  basis, to permit an expedited process for cutting Social Security.  That is something new. That is something bad, very, very bad.

Paul Ryan's template for slicing and dicing Social Security, and Lynn Jenkins is on board with this, is the Bowles-Simpson proposal.  That came from the Fiscal Commission, otherwise known as the Cat-food Commission, because it will force senior citizens to rely on generic Kibbles and Bits for nutrition.

 

Now remember that Congress can't just cut benefits, but for any year where Social Security is out of a 75 year balance, then they bring out the butcher knives.  And Bowles-Simpson wants to cut benefits for the poorest, they want to slash benefits for 60% of the very low wage earners.  Republicans  want to raise the full retirement age to 69, with earliest eligibility at age 64.  Bowles-Simpson and the Republicans want to negate cost of living inflation by using a new statistical tool called the Chained Consumer Price Index (C-CPI) by the Bureau of Labor Statistics(BLS).

The BLS says this C-CPI "index employs a superlative Tornqvist formula and utilizes expenditure data in adjacent time periods in order to reflect the effect of any substitution that consumers make across item categories in response to changes in relative prices."  Well, that's about as clear as mud!  What is lucid is the Republican plan to use the C-CPI to slash $108 billion in benefits over the next decade.

No thanks Lynn, you see the poor, the underemployed, the elderly, those needing housing, or seeking an education as dependent on the government.  I see them as citizens. I see them as persons.  I see them as "We the People" and your plan to cut their Social Security is despicable.

 

Representative Jenkins then tries to tell me how good H.R. 2560, the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011, is.  Please.   This is the knee jerk Balanced Budget Amendment bill.  It is a rotten idea.  Please read the Washington Post's article in the Post Partisan section written by Robert J. Samuelson on July 18, 2011, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/a-balanced-budget-amendment-bad-idea-for-many-reasons/2011/07/18/gIQAZ8nNMI_blog.html.

Or listen to the short and simple advice from  The Incidental Economist who agrees that the Balanced Budget idea doesn't hold water, http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/balanced-budget-amendment-is-a-bad-idea/.

The Baltimore Sun, on its opinion page says "Amending the Constitution won't move us toward a balanced budget anytime soon, and it will rob us of needed flexibility in hard times."  Read Phillip Joyce's op-ed at http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-07-21/news/bs-ed-budget-amendment-20110721_1_budget-amendment-balanced-budget-balance-act.

The people know what the answer is.  Eliminate the Bush Era tax cuts for adjusted net incomes above $250,000.  Make responsible cuts to every department in the government.  Pass jobs bills now to get people back to work now.  Quit taking the American economy hostage by partisan stunts such as refusing to raise the debt limit.  The debt limit is never about new spending,  it is always about paying for what we've already spent. 

The difference between Lynn Jenkins and the mainstream of Eastern Kansas voters is clear and stark.  In my memory I can still hear the weekly call from my pastor, before we passed the collection plate.  "Where your heart is there also is  your treasure."  Good logic tells me if I follow the money going into Lynn Jenkins war chest that I'll find that which fuels her heart.  You can review that information at http://www.opensecrets.org/. 

From where I am standing, it sure looks like Lynn Jenkins could benefit from a heart transplant.

BENEDICT ARNOLD, TAX CODES, JOB CREATORS, LIARS, SCOUNDRELS, AND REPUBLICANS

Benedict Arnold, an American traitor, made the similar bogus arguments, about taxing  job creators as do contemporary Republicans.  I was perusing an online inventory of rare books at www.abebooks.com when I came across the following item: ARCHIVE OF PAPERS RELATING TO THE EARLY BUSINESS ENDEAVORS (AND DISREPUTABLE CONDUCT THEREIN) OF BENEDICT ARNOLD, INCLUDING TWO A.Ls.S.].

Any of the recent Republican rivals vying in Iowa could have written the logic of America's first notable traitor.   The following  account comes courtesy of the book's online description.

Seems Benedict Arnold was, inter alia, a New Haven, Connecticut Druggist and Bookseller. The shingle he hung remains preserved by the New Haven Historical Society.

Actually the store was, according to his biographer, more of a department store.  Not your corner pharmacy, fancier than a general store, you could describe it as the pre-revolutionary version of Target, not Wal-Mart.

Arnold opened up shop in 1761 and was doing a thriving trade.  So successful was he that he crossed the pond to purchase inventory in London, on credit, then returned to set up shop on Chapel Street.

Remember we are talking New Haven, which means we're talking about Benjamin Arnold catering to Yale students.   Arnold's creditors included many of the leading London publisher- booksellers of the day, including Thomas Longman, the map and printmaker Henry Overton, the Bible publishers Wright & Gill, and William Parker, proprietor of the radical GENERAL ADVERTISER.

Then Arnold began to expand his portfolio. He acquired a sloop and undertook trading voyages to the Caribbean and Canada. Most of these voyages, however, were devoted to smuggling rather than upstanding trade: "Benedict Arnold's business was secret by definition. To keep accurate records would have been self-destructive, yet not to engage to some degree of smuggling was all but impossible if such a business was to survive increasingly stringent British trade policies"

Arnold was a scoundrel who did not abide in the concept of  "Sanctity of Contract" and was more a "Beneficial Breach of Contract" businessman.

Benedict Arnold blamed the tax codes too!

The evidence of this archive would suggest that Arnold used these acts as an excuse for not settling debts he had no intention or ability to pay off. He first became active with the Sons of Liberty in mid-1766, and in January 1767 was involved in a notorious case of beating up a colonial tax collector. American liberty and Arnold's personal freedom from debt were to him, one and the same.

Arnold's contemporaries, the Republicans, say that the top 2% of America's richest folk cannot and will not create jobs until the tax rate becomes predictable.  These persons have had the "Bush Era" tax rates, also known as the Fat Cat Tax Boondoggle, all during the time the economy tanked under Bush and the recovery has struggled under Obama.  

Under the Clinton tax rates the economy prospered, the debt was significantly paid down, there was a budgetary surplus, and Social Security was paid for. Rather than return to the Clinton era tax cuts the Republicans are using these acts as an excuse.

Republicans are paying the piper.  Ending the "Bush Era" rates will cost the Koch Brothers $2 billion, the Wal-Mart Walton family $7 billion, the Campbell Soup Dorrance Family more than a half a billion dollars, and the family at the center of the Mars Candy Co. fortune will not be able to realize a $2.5 billion savings on their estate taxes.

The simple truth is that the big banking, accounting, and investment firms are taking the lion's share of these tax breaks and are not creating jobs. So what's a citizen to do?

My suggestion is simple.  The Democrats want to add $30 in taxes for every $1,000 in income above $250,000 net adjusted, below the line, after you get each and every other allowable deduction and credit.  So, if after your tax professional figures up your taxable income, you pay no more for the first quarter of a million dollars.  You'd pay $30 more for every thousand bucks you earn after that.  If you make another quarter of a million then you'd pay $7,500 more!

But I am a reasonable person. For every new job created by the job creator, that pays at least 150% of minimum wage (or $10.88 in Kansas), and is not an exempt management position then I'd vote for a $30 tax credit for  every $1,000 paid in wages.  That would mean they'd get a tax credit of $900 for every $30,000 in qualified wages being paid.  Of course, those employees are productive and earning them money.  It is a win-win deal.  You can find your state's minimum wage from the Labor Department at: http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm.

It is high time Republicans quit using Benedict Arnold's template and show a little Quaker honesty.

Thomas Corbyn, from whose papers this archive derives, was Arnold's principal creditor and represented Arnold's creditors from the London end. These papers begin in July, 1766, after Arnold's failure. Unlike Arnold, Corbyn's business was rooted in Quaker honesty, as the entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography makes clear: "Corbyn's probity both at home and abroad was an important factor in the success of the firm. He frequently lent money to young men starting in business - and not infrequently lost it. . The life and career of Thomas Corbyn shows that the expanding drug trade of the eighteenth century was based on greater trust and probity than is often thought." To New York merchant Bernard Lintot, author of most of the letters to Corbyn, fell the unenviable task of dealing directly with Ar. Bookseller Inventory.   

I am a Democrat because there is no Sinn Féin in Kansas

When asked why I am a Democrat I often respond : "because there is no Sinn Féin in Kansas.  That sentiment is not born of dry wit.  Sinn Féin is an Irish political party with roots to the Provisional Irish Republican Army.  This is not an aloof set of intellectuals dealing with theory.  Sinn Féin is integrally connected to the well being of the Irish people.  Democrats need to open an eye and lend an ear, because in America we are to be the political party on the front lines in the battle for economic justice, civil rights, and the proposition that government exists to serve the people, not just the rich people, the corporations, but all of the people.

When I call for Democrats to open their eyes and lend their ears, let me offer an example.  Young Democrats need to pay particular attention to this.  Mary Kate Quinn is a young lady from the  Crumlin Glenavy area of Northern Ireland (Lagan Valley).  She ran for Northern Ireland's Assembly back in May.  She didn't win, seems that the district boundaries were changed.  That makes me wonder what Kansas' Congressional Districts will look like after redistricting.

Like Kansas Democrats, Mary Kate Quinn did not win.  But she vows to continue the work.  Here is a video clip of Mary Kate Quinn, watch this and tell me if you also are only a Democrat because there is no Sinn Féin in Kansas.



Next, I'll give you a look at the youngest ever Lord Mayor of Belfast, from East Belfast Sinn Féin's Niall O'Donnghaile. 



PETITION FOR CERTIORARI FILED IN SB 1070 CASE

The Tucson Sentinel has posted a copy of Arizona's Petition for Certiorari, which Paul Clement filed with the Court today.  The link to see the petition, which is not yet available from the Court is http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/documents/doc/081011_sb1070_supreme_court_doc/.

I am going to go read it.

USA v. ARIZONA - SB 1070 PETITION FOR CERTIORARI DUE IN SEPTEMBER

The Supreme Court has rules about procedure.  Rule 13 sets the timeline for filing a petition for a writ of certiorari, one of two methods of getting a case before the Court.  The other is by a direct appeal authorized by law, a right of appeal.  Rule 13 says that the party seeking review must file their petition within ninety days from the date of final judgment in the court below (either a state court of last resort or a United States court of appeals).

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in USA v. Arizona, the SB 1070 case, on March 11th. That was not the trigger starting the clock running on the need to file for certiorari.  On June 29th the Ninth Circuit issued its mandate on their opinion.  That's when the clock began ticking.

The combination of the Arizona Republic and Phoenix's NBC affiliate KPNX (local channel 12) incorrectly reported the date by which the petition for certiorari needed to filed with the Court.  On May 9th AZCENTRAL.com, the website for the paper and station, reported that the petition needed to be filed by July 11th.  See, http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2011/05/09/20110509sb1070-appeal-arizona-next-step09-ON.html.

KVOA.com, Tucson's NBC affiliate, is reporting on their web page that former Solicitor General Paul D. Clement is the lead counsel for Arizona before the Court.  See, http://www.kvoa.com/news/federal-court-hears-arguments-regarding-arizona-s-counterclaim-in-sb-1070-case/.

Calculating days to determine when Clement must have the petition filed is governed by Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  You don't count June 29th, but begin counting on June 30th.  You never count the date of final judgment. September 27th is a Tuesday, so there is no issue about the last day being a weekend day, nor is September 27th a holiday.

Mr. Clement has until 2:00 p.m. to get the petition for certiorari to the Court September 27th.  In these awkward post-911 days the Court has to have security scrutinize all of the fillings.  Here is how the Court says documents have to be filed:

A case-related document delivered in an open container or an open box to the police booth at the North Drive of the Supreme Court building by 2:00 p.m. on a day that the Court is open for business will be delivered to the Clerk's office by the close of business that day.  See, http://www.supremecourt.gov/deliveryofdocuments.aspx.

Generally, the Court hears and typically decides whether or not to grant certiorari within five days after the petition is filed during a regular term of the Court.  They can also re-list the petition on their calendar if they want the input from the Solicitor General.  Under the "Rule of Four" it takes the votes of four members of the Court to grant certiorari.

The next term of the Supreme Court begins Monday October 3rd. the first Conference will be held on the afternoon of Wednesday October 5th.  Stay tuned, the Court will post an order.  On the opening day of the term it is not uncommon for the  Court to issue summary disposition orders relating to certiorari.  We won't know whether the Court will grant certiorari or deny the petition until October.