President Bush responded to a question at Wednesday’s (10/25/06) press conference about the upcoming election :
BUSH: “I think the coming election is a referendum on these two things: which party has got the plan that will enable our economy to continue to grow and which party has a plan to protect the American people.”
He said he also will push the unfinished business of his second term -- reforming Social Security, overhauling the tax code and pushing for a broad immigration bill -- and is "more likely to achieve those three objectives with a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican-controlled Senate."
My thoughts.
SECURITY : We’ve heard it before … everything changed on 9/11.
I remember 9/11 not only for the attack, but also that the Bush Administration was, dispite warnings, oblivious to the threat.
On January 31, 2001 former Senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman issued their report on the U. S. Commission on National Security/21st Century which included projecting a direct attack on the United States and concerns terrorism in general. Bush put Cheney in charge of this.
On September 10, John Ashcroft submitted his first budget which although he sought increases in funding for sixty-eight Department of Justice programs, none were related to counterterrorism. In fact, he rejected the FBI’s request for $58 million for 149 new counterterrorism field agents, 200 additional analysts and 54 extra translators. On the same day, Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff informed Senator Dianne Feinstein that the draft legislation on counterterrorism and homeland defense would require another six months to study.
After the tragedy of 9/11, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States – more commonly known as the 9/11 Commission – was created. Although it was composed of 5 Republicans and 5 Democrats, it issued a unanimous report – with no additional views and no dissents – recommending changes that needed to be made to improve our security. These changes required Congressional action. The bill was entitled : Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 : A bill to reform the intelligence community and the intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, and for other purposes.
Since this bill had President Bush’s support, one would have thought it should have the support of Republicans. In the Senate, it was overwhelming approved with only two dissenters ( Coleman and Dayton both voted to approve the legislation.) On December 7, 2004, the House took its vote … the Minnesota House Republicans had one dissenter … as Kennedy, Kline and Ramstad voted in favor of Security, but GUTKNECHT voted AGAINST it. Why would Gutknecht vote against this legislation? I can only surmise that it was because it did not include provisions regarding the issuance of driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants … America was attacked by terrorists who entered the country legally … Gutknecht would rather delay improving our National Security by attaching an issue that he cares about to critical legislation. Virtually, two years later, America does not have a compressive illegal immigration plan because of the extreme views of Gutknecht, Tancredo, Sensenbrenner and other alarmists who act in defiance of the majority of Republicans (Bush, Frist, Coleman, et al) and Democrats.
A GROWING ECONOMY :
Do you know the difference between a Recession and a Depression ?
A Recession is when your neighbor is out of work; a Depression is when you are out of work.
That’s what this economy is about. I’m doing okay … but at my neighbor’s house, both the husband and wife lost their jobs this year … and they had each worked in their individual field for over 20 years … he’s found a job, she hasn’t.
The economy may be growing but what is also growing is income inequality -- especially at the top -- the very rich are pulling away from the ordinary rich and the middle class. Case in point : the total pay for chief executive officers at 1,522 of the largest U.S. companies swelled by a median of 30 percent in 2004. That's double the rate of growth in 2003, according to a survey released in October by the Portland, Maine-based researcher Corporate Library. President Bush commented on CNBC on Monday: "I get astounded by the size of the pay packages. Consider me floored, when I see a guy making a billion dollars as the CEO of a company."
For ordinary folks, our biggest asset is our home and those values are dropping. Yesterday, the National Association of Realtors reported a sharp decrease in the price of homes. The price of existing homes fell 2.2 percent last month, while the median price of a single-family home fell 2.5 percent from September of last year. This marked the largest annual decrease since the NAR started tracking prices in 1969.
So the stock market is up and those that are rich are doing fine, but us, ordinary folks, we’re concerned about our jobs, families, retirement, health care, college-education for our kids, etc.
Gutknecht’s tax plan is maintain the status quo.
Congress continues to approve to deficit budgets which increase the national debt which increases the birth tax. After 9/11, there may have been acceptance of a temporary budget imbalance, but why is that so five years later ?
The economy has grown and tax receipts have risen over the past two years, but the Bush tax cuts played a small role in that process. An analysis of Treasury data prepared last month by the Congressional Research Service estimates that economic growth fueled by the cuts is likely to generate revenue worth about 7 percent of the total cost of the cuts, a broad package of rate reductions and tax credits that has returned an estimated $1.1 trillion to taxpayers since 2001. In short, the Treasury lost more in taxes than it gained from the resulting economic stimulus. Yes, the federal revenues increased but not as much as it could have.
Gutknecht embraces lower tax rates on passive income (dividend and capital gains) which help advance the fortunes of wealthy Americans versus working families wage income.
Gutknecht also favors tax breaks for corporations such as H.R. 4761 which would award tax incentives for oil companies that even the White House acknowledges would reduce federal receipts by several hundred billion dollars over 60 years.
Gutknecht idea of the status quo is to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.
If the issue is tax fairness, Gutknecht clearly favors the affluent and corporations.
SOCIAL SECURITY :
Bush has repeatedly made it clear that he plans to resolve the Social Security question in the last half of his term. Gutknecht favors privatization which will only add trillions to the national debt.
CONCLUSION : Gutknecht is not running for another term … he’s running for a lifetime appointment. I, and the next generation, cannot afford a Congressman who so clearly uses taxes as a campaign slogan without consideration of our long term financial future. The question is not whether "you can spend your money smarter than the federal government"; the question is "why won't the Congress make others pay their FAIR share?"
I have read the Walz position paper (link below) and clearly he gets it.
Eliminate the Democrat or Republican candidate label and it is clear who is the most fiscally responsible candidate.
SOURCES :
Roll Call vote on Terrorism Prevention
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll544.xml
Walz’s position paper on Middle Tax Cuts
http://www.timwalz.org/vertical/Sites/%7BDD1DDF80-8E82-48D5-8648-607855AC529B%7D/uploads/%7B6FE57A5D-1413-4327-BF42-EA529683D1C7%7D.PDF
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Monday, October 23, 2006
VOTER WARNING : Gutknecht “Problems With Amnesty” mailing
On Saturday, I received the first piece of campaign literture from the Gutknecht For Congress committee. The front side photo depicts barb wire on top of a chain link fence with the question “If we grant illegals amnesty, who will pay?” The other side has three sentances warning of the potential drain on Social Security and jeopardizing Medicare with references to The New Ulm Journal and Washington Post newspapers.
I’m glad that Gutknecht is addressing Social Security and Medicare funding, but in three short sentences, he does not give the complete story.
The Washington Post story states : “In the long run, tax revenue generated by new workers would ease the baby-boom generation's burden on Social Security and offset virtually all the additional spending … [snip] … the report said legalized immigrants would represent "only a modest increase" in enrollment for child nutrition programs, food stamps and Medicaid. Caseloads would be 2 to 3 percent higher by 2016, the CBO said.
The real fight is not between Gutknecht and Walz, but instead between Gutknecht and President Bush, Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Norm Coleman and many other Republicans and Democrats.
Gil Gutknecht, Tom Tancredo and other extermists are hijacking the problem of border security, anti-terrorism and immigration by inciting fearmongering and promoting polarization based on ethnicity. The legislation offered by the Senate is considerably more comprehensive. It increases the number of H1-B visas for skilled workers from 65,000 to 115,000 annually, beginning in 2007. Immigrants with certain advanced degrees would not be subject to the caps, which could rise by 20 percent depending on labor market demands. This need has been recognized by many politicians such as Governor Tim Pawlenty. Additionally, the Senate bill would fund the hiring of a substantial number of border patrol agents … much more than the number authorized by the House bill ( ? Did anyone learn anything from attempting to liberate Iraq with too few troops to police the Iraq borders and maintain order ? ).
Last week on KTOE’s Talk of the Town radio program, Tim Walz expressed his frustration with Gutknecht’s antics. Walz wanted to discuss Social Security (an ISSUE that needs serious debate during this election) but instead had to re-educate voters and the media on his Immigration Proposals.
But not only was Walz upset, so was The New Ulm Journal which complained of having its reporting willfully manipulated. From their editorial :
It is discouraging for newspaper reporters who find a lengthy interview with a candidate boiled down and distorted to be used in an attack ad. A report from The Journal in July on Tim Walz, for instance, is the basis for a claim in a Gil Gutknecht ad that Walz favors amnesty for illegal aliens. The full story shows Walz would require illegal aliens to leave the country first before applying for citizenship.
SOURCES :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082101539.html
http://www.nujournal.com/opinion/articles.asp?articleID=4220
I’m glad that Gutknecht is addressing Social Security and Medicare funding, but in three short sentences, he does not give the complete story.
The Washington Post story states : “In the long run, tax revenue generated by new workers would ease the baby-boom generation's burden on Social Security and offset virtually all the additional spending … [snip] … the report said legalized immigrants would represent "only a modest increase" in enrollment for child nutrition programs, food stamps and Medicaid. Caseloads would be 2 to 3 percent higher by 2016, the CBO said.
The real fight is not between Gutknecht and Walz, but instead between Gutknecht and President Bush, Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Norm Coleman and many other Republicans and Democrats.
Gil Gutknecht, Tom Tancredo and other extermists are hijacking the problem of border security, anti-terrorism and immigration by inciting fearmongering and promoting polarization based on ethnicity. The legislation offered by the Senate is considerably more comprehensive. It increases the number of H1-B visas for skilled workers from 65,000 to 115,000 annually, beginning in 2007. Immigrants with certain advanced degrees would not be subject to the caps, which could rise by 20 percent depending on labor market demands. This need has been recognized by many politicians such as Governor Tim Pawlenty. Additionally, the Senate bill would fund the hiring of a substantial number of border patrol agents … much more than the number authorized by the House bill ( ? Did anyone learn anything from attempting to liberate Iraq with too few troops to police the Iraq borders and maintain order ? ).
Last week on KTOE’s Talk of the Town radio program, Tim Walz expressed his frustration with Gutknecht’s antics. Walz wanted to discuss Social Security (an ISSUE that needs serious debate during this election) but instead had to re-educate voters and the media on his Immigration Proposals.
But not only was Walz upset, so was The New Ulm Journal which complained of having its reporting willfully manipulated. From their editorial :
It is discouraging for newspaper reporters who find a lengthy interview with a candidate boiled down and distorted to be used in an attack ad. A report from The Journal in July on Tim Walz, for instance, is the basis for a claim in a Gil Gutknecht ad that Walz favors amnesty for illegal aliens. The full story shows Walz would require illegal aliens to leave the country first before applying for citizenship.
SOURCES :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082101539.html
http://www.nujournal.com/opinion/articles.asp?articleID=4220
NEWS FLASH : Gutknecht Supports Minimum Wage Increase
NEWS FLASH : Gutknecht Supports Minimum Wage Increase
… and I’ve got a bridge in the desert to sell the believers.
Gil Gutknecht is running a radio commercial challenging some of the assertions in Tim Walz’s commercials. I heard it a number of times during the afternoon … good strategy … the target audience is workers with a radio on in the background … this strategy was successfully used by Richard Nixon to win the White House.
Gutknecht asserts that he voted to support an increase in the minimum wage.
Voting for a bill and actively supporting legislation are two distinctly different activities. Congressmen vote on a number of bills for the pure purpose of telling their constituents that they supported that concept while knowing fully well that legislation will never become law.
Fact : Gutknecht did vote to raise the minimum wage. Fact : In the same bill, he also voted to give tax reductions ranging from timber sales to inheritance taxes.
Would you tell me how important increasing the minimum wage was to Gutknecht based on the first line of his August 28th press release.
Washington, DC -Representative Gil Gutknecht (MN-01) today voted with his colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to pass the Estate Tax Extension and Tax Relief Act of 2006, which provides permanent estate tax (better known as the death tax) relief.
The precise bill is H.R.5970 : Estate Tax and Extension of Tax Relief Act of 2006
( Introduced 7/28/06 and passed 7/29/06)
Title: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the unified credit against the estate tax to an exclusion equivalent of $5,000,000, to repeal the sunset provision for the estate and generation-skipping taxes, and to extend expiring provisions, and for other purposes.
Although passed by the House of Representatives, it would still have to be approved by the Senate and the President. When a bill is introduced and voted on within 24 hours, I think you can safely say “election-year gimmick”.
Now, if Gutknecht would truly be in favor of raising the minimum wage, he would work to pass H.R.2429 which is entitled : To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide for an increase in the Federal minimum wage.
That is a straightforward bill.
It was introduced on 5/18/2005 and has 144 co-sponsors
Since it has been held up by the Republican leadership, a discharge petition (#109-11) was started on 2/28/06 ... and although all four Minnesota Democratic Congressman signed the petition, none of the Minnesota Republicans did ... it should be noted that Republican Congressmen from other states did sign the petition ... but not Gil.
So here is the question for the next public debate : Congressman Gutknecht, will you sign the discharge petition and vote in support of H.R. 2429 - a straightforward bill which will increase the minimum wage?
So voters remember even when you hear the words “I approved this message” … ignore the message. Instead look at the complete voting record and any policy statements.
… and I’ve got a bridge in the desert to sell the believers.
Gil Gutknecht is running a radio commercial challenging some of the assertions in Tim Walz’s commercials. I heard it a number of times during the afternoon … good strategy … the target audience is workers with a radio on in the background … this strategy was successfully used by Richard Nixon to win the White House.
Gutknecht asserts that he voted to support an increase in the minimum wage.
Voting for a bill and actively supporting legislation are two distinctly different activities. Congressmen vote on a number of bills for the pure purpose of telling their constituents that they supported that concept while knowing fully well that legislation will never become law.
Fact : Gutknecht did vote to raise the minimum wage. Fact : In the same bill, he also voted to give tax reductions ranging from timber sales to inheritance taxes.
Would you tell me how important increasing the minimum wage was to Gutknecht based on the first line of his August 28th press release.
Washington, DC -Representative Gil Gutknecht (MN-01) today voted with his colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to pass the Estate Tax Extension and Tax Relief Act of 2006, which provides permanent estate tax (better known as the death tax) relief.
The precise bill is H.R.5970 : Estate Tax and Extension of Tax Relief Act of 2006
( Introduced 7/28/06 and passed 7/29/06)
Title: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the unified credit against the estate tax to an exclusion equivalent of $5,000,000, to repeal the sunset provision for the estate and generation-skipping taxes, and to extend expiring provisions, and for other purposes.
Although passed by the House of Representatives, it would still have to be approved by the Senate and the President. When a bill is introduced and voted on within 24 hours, I think you can safely say “election-year gimmick”.
Now, if Gutknecht would truly be in favor of raising the minimum wage, he would work to pass H.R.2429 which is entitled : To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide for an increase in the Federal minimum wage.
That is a straightforward bill.
It was introduced on 5/18/2005 and has 144 co-sponsors
Since it has been held up by the Republican leadership, a discharge petition (#109-11) was started on 2/28/06 ... and although all four Minnesota Democratic Congressman signed the petition, none of the Minnesota Republicans did ... it should be noted that Republican Congressmen from other states did sign the petition ... but not Gil.
So here is the question for the next public debate : Congressman Gutknecht, will you sign the discharge petition and vote in support of H.R. 2429 - a straightforward bill which will increase the minimum wage?
So voters remember even when you hear the words “I approved this message” … ignore the message. Instead look at the complete voting record and any policy statements.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: Gutknecht’s Signature Issue But NOT Minnesotan Voters’
Although totally unscientific, Minnesota Public Radio interpreted voter survey data to determine what issues Minnesotans are most interested in this election. Immigration came in 8th.
Based on Gutknecht’s advertising campaign for re-election, illegal immigration is his top priority. [ WEBSTER’s DEFINITION : Advertising : 1: the action of calling something to the attention of the public especially by paid announcements so as to arouse a desire to buy or patronize: promote. MY DEFINITION : Magnify an issue for political gain especially when you have failed to perform in the past and offer no vision for the future. ]
Have you noticed that there has been no commercials being run in the Governor or US Senate race where illegal immigration is the topic?
What about the other US House races ? Of the competative races, immigration does not get top billing. The Oberstar-Grams the topic seems to be about jobs. The Bachmann-Wetterling race seems to be about moral values and taxes. The Kline-Rawley race seems to be about Iraq. In the non-competative districts, incumbents are talking about their issues that affect their constituents : Ramstad – Healthcare, Peterson – Ethanol and McCollum – Iraq.
The illegal immigration issue is not a Republican Party issue, but instead issue between a group of extermists versus Republicans and Democrats. Last week in Albert Lea, Gutknecht lashed out at the Senate calling it “the graveyard of all good ideas”. I suppose that is because the Senate Majority Leader, Republican Bill Frist, Norm Coleman and over 20 other Republican senators offered an opinion that differed with the extremist views of Tom Tancredo and Gil Gutknecht.
Consider the following statement from the Republican-endorsed candidate’s website for MN-5th District. “Regarding the eleven million illegal immigrants who are already here, it is impractical and unreasonable to consider widespread deportation. Instead, we need to integrate the majority of this population into our society. This does not mean amnesty. This means that we must screen these individuals (and consider deportation of those who have committed criminal acts), get those who need it into guest worker programs, and put these people on the path to legal immigration that every legal immigrant has had to follow.“
Gutknecht offers no solution for the 11 million people that are here. Many of those have come here over the 12 years that Gutknecht has been in Congress. This unwillingness to compromise with Republicans and Democrats has stalled legislation and left our borders unprotected. Gutknecht would rather encourage gridlock than engaged, thoughtful discussion.
SOURCES :
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2006/10/what_are_people.shtml
http://fineforcongress.org/immigration.htm
Based on Gutknecht’s advertising campaign for re-election, illegal immigration is his top priority. [ WEBSTER’s DEFINITION : Advertising : 1: the action of calling something to the attention of the public especially by paid announcements so as to arouse a desire to buy or patronize: promote. MY DEFINITION : Magnify an issue for political gain especially when you have failed to perform in the past and offer no vision for the future. ]
Have you noticed that there has been no commercials being run in the Governor or US Senate race where illegal immigration is the topic?
What about the other US House races ? Of the competative races, immigration does not get top billing. The Oberstar-Grams the topic seems to be about jobs. The Bachmann-Wetterling race seems to be about moral values and taxes. The Kline-Rawley race seems to be about Iraq. In the non-competative districts, incumbents are talking about their issues that affect their constituents : Ramstad – Healthcare, Peterson – Ethanol and McCollum – Iraq.
The illegal immigration issue is not a Republican Party issue, but instead issue between a group of extermists versus Republicans and Democrats. Last week in Albert Lea, Gutknecht lashed out at the Senate calling it “the graveyard of all good ideas”. I suppose that is because the Senate Majority Leader, Republican Bill Frist, Norm Coleman and over 20 other Republican senators offered an opinion that differed with the extremist views of Tom Tancredo and Gil Gutknecht.
Consider the following statement from the Republican-endorsed candidate’s website for MN-5th District. “Regarding the eleven million illegal immigrants who are already here, it is impractical and unreasonable to consider widespread deportation. Instead, we need to integrate the majority of this population into our society. This does not mean amnesty. This means that we must screen these individuals (and consider deportation of those who have committed criminal acts), get those who need it into guest worker programs, and put these people on the path to legal immigration that every legal immigrant has had to follow.“
Gutknecht offers no solution for the 11 million people that are here. Many of those have come here over the 12 years that Gutknecht has been in Congress. This unwillingness to compromise with Republicans and Democrats has stalled legislation and left our borders unprotected. Gutknecht would rather encourage gridlock than engaged, thoughtful discussion.
SOURCES :
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2006/10/what_are_people.shtml
http://fineforcongress.org/immigration.htm
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
State of Denial – Gutknecht Style
During his October 12th campaign rally at Minnesota State Mankato, Gil Gutknecht observed that it is the best of times stating "If there was ever a time and place to be alive it would be here and now."
Looking at the political world in a positive perspective was an undercurrent of Gutknecht's speech: citing progress "in what the president calls 'the war on terrorism'”; observing during his Iraq visit “an oasis of peace and prosperity" in the Kurdish area; and in Iran, there is a new generation of young people that Gutknecht said loves America.
Wow, that’s pretty positive. As happy as he saw the world on Thursday, by Friday, things looked a little different from the Congressman's world viewpoint.
In his October 13th eline, Gutknecht addresses the North Korea situation :
“Earlier this week, North Korea announced that it had conducted a successful nuclear test. If this claim is proven true, it would be the first nuclear bomb detonated since June 1998. We are working to confirm North Korea's claim. This threat is a terror tactic that endangers our international community.
It's a very scary world we live …”
I will address Korea later, but for the purpose of this commentary, my only question is : if Gutknecht is so positive, why are all his campaign ads so negative ?
Based on his self-approved commercials currently running on TV and radio, illegal immigration is his biggest concern. In the commercials, he makes a number of assertions including the impact to Social Security funding. This claim is not unique to Gutknecht, as locally we see it in Mark Kennedy’s commercials also. In fact at least 29 GOP ads have been run nationally using these claims.
As such the Annenberg School did an analysis of these assertions … and it is to put it mildly, they found them to be “misleading”.
The analysis states : “Nobody's proposing paying benefits to illegals, not until and unless they become US citizens or are granted legal status.”
The current law already allows illegal workers to get Social Security credit for the taxes they pay while illegal, if and when they become citizens or gain legal permission to work.
There were changes offered in the Senate version of the immigration reform bill that would have addressed the Social Security issue, but those changes were not included in the final version. In May, the Senate version passed 62-36 with Norm Coleman and 22 other Republicans voting in support.
The problem that Gutknecht has with Immigration Reform is not with the Democrats, but with his own fellow Republicans. Once again, I must ask, if this is his biggest concern, why have Gutknecht and the House not conferred with the Senate to resolve these bills? If an overwhelming majority of Senators believe this is good legislation, how can he claim that anyone that doesn’t agree with him is out of the mainstream and not representing Minnesota values?
He’s in a state of denial.
Sources :
http://www.factcheck.org/article447.html
http://www.startribune.com/10113/story/742015.html
http://www.msureporter.com/media/storage/paper937/news/2006/10/17/LocalandStateNews/Elephant.Rally-2372033.shtml?norewrite200610180722&sourcedomain=www.msureporter.com
Looking at the political world in a positive perspective was an undercurrent of Gutknecht's speech: citing progress "in what the president calls 'the war on terrorism'”; observing during his Iraq visit “an oasis of peace and prosperity" in the Kurdish area; and in Iran, there is a new generation of young people that Gutknecht said loves America.
Wow, that’s pretty positive. As happy as he saw the world on Thursday, by Friday, things looked a little different from the Congressman's world viewpoint.
In his October 13th eline, Gutknecht addresses the North Korea situation :
“Earlier this week, North Korea announced that it had conducted a successful nuclear test. If this claim is proven true, it would be the first nuclear bomb detonated since June 1998. We are working to confirm North Korea's claim. This threat is a terror tactic that endangers our international community.
It's a very scary world we live …”
I will address Korea later, but for the purpose of this commentary, my only question is : if Gutknecht is so positive, why are all his campaign ads so negative ?
Based on his self-approved commercials currently running on TV and radio, illegal immigration is his biggest concern. In the commercials, he makes a number of assertions including the impact to Social Security funding. This claim is not unique to Gutknecht, as locally we see it in Mark Kennedy’s commercials also. In fact at least 29 GOP ads have been run nationally using these claims.
As such the Annenberg School did an analysis of these assertions … and it is to put it mildly, they found them to be “misleading”.
The analysis states : “Nobody's proposing paying benefits to illegals, not until and unless they become US citizens or are granted legal status.”
The current law already allows illegal workers to get Social Security credit for the taxes they pay while illegal, if and when they become citizens or gain legal permission to work.
There were changes offered in the Senate version of the immigration reform bill that would have addressed the Social Security issue, but those changes were not included in the final version. In May, the Senate version passed 62-36 with Norm Coleman and 22 other Republicans voting in support.
The problem that Gutknecht has with Immigration Reform is not with the Democrats, but with his own fellow Republicans. Once again, I must ask, if this is his biggest concern, why have Gutknecht and the House not conferred with the Senate to resolve these bills? If an overwhelming majority of Senators believe this is good legislation, how can he claim that anyone that doesn’t agree with him is out of the mainstream and not representing Minnesota values?
He’s in a state of denial.
Sources :
http://www.factcheck.org/article447.html
http://www.startribune.com/10113/story/742015.html
http://www.msureporter.com/media/storage/paper937/news/2006/10/17/LocalandStateNews/Elephant.Rally-2372033.shtml?norewrite200610180722&sourcedomain=www.msureporter.com
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Gutknecht Points Finger at Republican Failures
My Mother, rest her soul, taught me many lessons including NEVER Point your Finger at anyone. And the explanation of that admonishment was “remember, you’ve got three fingers pointed back at you.”
Congressman Gutknecht is running an attack ad pointing a finger Tim Walz over border security, yet it seems to me that he is also pointing three fingers at the Republican Party.
The ad starts off with a quote allegedly from President Ronald Reagan “A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation.” [NOTE : I say allegedly because I cannot find a source for these exact words … it may be a reincarnation of another Reagan quote "A nation without borders is not a nation."] The ad goes on to cite impacts to Social Security benefits and all sorts of other horrors that could happen.
First comment, I would suggest rather than allowing Gutknecht to interpret Walz position, why not read Walz’s position paper available on his website. http://www.timwalz.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7BF4087AC5-328C-4413-893C-AA89215E9960%7D&DE=%7B2143EBF3-E3D1-4181-950C-A903804D7F94%7D
Now, to those three fingers.
FINGER # 1. Although Reagan is an icon to many Republicans and converted many Democrats into Republicans, it was President Reagan who signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) which legalized 3 million aliens. The theory of IRCA was that by legalizing the country’s undocumented population and then creating a stronger enforcement system, we would end illegal immigration. IRCA created the I-9 forms that every employer must check to ensure that an employee is authorized to work in the US. Included in that legislation, the federal government mandated that all amnesty applicants spend 40 hours in English language, history and civics instruction.
Based on the on-going debate and the estimated over 11 million illegal immigrations currently in the country, it is fair to say that IRCA did not work.
FINGER # 2. The illegal aliens issue has been known for years and President Bush offered his own support for guest workers and a route to citizenship for existing residents. Bush's plan includes support for the State Department package called "totalization." That is a bureaucratic code word for a plan to make illegal aliens eligible to receive Social Security benefits even though they committed fraud by using a false Social Security number. In one version of "totalization," the foreign workers would be given credit toward U.S. Social Security benefits for years they worked in a foreign country when they did not pay into our system.
The Bush idea, the McCain idea, the Tancredo idea and many more ideas have created legislative gridlock. The House passed a version. The Senate passed a different version. Instead of resolving the issue in conference committee, the House (yes, that’s Gutknecht’s group) decided to stall by holding “listening sessions” around the country … or to make sure that there was a campaign issue for November’s elections.
As a point of clarification, Bush, McCain and Tancredo are all Republicans. The Senate and the House are both controlled by Republicans. Further, illegal immigrates generally use false social security numbers, which means that those dollars fund the social security reserve but the worker never gets to claim the benefits … and the social security reserve fund has been used to help offset the current budget deficit.
Based on the fact that the issue has been known for years and the Republicans have been in control of the government for the past six years, it is fair to say that the Republicans are not resolving the issue. If Gutknecht has a complaint, his complaint is more so with the Republicans in the Senate and President Bush.
FINGER #3. Control of the borders is not only an entrance for illegal immigrants but also a concern for terrorist activity.
The 9/11 Commission reported that all 19 hijackers successfully entered the country through regulated entries. False passports and overstayed visas are problems that do not appear to be a concern for Congressman Gutknecht.
Since 9/11/01, ABC News packed 15 pounds of depleted uranium in a steel pipe with a lead lining in a suitcase that sailed through customs undetected … not once, but twice.
For three straight years after 9/11, Bush did not include any monies in his budget for port security.
During the Cheney-Edwards Vice-Presidential debate, Cheney said “the biggest threat we face today is the possibility of terrorist smuggling a nuclear weapon or biological agent into one of our own cities and threatening the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans.”
Al Queda has demonstrated the capacity to use watercraft as weapons (remember the USS Cole was attacked when a small boat was used as a weapon).
So, we see the problems and it should not take much imagination to see what a terrorist could do. Imagine smuggling a bio or chemical or nuclear device in a ship container. Just by exploding that container on ship … for example in a tanker at anchor … might wreak havoc on petroleum ports. Or if a large vessel was commandeer, it could be used as a bludgeon knocking out bridge abutments and blocking shipping channels.
The 9/11 Commission has made recommendations and issued follow-up grades in December 2005.
Grade of C- for a National Strategy for Transportation Security
Grade of F for Airline passenger pre-screening
Grade of D for Airline screening at commercial airports
Grade of D for Airline cargo screening.
This is a legitimate campaign issue … but not one the Republicans which to recognize as their own shortcomings are evident. Maria Cantwell is using port security as her main issue for reelection as Senator representing the port state of Washington … polling indicates that she is winning because she is exposing the Republicans failings.
Based on the above, it is clear that Congress is not securing the borders.
My advice for Congressman Gutknecht, don’t point any fingers.
Congressman Gutknecht is running an attack ad pointing a finger Tim Walz over border security, yet it seems to me that he is also pointing three fingers at the Republican Party.
The ad starts off with a quote allegedly from President Ronald Reagan “A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation.” [NOTE : I say allegedly because I cannot find a source for these exact words … it may be a reincarnation of another Reagan quote "A nation without borders is not a nation."] The ad goes on to cite impacts to Social Security benefits and all sorts of other horrors that could happen.
First comment, I would suggest rather than allowing Gutknecht to interpret Walz position, why not read Walz’s position paper available on his website. http://www.timwalz.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7BF4087AC5-328C-4413-893C-AA89215E9960%7D&DE=%7B2143EBF3-E3D1-4181-950C-A903804D7F94%7D
Now, to those three fingers.
FINGER # 1. Although Reagan is an icon to many Republicans and converted many Democrats into Republicans, it was President Reagan who signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) which legalized 3 million aliens. The theory of IRCA was that by legalizing the country’s undocumented population and then creating a stronger enforcement system, we would end illegal immigration. IRCA created the I-9 forms that every employer must check to ensure that an employee is authorized to work in the US. Included in that legislation, the federal government mandated that all amnesty applicants spend 40 hours in English language, history and civics instruction.
Based on the on-going debate and the estimated over 11 million illegal immigrations currently in the country, it is fair to say that IRCA did not work.
FINGER # 2. The illegal aliens issue has been known for years and President Bush offered his own support for guest workers and a route to citizenship for existing residents. Bush's plan includes support for the State Department package called "totalization." That is a bureaucratic code word for a plan to make illegal aliens eligible to receive Social Security benefits even though they committed fraud by using a false Social Security number. In one version of "totalization," the foreign workers would be given credit toward U.S. Social Security benefits for years they worked in a foreign country when they did not pay into our system.
The Bush idea, the McCain idea, the Tancredo idea and many more ideas have created legislative gridlock. The House passed a version. The Senate passed a different version. Instead of resolving the issue in conference committee, the House (yes, that’s Gutknecht’s group) decided to stall by holding “listening sessions” around the country … or to make sure that there was a campaign issue for November’s elections.
As a point of clarification, Bush, McCain and Tancredo are all Republicans. The Senate and the House are both controlled by Republicans. Further, illegal immigrates generally use false social security numbers, which means that those dollars fund the social security reserve but the worker never gets to claim the benefits … and the social security reserve fund has been used to help offset the current budget deficit.
Based on the fact that the issue has been known for years and the Republicans have been in control of the government for the past six years, it is fair to say that the Republicans are not resolving the issue. If Gutknecht has a complaint, his complaint is more so with the Republicans in the Senate and President Bush.
FINGER #3. Control of the borders is not only an entrance for illegal immigrants but also a concern for terrorist activity.
The 9/11 Commission reported that all 19 hijackers successfully entered the country through regulated entries. False passports and overstayed visas are problems that do not appear to be a concern for Congressman Gutknecht.
Since 9/11/01, ABC News packed 15 pounds of depleted uranium in a steel pipe with a lead lining in a suitcase that sailed through customs undetected … not once, but twice.
For three straight years after 9/11, Bush did not include any monies in his budget for port security.
During the Cheney-Edwards Vice-Presidential debate, Cheney said “the biggest threat we face today is the possibility of terrorist smuggling a nuclear weapon or biological agent into one of our own cities and threatening the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans.”
Al Queda has demonstrated the capacity to use watercraft as weapons (remember the USS Cole was attacked when a small boat was used as a weapon).
So, we see the problems and it should not take much imagination to see what a terrorist could do. Imagine smuggling a bio or chemical or nuclear device in a ship container. Just by exploding that container on ship … for example in a tanker at anchor … might wreak havoc on petroleum ports. Or if a large vessel was commandeer, it could be used as a bludgeon knocking out bridge abutments and blocking shipping channels.
The 9/11 Commission has made recommendations and issued follow-up grades in December 2005.
Grade of C- for a National Strategy for Transportation Security
Grade of F for Airline passenger pre-screening
Grade of D for Airline screening at commercial airports
Grade of D for Airline cargo screening.
This is a legitimate campaign issue … but not one the Republicans which to recognize as their own shortcomings are evident. Maria Cantwell is using port security as her main issue for reelection as Senator representing the port state of Washington … polling indicates that she is winning because she is exposing the Republicans failings.
Based on the above, it is clear that Congress is not securing the borders.
My advice for Congressman Gutknecht, don’t point any fingers.
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Money makes the man - How do Congressmen invest their monies?
When Money Speaks, the Truth is Silent ... old Russian proverb.
Mark Kennedy came out swinging at Amy Klobuchar during the State Fair debate over her investments in Big Oil and Pharmaceutical companies. This was just one of many stupid campaign foibles that Kennedy has tried. Yes, Klobuchar does have investments … through her retirement fund … which she does not have any control over how the fund manager invests her (and thousand of others') payroll contributions.
But now, OpenSecrets.org has Federal employees' personal financial disclosure forms online. Lo and behold, upon checking Congressman Kennedy, we find his largest publicly traded asset is a mutual fund – Fidelity Spartan 500 Index. Anybody want to guess the number one asset in that fund? Can you say ExxonMobil ? Based on the fact that 3.21 % of the fund’s assets are in XOM, Kennedy owns somewhere between $3,210 and $6,420 of ExxonMobil. Now, I don’t think that Kennedy would be influenced by such a paltry amount, yet he’s attacking Klobuchar who has less control than he does. Remember, Klobuchar’s monies are in a retirement fund … Kennedy’s is in his personal portfolio. In theory, Kennedy could decide to buy/sell the mutual fund based on the fund’s objectives and portfolio.
It should be recognized that Kennedy’s portfolio is currently entirely invested in mutual funds. Using mutual funds minimizes any potential influence.
However, when I checked Gil Gutknecht’s form, I have some concerns. He does invest directly in companies. His largest holdings are in BellSouth and Fastenal. Both of these companies are Fortune 500 companies.
Fastenal is a Winona based company and one that has seen its share price double in the past five years. Fastenal’s primary business is nuts and bolts and other MRO items. There is probably little direct legislative action that Fastenal’s business would need the influence of a Congressman. Back in the late 90’s Congress enacted legislation when it was concerned about the quality of foreign produced fasteners and required testing laboratories be used. DCAA (government inspectors) pay a lot of attention to nuts and bolts in a manufactured product … stresses impact performance and if the product is used in a space shuttle, Navy ship, etc, lives could be at stake. Based on Fastenal’s standing as an employer in the First District, I would think that they would get pretty easy access to the Congressman, regardless of him being a stockholder. Yet, it does not look good. With an investment of over $30,000, the how, when and why Gutknecht bought the stock should be disclosed.
BellSouth is a name that most would know since it was created by the government break-up of American Telephone and Telegraph Company. With Gutknecht's stock investment value at over $50,000, this IS a concern. Historically, investing in telephone companies was considered a safe investment for retirement, but with today’s everchanging technologies, that is not the same environment. Most troubling is that Gutknecht is the Telecommunications Task Force Co-Chairman. In his June 23, 2006 eline, he trumpeted the House passage of HR 5252 which changes the rules of how the Internet operates and allows telephone companies to charge fees and determine what information is made available. Despite appeals by such groups as Christian Coalition of America and Gun Owners of America, Gutknecht listened to the telecommunications industry and the reaction from the telecommunications industry was quick. BellSouth immediately announced a change in policy to charge user fees, even though the bill had not been passed by the Senate. Reaction from customers was swift and on August 25, it rescinded the user fee charge … but the point is that BellSouth tried, and who knows if the Senate had passed the bill, if they would have rescinded the fee charge.
Additionally, BellSouth Corp through their Political Action Committee gave Gutknecht $1,000 for his 2006 primary campaign. (LOL … for his primary campaign???? … did anyone think that Greg Mikkelson was going to beat Gutknecht???).
When a politician has earned his monies from family businesses or personal involvement, I can understand the reluctance to divest those monies. But a politician should avoid - at all costs - making investments in individual stocks. Senators Bill Frist and George Allen have been in the headlines based on how they have handled Blind Trusts. If I were an elected official, I would only use large mutual funds.
Kennedy’s Personal Disclosure Form
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/CIDsummary.asp?CID=N00009670&year=2005
Gutknecht’s Personal Disclosure Form
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/CIDsummary.asp?CID=N00004527&year=2005
Mark Kennedy came out swinging at Amy Klobuchar during the State Fair debate over her investments in Big Oil and Pharmaceutical companies. This was just one of many stupid campaign foibles that Kennedy has tried. Yes, Klobuchar does have investments … through her retirement fund … which she does not have any control over how the fund manager invests her (and thousand of others') payroll contributions.
But now, OpenSecrets.org has Federal employees' personal financial disclosure forms online. Lo and behold, upon checking Congressman Kennedy, we find his largest publicly traded asset is a mutual fund – Fidelity Spartan 500 Index. Anybody want to guess the number one asset in that fund? Can you say ExxonMobil ? Based on the fact that 3.21 % of the fund’s assets are in XOM, Kennedy owns somewhere between $3,210 and $6,420 of ExxonMobil. Now, I don’t think that Kennedy would be influenced by such a paltry amount, yet he’s attacking Klobuchar who has less control than he does. Remember, Klobuchar’s monies are in a retirement fund … Kennedy’s is in his personal portfolio. In theory, Kennedy could decide to buy/sell the mutual fund based on the fund’s objectives and portfolio.
It should be recognized that Kennedy’s portfolio is currently entirely invested in mutual funds. Using mutual funds minimizes any potential influence.
However, when I checked Gil Gutknecht’s form, I have some concerns. He does invest directly in companies. His largest holdings are in BellSouth and Fastenal. Both of these companies are Fortune 500 companies.
Fastenal is a Winona based company and one that has seen its share price double in the past five years. Fastenal’s primary business is nuts and bolts and other MRO items. There is probably little direct legislative action that Fastenal’s business would need the influence of a Congressman. Back in the late 90’s Congress enacted legislation when it was concerned about the quality of foreign produced fasteners and required testing laboratories be used. DCAA (government inspectors) pay a lot of attention to nuts and bolts in a manufactured product … stresses impact performance and if the product is used in a space shuttle, Navy ship, etc, lives could be at stake. Based on Fastenal’s standing as an employer in the First District, I would think that they would get pretty easy access to the Congressman, regardless of him being a stockholder. Yet, it does not look good. With an investment of over $30,000, the how, when and why Gutknecht bought the stock should be disclosed.
BellSouth is a name that most would know since it was created by the government break-up of American Telephone and Telegraph Company. With Gutknecht's stock investment value at over $50,000, this IS a concern. Historically, investing in telephone companies was considered a safe investment for retirement, but with today’s everchanging technologies, that is not the same environment. Most troubling is that Gutknecht is the Telecommunications Task Force Co-Chairman. In his June 23, 2006 eline, he trumpeted the House passage of HR 5252 which changes the rules of how the Internet operates and allows telephone companies to charge fees and determine what information is made available. Despite appeals by such groups as Christian Coalition of America and Gun Owners of America, Gutknecht listened to the telecommunications industry and the reaction from the telecommunications industry was quick. BellSouth immediately announced a change in policy to charge user fees, even though the bill had not been passed by the Senate. Reaction from customers was swift and on August 25, it rescinded the user fee charge … but the point is that BellSouth tried, and who knows if the Senate had passed the bill, if they would have rescinded the fee charge.
Additionally, BellSouth Corp through their Political Action Committee gave Gutknecht $1,000 for his 2006 primary campaign. (LOL … for his primary campaign???? … did anyone think that Greg Mikkelson was going to beat Gutknecht???).
When a politician has earned his monies from family businesses or personal involvement, I can understand the reluctance to divest those monies. But a politician should avoid - at all costs - making investments in individual stocks. Senators Bill Frist and George Allen have been in the headlines based on how they have handled Blind Trusts. If I were an elected official, I would only use large mutual funds.
Kennedy’s Personal Disclosure Form
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/CIDsummary.asp?CID=N00009670&year=2005
Gutknecht’s Personal Disclosure Form
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/CIDsummary.asp?CID=N00004527&year=2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![Vote 60](http://img%20src=http://img.inkfrog.com/pix/ravendog/clic.gif%20border=”0"){kind=link}