MN-02 : Kline Eerily Silent After Taxpayer Victory on JSF Engine

It seems that John Kline (R-MN-02) takes every opportunity to alert voters to Washington’s Reckless Spending … but not this week when the Department of Defense issued a stop-work order

DOD Issues Stop Work Order on the JSF F136 Extra Engine Program

The Department of Defense (DoD) today issued a stop work order in connection with the Joint Strike Fighter extra engine program.
The administration and the DoD strongly oppose the extra engine program, as reflected in the President’s fiscal 2012 budget proposal that was recently submitted to Congress, which does not include funding for the program. In our view it is a waste of taxpayer money that can be used to fund higher Departmental priorities, and should be ended now.
The House of Representatives has recently expressed its own opposition to the extra engine in its passage of H.R. 1 including the adoption of the Rooney Amendment which removed all fiscal 2011 funding for this program. In addition, funding for the extra engine was not authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2011, enacted in January. In light of these recent events, Congressional prerogatives, and the administration’s view of the program, we have concluded that a stop work order is now the correct course. The stop work order will remain in place pending final resolution of the program’s future, for a period not to exceed 90 days, unless extended by agreement of the government and the contractor.

Some considered this to be a victory for the TaxEnoughAlready movement that advocate Fiscal Responsible operation of OUR government.

Yes, some did issue press releases …
Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) :
I have long called for the elimination of funding for a second F-35 jet engine which is a wasteful use of taxpayer money," said Senator Collins. "As we begin to tackle the mounting debt, we must eliminate programs like this that are duplicative and unnecessary. I applaud the Secretary of Defense's decision to halt further development of the extra engine."

Congressman John Larson (D-CT-01) “I applaud Secretary Gates for following through on his commitment to end the Joint Strike Fighter’s duplicative ‘extra’ engine program,” Congressman Larson said. “This program is the epitome of government waste, one that the Secretary himself referred to as an ‘unnecessary and extravagant expense.’ Today’s decision will save the American people nearly a million dollars a day and bring to close an issue that has been debated in Congress for more than 4 years. I hope that my colleagues will now join me in focusing our attention on more pressing national security matters.

Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) “The termination of the alternate engine program is an essential step toward focusing our scarce defense dollars on the programs that will actually help keep America safer, ” Lieberman said. “As American service members fight to defend our freedoms and safeguard human life across the world, I hope that today’s decision will allow Congress to set this long-debated matter aside and move on to the critical business of the American people.”

That’s correct, Republicans, Democrats and Independent members of Congress laud this ending of another example of Washington’s Reckless Spending.

So, how did this happen.
First, let’s give credit to the man who put the nail in the coffin by corralling 47 freshman House members to score a 233–198 vote on an amendment that scuttled the program … Congressman Tom Rooney (R-FL-16)

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my amendment striking funding for an extra engine for the F-35 fighter Jet to immediately save American taxpayers $450 million dollars.
“It is dubious why Congress continues to fund a program that the Air Force, Navy, the Marine Corps and Department of Defense adamantly state they do not want. Just today, Defense Secretary Gates called the program “an unnecessary and extravagant expense” and stated that this money is needed for higher priority defense efforts. As we decide which cuts to make in our defense, ones that won’t hurt our troops today, this should be at the top of the list.
“Mr. Speaker, the American people sent us here to change how Washington works. This amendment is a perfect opportunity to show your constituents that business as usual in Washington is over. I urge my colleagues to follow through with their promises, to listen to the voters on why they sent us here, and vote to strike funding for this expensive and unnecessary program. Thank you and I yield back the balance of my time.”

Normally, Mr. Kline likes to promote these successes …. but on the F136 alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter, Mr. Kline was eerily silent.

Why because Mr. Kline voted to keep the funding going … as did potential President Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) and Raymond Cravaack (R-MN-08).

The Pentagon opposed this program … as did the Bush Administration and the Obama Administration, yet Congress kept funding it.

The choice should have been clear … support John Boehner (R-OH-08) whose chief beneficiary, General Electric is a major employer in Ohio … or support Fiscal Responsible spending.

This vote tells voters who are the Faux Fiscal Conservatives that are working for the Washington powerbrokers … who are truly concerned about addressing wasteful spending.

THANKS to Tim Walz (D-MN-01), Erik Paulsen (R-MN-03), Betty McCollum (D-MN-04), Keith Ellison (D-MN-05) and Colin Peterson (D-MN-07) for voting to end this wasteful program.

MN-02 : Kline Willing to Risk 3M Jobs to Cut Corporate Welfare ?

Timing is everything in politics.

An issue can be ignored until it’s time to be used to make political hay.

Some would say that the Republican current fixation with deficit spending is an issue whose “timing” will help this November.

So it is that when John Kline posted on his website : Congressman John Kline is inviting Minnesotans to help Washington end its addiction to wasteful spending, that I was not surprised. I expected to see the typical stuff that he likes to talk about … like an earmark added to the 2006 Appropriations Bill (HR 3058) for the Sparta Teapot Museum in North Carolina. But NO, Mr. Kline actually asked about ending a program that is more Corporate Welfare than a Congressman bringing “home the bacon.”

Of the four choices, the biggest dollar program with a projected savings of $2 Billion is : “Eliminate funding for a green government project that the private sector is already leading: The “FreedomCAR” and fuel partnership program is a duplicative program already being implemented by the private sector.”

FreedomCAR ? Hmmmm… I will bet that you never heard of the FreedomCAR, but since Freedom is in the name, somehow you are probably thinking that this is a Republican-themed program. The C-A-R in FreedomCAR is an acronym for Cooperative Automotive Research, but what’s the Freedom … simple … to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and the foreign dictators that reap monies off our dependence. A goal that every American can agree with … and also agree that we have a long way to go to get there.

The program was created during John Kline’s first term in Congress … that’s when the Republicans controlled the House and George Bush announced the program in his 2003 State of the Union address. Funny, how we forgot about that … but now, the “timing” has a Democrat in the White House and Democrats controlling the House.
Yes, “timing” is everything … especially since President Obama just drove Chevrolet Volt during his tour of the Detroit-Hamtramck assembly plant last week.

This program subsidizes research by major automakers for developing their own versions of hybrid, plug-in hybrid (PHEV), and fuel cell vehicles. The subsidies also fund private R&D of light- weight materials, electronic power control, and electric drive motors.

One of the main components in these plug-in hybrid vehicles is the battery … since PHEVs have the potential to displace a large amount of gasoline by delivering up to 40 miles of electric range without recharging— new batteries would have to be developed. The Department of Energy awarded 3M in Saint Paul up to $1.14 million (total DOE/industry cost share: $ 2.28 million) over two years to screen nickel/manganese/cobalt (NMC) cathode materials through building and testing of small-sized cells.

I do not know the status of 3M’s project, nor how many jobs were created or retained, but the objective sure sounds reasonable.

Working with corporate interests is not new … when President Bush gave monies to the auto industry, he said : “In the midst of a financial crisis and a recession, allowing the U.S. auto industry to collapse is not a responsible course of action." The monies for this came from the TARP legislation that John Kline voted for. Ah, “timing” is everything … while President Obama’s so-called bailout of the GM and Chrysler is now getting repaid, the Bush monies will never be returned.


What seems odd though is the “timing” and what project Mr. Kline included in his choices.

Ending Corporate Welfare is fiscally responsible. Yet, this project is one that may take government incentives from our goal of being energy independent.

The question is why did Mr. Kline and the Republicans pick the FreedomCAR project and not some other Corporate Welfare programs.

The term “Corporate Welfare” actually has many components.

How about ethanol subsidies which cost the US Treasury $6 billion in 2009 ?
Ethanol subsidies are just the tip of the money tree. "Farm subsidies are America's largest corporate welfare program," said Brian Riedl, an analyst at the Heritage Foundation. The question is why federal money flows primarily to growers of five crops—corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton and rice—while livestock, poultry and produce farmers get by without subsidy checks? After the media reported that at least 2,702 millionaires received farm payments from 2003 to 2006 (including such hobby-farmers as Scottie Pippin of the NBA fame and a number of family members of Congress including Minnesota’s Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06), the 2008 Farm bill prohibited all subsidies to anyone whose non-farm adjusted gross income exceeds $500,000. The Obama administration said its proposed farm subsidy cuts would save $2.3 billion over 10 years. Its new budget proposal would lower the cap on direct payments from $40,000 per person per year to $30,000. It would also reduce income eligibility limits over three years to $250,000 for non-farm adjusted gross income.

As easy to see Corporate Welfare in the Ag sector, there is a larger sector that is prone to largesse … and that’s is processed by a House Committee that Mr. Kline sits … The House Armed Forces Committee. Interestingly, Mr. Kline makes the argument the FreedomCAR program is a “duplicative program.” Hmmm. Why is Mr. Kline supportive of General Electric’s request for $1.8 - $2.9 billion required for an alternative engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter ? In essence, a “duplicative program.”

GE claims that its alternate engine will enable the government to have cost-saving competitions across the lifetime of the F-35 program, saving taxpayers billions of dollars. What it leaves out of its talking points is that the government would first have to pay for two production lines, two supply chains and two workforces to build the competing engines, and then split the annual buys between two teams in a way that would eliminate any economies of scale. Once fielded, the two engines would require separate sets of spare parts, separate maintenance procedures, and other redundant items that would increase rather than decrease the cost of operating the plane. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) during debate about whether to fund the alternate engine expressed concerns about having two redundant engines would increase the complexity of the program, potentially undercutting both affordability and readiness.

Lockheed chairman Robert Stevens has stated that the company expects the actual purchase price of each Air Force F-35 variant will be roughly the same as a current Lockheed F-16 or Boeing F/A-18. That would be about $60 million in today's dollars -- less than half the price of an F-22 Raptor -- and it includes all the necessary mission equipment. Remember that Mr. Kline supported an “earmark” to procure additional F-22 that the Pentagon does not want …. Oh, and the alternate engine was not requested by President Bush or President Obama or the DOD … it’s just Corporate Welfare being funded by Mr. Kline and his friends in Congress.


“Timing” is everything in politics … and this “Timing” reeks of a political stunt.
Cutting Corporate Welfare for the FreedomCAR maybe short-sighted. Developing the technology required to ween ourselves from foreign produced oil, will require decades of trial and error in which a variety of bridge technologies are phased in over time.
Cutting FreedomCAR funding may sound good for political purposes but not be a good strategic decision.

MN-02 : Kline - Penny UnWise, Pounds Foolish

Adage : "If you're not part of the solution, you must be part of the problem."

Major General Paul Monroe was called to testify before John Kline (R-MN-02) and the House Education and Labor Committee last week.
Major General Monroe was testifying on behalf of over 130 other retired generals, admirals and senior military leaders in calling on Congress to address an issue that “threatens to diminish our military strength and put our national security interests at risk. ”
In very compelling testimony, the situation was outlined :
--- At least 9 million young adults, or 27 percent of all young Americans ages 17 to 24, are too overweight to enlist. Since 1995, the proportion of candidates who failed their physical exams due to weight problems increased by a staggering 70 percent.
-- Every year, the military discharges over 1,200 first-term enlistees before their contracts are up because of weight problems; the military must then recruit and train their replacements at a cost of $50,000 for each man or woman, thus spending more than $60 million a year.
-- The journal Health Affairs reports that 80 percent of children who were overweight at ages 10-15 were obese at age 25.

Supporting these comments, former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, U.S. Army Generals John M. Shalikashvili and Hugh Shelton wrote : “Our school districts need the resources to offer our children more vegetables, fruits and whole grains as well as products with less sugar, sodium, fat and calories in school cafeterias and vending machines. Yes, this will mean increasing funding for child nutrition programs. But with our nation spending at least $75 billion a year on medical expenses related to obesity, we think these steps will pay off over the long term.”

The legislation in question is H.R.5504, the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act which is being crafted by Mr. Kline’s committee with Representative Todd Russell Platts (R-PA), ranking Member on the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities stating : “Given the serious fiscal challenges facing our country, we must ensure that we devote our limited resources to our nation's most urgent priorities. Providing nutritious meals and improving health standards for our nation's children, especially those most in need, are such priorities. I am pleased to join with Chairman George Miller and Chairwoman Carolyn McCarthy in sponsoring this important legislation."

However, Mr. Kline statement is less than accepting of the military’s plea : “We stand ready on this side of the aisle to reauthorize the programs and improve their effectiveness and efficiency.
What has given us pause, however, is the $8 billion price tag attached to this bill.
[SNIP]
But I hope we do not allow an important discussion about nutritional science and wellness policy reporting to detract from our larger obligation to prevent hunger and improve child nutrition responsibly.”
Mr. Kline is once again offering lip service … his job is to offer solutions … but instead he’s being an obstructionist.

First, this is not a free lunch … it will cost money … as it did when it was created as the National School Lunch Act of 1946. Then it was passed as a matter of national security – the military’s concern then was that malnourishment would render American youth unfit to defend the nation.
Mr. Kline’s using the $8 billion price tag does not acknowledge that it is actually over a ten year period, so that is $800 million a year. If $75 billion is spent on medical expenses related to obesity, then spending less than a billion should be a good preventative …sorta wisely spending a Penny today so that a Pound will not be needed tomorrow.

But if the Mr. Kline wants to find $800 million to offset it that should not really be a problem.
Here’s some suggestions.
--- Reduce payments in the Conservation Reserve Program or CRP. Few people outside of the farm belt have heard of this program, but for 25 years, CRP has been the backbone of the government’s welfare system for farmers. The program pays agriculture producers to take highly erosion-able lands out of production and plant it to some kind of cover vegetation—usually grass. The program currently covers 36 million acres or about 8 percent of all cropland.
Farmers elect to enroll in the program which pays a rental fee that averages about $50 an acre. Farmers typically sign 10 year contracts promising not to farm or even graze such lands. In 2007 the federal government paid $1.9 billion dollars to farmers and ranchers under this program -- something they should be doing anyway—which is to avoid farming highly erodible lands.

--- As Brian M. Riedl, of the Heritage Foundation wrote : “Lawmakers who are serious about fiscal restraint should consider farm subsidies one of the most justifiable places to find savings. These corporate welfare programs enrich agribusinesses and other non-farmers at the expense of family farmers, the farm economy, and taxpayers.”
Eligibility for farm subsidies is determined by crop, not by income or poverty standards. A glance at those who received farm subsidies in 2002 shows that many of them do not need federal dollars. Farm program benefits are highly concentrated in the hands of a small minority of subsidized individuals and operations, with the top 1 percent of beneficiaries claiming 17 percent of the crop subsidy benefits between 2003 and 2005. Twelve Fortune 500 companies received farm subsidies in 2002. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance's $2.3 million farm subsidy payment was by far the largest among these companies. The farm subsidies granted to these Fortune 500 companies since 1995 are--on average--70 times larger than those granted to the median farmer.
IF you need details of this program, Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06), Tom Latham (R-IA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Richard Lugar (R-IN) can probably give you personal stories ... since they have received subsidies in the past.

--- Of course, if you don’t want to impact Ag programs, there is always the “earmarks" that Congress has requested (i.e. F-18, F-22, C-17, etc.) but Pentagon has not requested … Tom Coburn (R-OK) wrote : Not counting the spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the “base” Pentagon budget has increased from $407 billion in 2001 to $553 billion for 2011 in inflation-adjusted dollars, according to the newest US defense budget data. Over the past decade, this means a cumulative total increase of almost $1 Trillion for the base DOD budget.

Why highlight Ag and military programs for possible cuts … because Mr. Faux Fiscal Conservative, John Kline voted for the Farm Bill and Republican-sponsored “earmarks”.
“Stop the Pork” is an effective campaign slogan, but Mr. Kline’s votes do not support his rhetoric.

Mr. Kline, the military says Obesity is a national security concern … Republicans recognize it … it’s time for YOU to work for solutions instead of being the obstructionist problem. It's time to quit hiding behind this faux fiscal conservative image ... it's time to invest wisely for America's future.

MN-06: Bachmann Benefits from Person of the Year

Time misses the mark naming it's Person of the Year -- Ben Bernanke.
It still missed on its runner-ups : Stanley McChrystal, the Chinese Worker, Nancy Pelosi, Usain Bolt ...
and then Time listed all The People Who Mattered :
• Neda Agha-Soltan
• Glenn Beck
• Lloyd Blankfein
• Rahm Emanuel
• Dr. Thomas Frieden
• Jon and Kate Gosselin
• Hamid Karzai
• Adam Lambert
• Jay Leno and David Letterman
• Bernie Madoff
• Alan Mulally
• Barack Obama
• Manny Pacquiao
• Sarah Palin
• Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart of Twilight
• Alex Rodriguez
• Olympia Snowe
• Sonia Sotomayor
• Chesley B. (Sully) Sullenberger III
• Taylor Swift
• The Twitter Guys
• Joe Wilson
• Tiger Woods
• Manuel Zelaya and Roberto Micheletti
• Zhou Xiaochuan

How could they miss the obvious choice ?

First off the list is Pattinson and Stewart … when they have to include a hint ( Twilight ), it is obvious that they have not made an impact regardless of how many cover shots they have done for Time’s sister publications People, EW, or InStyle.

Seeing Glenn Beck and Joe Wilson on the list should be a clue as to who the Person of the Year should be.
It’s not the figurehead talker but instead the people behind the curtain pulling the puppet’s strings.

The winner should be Tim Phillips.
If you don’t know Mr. Phillips by name, you know him by his creation … the grassroots’ political activist events … some have had minor success like the Ending Earmarks Express and some have had major press … like the Tea Party movement.

It is not uncommon to see Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann at these events … most recently last week at the Code Red Rally which by thier own accounts, the attendance was small … in the 5,000 range.
But Ms. Bachmann increased her profile after attaching herself to Mr. Phillips’ Congressional House Calls rally in November. According to Ms. Bachmann, “I was near despair” thinking that the House would pass health care reform. "I was thinking, 'It looks like this bill is going to go through.' But then I thought, 'This is it. This is the Super Bowl of Freedom.' " Then she heard about Mr. Phillips’s "Congressional House Calls", Bachmann said, "I just did a take-off on it."

2010 will be a big year for Tim Phillips. In Florida, there already is a registered political party named the "Tea Party" and is promising to run candidates against Republicans and Democrats in state and national races. Mr. Phillips has already made his imprint on political campaigns … most significantly with the television commercials question the patriotism of Senator Max Cleland (D-GA) who as a result of the ads is now known as Former Senator Cleland.

Which leads to the question for 2010 politics, will there be a formal Minnesota political party called the Tea Party and will Representative Bachmann be their first endorsed candidate ?

Runner-up to Mr. Phillips as Person of the Year, is the Health Care Lobbyists who are set to shatter their financial records. Many of the organizations involved posted six- and even seven-figure increases.
And if anyone is keeping tally, reported thus far for Representative Bachmann’s re-election campaign is $21,850 from the Pharmaceuticals/Health Products industry.

Mr. Phillips and the lobbyists game plan is simple … excite and anger … the result is that a vocal minority out-shouts a silent majority … and as their Queen – Representative Bachmann – appears in FOX television and various selected radio programs espousing whatever the puppeteer tells her to say.

MN-03 : Paulsen Joins Minority to Oppose Workers

Country First !
That was the message at the Republican National Convention held in Erik Paulsen’s back yard … yet, he seems to have rejected that idea.
The concept was simply expressed as putting the good of the Country ahead of personal ideology, state, or partisan interests.

No doubt that there many stark difference between the political parties and those differences are on display when roll call votes reflect party line votes.
But it’s the measure of “Country First” when a majority of both parties approve legislation.
But what stands out is when somebody stays in the minority to their party.
Increasingly, that is where voters will find Erik Paulsen.

Case in point … on Roll Call Vote 722 : Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009 a majority of Republicans (104) voted in favor of the legislation while sitting in the minority was Erik Paulsen.
A year earlier, when similar legislation was being considered (Roll Call 683 :Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2008) , Minnesota’s Third District was represented by someone else … Republican Jim Ramstad … who joined with 141 other Republicans to approve it.

Representative Paulsen is well aware of the national employment situation as he wrote on his 10/2/09 blog entry : “U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics report of an increase in the unemployment rate to 9.8 percent – a 26-year high – is bad news for American workers and their families. The U.S. lost another 263,000 jobs in September and 5.4 million workers have now been unemployed for 27 weeks or longer.”

Looking at our state, about 120,300 Minnesotans lost jobs and went on unemployment from Jan. 1 to Aug. 31 while an estimated 1,000 people currently exhaust unemployment benefits each week, said Dan McElroy, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED). State figures show that for every job vacancy, there are 7.7 people looking for work.

Representative Paulsen knows the problem exists.
Representative Paulsen believes that jobs must be created.
Representative Paulsen misses the point that to create jobs, demand … customer demand must be there … but too many people are curtailing demands because they are working less hours, are in fear of losing their jobs, or do not have jobs. The simple fact is that businesses want customers ... and after they get customers, then they will rehire.
The need is now … people want to work … but if there is an oversupply of workers, does the Country want to encourage more foreclosures, more people scrimping on healthcare needs, and draining food shelves ?


When the question of extended unemployment benefits was being voted on in 2008, it was cited that “Extending unemployment benefits has the potential to help the entire American economy. According to the Congressional Budget Office, it is one of the most cost-effective and fast-acting ways to stimulate the economy because the money is spent quickly. For every $1 spent on unemployment benefits generates $1.64 in new economic demand.”
Denying extension of benefits actually hurts the country.
At that time, the complaint was about Republicans John Kline (MN-02) and Michelle Bachmann (MN-06)] and their failure to support this increase … now Erik Paulsen has joined the minority.
As pointed out in that commentary, the Federal Unemployment Tax Trust Fund is over-funded … these funds were saved for this rainy day. Business paid into the fund, so that if there would be a downturn, that their workers could get some money to pay for basic needs … and keep local businesses going.

In the past, Representative John Kline has said federal unemployment benefits are needed only when there are desperate economic conditions … well, Represenative Kline acknowledged on February 13, 2009 that “our nation facing economic distress” as evident by Le Sueur County unemployment rising to 10.1 percent. Yep, in case you were wondering, Representatives Kline and Bachmann voted again against this extension.

Why ?

Let’s look at what Country First is supposed to preclude : personal ideology, state, or partisan interests.

First, Representative Paulsen voices a personal ideology of government spending needs to be curtailed … okay, but these funds are coming from an overfunded FUT Trust Fund. Representative Paulson can fall on the old line that “such assistance threatens to stem the economic upturn” if businesses have to pay higher taxes, but since the monies are already in the FUT Trust Fund, that argument is invalid. Representative Paulsen’s opposition may please a segment of the Republican faithful, thus his opposition may be more to ensure that he does not have a primary challenger from within his party.
Representative Paulsen fails on this test putting his personal ideology (and self-interest) over Country First.

Second, it is true that “today”, only 22 states will benefit from this extension and Minnesota is not one. And that is why this is good legislation … there is a high threshold … helping only those states that really need it now … but the forecast is that Minnesota will soon be in that group. Also, when Federal benefits cease, there is an impact on state resources.
Representative Paulsen fails on this test putting his state over Country First.

Third, partisan interests does not apply as a majority of Republicans supported these extensions.
Representative Paulsen fails on this test.


In my view, Representative Paulsen is not putting Country First … much less his constituents and makes me appreciate more how great a Congressman Jim Ramstad was.

What would Thomas Jefferson think of Bachmann and Coburn comments ?

Revolution talk is in the air.

Last week, the Tulsa Beacon reported that Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) said “I like the idea of tea parties and a real revolution.”
During the same interview, Coburn was asked about The Freedom of Choice Act and how people should react if it was enacted.
Dr. Coburn’s answer? "Civil disobedience.”
Coburn went on to say “The battle in Washington, D.C. is real. Every day in the Senate without Al Franken is a great day. ”

Saturday, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN:06) told WWTC 1280 AM, "I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us 'having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,' and the people -- we the people -- are going to have to fight back hard if we're not going to lose our country.

Would the Founding Father recognize – Revolution, Civil disobedience, Battles, Armed and Dangerous – as the political discourse prevalent in our nation 220 years after the Constution was approved ? Hardly.

Thomas Jefferson would not appreciate having his words mangled and taken out of context. Jefferson never said or wrote 'having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,'; Jefferson did write to Abigail Adams in 1787 (Note : Jefferson was in France during 1787) “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere."
So a number of thoughts.
First, it was written before the US Constitution was approved, and the Congress or President elected. America was still in its development.
Second, he clearly stated that “resistance” is based on “certain occasions” … in other words, a limited application. A “little rebellion” which is a vast difference from a “revolution” to overthrow the government. Today, peace protest marches have replaced armed rebellions.
Third, Jefferson eventually saw that the elective form of government was working and in 1806 wrote “In a country whose constitution is derived from the will of the people directly expressed by their free suffrages, where the principal executive functionaries and those of the legislature are renewed by them at short periods, where under the character of jurors they exercise in person the greatest portion of the judiciary powers, where the laws are consequently so formed and administered as to bear with equal weight and favor on all, restraining no man in the pursuits of honest industry and securing to every one the property which that acquires, it would not be supposed that any safeguards could be needed against insurrection or enterprise on the public peace or authority.”
In other words, voters should use the ballot box for protest … not insurrection.

The common denominator for Coburn and Bachmann is their opposition to abortion and a proposed “cap and trade” legislation.
Jefferson may have an opinion here also. After his presidency was over, Jefferson wrote in 1816 “Each generation is as independent as the one preceding, as that was of all which had gone before. It has then, like them, a right to choose for itself the form of government it believes most promotive of its own happiness; consequently, to accommodate to the circumstances in which it finds itself that received from its predecessors; and it is for the peace and good of mankind that a solemn opportunity of doing this every nineteen or twenty years should be provided by the constitution; so that it may be handed on, with periodical repairs, from generation to generation, to the end of time, if anything human can so long endure."
So Jefferson was in essence suggestion that the Constitution was not a fixed document, but that new generations may look at issues differently.
A March 2009, Zogby Poll found that nearly 42 percent of the respondents said they "strongly agree" while another 16.5 percent who reported that they "somewhat agree" with the president’s proposal "that places a market-based cap on carbon pollution and drives the production of more renewable energy in America."
A January 2009, ABCNews/Washington Post Poll found that over 80% approved of abortion which involved saving a woman’s life, health or in the case of rape or incest. Further, 57% considered it should be legal in most cases.
My point is not to debate “cap and trade” or abortion, but just to point out that if Jefferson’s concept of a new constitution every generation may produce – over time – a country that addresses gay rights, health care reform, gun restrictions, etc in an entirely different approach than today … and that Coburn and Bachmann may not like what the “people” would enact a new constitution.

Using terms like Revolution, Civil disobedience, Battles, Armed and Dangerous is totally inappropriate by someone elected and sworn to uphold the Constitution.
The words inspire Anarchy.
According to a Bachmann spokesman, her remarks about Revolution were Metaphorical.
That response is insufficient.
These comments could easily be denounced by Democrats, but it really must come from Republicans. No doubt that “Cap and Trade” is a contentious issue … after all, Bachmann was unable to get the RNC Platform Committee to included any amendments to oppose cap-and-trade. This is understandable considering that Senator John McCain was a proponent of the legislation. McCain was not alone. Norm Coleman was a co-sponsor of John Warner and Joe Liebermann legislation. Although Coleman is not presently a member of the Senate, he could exercise great leadership by denouncing both Coburn’s and Bachmann’s choice of words.
Another Minnesota Republican that should denounce these words is Governor Tim Pawlenty. Pawlenty approved the Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 which addresses a multi-sector cap-and-trade program.

The country has too many problems that need addressing that require reasoned discussions, not rhetoric that is designed to incite a radical emotion.

Overwhelming Support for Lily Except for House GOP Women

Today, President Obama has signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 ... his first piece of legislation.
Legislation that was driven by a woman, so do women support this legislation ?
Let’s look at the scorecard : Senate 100 % approval (16 yes and Zero No votes) while the House approved 59 to 16 with two not voting.

So who are these House Nay-Sayers ?
Michele Bachmann (R-MN)
Judy Biggert (R-IL)
Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL)
Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV)
Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO)
Mary Fallin (R-OK)
Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
Lynn Jenkins (R-KS)
Cynthia Lummis (R-WY)
Mary Bono Mack (R-CA)
Candice Miller (R-MI)
Sue Myrick (R-NC)
Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA)
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)
Jean Schmidt (R-OH)
Note : Kay Granger (R-TX) did not vote on the initial version ( Roll Call 9 ) but did vote NO on the final version ( Roll Call 37 ).


That’s right, every NO vote in the House came from Republican women !
Yet in the Senate, EVERY Republican Woman voted FOR this legislation.
WHY the difference ?
Congresswoman Bachmann defended her vote on her blog entry .
Time will tell if the Congresswoman’s concerns are valid. She writes ”This would likely increase the number of frivolous pay-discrimination claims in future years, since older claims are more subject to faded memories, missing documents, unfound witnesses, and businesses that have changed hands or no longer exist. In the Fall of 2010, it would be a fair question to ask the Congresswoman how many “ frivolous pay-discrimination claims” have been filed … my gut tells me that she won’t have a significant number to report.
Republicans have not fared well in the past two elections. Women elected under the Democrat banner far exceed the Republican women. Somehow, this vote may not help their future cause.

Of course, this is only the women in Congress. The men had a say in this vote (the House male vote was 186 to 155 in favor). I wonder about some of those men. While I am sure that Hope Walz is proud of her poppa (that would be First District Democrat Tim Walz) for supporting this legislation, I wonder how Sixth District Congressman Erik Paulsen (R-MN) will explain his vote to Cassie, Briana, Tayler, and Liesl Paulsen. That may be a difficult conversation especially when President Obama cited protecting his two daughters from future wage discrimination while recognizing the employment of his maternal grandmother.

Although the 111th Congress is just starting, there is already a too strong partisan bent. There are some issues that should be above party ranker … yet the Republican women in the House would rather follow their Party Managers instructions than stand up as the Republican women in the Senate did.
Change needs to start in the House.

GOP Not Serious About Earmarks; Dems Not Serious About Reform

Congress is back !
While some things stay the same, other things change … and not for the better.

Oh, sure there are plenty of new faces --- each with unbridled optimism and good intentions. Alas, their first reaction must be … did you guys run last November ?
For those voters that thought that change would be in order, must now be seriously disappointed. In Minnesota, all the House incumbents were re-elected … but what changes will really happen ?

In the House on Republican side, Minnesota has returned John Kline and Michele Bachmann.
Kline’s major theme of his re-election was Stop the Pork while Bachmann is also on a pork-free diet. So, did the Republicans heed their campaign motto ? NO.
Pork can be best controlled through the Appropriations Committee which directs all federal discretionary spending. I have never heard Kline or Bachmann openly campaign for assignment to this committee. With Democrats increasing their overall numbers in the House, the Appropriations Committee ratio changed from 37-29 in the 110th Congress to 37-23 in the 111th, leaving Republicans with only two seats to fill after accounting for retirements and election losses. Of course, they could have re-assigned existing members including dishonored Jerry Lewis (R-CA) but that change is rarely made. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) who is an outspoken critic of wasteful government spending openly campaigned for a seat last session and for this new session. IF the Republicans wanted to stop the pork, they would have made sure that Flake got that assignment. Alas, the new members will be Tom Cole (R-OK) and Steven LaTourette (R-OH). Word is that Cole was promised the assignment in exchange for stepping down as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (no Blagojevich buy-out here).
Minnesota’s newly elected Erik Paulsen (MN-06) has been assigned to the House Financial Services Committee where Bachmann has served.
So, on the Republican side, Minnesota has lost its voice in the powerful Ways and Means Committee with the retirement of Jim Ramstad. Republicans filled six slots - Charles Boustany Jr. (LA); Ginny Brown-Waite (FL); Geoff Davis (KY); Dean Heller (NV); Dave Reichert (WA); and Peter Roskam (IL).
Voters were sold a “pig in the poke” with Kline and Bachmann’s ranting … they have started off this session exhibiting their failures to motivate their colleagues … all the while the grandstanding continues for voter’s obfuscation. Kline issues press releases while Bachmann editorializes about limestone sidewalks, skateboard parks and bike lanes. No doubt we will hear about these “earmarks” thoughout the session, yet they have failed to take the necessary action by making real change in committee assignments.
The GOP is playing us for suckers again.

And the Democrats are not starting out well either.
In the House, the Rules have been changed. Term limits on committee chairs have been changed while the “Pay-go” rules which required spending proposals to be balanced with revenue or cuts, have been gutted.

While Kline and Bachmann are pseudo-deficit spending and "anti-pork-barrel" politicians, Minnesotans in the First District remember a true fiscal conservative – Tim Penny. When Penny was in the House, he formed the Democratic Budget Group and when his party failed to reduce the federal deficit, he did not seek re-election. Penny saw the hypocrisy and excessive partisanship first hand. He wrote a book entitled Common Cents: A Retiring Six-Term Congressman Reveals How Congress Really Works--And What We Must Do to Fix it which he denounces the rules that make chairmen too powerful. Penny was right then and the Republicans changed those rules under the guise of the "Contract With America”. After the lessons of Tom Delay, Duke Cunnningham, John Doolittle, Jerry Lewis, and Rick Renzi just to name a few dishonored Republicans, the Democrats are reverting to the old rules just when Charlie Rangel (D-NY) ethics problems are being investigated. Rangel chairs the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. It was a good move when Henry Waxman (D-CA) took over for John Dingell (D-MI) as chairman of the influential Committee on Energy and Commerce. Failure to allow younger members like Tim Walz (D-MN-01) and Keith Ellison (D-MN-05) to assume responsibilities opposes the opportunities for change.

Walz should be angered by the relaxing of Pay-go rules as his votes last session clearly embraced that philosophy, and was a major theme in his election campaigns.

Somehow, I suspect that Penny, who must still be smarting over the over half a million in federal funds that was slipped into the 1991 budget at the last moment to preserve and enshrine Lawrence Welk's boyhood home in Strasburg, N D (pop. 623), must see that nothing has changed has changed in over a decade since he left Congress.

{NOTE : on the Senate side, the major committees that will impact spending include : Appropriations Committee - Minnesota does not currently have a member and the Democrats have a four seat advantage. On the Senate Budge Committee, Minnesota does not currently have a member and the Democrats have a three seat advantage. Franken may be in-line for a seat on the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee where the Democrats have a one seat advantage. The Coleman legal challenge is impacting Minnesotans from having input on shaping our fiscal future.}

Bachmann misses Television Appearance

It is common knowledge that Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN:06) has pledged to never to vote for a new tax or tax increase , as well as pledged to not pursue earmarks, and even a pledge against legislation involving climate change, but has she made a pledge not to appear on television ?

Heaven forbid that after appearing 23 times over seven weeks starting in September, I would hate to think that one minor setback on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews would stop her from appearing on the only television worth viewing … CSPAN.

On Wednesday, November 12, Bachmann’s House Committee on Financial Services held a hearing on Mortgage Modifications. Considering that former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan called the current situation “a once-in-a-century credit tsunami” one would have hoped that Congresswoman Bachmann would be there to represent Minnesota.
Sadly, it was broadcast on CSPAN and no Bachmann in attendance.
I hope that the Congresswoman has not gotten camera-shy.

Republicans were well represented by Spencer Bachus (AL-06), Tom Price (GA-06), Randy Neugebauer (TX-19), Judy Biggert (IL-13) and others.
Bachus spoke with concern not only about the foreclosure problems, but also about the automobile industry since he has two plants in his district.
But the best comments came from Steven LaTourette (OH-14) who expressed outrage at the potential tax benefits used by banks to acquire each other. “When you have a handful of people picking winning and losing banks and deciding how to spend hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money, transparency must be required,” LaTourette has stated. Describing the PNC buyout of National City Bank, “This was no ordinary bank acquisition once the government stepped in with billions of dollars. We need to shine a light on this and see if it was on the up and up.”
Further, LaTourette expressed grave concerns with the slowness in $300 billion "Hope for Homeowners" program which is intended to keep homeowners in their homes yet has only received only 42 applications in the first two weeks, a dismal fraction of the 400,000 homeowners it was intended to help. Congressman LaTourette said the current financial situation in the U.S. "is a mess."
Additionally, the New York Times has reported there is a lobbying frenzy by an army of hired guns for banks, savings and loan associations and insurers for access to the Treasury program; making citizens ponder if government is the biggest friend of corruption..

It should be pointed out that Congressman LaTourette, as Congresswoman Bachmann, voted against the bailout bill … yet his concern did not end with his vote.

And if Bachmann thought they she could skip this hearing because she had a “tough election”, that wasn’t any acceptable excuse to Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D-PA-11) who had a come-from-behind re-election victory. Kanjorski expressed Instead of placing blame, we must work together toward a solution.
In fact, there was a great degree of bi-partisan spirit by the members in attendance.

At a news briefing yesterday, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson emphasized that the consumer credit market "has for all practical purposes ground to a halt," which is "raising the cost and reducing the availability of car loans, student loans, and credit cards."

Next week, Congresswoman Bachmann has two more opportunities to participate in hearings Oversight of the bailout and aid for the auto industry . These are critical hearings and Congresswoman Bachmann would be advised to skip her announced “basic educational Israel trip”.

The election is long over but time for attention to her Congressional duties is now. Bachmann is campaigning for a seat on the House Ways and Means Committee … based on her lack of participation in Financial Service hearings (she also missed the October 21st hearing on the shadowy banking practice of credit default swaps), she has not earned it.

Is one Minnesota Congresswoman going too far to say Thank You ?

Following Tim Walz election victory in November, 2006, he launched a “Thank You” tour of cities – large and small -- throughout the First District. The New Ulm Journal wrote : “The common-sense, pragmatic people of southern Minnesota are ones you should look to on what they’re going to do so I’m honored to be your representative there,” Walz told a gathering of about 60 in the Grand Hotel. “We won, and for that I’m incredibly proud. So, it was a great day the other night. Electoral politics still works in America. This is still the best democracy in the world. It doesn’t matter what you were up against. The people here in this country decided they wanted to see a change, and each and every one of you did everything possible to make that change. It wasn’t for yourselves; it was for those future generations.”

That tour wasn’t the last time that voters would see Congressman Walz … sure he was there when there was a natural disaster … but he was also there at Hy-Vee groceries stores throughout the District – talking with citizens regardless if they voted for him. He also held hearings in the District on the Farm Bill, legislation for seniors and legislation for Veterans. That’s why Walz was overwhelmingly re-elected winning every county and taking 678 out of 749 precincts.

There is another member of Congress who is about to go on her own “Thank You” tour.
The Star-Tribune reports : Sponsored by the Jewish Community Relations Council, the trip will be what a Bachmann staffer referred to as “just your basic educational Israel trip.” The excursion will last for all of next week, but she isn’t expected to meet with any VIPs while there.
So, why is Congresswoman Bachmann taking another trip to Israel ?

Could it be to make a formal “Thank You” to her contributors … which have earned Bachmann a slot in the Top Ten of PAC Contributions in 2008.

Taking junkets to Israel to develop some future business for Minnesota firms is cited by Governor Tim Pawlenty as his reason for taking a Jewish Community Relations Council trip. Considering Israel and America have been active trading partners, it may not be an earth shattering event … as would be a Pawlenty mission to Cuba (which Govenor Ventura did and considering a new Obama Administration, it is more likely to develop new Minnesota businesses opportunties first.)

But Bachmann’s reasoning - “just your basic educational Israel trip” - just doesn’t make sense … . In August of 2007 Bachmann went on a privately funded trip sponsored by the America Israel Education Federation (AIEF) to Israel. On that trip, she met with foreign leaders.
How many trips does the Congresswoman need to take to get “just your basic education”?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that she hopes Congress can return this month to approve spending measures to stimulate the depressed economy. The election campaign may be an excuse for Congresswoman Bachman to miss Congressional hearings regarding the roll of Congress in the failure to regulate credit default swaps. But there is no excuse for not being there after the election. Of course, if Bachmann had attended the hearing, she may have learned that her misguided blaming of Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) as being the driving force for the credit crisis with her allegation that "loans started being made on the basis of race, and often on little else" was refuted. There are three reasons to exonerate the Community Reinvestment Act in the mortgage meltdown:
• The CRA applies to banks. Most subprime mortgages came from lenders that were not banks -- so the CRA did not cover them.
• The nonbank lenders made more reckless lending decisions than banks did.
• Regulations didn't drive the subprime lending boom. The pursuit of profits did.
But then again, we don’t know what “Thank You" tour, Congresswoman Bachmann has for her contributors from the Banking Industries.

When voters went to the polls last week, the message was loud and clear --- we want action … and Bachmann is enjoying junkets.

Credit Crisis : Walz –v- Bachmann : Engaged –v- ill-informed

Do you remember the 60’s question “What if they gave a war and nobody came ?” …
well ”What if America had a crisis and only ONE Republican showed up ?”
or “What if American had a crisis, would your Representative report for duty ?”

When the Bush Administration stated it wanted a bailout package totaling $700 billion giving unlimited powers to the Secretary of the Treasury, Congress – Republicans and Democrats – were alarmed.

The vote was actually the easy part … either you accept this legislation or continue to redefine it until acceptable legislation is created. Eventually, a package was approved at a higher amount but with curtailed powers … with notable NO Votes from Congressman Tim Walz (D-MN-01), Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) and Congressman Collin Peterson (D-MN-07).

After approval, it would be easy for Congress to let the Bush Administration work out its plan during this period prior to the November elections.
That would be wrong.
With America’s financial future changed by government intervention and partial nationalization of the nation’s largest banks, it’s clear that we want our Representatives involved. The key question is what new regulations would be enacted — and how can Congress ensure that the regulations will work.

Peterson in his capacity as Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture was concerned about the failure of American International Group (AIG), Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and Washington Mutual, among others and the impact of shadowy banking practice of credit default swaps (CDS) and other derivatives. The Ag Committee has oversight of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission with the obvious implications of the Commodity Exchange Act in this crisis.

Congressman Peterson responded to the crisis by scheduling a hearing despite this being “campaign season”.
After the hearing, Chairman Peterson offered this scary warning “There is an estimated $55 trillion in credit default swaps somewhere out there, but no one knows for sure if any of these swaps offset each other, exactly who is on the hook for these swaps, who is trading with who and on what terms; and worst of all, no one has any idea who is solvent and who is upside down. The first step we need to take is to shed some light on just how the unwinding of these obligations will take place.”
Congressman Walz went off the campaign trail, participated in the hearing, and offered his assessment.
Sadly, as important as this issue is, only ONE Republican participated in the hearing … Bob Goodlatte (R-VA).

While Peterson did his job, he wasn’t alone. The Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee scheduled a hearing for Tuesday, October 21st “to examine our failure to regulate credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations and their derivatives, and the other fruits of their deregulatory push from 1995-2006. The results of that effort are now in—a crisis that is sweeping the global economy and threatening tens of millions of working families. The committee’s job is to see that this never happens again and that is the purpose of the hearing.” The hearing was broadcast via C-SPAN and offered expert opinion and suggestions from a panel of witnesses.

Sadly, Minnesota’s member of the committee, Representative Bachmann was not there to participate.
$55 trillion in credit default swaps problem and Bachmann is a no show.
IF Bachmann has problems with the course the Committee Chairman is pursuing, by skipping the hearing as a means of protest, she is doing a disservice to the process.
Rather than listen to solutions, Bachmann blames the Community Reinvestment Act for the problem, yet the CRA’s impact has been wildly exaggerated.
Where was Bachmann ? At a Rotary meeting !

If you are a regular viewer of CSPAN you have noticed the lack of Republican participation as well as there use of procedural tactics to delay votes.
Enough is enough.
Members of Congress will often cite the number of roll call votes they participate in as a symbol of their involvement; I suggest that they also tell voters how many Committee hearings they missed and to provide a reason why they were not there.

From my vantage point, none of these Members of Congress liked the bailout bill but Congressmen Peterson and Walz are actively working to ensure taxpayers interests are properly considered while Congresswoman Bachmann’s absence is inexcusable. During the August recess, Bachmann was expending Congressional funds to fly back and forth to Washington (and blogging ) that the House should be called “back immediately so we can debate and vote on the legislation that has been offered to deal with rising energy costs.” Drilling was her issue, not the housing crisis even though her district has a higher foreclosure rate than the rest of Minnesota and the rest of the country.

Minnesota voters need to know whose working for them (Peterson and Walz) while Bachmann may be more concerned with her relationship with her number one campaign contributor --TCF Bank, which is also one of the top-ten mortgage lenders in the state.

Public Service Announcement for Congressional Candidates

As the campaigns go into high gear, candidates may forget some of their own personal obligations. Fortunately, some government agencies, such as Blue Earth County, want to make sure that everyone knows that Second Half Property Taxes are due October 15th. Now, I don’t know if Olmsted County issues PSA, but please remind Dr. Brian Davis that taxes are due. After all, according to Olmsted County property records Dr. Davis has had ten late payments since 2003.

Davis should not be singled out as the only deliquent payer as current Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06) was fined for paying her 2003 property taxes late. Adhering to deadlines may be a problem for Bachmann as she was deliquent in filing her Personal Financial Disclosure Report this year. House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (the “Ethics Committee” as it is commonly called) policy is that there is a fine of $200 for failure to submit it by the due date. Voters should not only remind Bachmann to pay her property taxes but also the fine for late filing of her Personal Financial Disclosure Report.

With the salary that a member of Congress receives (which is currently $169,300 per year), paying property taxes should not be a hardship. Based on past practices of increasing Congressional pay based on increasing all federal employees pay, their pay will go up as President Bush has issued his budget proposal for 2009 which includes a 2.9% increase.

In light of the current financial crisis, should Congress give themselves a raise ?

A recent CQ Politics article describes how the political parties hoodwink the public.
• Each party would get roughly three-fifths of its members to vote to keep the pay raise and allow two-fifths of its members to vote “no” (some members always skip the vote).
• Senior members and those who had safe re-election races could vote for the pay raise and those who might fall victim to voter anger could avoid the tough vote without endangering the increase for everyone else.

The CQ article may be based on some fact, but Minnesotans know that some politicians operate differently. Senator Paul Wellstone donated his salary increases to charity. First District Congressman Tim Walz (Dr. Davis’ opponent) goes one step further … not only did Walz not accept a salary increase but in 2007 he returned approximately 7 percent of his Member’s Representational Allowance (MRA). Every member of the House of Representatives receives an annual MRA allowance to fund his or her office activities which in 2007 totaled roughly $1.4 million.

Not only should Congress not accept a raise, they should decrease their pay to the rate that was in effect the last time there was budget surpluses … 2000. And they should follow Walz’ lead and reduce their MRA and not use tele-town hall meetings (as Bachmann and John Kline do) which are just public expenditures for their re-election efforts.

Politics aside, Politicians Praise MN Largest Earmark

It certainly wasn’t a Mark Antony moment ( you know, ”I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him), yet for less than an hour on Monday, September 15th, the poisonous pox of “earmarks” was not acknowledged … no they came to praise the largest “earmark” project to built in Minnesota in a very long time.

It was a good day … no sneering of the evils of “earmarks” … just a spirit of accomplishment … as it should be. In alternating speeches, Republicans and Democrats gushed in a esprit de corps. Yet there were some differences in the scope of how they approached their few moments of allocated time to address the audience. Congresswoman Michele Bachman (R-06) spoke of in her “Minnesota Nice” manner assuring the crowd that private donations will quickly be funding the 35W Remembrance Garden while Congressman Keith Ellison (D-05) saw this as only a minor start on the need to address the nation’s infrastructure needs. There was much praise for the workers who built this project… Congressman Tim Walz (D-01) thanked the rescue workers … and the children who were on the bus as the bridge was collapsing thanked the volunteers with the Salvation Army and Red Cross for all their assistance since the tragedy occurred.

And throughout it all there was no mention that the only members of the Minnesota delegation voting against a funding bill that included $195 million for funding the reconstruction of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis were Representatives John Kline (MN-02) and Michele Bachmann, both Republicans … as that could have been embarrassing since they were both on the podium giving speeches.

My question is : Isn’t this proof that all “earmarks” are not wasteful government spending ?

While Bachmann and Kline are on a “pork-free” diet, they are not recognizing that the “earmark” process actually dispenses monies for needed projects.
Joe Bodell asked the right question … is this a principled stand against pork, or is Kline cutting off his nose to spite his face ? Bodell’s column is dated, but the intent is valid and he reviews the “earmarks” requested by Congressmen Oberstar, Ellison, Kline and Walz. Bodell finds minor problems with the “earmarks” in the Transpiration bill. My conclusion based on reviewing the Defense and HHS funding bills is that Minnesota’s members of Congress are not abusing the system but that Bachmann and Kline are short-changing their Districts and the State. In Bachman and Kline's world, others get a larger share of the pie ... as the pie does not get smaller ... our needs are not served ... but our monies go elsewhere.

In the First District, Congressman Walz is being challenged by Dr. Brian Davis who has campaigned on “earmark” reform.
Walz has been transparent on his funding requests publishing his 47 "earmark" requests for 2009 appropriations.
From Walz’s press release : “While it is likely that only a few of these meritorious projects will ultimately receive funding, I believe it is important for residents of southern Minnesota to be able to see the list of projects I am supporting and I am proud to release this list of local priorities.”
In this way, voters know Walz’s vision for the District’s needs … Dr. Davis needs to tell voters which projects he does not believe should be funded and any that he would add to the list. If it’s “wasteful government spending”, then tell us and if you plan to adhere to a “pork-free diet” tell us that.

For one hour on Monday, “earmarks” were not evil … they were a bridge to improving our infrastructure ... and there are a lot of bridges that need improving.

Will MN Republicans Support McCain’s Plan to Tax Health Care Benefits ?

As voters enter the voting booth this November, a recent NYTimes / CBS News poll indicate that the top issue will be jobs and the economy. The most salient point that Barack Obama made during his acceptance speech concerned those issues :
OBAMA: Now, I don't believe that Senator McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of Americans; I just think he doesn't know.
Why else would he define middle-class as someone making under $5 million a year? How else could he propose hundreds of billions in tax breaks for big corporations and oil companies, but not one penny of tax relief to more than 100 million Americans?
How else could he offer a health care plan that would actually tax people's benefits, or an education plan that would do nothing to help families pay for college, or a plan that would privatize Social Security and gamble your retirement?

That’s right … under the McCain plan, employer-provided health insurance benefits would be taxed as normal income for individual income tax purposes.

While employers would continue to deduct health insurance coverage costs, employees would pay taxes on the fringe benefit. Currently, the tax code provides an exclusion that allows companies to offer health care benefits to employees free from taxation.

That’s a MAJOR TAX INCREASE that is not being portrayed as such.
In August 2007 the U.S. Census Bureau reported that 59.7% of Americans received employment-based health insurance in 2006. Thus, this would be a major change for those employed by employers who provide health insurance benefits and no impact for those companies that do not.

Your employer may have different rates depending upon group history and policy coverage. For a point of reference, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research and Educational Trust report the annual cost of a family health insurance premium in 2006 was $11,480. Essentially under the McCain plan, your taxable income would increase by that amount … and whatever your tax rate (10% to 35%) would be applied. Although the employer has a rate per employee, the insurance expense is probably a group policy expense, so the impact of adding $11,480 to the average worker’s pay will impact lower wage-earners harder … as well as ethnic breakdown. For example, the median household income in 2006 for White Americans was $50,673 (25% tax bracket) while Hispanics were $37,781 and African-Americans were $31,969. (Source : Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States, 2006. Current Population Reports, Consumer Income. August 2007).
Simply, the CEO of the company will have the same additional taxable income --- $11,480 health benefit --- as well as the lowest paid worker.

While burdensome to all but the most affluent families, this level of spending can be deemed excessive.

While this tax increase is substantial to the individual, it would provide the Government with some needed revenue. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget A Fiscal Voter Guide to the 2008 Election report, this plan to eliminate of the tax exclusion for employer provided health insurance could result in adding $201 billion to $274 billion to the Federal Treasury. (Yep, that’s Billion.)

One could look at this as a necessity to pay for the ongoing Iraq and Afghanistan operations or addressing the “borrowing” from Social Security and Medicare fund for other spending programs. Yet the CRFB report also indicates that McCain’s plans to continue the Bush tax cuts which will cost the government $294 billion, and that McCain plans to reduce the Corporate Income Taxes costing the Treasury another $55 to $68 billion. (Yep, that’s Billion.) MORE on reducing Corporate Income Taxes in a future commentary.

The obvious question is, Why does McCain advocate this change ?

Republicans like Dr. Brian Davis believe that there needs to be more competition and less government intervention in healthcare.
IF employees begin to be taxed for health care benefits, employees may be inclined to want to opt out of insurance. With the rising cost that employers have seen in health care costs, they may likely comply. This could lead to the end of the employer-sponsored health care benefit system. In 2007, some 45.7 million Americans — 15.3 percent of the population — were uninsured so that figure could rise substantially as more people just determine that health care insurance is unaffordable.

That may work out good for employers … and possibly for healthy employees, but for the others that have health problems that would be a problem. The percentage of Americans with insurance through a public program increased from 27.0 percent in 2006 to 27.8 percentage in 2007, primarily as a result of gains in coverage through Medicare and Medicaid. IF the employer-sponsored health care benefit system is effectively terminated, that would cause an increase demands for public programs which may result in scaling back Medicaid benefits and eligibility.

Remember McCain said that Bush made "the right call" in vetoing the SCHIP legislation and has repeatedly voted to cut, eliminate, or restrict health insurance coverage for low income children and pregnant mothers.(source) Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-06) and Congressman John Kline (R-02) also voted against SCHIP legislation.

When Norm Coleman, Dr. Brian Davis, Dick Day, John Kline, Erik Paulsen, Barb Davis White, Ed Matthews, Michele Bachmann, or Glenn Menze talk about taxes, be sure to ask them if they support McCain’s efforts to tax health care benefits.
Also, as you watch the Republican National Convention, watch for how often "cutting taxes" is discussed and how many times eliminating the health care tax benefit is mentioned.

Tax fairness should not begin with taxing the health care benefits.

MN-06 : GOP Platform is a Nightmare for Bachmann

For Congresswoman Michele Bachmann to control the Party’s agenda, the best way is to get involved in approval of the Party Platform. Thus far, the results may not be to her liking.

Bachmann is one of 112 Republican activists writing the planks for the RNC Platform. There are a number of key issues :
Drilling in ANWR
Cap and Trade legislation to curb greenhouse gas emission
Immigration
And even, gun ownership ( The Bush Administration wants background checks prior to someone on the Terrorist Watch List before being able to buy a gun. )

Surely, at the top of Bachmann’s list is Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).

Of expanding oil drilling into ANWR, she recently said, "Currently, the U.S. is the only country in the world that discourages using its own energy resources. Our country imports 10 billion barrels of crude oil every day. And we are importing 1.3 million barrels of refined gasoline.”

But drilling in ANWR is not something that everyone agrees. Bachmann said in an interview with Townhall.com “It’s difficult when our nominee is not on the same page with us.”

CQ Politics reports the draft proposal unveiled Tuesday called for “accelerated exploration, drilling and development in America, from new oil fields off the nation’s coasts to onshore fields such as those in Montana, North Dakota and Alaska” but was silent on the specific issue of ANWR.

Additionally, from the CQ article “the platform committee also rejected a proposal to discourage the export of oil and gas garnered from any new leases.
Consider that DOE data revealed “A record 1.6 million barrels a day in U.S. refined petroleum products were exported during the first four months of this year, up 33 percent from 1.2 million barrels a day over the same period in 2007. Shipments this February topped 1.8 million barrels a day for the first time during any month. The surge in exports appears to contradict the pleas from the U.S. oil industry and the Bush administration for Congress to open more offshore waters and Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. ”
Congressman Edward Markey (D-MA) protested this exporting practice to President Bush writing that projections from the Department of Energy for offshore drilling say that “at the height of production, in 2030, increased offshore drilling would produce only 200,000 barrels per day – one ninth the amount of oil we currently send to foreign countries every day.”

While the RNC Platform Committee may be rejecting her plea, she has offered a Discharge Petition on HR 6107 that would open ANWR for drilling. Thus far 90 Republicans have not signed her petition.

And as a side note, this platform plank is in direct opposition to the stated goals of Dr. Brian Davis, State Senator Dick Day, Congressman John Kline (R-02), and Ed Matthews (whose speech at the MN-GOP convention demanded drilling). But Erik Paulsen and Senator Norm Coleman do not support drilling in the ANWR.

So for voters that hear MN-GOP Party Chairman Ron Carey attempting to blame Congressman Tim Walz (D-MN-01) for the failing to open ANWR for drilling, they need to be reminded that the RNC is not committed to that goal.

On Immigration, the draft does not include stronger anti-amnesty language that some advocates wanted. It does not specifically oppose “comprehensive immigration reform” and is silent on a guest worker program, a policy that President Bush and McCain have both supported.

On Cap and Trade, the Platform Committee included no amendments to oppose cap-and-trade explicitly, in fact there were no amendments on climate change at all. By taking a heavy pen to the section that used to read “Global Warming and Environmental Protection”, they decided to strike the phrase “global warming” anywhere it appeared in the document, either replacing it with the more neutral “climate change,” or removing it altogether.
Ah, thus RNC answers the question – If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there does it make a sound?
If the RNC does not acknowledge “global warming”, then it must not be happening.

And on another annoyance for Bachmann, the Platform Committee voted down a proposal to call the opposition the "Democrat Party" in the 2008 platform. Instead, they'll go with the proper Democratic Party. "We probably should use what the actual name is," said Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, the panel's chairman. "At least in writing."
Bachmann, as evidenced by her appearance on television broadcasts has a tendency to use the “Democrat” term.

The decision on Gun Ownership has not been publicized yet.

MN-06 : Has Bachmann Read HER Bill ?

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann has updated her blog encouraging her colleagues to support HR 6716 - Promoting New American Energy Act of 2008. Bachmann is the prime author of the legislation which was introduced on July 31st with seven Republican co-sponsors.

On her blog, she writes : “Renewable energy is currently a sort of second-class citizen in the United States because of its high cost. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), renewable energy plants are generally more expensive to operate than plants using coal and natural gas. But we’re leaving real solutions behind by not changing this disincentive. Tax incentives for renewable plants would help equalize the financial burden, creating more energy production and a number of new domestic jobs.” [Emphasis added]

It’s laudable that she has finally come around to encouraging greater investment in solar, wind, geothermal and biodiesel. But if you read HR 6716, it really is a very limited bill. It changes the deprecation rates for “energy production and distribution facilities” which would include any electric utility nuclear production plants (Sec. 2.3 a-v) as well as any electric utility combustion turbine production plant which is fueled by natural gas (Sec. 2.3 a-viii).

Her own bill will not equalize the financial burden for the renewable energy industry if the same benefit is given to the nuclear and natural gas industries.

Bachmann’s post is an attempt to confuse the voters by implying that she is working to advance renewable energy, yet it is clear that she is offering a broad tax law change without any offset for the lost revenues.

Frankly, Congresswoman Bachmann (joined by Second District Congressman John Kline) voted in February, 2008 against the HR 5351 - Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008 which has put Minnesota jobs at stake.

Voters in the Sixth District should be aware that DFL candidate El Tinklenberg has written in an OpEd piece “Provide incentives for biofuel, wind, solar and clean coal energy development. American innovation is our key to an independent energy future. While there is general agreement in Congress that economic incentives are necessary to develop alternative energy technologies, the parties quickly split when the discussion turns to paying for them. We can start by eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the richest Americans and using the money to pay for these incentives.”

Is “Drill here, Drill now” Just a Feel-good Slogan ?

George Bush knows something about oil.
In 1951, Bush #41 started Bush-Overby Oil Development Company and became a millionaire.
In 1977, Bush #43 started Arbusto Energy which under its own weight would have gone bust if not for the political connections of his father.
That’s the oil business … boom or bust (unless you get a bailout) !

So will drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) be a boom or a bust … or just a stalling of the inevitable ?

Menzie Chinn writes “Although a significant volume of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and natural gas resources is added in the OCS access case, conversion of those resources to production would require both time and money. In addition, the average field size in the Pacific and Atlantic regions tends to be smaller than the average in the Gulf of Mexico, implying that a significant portion of the additional resource would not be economically attractive to develop at the reference case prices.” Chinn believes the impact of OCS drilling on the world’s oil prices to be minimal and production output years away.

But assuming that the US Government changes its regulations and industry acquires the production resources, will the oil be there ?
According to Sara Banaszak of the American Petroleum Institute (link) “Leases don't come with MapQuest directions that say "Drill here for 50 million barrels." It takes a process of exploration. Banaszak says developing an oil lease, especially offshore, can take up to 10 years and cost as much as a billion dollars .. ”
Banaszak is right. ExxonMobil took a year and a half to drill at cost up to a staggering $200 million going down over 30,000 feet at the Blackbeard West well before giving up.
BUST.
Even if your Exxon or George Bush, there is no guarantee of success.

“Drill here, Drill now” is feel-good slogan that may garner some votes for Republican candidates this November, but what then ? Voters will quickly realize that we’ve been had. OCS drilling should be part of the solution … but even those wells will run dry. Mexico’s production has been diminishing.
Ultimately, the long term solution must be based on better consumption utilization, wind and solar.

And while Republican candidates like to chant “Drill here, Drill now”, voters need to read Tom Friedman’s column concluding “The fact that Congress has failed eight times to renew them [investment tax credits for installing solar energy and the production tax credits for building wind turbines and other energy-efficiency systems] is largely because of a hard core of Republican senators who either don’t want to give Democrats such a victory in an election year or simply don’t believe in renewable energy.”

This should be a stark reminder for voters in Minnesota’s Second and Sixth Districts that while John Kline and Michele Bachmann have spent time in Washington talking in the dark chanting “Drill here, Drill now”, voters need to be reminded that they opposed these tax credits putting Minnesota jobs at risk.

Slogans are not needed … embracing a comprehensive long-term solution is. Candidates should talk policy … not shout slogans.

MN-02 : Kline Protest results in 8% Cut in Federal Dollars for Minnesota

The next time that your filling up your tank, remember that John Kline’s protest is sending your Minnesota tax dollars elsewhere.
That’s right.
For every gallon of gas that you buy, you pay a Federal Tax of 18.4 cents per gallon. Originally these tax dollars went into the general treasury, but since the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 was established, it stipulated that 100% of the gas tax be deposited into Highway Trust Fund. Those dollars are then re-distributed back to the states. If your congressman is doing his job, all your Federal Tax dollars will be returned to your state resulting in jobs and well maintained infrastructure.

But John Kline decided to protest the system. The result according to Bob Hofstad of MnDOT is that the state receives about 92 cents for every dollar that its residents send to Washington. According to Tony Kellen, president of the Minnesota Public Transit Association, about 40 percent of the money in the state's transportation budget comes from the federal gas and diesel tax.

Now, Kline may give the impression since his favorite imported vodka is SurReal (from Latvia) that he would be a pretty savvy investor, but an 8% loss is not a good return on our tax dollars. Now, maybe private citizen investor Kline is okay with that, but these are our public dollars.

Kline’s concern is with the “earmark” system whereby Congress authorizes specific projects. We can all agree that there are many examples of “wasteful Washington spending” but not all “earmarks” are wasteful.

John Kline believes the “earmark” system “is a broken process” and has pledged not to seek earmarks. According to Kline, the best way to fight an irrational process is not to take part in it but protest it, as a handful of other congressional members have agreed to do. Kline is now joined by Sixth District Congresswoman Michele Bachmann in taking the “no earmarks pledge”.

Some may see that as a noble cause, but taxpayers should view this as unwise idealistic quixotical lonely persuit using our tax dollars.

There are better ways to address the abuses in the “earmark” system.

First District Congressman Tim Walz is a practioner of transparency in his funding requests. According to Walz, “Minnesota sends more money to Washington that it gets back, and it’s appropriate for us to advocate for the good use of tax dollars (in the district).”
Walz stands up and fights for our dollars, while Kline is inclined to stand in protest.

As I wrote in August, 2007, members of Congress must work with state DOT so that monies are allocated based on the needs and not a Congressman’s personal vision.

So transparency and MnDot agreement is what is needed.

According to the Star-Tribune, Kline's rejection of earmarks has reverberations in Second District.

Voters need to consider Kline’s stance versus his challenger, Steve Sarvi … but also John McCain and Barack Obama.

McCain has vowed to veto all legislation that contains “earmarks” … another idealistic quixotical lonely persuit, but as President he could affect some spending. If he is successful, in theory, Congress will have no impact on how gas tax dollars are returned to the states … it is possible that our 8% loss could grow if the new McCain Administration deemed that infrastructure needs are greater in faster developing states like Arizona.

Barack Obama will address the infrastructure challenge by creating a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to expand and enhance, not supplant, existing federal transportation investments. This independent entity will be directed to invest in our nation’s most challenging transportation infrastructure needs. The Bank will receive an infusion of federal money, $60 billion over 10 years, to provide financing to transportation infrastructure projects across the nation. These projects will create up to two million new direct and indirect jobs per year and stimulate approximately $35 billion per year in new economic activity. link

The next president will enter office with a fragile economy. No doubt that some stimulus package will be suggested. One of George Bush’s first actions was in June of 2001 with the “Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001" which included tax cuts and rebate checks. McCain is talking of maintaining those tax cuts (and the other Bush cuts.) Obama may act instead to push investment in infrastructure that will produce jobs.

If Kline is re-elected and McCain is president, “earmarks” may be over … however if Kline is re-elected and Obama is president, Minnesota will have one Congressman standing in protest.

MN-01 : Did Dr. Davis Talk to Congressman Cole about Pay Cuts ?

Representative Tom Cole (R-OK) is coming to Minnesota on Thursday, July 3rd with scheduled appearances on behalf of Sixth District Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06) and Republican endorsed First District candidate Dr. Brian Davis.

Externally, there will be much discussion about gas prices and the suggestion by Democrats to tax the oil companies. Bachmann contends any effort to tax oil companies will only backfire on the consumers. "Taxes are passed through, that's what businesses have to do, so it will be the American people that will pay and the price will continue to shoot up at the pump."

Hopefully, Internal discussions will be on another subject that is on Congress’ legislative calendar and also one that effects more than 44 million Americans directly and the rest of us indirectly.
That would be a Health Care costs.
Recently, the House had a chance to vote on the H.R. 6331: Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008. At hand was a 10.6% cut in Medicare’s payments to doctors. To compensate for this payment, the bill proposed trimming costs in the Medicare Advantage program. The basic question was whether the health care for the elderly and disabled should be shouldered by insurance companies or physicians. Overwhelmingly, the bill was approved 355 to 59 with Representatives Bachmann and Cole supporting the insurance companies.

Here’s the question for Congresswoman Bachmann, will the doctors respond - just as you suggest the oil companies would - and raise their fees to other groups … that would be me and everyone else not on Medicare. As a physician, Dr. Davis, who reported a salary of $411,720 in 2007 may be impacted if he accepts Medicare eligible patients. What would Dr. Davis recommend to his colleagues? The American Medical Association warned that smaller paydays would give doctors an incentive to stop taking Medicare patients. Further this is a political issue as it may hit politicians right where it hurts … in campaign contributions and support by Seniors. The Texas Medical Association Political Action Committee abruptly rescinded its endorsement of Senator John Cornyn after he failed to support the doctors in the Senate vote.

Why would this bill so be passed so overwhelmingly in the House but be stalled in the Senate. Obviously, the strength of the Insurance lobby versus the AMA lobby is at the crux. The House looked at it without the blinders of lobbyists and instead with a look toward fiscal sanity. After all, Medicare Advantage program, which uses private insurers; and these health plans get net payments that are approximately 12 percent higher than traditional Medicare's per capita costs. Duh, it should not be a battle between lobbyists but instead a vote for fiscally responsible government. PAYGO should be the Bible in every piece of legislation.

No doubt that we can all see the “pain at the pump” every time a gas station is passed. And we know that gas that was just under three dollars a year ago is now at the four dollar mark. Yet, the increase in health care insurance is not visible to everyone. Some may have coverage through work, some may decide they cannot afford it, and there are those of us who are self-insured. My insurance company notified me that my next renewal premium would be raised $104 … that’s per month … or $1248 per year. Trust me, my vehicles do not use that much gas in a year … and that is just the increase. This “pain” is not as evident as the seen at the “pump” but it is real. If your employer provides insurance, they are seeing the same impact. With gas, I have a few things I can do --- maintain my vehicle properly, consolidate trips, reduce trips, walk, etc --- but my choice for health insurance is limited. Pay it or chance it. In Fargo today, Barak Obama stated that the impact caused by the uninsured is $900 per year … that is borne by the others in higher premiums.

The insurance industry has found the southern Minnesota media market a relatively inexpensive buy and in the past have launched print ads in papers like the Mankato Free Press, television ads and radio ads targeting Congressman Tim Walz. Walz has stood by his convictions and continued to vote in support of SCHIP and Medicare programs. NOTE : Walz’s vote in favor of SCHIP while Bachmann and Cole opposed.


Congressmen are not “one issue” representatives … although Davis may want to talk about today’s issue-de jour – gas prices and drilling -- voters are concerned about a lot of other issues … the national debt, the Global War on Terrorism, jobs, global warming (Dr. Davis has already spoken on that issue "Let me be clear: I totally reject the man-made global warming religion,"), but Health Care is at the tops of everyone’s concerns.
Voters need to know where Dr. Davis stands on this important issue. Is he part of the Bachmann / Cole insurance-backing crowd --- or part of the Doctor-backing crowd --- or is he a visionary that believes there is a better system where insurance companies are not dictating doctor services and citizens can receive preventative and needed medical care at a reasonable price.