Tag Archives: Spendulus

News

Porkulus-2 bill would destroy school choice in Washington D.C.

2 Comments

I already blogged about the new 410 billion dollar omnibus bill here, but on John Boehner’s blog, I found out more about it. It’s not just that it contains 9000 earmarks, as Michelle Malkin noted. On John Boehner’s blog, he argues that the bill also contains a hidden provision that would destroy the voucher program in Washington, D.C..

This post states:

Congressional Democrats are scheming to deny low-income parents and students in the nation’s capital a popular school choice program by inserting a provision mandating Congress renew the program before more money is spent on it.  While this may sound innocuous enough, it would serve as a death blow to the groundbreaking D.C. school choice program – a goal Congressional Democrats have sought since taking control of Congress in 2007.

The post also links to a video produced by the Heritage Foundation that shows some of the affected students pleasing with Obama to let them attend private schools using vouchers, instead of attending defective public schools.

You may have heard that Washington, D.C. spends the most amount of money per pupil, but gets the least return on their investment. Andrew Coulson of the libertarian Cato Institute calculates the cost per student per year as $24,600. That is not a typo. The Washington Times notes that the voucher system cost only $7500 per year, and produced far better results than the government-run, union-staffed public schools.

The Opportunity Scholarship Program that Congress established allows more than 1,900 low-income D.C. children to receive vouchers so they can attend the private school of their parents’ choosing. The scholarships are good for up to $7,500. So, the best bet is obvious: a $7,500 voucher that caters to children – not a one-size-fits-all $24,600 per-pupil plan. The former has measurable academic success and incredible parental demand; the latter consistently places children at the bottom rungs of the academic ladder. In fact, D.C. ranked the lowest in math and reading, according to results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress tests released in September.

The Boston Globe summarizes the numbers on reading and math here:

According to the authoritative National Assessment of Education Progress, only one in seven fourth-graders is ranked at grade-level (“proficient”) or better in reading and math. Among eighth-graders, only one in eight is proficient in reading; only one in 12 can handle eighth-grade math.

John Boehner is quote in his blog post as follows:

The D.C. school choice program has provided hope for thousands of low-income children in the District of Columbia since it was established, and has been demonstrating results when it comes to parental satisfaction and increased parental involvement.  Eliminating this program would represent an irresponsible and shameful act on the part of the Democratic leadership in Congress, and the children of the District of Columbia deserve better.

If the Barack Obama is willing to take away school-choice from the poorest students in the nation in order to satisfy the teachers unions that got him elected, then what hope do the rest of us have of keeping our liberty?

News

Democrats to expand porkulus with 410 billion omnibus bill?

Leave a comment

The Democrats aren’t done redistributing wealth to their constituencies yet. They want an increase in discretionary spending that Republicans say will cost another 410 billion dollars on top of the auto-bailout and the spendulus!

Wall Street Journal reports on the story here:

Congress returns next week to take up another spending bill, this one with a price tag of $410 billion. Unlike the emergency recovery plan rushed through Capitol Hill in a matter of weeks, this covers the regular functions of government, from education to agriculture.

The “omnibus” bill would increase discretionary spending — funds for programs that aren’t benefits like Social Security and Medicare — by 8.7% over 2008. “This would be the largest increase in discretionary spending since at least 1978 — with the exception of a 10% boost in 2002, shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks — according to figures from the White House Office of Management and Budget.

And it’s worse… the omnibus bill will contain loads of earmarks and pork:

President Barack Obama and congressional Democratic leaders boasted that the stimulus bill had no “earmarks,” or special projects inserted by lawmakers for their home areas. In contrast, the new spending bill will have billions of dollars in such projects.

…

Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog group, has listed several thousand earmarks in bills that have passed a subcommittee or full committee and are being combined into the final version. Among them, for example, are $425,000 for Aultman Health Foundation in Canton, Ohio, to buy technology and equipment; $540,000 for Children’s Memorial Hospital in Chicago to improve its facilities and buy equipment; and $300,000 for the Discovery Center in Boise, Idaho, to mount exhibitions and conduct outreach.

Wow, Michelle Malkin’s headline is “9,000 earmarks in the $410 billion omnibus spending bill: Gang tattoo removal, Maine lobster, La Raza & more!”.  She even has specifics from Hill staffer Tom Jones on the earmarks!

  • $200,000 for “Tattoo Removal Violence Prevention Outreach Program,” pg. 283;
  • Maine lobster earmark in the omnibus, pg. 173;
  • $5.8 million earmark for the “Ted Kennedy Institute for the Senate…for the planning and design of a building & an endowment,” pg. 232;
  • and National Council of La Raza, $473,000 earmark from Sens. Bingaman and Menendez, pg. 212.

Human Events reports (H/T GatewayPundit) that John Boehner and Mike Pence are both requesting that the bill be put out there in the open so everyone can see what’s in it. But they are getting snubbed, apparently:

House minority leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) called upon the Speaker Thursday to release the voluminous spending bill online without delay. “If Democratic leaders plan to schedule a vote on the half-trillion dollar omnibus spending bill next week, they should post the legislation online immediately so the American people have adequate time to read the measure and understand what is in it,” Boehner said. “My colleagues in the Republican leadership and I made this request two weeks ago, and to date, our request has gone unanswered…”

Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), the House Republican Conference chairman, joined Boehner in asking again – apparently in vain — for an open process from the secretive Democrat leadership this time around. “More than two weeks ago, House Republicans called on Speaker Pelosi to post online the text of the upcoming half-trillion dollar ‘omnibus’ spending bill, bringing it out of the shadows and before the American people,” Pence said. “So far, that call has gone unanswered…”

Read the comments, the commenters have found even more earmarks!

Also, Nice Deb notes the irony of Obama painting himself as a fiscal conservative. She links to CBS News, and they say:

Mr. Obama has promised to slash the federal deficit in half by the end of his first term, reports CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante.To do that, the president will reduce Iraq War spending, end tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, and streamline government.

Contrast Obama’s wasting of taxpayer dollars with Bobby Jindal, turning down porkulus funds. The Anchoress linked to this video over at Hot Air of Jindal excoriating Obama for trying to pass off government spending as a means of stimulating the economy. Just listen to the way that Jindal structures his speech like a debater, and includes facts to support his assertions. WE NEED A COMMUNICATOR. Jindal is all substance and Obama is all style.

UPDATE: Here I explain how taking every penny earned by people making $75,000 or more will not pay for all the spending. Here I explain how Porkulus-2 would abolish the Washington, D.C. voucher program which allows school choice.

Commentary

Two ways to conduct a Tea Party revolution against socialism

2 Comments

GatewayPundit is reporting that the economic news is getting even worse.

Along with raising taxes on businesses, raising taxes on the “rich,” and allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire…
President Obama will also announce the implementation of an expensive cap and trade energy policy this week to battle pretend global warming.

He cites Human Events’ report that we will lose between between $444 billion and $1.308 trillion of GDP output, and unemployment would increase 2.7% (= 4 million jobs lost), mostly in the manufacturing sector.

Well, we’re doomed. Or are we? I’ve found a couple of clever ideas for dealing Obama’s plans to plunge the United States into socialism.

The first idea is from Biola University professor Doug Geivett, who is a first-class evangelical Christian scholar. I met Doug at a philosophy conference on Providence and Open Theism at Wheaton College, IL in 2000. I remember asking him whether investments were a form of gambling. He explained that investing was not gambling, because investments fund the creation of new products and services that grow the economy.

Doug starts by noting Rick Santelli’s rant against Obama’s socialist policies which involve wealth redistribution from those who produce to those who consume. (Note: there is now a new rant up, with supply-sider Larry Kudlow).

In his post, Geivett enumerates the points made by Santelli:

First, fiscally responsible Americans don’t want to pay the bill for borrowers who can’t keep up with their mortgages.

Second, fiscally responsible Americans shouldn’t have to pay the bill for borrowers who can’t make their payments.

Third, this plan doesn’t rob the rich to give to the poor. It takes from every tax-paying American and turns it over as free cash to people who can afford to rent but can’t afford to buy.

Fourth, there are ways to get the federal government to pay attention, ways the government is totally unprepared for.

Santelli suggests that responsible, productive Americans may want to consider a revolution – a kind of Chicago Tea Party. Right now, the banks are being more careful about who they give credit to. This is not a problem for responsible people with good credit history. The government is giving out bailouts to banks in order to ease credit for irresponsible consumers – the same ones that got us into this mess in the first place.

Geivett describes what he thinks this Chicago Tea Party might look like:

For example, what do you think would happen if 30% of all Americans with an income of $50,000 or more organized to do the following two things:

  1. Convert all of their assets held in the stock market and at banks and credit unions into cold, hard cash (or gold bars holed up in their bank’s safe deposit boxes)?
  2. Refused to pay income tax for 18 months (or indefinitely)?

This would remove the money that banks use for consumer loans. If no one can get credit, then no one can default, and there is no need for bailouts to these delinquents. By refusing to pay income taxes for a period of time, the government would have no funds available for bailing out their favorite special interest groups. People might finally have to stop spending and start working and saving again.

Geivett goes on to describe how this plan should incorporate reduced consumer spending, which I agree with. Somehow, America has gone terribly wrong. We use to be a nation of workers and savers. But the progress of left-wing socialism, with all the redistributing of wealth from producers to free-riders, has caused us to drift into an irresponsible, immature, hedonistic culture.

Geivett’s plan made me think of a post I read before on “Going Galt”. What if all the people who produced wealth just stopped producing?

Do you ever wonder after dealing with all that is going on with the economy and the upcoming election if it’s getting to be time to “go John Galt”? For those of you who have never read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, the basic theme is that John Galt and his allies take actions that include withdrawing their talents, “stopping the motor of the world,” and leading the “strikers” (those who refuse to be exploited) against the “looters” (the exploiters, backed by the government).

…

Obama talks about taking from those who are productive and redistributing to those who are not — or who are not as successful. If success and productivity is to be punished, why bother? Perhaps it is time for those of us who make the money and pay the taxes to take it easy, live on less, and let the looters of the world find their own way.

The National Taxpayers Union explains who pays the taxes that Democrats are redistributing to their freeloading constituents. The top 50% pays 97% of all income taxes collected! The lazy half the country is freeloading off of the productive half.

The second idea that I found for responding to Obama’s socialist bailouts is to move to Canada. Captain Capitalism had this post in which he compares the two economies and concludes that Canada has a better future than the United States. Canada has a smaller deficit, a smaller debt, and is not facing a meltdown from entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security, like we are.

Investor’s Business Daily reports that:

By 2041, Social Security will be essentially broke, having exhausted its trust fund, those dollars amassed through decades of surplus payroll tax revenues that Congress will have already squandered on general budget expenditures. Medicare’s future is just as bleak. It is already spending more than it is receiving in payroll taxes.

The prime minister of Canada right now is economist Stephen Harper, a strong fiscal conservative in the mold of F.A. Hayek.

UPDATE 1: Michelle Malkin has even more ideas on what to do here.