- About Me (18)
- Book Reviews (20)
- Community Outreach (26)
- Economy and Finance (152)
- Education (101)
- Fiction (7)
- He Said -- She Said (15)
- Humor (6)
- Memoirs (66)
- Mouth of Matuszak Radio Show (26)
- News (457)
- Philosophy (47)
- Poetry (5)
- Political Essays (586)
- Political Foodie (17)
- Royka's Ramblings (1)
- Science Geek (14)
- Second Amendment (106)
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Congress To Vote On 'Plan B' Debacle
The other day, Speaker Boehner proposed a capitulation he termed as "Plan B". He has attempted to propagate the bill as a compromise. Still, it is basically a surrender. The bill is set for a vote on December 20, 2012.
Hopefully, conservative representatives either vote it down or amend it to include realistic and necessary spending cuts as well as a path towards a balanced budget. Perhaps it's a good time to push forward the Balanced Budget Amendment as well.
This follows Boehner removing fiscal conservatives from key budgeting and finance committees claiming that they "weren't towing the party line". He has forgotten that these representatives were hired (elected) because of their fiscally conservative stances. Basically, he removed them from the committees for doing the jobs we hired them to do. It's obvious that Boehner has forgotten to whom he must answer and what he was hired to do. His job is not to have private meetings with Obama. His job is to represent the will of his constituents.
"Plan B" is basically the tax and budget plan Nancy Pelosi once proposed.
Yes, he has put forth a plan devised by the same socialist who rammed the PPACA down our throats. The same Nancy Pelosi who waved a 2000+ page mess of fascist takeover of private industries saying (paraphrase) that to know what fascist regulations and government infringements are in the bill, that representatives must first vote in favor of it and put it into action.
So, "Plan B" is her socialist tax and spend plan.
Plan B does, in effect, broaden the range of what is interpreted as middle-income households.
It may "freeze" their income tax rates. It does not prevent increased taxation, especially from those looming tax increases due to the PPACA. So, taxes on all wage earners are set to rise, regardless.
The plan also does not cut spending. It may cut the increase in spending. That is not decreased spending, however. It just means that the bill proposes they spend only $200 beyond their income instead of $250 beyond the income (to put it in terms of household budgeting). It is still spending beyond their means and will never lead to a balanced budget.
The plan also does not increase the tax base. That is the only possible way to actually increase federal tax revenue. In any case, increases in tax revenue are not likely to cover current spending, much less any increase. Then again, Pelosi championed having no budget during her tenure as Speaker.
The irony is that Obama has already stated that he won't sign "Plan B" because it doesn't tax people enough. Obama's rhetoric while campaigning for re-election was the constant deluge of "millionaires and billionaires". If he truly wanted to put his money where his bull-crap blower is, he'd sign "Plan B" without a hitch. The fact is, he was lying, as usual, when he said "millionaires and billionaires". What he meant was "anybody making a comfortable paycheck who can possibly save or invest part of their disposable income".
While this plan is the closest thing to a viable compromise to Obama's temper-tantrum demands, it is not a fair compromise for the citizens. It also is irresponsible. Cuts in spending, especially corporate welfare, ridiculous grants, food stamps, "Obamaphones", and other incentives for laziness and decreased prosperity; need to be made.
It does not avoid the "fiscal cliff". It just puts an ineffective governor on Obama's acceleration pedal so we go over at 90 mph instead of 110 mph.
The defense department needs to revamp its spending and budgeting. However, service member pay and benefits do not need to be cut. As it is, civilian public sector bureaucrats (DA, DN, and DoD civilians) working similar jobs are paid much more and receive better benefits despite working fewer hours and in far less dangerous circumstances. There are wastes on things such as so-called "green energy" projects that have proven to be far less cost-effective than proposed. Cut those. Do not cut pay, benefits, training funds, or equipment and maintenance funds. Do not cut personnel. Do not cut defense spending. Just make sure it is properly prioritized and utilized.
The VA needs to do much of the same. They don't need to spend money on costly and unneeded "training conferences" that lead to corrupt spending on anything but caring for veterans.
The Department of Justice wasted who knows how many millions of dollars on that illegal debacle known as Operation Fast and Furious. Where was the budgetary oversight on that mess?
There are countless more examples of wasted federal revenue and irresponsible spending. Many of these grants and stipends actually violate the 8th and 9th sections of Article I of the US Constitution. Any plan needs to start there. Look at what congress is actually allowed (and mandated) to spend money on. Putting a shrimp on an underwater treadmill is not a responsible allocation of funds.
"Plan B" is a debacle. It is not a compromise. It is a capitulation. It also will not work. All it does is set the stage for Obama to demand more from his lordship's serfs and subjects.