Caveat Emptor: Rethink Obama's Health-Care Bill

Are you sold on the Obama Health-Care bill? If so, think about a serious issue that hasn't been completely explained to Congress or the American public.

In 2006 the Democrats took over control of Congress and immediately they restored the pay-go as a rule for both houses. (In basic jargon, this meant that if a new entitlement program were enacted, in order to pay for it some other program had to be cut....somewhere). This year, Obama begged the legislature to make it a law, envisioning that he would have more power to enforce it. What is not reported to the public is the fact that it could do the opposite. This bill states that if Congress has spent more on new entitlements (or has given more tax cuts) than it has saved, the Prez. can roll back or hide the excess.

So why is that such a bad idea? The Congressional Budget Office sent out an alarming memo that said that the bill as introduced might allow spending to increase by an alarming amount ( let's call it an astronomical amount). The memo further stated, "that rule would allow Congress to enact legislation that would increase deficits by an amount in the vicinity of $3 trillion over the 2010-2019 period with a sequestration."

Still confused? The bill would exempt from pay-go all of the spending in Medicare physician payments and all of the revenue dependent on estate and gift taxes, the alternative minimum tax for individuals and the administration's plan to continue the middle-income tax cuts of 2001-2003.

This pay-go program doesn't have a multi-year cap on discretionary spending and could result in a budget with a 40% loophole of staggering proportions that doesn't have to be paid for.

Mr. Obama promised transparency, he promised a "revenue neutral" budget, he promised accountability. What many are seeing is a devil in the details that might just up and bite us on the butt. Caveat emptor.

Huge False Alarm: Was it Done on Purpose?

Yesterday, for no worthy reason, the respected Washington Post editorial staff sent out the ominous alarm that we would see a "light-switch tax" in Prez Obama's budget. So, right now let's get it clear before the heated discussions at the water dispensers and the local pubs heat up. It's not in the bill. It's not even vaguely mentioned in the bill.



I have a great respect for the fourth estate. We sorely need them to serve as a check and balance on the three branches of the federal govt. We should expect them to report the facts and we should also understand that they can surmise all the want in their op-ed sections, but to stoop to a legerdemain-like trick as the Post did yesterday is below the standards of good journalism. Was this done in a manner to get the concept out into the marketplace of ideas to see if it would fly? Doubtful.
Was it done as a way to create an even greater uproar from members of Congress (who probably haven't read the bill and are not likely to do so) to stifle its passage? Maybe.

Was it an oversight? Not in a million years.

Who knows? Just know that it isn't true .

Joseph Goebbels said something to the effect that if we tell a big enough lie long enough the will people tend to believe it. I am pretty sure this false alarm will be repeated as the truth for weeks/months to come by millions.

Modern Day Salem Witchhunt: Scapegoating the Auto Industry

Treasury Sec. Geithner announced yesterday that, yes, we will probably need to push more money into the banking industry. At the same time the Prez announced that he wouldn't give the auto industry anymore $$$ without huge changes; he basically took these CEOs to the public whipping post and meted out punishment after he humiliated them via the airwaves. The clarion call echoing nation-wide is "Let Them Go Bankrupt".

I don't get it, and I don't think the average citizen gets it, either. This govt gave the industry a whopping $18 billion and is miffed that the magic wand of capitalism isn't bringing about sky-rocketing auto sales. And, because of the paucity of sales, the Prez and Congress have had a field day beating up on them.

The banking industry, on the other hand, which hasn't done a thing has been given the royal treatment. Many have been invited to the White House or to special functions by members of Congress for a red carpet-back slapping- good ol' time. Remember these are the same g/gals who got us into this mess and, guess what, no one in leadership wants these CEOs fined, prosecuted, removed, or even verbally criticized.

Oh, lest we forget, the banking industry has been handed $1 trillion U.S. dollars (and getting more). The auto industry at least created jobs and our beloved cars.

A..I.G. Bonuses: What a Bunch of Bull

To hear it from the august body of Congress, we now must suffer from the complete anger of its members . What a great day, can't you see it? Ranting, raving about how untoward it is for A.I.G. to send out bonuses albeit the fact that they are miniscule in relation to the bailout (1%).

What a microphone day these Congressional g/gals must be having! Can't you see it: raising hell over nothing but getting credit for being a vanguard of the public trust. (Where have they been?)
Everyone connected to this episode knew that the Feds and the Treasury Dept. gave complete and total information regarding this (not so important) story months ago.
But, hey, it fills up the giant T.V.s and gives us a reason to flip-off a commentator to vent our anger. But, it's a no story made huge.
How about reporting on the unemployed, the failings of Iceland, or Darfur? Much like the Octo-Mom, whom I ditched weeks ago, I am pretty much tired of listening to this non-event.