The Check is in the Mail

Is this really neccesary?

WASHINGTON (AP)- At a cost of nearly $42 million, the IRS wants you to know: Your check is almost in the mail. The Internal Revenue Service is spending the money on letters to alert taxpayers to expect rebate checks as part of the economic stimulus plan.

Keith Hennessey, director of the president's National Economic Council, said the letters are being sent to explain how the tax rebates will work. "Any time you do something as a government tens of millions of times, there is ample room for people to get confused. And so if you're going to have tens of millions of taxpayers getting checks, you want to get the information out so that you have as few people as possible confused about what's happening, they understand what's coming, and it reduces the number of incoming requests that IRS and Treasury have to figure out how to deal with it," said Hennessey.

Oh ya that makes it alot clearer, thanks Kieth. Being from Iowa it is so easy to get Cornfused!

Trimming the Fat Hog.

It appears that there may be a chance for President Bush to undo at least some of the mind numbing 11,000 earmarks in the recently passed Omnibus spending bill which wallowed its way out of congress this week. The Heritage Foundation describes the Presidents options and the President has directed new budget director Jim Nussel (R.Iowa) to examine the possibilities.

For those on the left that rant that the White House has usurped the Constitution, declared itself a unitary executive, and has underhandedly thwarted the democrats every effort to accomplish anything of substance in the past year, this would be a rather first rate lump of coal for their Christmas Stocking. Merry Christmas.

Earmark Reform

The democrats became the majority with a promise to change the way Washington operates but so far they have been long on promises and short on action. I know the obstructionist Republicans have foiled them at every turn.............Sorry, fell out of my chair laughing.

My one pet peave that they could resolve with support of the republicans would be earmark reform. Bringing home the bacon is a time honored perk of power that has grown so large and the handouts so outragous that it is time to end this corrupt practice.

On the side bar I have placed a petition for the reform efforts of Senator Jim Demint. Please take a second and fill it out.

Harking Bringing Home the Bacon: Part II

After I reported on the earmarks Senator Harkin attached to the 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bill (Senator Harkin, Bringing Home the Bacon), which included several million for the Senators constituents outside of Iowa and the even more troubling $500,000 for the political group 'The National Council of LaRaza', I contacted the senator for an explanation. Surprisingly, I received a reply from the Senator. Obviously just a form letter but I will post it in part none the less.

Dear Scott:

Thank you for contacting me. I am always glad to hear from you. I appreciate your interest in important health, education, and workforce programs funded by the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services (HHS), and Education, which I Chair. As you may know, the Fiscal Year 2008 Labor, HHS, and Education Appropriations bill, S. 1710, was approved by the full Senate Appropriations Committee and will soon be considered by the full Senate. I have long believed that budgets are about priorities. The President's proposed budget cuts represent the wrong priorities for America. I believe the Labor, HHS, and Education bill approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee represents the right priorities for our nation.The President's budget would have slashed funding for important health and education programs. My Senate bill...

The Senator then spent several hundred words describing all the great the things that were included in the legislation. None of which included the earmarks attached to the bill or an explanation of the specific spending that I inquired about.

...Please rest assured that I will continue to work for a final Labor, HHS, and Education spending bill that protects and respects the interests and values of Iowans. If I can be of any more assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, thanks for sharing your views with me. Please don't hesitate to let me know how you feel on any issue that concerns you.

Sincerely,

Tom Harkin
United States Senator

I am left with that feeling that I have just had smoke blown up the backside. I will be contacting the good Senator and will hopefully get a better more personally directed explanation of my inquiry

Earmark reforms

One mans pork is another mans deep fried tenderloin with ketchup, mustard, pickles and onions. The Club for Growth has compiled a record of congressional votes on 50 anti-pork amendments." Of of the fifty amendments submited only one passed in spite of Democrats pledging to clean up Washington.

Some highlights from the report:

• Sixteen congressmen scored a perfect 100%, voting for all 50 anti-pork
  amendments. They are all Republicans.


• The average Republican score was 43%. The average Democratic score was 2%.


• Rep. David Obey (D-WI) did not vote for his own amendment to strike all
  earmarks in the Labor-HHS appropriations bill. Rep. Obey scored an embarrassing 0% overall.


• 105 congressmen scored an embarrassing 0%, voting against every single
  amendment.


• The Pork Hall of Shame includes 81 Democrats and 24 Republicans.


• The Democratic Freshmen scored an abysmal average score of 2%. Their
  Republican counterparts scored an average score of 78%.

So no matter how you may feel about earmarks this is how our Iowa Representatives have voted on recent earmark reform legislation.

Bruce Brailey (D) 43/50 83%

Leonard Bosswell (D) 43/47 91%

Dave Loebsack (D) 1/50 2%

Tom Latham (R) 2/50 4%

Steve King (R) 43/47 91%

Overall not a bad record for the Iowa delegation but congressmen Latham and Loebsack got some splainin to do.

Senator Harkin, Bringing Home the Bacon

The group "Americans for Prosperity" has compiled a list of the earmarks for the 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bill. AFP reports;

The 1,016 earmarks total nearly $392 million, and include millions for questionable projects such as $1 million in tax dollars for a museum dedicated to recreating the 1969 Woodstock Music Festival experience and $250,000 to help fund the Polynesian Voyaging Society, which makes and sails ancient canoes from Hawaii to Japan.

Iowa Senator Tom Harkin brought $28 million into a variety of state organizations including $100,000 for “Lighten Up Iowa,” an online program encouraging people to lose weight while also preaching the benefits of vegan diets. He also teamed with Republican Senator Chuck Grassley for another $10 million. Grassley on his own was only able to muster a mere $400,000. It's tough being in the minority.

Harkin's efforts didn't stop at the Iowa border however. He also brought home a little bacon for his constituents in Arizona, Florida, Delaware, Maryland, Missouri, Mississippi Texas, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. Which included a grant of $500,000 for the "National Council of La Raza" in Washington, DC.

Grassley Watch

Senators Baucus (D) and Grassley (R)

From the The American Conservative Union:

It never fails, whenever the free market is poised to succeed and innovate further, there is always an effort to tax or regulate it from reaching its true potential. The most recent example: efforts to impose new punitive taxes on
publicly traded partnerships.
In view of several pending and potential Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) by private equity firms seeking to join the public markets, U.S. Senators Max Baucus (D-MT)and Charles Grassley (R-IA) unveiled punitive legislation in S.1624 late last week to actually RAISE taxes on ALL existing and new publicly traded partnerships.
Like bad tax policy before it, this legislation was offered without the benefit of normal Congressional or Joint Tax Committee hearings or any analysis from the U.S.
Treasury or the Internal Revenue Service. The free market community is united against any new tax increases and will oppose this bill vigorously. Not only is this legislation a major tax increase, it will actually depress tax revenues as other partnerships will choose to stay private or reincorporate abroad – neither of which is good for the economy, the government or investors. This legislation will more than double the tax-rate for ALL current publicly traded partnerships – the vast majority of which are not even private equity-based partnerships.

Grassley Watch

Senators Baucus (D) and Grassley (R)


When I recently discussed Senator Grassley’ calling the tax credits to the oil companies a “pig in a poke” as reported on the CBS website the quote was not quite what it seemed. The AP reported:

The bill's prospects are uncertain in the Senate, where Democrats hold a narrow majority. The top Republican on the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, said the bill was "another pig in the poke" that targets incentives necessary to promote domestic drilling.[1]

If we go to the transcript of the senator’s statement on the senate floor, it would seem that he is against the rollback of oil company incentives. Or is he? From the Floor Statement of Senator Grassley:

Thursday, January 18, 2007
I rise to address an issue that has received much scrutiny during the past few months, and is currently being debated in the House of Representatives. The other body is debating a bill that will repeal the so-called sweet-heart tax deals for Big Oil that were included the Energy Policy Act of 2005….
During the campaign cycle, members on the other side sold the taxpayer a bill of goods. They committed to repealing all the “tax giveaways” to Big Oil that the Republican Congress included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005…. How much money are they going to take back from Big Oil to alleviate consumers’ pain at the pump?One provision. That’s right, Mr. President. After all the demagoguery against our party and ties to big oil, they’re going to repeal one single tax provision enacted in the Energy Policy Act. And that’s only half of the story. It turns out that this outrageous “tax giveaway” to Big Oil is scored by the Congressional Budget Office to save the U.S. treasury $104 million over ten years. Not $14 billion. Not $1.4 billion. A mere $104 million….
A word of caution to the voters across America – beware of the goods you were sold
by this new Democrat Majority. In the case of repealing the big oil “tax giveaways” from Energy Policy Act, it’s turned out to be another “pig in the poke.”[2]

It wasn’t that the majority planned to roll back $104 million in tax incentives but instead it seems that that sum was not enough for the good senator.
Fast forward to June 19 and it is reported that the bill would reduce incentives by $6 billion and raise a total of $15 billion through new taxes; it is here that the media portrays Grassley as being against the bill, the whole this being “a pig in a poke.”
Later that same day it was reported that the bill would raise $29 billion. But this time the AP reported:

Senators acknowledged that oil companies would howl over the new taxes. But Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the Finance Committee's top Republican, said, "We have entered a new era in energy markets ... (that) requires a dramatic shift away from tax incentives for oil and gas production" and toward support for other energy sources and efficiency. (3)

Suddenly the Senator from Iowa was firmly on board and joined at the hip with Senator Baucus chairman of the Finance Committee. In senate debates broadcast on CSPAN June 20th Grassley speaking from the majority side of the aisle, and arguing against an amendment by fellow republican Senator Kyl, Grassley stated that we now have sufficient offsets, ie. taxes, to make a serious contribution to developing alternative energy resources. Offsets, which by now had climbed to $31 million from the oil industry to pay for this new energy package.
To think that by supporting the socialist agenda of the democrats that he is doing the right thing for the people of Iowa is ludicrous. Surely the oil companies will do more than howl as Mr. Grassley stated. These actions will have an adverse affect on domestic oil drilling and refining and with the exception of Iowa farmers and the ethanol industry the rest of us will be paying for this fiasco every time we pull up to the pump.

[1] http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/WireStory?id=2805859&page=
[2] http://www.senate.gov/~finance/press/Gpress/2007/prg011807.pdf
[3] http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3294641

Senator Grassley Doublespeak.

From this mornings issue of The Cedar Rapids Gazette " Grassley Backs Democrat's (energy) Bill". The package plans to distribute $14 billion to various renewable energy sources. Senator Grassley states;

"This bill reflects energy needs in the 21st Century. Americans need clean, green, domestic energy for their homes and cars. I’m glad to see the extension of key renewable energy provisions for ethanol, wind, and bio-diesel. People need tax certainty to invest in infrastructure and keep production moving. Production has to meet demand, and alternative energy has never been in such demand.

This newest handout comes on the heels of a recent report that the phony panacea of the ethanol industry is reaching saturation and is in for tighter times ahead.

But wait. Didn't Chuckles lambaste the the democrats for rolling back oil company incentives for domestic production? Something he called a "pig in a poke". A bill that coincidentally would raise somewhere in the neighborhood of $14 billion.
Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens who had on a bright red shirt and made reference to it when he said this of the redistribution plan;

"It's the color of this bill we're debating, Communist red." The legislation amounts to a taking of private property" by forcing oil companies to renegotiate leases they view as valid contracts, he said.

Talking out of both sides of your mouth can be so confusing. Perhaps it's suppose to be when you are robbing Petrol to pay Ethanol.

From the Desk of Tom Harkin D-IA

When the new immigration bill was announced I thought I would investigate where our two Senators stood on the issue.
Senator Chuck Grassley R-IA had already listed the "Top 15 Flaws" of the bill on his website.
Tom Harkin on the other hand does not even list immigration on his issues page. Friday I emailed my esteemed senator and voiced my concerns with the bill. Today I received what I assume is the standard response which I will pass along for your reading enjoyment. You can contract Senator Harkin here and let him know that for many Iowans immigration is an issue.

Dear Scott:
Thank you for contacting me. I am always glad to hear from you. I appreciate your views on the need to reform our immigration laws. As you may know, after many months of negotiations, a bipartisan group of senators recently agreed on a comprehensive immigration reform package. Unfortunately, I was not a member of this working group, so while the general outline of the deal has been announced, I have only just received a copy of the bill language. At this time, I am still working my way through the text of the bill.While I have not decided whether or not I will support this piece of legislation,

I feel that we must work to fix our broken immigration system. I will be evaluating the new compromise bill based on the factors that I feel are most important to a comprehensive solution: the need to beef up security along our borders; the need to step up enforcement against those who hire illegal workers; and finally, the need to create a practical solution to allow undocumented workers presently in this country to come forward, undergo a background investigation, pay a fine as restitution for having been in the U.S. illegally, learn English, and maintain a clean criminal and work record.Please be assured that I will remember your concerns when the full Senate proceeds to consideration of this legislation. Again, thanks for sharing your views with me. Please don't hesitate to let me know how you feel on any issue that concerns you.

Sincerely,
Tom Harkin
United States Senator