President Obama's Favorite Republican

Richard Lugar, 78, Republican of Indiana was first elected to the US Senate in 1976. His political career started when he was elected Mayor of Indianapolis in 1968. President Richard Nixon called him his favorite mayor. Lugar no doubt started out in politics with best intentions to serve the people by keeping his oath to them and to the Constitution. But whatever good he did in Congress is long forgotten after 43 years of doing what he considered necessary in getting reelected as each term came to an end. And therein lays the problem.

His early good efforts are now overshadowed by his votes in recent years such as on behalf of the ethanol scam, for instance –see how that worked so well for his fellow Poster Child, Sen. Grassley (R-IA).As you read ask yourself would a Sen. who goes to Washington to serve the people sign on to such expensive, counter-productive scams? This issue is a perfect example of how career pols milk their positions of power. Ethanol is the one product that is not only subsidized by US taxpayers, but mandated that 10% of US gasoline contain it (Lugar has pushed for 15% mandate even though it hurts engines and increases pollution –many green groups oppose its use). Oh, and in case competitive ethanol pops up in the global marketplace, as it has from Brazil, then the career pols put a tariff on it. Brazilian ethanol is made from sugar and actually works cleaner than corn ethanol and costs less than gasoline to produce unlike the corn product. So, Lugar and Grassley and a majority of the Senate voted a 54 cent per gallon tariff to prevent the cheaper, more efficient ethanol from competing with their tax-supported inferior product. To make matters worse, their corn ethanol mandates, subsidies and protection have caused the cost to rise as corn is used to run cars instead of food. The one reason our duly elected representatives force this great inefficiency and expense on the people is to gain contributions and votes from their farmers and others like Archer-Daniels-Midland who reap huge profits from this boondoggle. [Boondoggle: a wasteful or impractical project or activity often involving graft.] Did I mention the 45 cents per gallon tax credit? Big bucks for beneficiaries and politicians; high taxes and debt for current and future taxpayers.

Typical of the career pol, Lugar felt entitled to "his" seat and now after being defeated in the primary, he refuses to endorse or help the Republican candidate.  'It is all about ME' for this RINO.

Close friends with VP Joe Biden and friendly with President Obama, Lugar was named an honorary co-chairman of their inauguration. President Obama calls him his favorite Republican. Photos of Lugar even appeared in campaign ads that helped Obama carry Indiana. Just some of the reasons he is regarded so highly by the Obama administration:
• Lugar declined to sign a brief supporting state lawsuits against President ObamaCare;
• Voted in favor of the Matthew Shepard Act, which expanded the federal hate crime statutes to include sexual orientation and gender identity;
• The first Republican senator to support for President Obama's first Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor and also voted in favor of his second Supreme Court nominee Solicitor General Elena Kagan. (Two more liberal judges could not be found –they both follow Obama’s view of the Constitution that it is flawed. Look for more emanations from penumbras from them over time.);
• Supported ratification of the START Treaty (Obama called Lugar to thank him for his help on it);
• Voted for the Dream Act, which was defeated but would have allowed the children of illegal immigrants to gain citizenship if they attend college or join the military.

Yet, he has a mostly pro-life record and recently voted against the “Employee Free Choice Act of 2007” (a/k/a Card Check) to eliminate the secret ballot for union members. Plus he voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment, limiting the definition of marriage to one man and one woman. In October 2010, he voted against repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy—which prevents homosexuals from serving openly in the armed forces. Just weeks later, Sen. Joe Lieberman announced that Lugar promised to vote to repeal the policy the next time it comes up for a vote. But then in December, Lugar voted against DADT again. Career pols have to be flexible. This vote came as a surprise to some, including Sen. Lieberman, but not to Indiana conservatives who are actively recruiting a primary challenger for 2012. It is called “pivoting” in the political trade.

When Lugar voted against an earmark ban that was championed by conservatives and tea party activists and even supported by Indiana's other senator, Democrat Evan Bayh, he lost any remaining support he had from that quarter.

These posters are limited by space-- there is a lot more that can be written both from the right and left view of this politician and not all of our examples are given as reasons for term limits. But, it cannot be denied that long-tenured professional politicians are largely responsible for the overgrown federal government and the huge debt we now carry and are putting on the shoulders of future generations. Lugar voted for many of the entitlements that now strangle the economy and, not incidentally, have no authority in the US Constitution. Limiting terms of congress is one reform that will prevent the corruption that invariably follows unlimited tenure. Help Sen. Jim DeMint by going to www.termlimits.org and sign on to support his proposed term limit amendment. Please comment on this article pro or con or to add information --check comments for updates. Thanks.

A Classic Scammer

updated 3/3/2015
AFT!  She's finally retiring but way too late --a couple $trillion too late

“To compel a person to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.” --Thomas Jefferson


(updated with term limit vote on 2/5/12*)
So when politicians pass bills that give taxpayer money to individuals and organizations that I disapprove of I call that tyrannical per Mr. Jefferson. I don’t approve of my tax money going to government radio and TV (NPR and PBS) or ACORN or Planned Parenthood or any other group –and there thousands of them—that live off hard-working American taxpayers. Not only do I personally disapprove but so did the Founders as there is no place in the Constitution that approves of these appropriations. But Barbara A. Mikulski approves of them, all right –they are her lifeblood. Her system, learned during 40 years in politics, is the classic scam of robbing Peter to pay Paul who then contributes to her campaign.

A most recent example as described by Isaac MacMillen of ALG News Bureau: Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) has come under heavy left-wing fire for her attempts to keep ACORN and others from using taxpayer money for political purposes. House Resolution 1388, the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act” (more commonly called the “GIVE Act”), was designed to help President Obama fulfill his campaign pledge to multiply the number of (paid!) volunteers, at taxpayer expense. But when the House voted to expand AmeriCorps from 75,000 to 250,000 (at a cost of billions of additional tax dollars), they also passed the Foxx amendment, limiting the ability for groups receiving federal funds to engage in lobbying activities. The amendment would also preclude certain political front groups from even receiving government funds. And that is good news for the American taxpayer.

Under Rep. Foxx's amendment, organizations simply cannot receive tax funds if they fall under, among others, one of the following categories:
• Lobbyist
• Political Party
• For-profit
• Labor organization

And the organizations that are eligible may not use the funds to engage in the following highly political activities:
• Lobbying
• Endorsing or opposing legislation
• Sponsoring events that oppose or endorse legislation
• Petitioning for political causes
• Staging protests, boycotts, or strikes
• Engaging in or interfering with union organizing

Reading the list, one is left nodding his or her head, and simply saying, “Well, of course.” Unless that one, it turns out, happens to be Sen. Barbara Mikulski, her fellow Senate Democrats or ACORN, and its cronies. …. Ms. Mikulski, in what may be a new world's record in transparent duplicity, substituted her own amendment for the Foxx Amendment. Senator Mikulski removed the prohibitions on lobbyists, political parties, union organizations, and for-profits from accepting funding. Which means that, under the Mikulski Amendment, ACORN, et al, may have all of the taxpayer funds they wish…” For an update on ACORN click here One Bite at a Time.

If she stays in office until March 17, 2012, she will become the longest-serving female member in the history of the US Congress yet she has never held a chairmanship of any full standing committee in the Senate. She has a master’s degree in social work which she applied to her first job after college: community organizing against construction of a highway. Mikulski was elected to the Baltimore city council in 1971 and to the US Congress in 1976 where she stayed until being elected to the Senate in 1987 where she has been ever since.

With a lifetime rating of near zero from both Citizens Against Government Waste http://ccagwratings.org/?s=Sen.+Mikulski and the Club for Growth www.clubforgrowth.org one can logically deduce that she is one of those lawmakers that have voted to create the current $16+ trillion dollar debt and also voted to stunt the growth of the economy. A bad combination but understandable from a lifetime politician who, like our other Posters, have had no real life experience.

Her history is one of following the Party Line upholding the traditional Tax-Spend-Elect philosophy of careerists in politics. It works –for them, not for taxpayers. She voted on 2/2/12 AGAINST the proposed amendment to limit the terms of congress and it was defeated* but we'll have another vote in the next session and so we're trying to get a million signatures on a petiton to help in that cause; please sign up at www.termlimits.org thanks.

*to see how your Senator voted:
http://senateconservatives.com/site/votes/112/2/11?c=5R4F2B4F9B3A137 hint: All Democrats but Joe Manchin of WV voted AGAINST the reform even though they know full well that a super-majority of their constituents are in favor of term limits.

At Home in the Beltway's Backrooms

Michael N. Castle (R-Del)’s opponent in the special election to be held in September to replace Joe Biden in the senate calls him Washington’s “invisible man,” a career politician, a true “Lord of the Backroom.” In political office since 1966 and Congress since 1992, Mike Castle is a Congressman no one knows, but whose votes affect us all. Christine O’Donnell, also a Republican, continues, “Until he came out solidly against repealing ObamaCare, Castle received almost no media attention. But in the Beltway’s Backrooms, he continually reinforces his credentials as a charter member of the Washington Establishment.” She does have a point in that Castle votes with Obama 60% of the time. In some years, he votes with the liberals half the time. In some years, it’s 75% of the time. He voted for the huge Cap & Trade Tax and against the surge in Iraq.

Rep. Castle’s latest move that got my attention and moved him up as a Poster Boy was his sponsorship of the Puerto Rico Statehood Bill that just narrowly passed the House April 29th. The bill is an attempt by Obama and the Dems to add to their one-party rule majority by adding three more votes –two in the Senate and one in the House. Why a nominally Republican Rep. would sponsor such a bill is a mystery. If Christine O’Donnell is right about her “Lord of the Backroom” description there was backroom deal of some sort. Like our other Poster Children he has been in politics all his life so that makes sense to us. And he is a lawyer.

Castle calls himself a Catholic but is a member of several pro-abortion groups including the Republican Majority For Choice, Republicans For Choice and Christine Todd Whitman's It’s My Party Too. Another contradiction?

Checking him out on our most reliable non-partisan taxpayer groups, we find that Castle is on both sides of the earmark debate as the Club for Growth RePork Card shows him voting for earmarks about half the time and against the other half. The National Taxpayers Union tabulations show that he started out in ‘93 favoring taxpayers 75% of the time but in the last several years he hovers around 50% with the last three years average at just over 40%. Citizens Against Government Waste rates Castle at 57% lifetime and the most recent year 31%. CCAGW rates members on a 0 to 100 percent scale. Our poster boy is rated “lukewarm” to taxpayers’ concerns.

When we see averages like this in the middle of the pack we conclude that the Rep. is trying to be all things to all people to enhance reelection prospects. In a liberal state like Delaware he tries to satisfy his party’s expressed opposition to spending and waste some of the time and then gives in to the spenders and puts in for earmarks to satisfy the liberal voters. Wishy-washy is the term that comes to mind. Others might label him "unprincipled."

Key votes http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/C000243/key-votes/

This is your typical career pol that starts out looking out for the taxpayers and then slipping into deficit spending to placate lobbyists and other special interest groups who help insure reelection. Reminds of Ronald Reagan’s description of the guy who goes to Washington to “drain the swamp” and after a bit he discovers it is really a hot tub –and he wants to stay there at all costs. Professional politicians Job #1 is to get reelected and since they are a majority what they do today is for their own benefit which must be paid for in future by our and their own children and grandchildren. Hence, the country’s multi-$trillion debt.

Disgusting!

Sorry, but I couldn’t resist this picture that gives the congressman’s reply to a constituent who, frustrated by the b.s. from his congressman, asked him “not to pee on my leg and call it rain.” Nice, huh? It gets worse.

Fortney Hillman "Pete" Stark, Jr. (D-CA #13) age 78, is the 6th most senior representative as well as 8th most senior member of Congress –he’s been there for nearly 40 years! When our other Poster Boy, Charlie Rangel, had to resign for ethics violations Pete Stark was given the chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee purely on the basis of tenure. But Stark was quickly pushed aside in favor of Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., after many Democrats privately complained that Stark was too volatile to lead such an important committee.

Stark has had his own run-in with the ethics committee, exhibiting “…bizarre behavior during an investigation…” Officials found Stark was "extremely belligerent" toward investigators from the Office of Congressional Ethics looking into his application for a homestead tax exemption in Maryland even though his official residence is in California. Long-tenured pols tend to believe that laws apply to the little people and not themselves.

Unlike most of our other Poster Children he is not a lawyer –he actually has an MBA from the University of California at Berkeley and was a highly successful banker having founded in 1963 Security National Bank at Walnut Creek and built it to $100 million enterprise within 10 years. He first ran for Congress from Oakland in 1972 and has been there ever since. He even served a couple of years in the U.S. Air Force, 1955-57. Not the background –except for the Berkeley years, that one expects for an avowed socialist.

Others we’ve posted, so far, who are fellow members of the largest socialist association in the U.S., the Democrat Socialists of America, are Henry Waxman, Maxine Waters (charged today with ethics violations), Hank Johnson, Barney Frank, Ed Markey, John Conyers, Jose Serrano, Nancy Pelosi and probably many more –the membership list is hard to get. Many in congress the longest are statist inclined which explains the ease with which Obama has passed his programs of government takeovers. When asked what limitations does the Constitution put on the federal government, Stark said “the federal government, yes, can do anything…” See him say it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1-eBz8hyoE&feature=player_embedded People who spend the bulk of their lives in government tend to believe in big or even total government.

Stark recently mocked the idea that the borders are not secure when asked by a constituent at a town hall meeting about the federal government's lack of activity on border security. "If you knew anything about our borders, you would know …that our borders are quite secure, thank you," Stark said, drawing jeers. Then he resumed his hostile act by asking a constituent, "… I've got to know how high the wall is and I'll sell a whole lot of ladders…”

Since 95 % of incumbents regularly are reelected given advantages of incumbency he assumes reelection. The liberal San Francisco Chronicle editorialized on Stark, "Only a politician who assumes he has a job for life could behave so badly on a semi-regular basis by spewing personalized invective that might get him punched in certain East Bay taverns. Would-be challengers sometimes sense a whiff of opportunity, but the reality of taking on a 16-term (now 19-term) Democrat in solidly liberal terrain is nothing short of daunting. Surely there must be someone along the shoreline between Alameda and Fremont who could represent the good citizens of the district with class and dignity. It's not the case now.”

In an August 2008 videotaped interview with Jan Helfeld concerning the size of the national debt, Stark stated that the size of the national debt is a reflection of the nation's wealth. When pressed if the nation should take on more debt in order to have more wealth, Stark threatened Helfeld and said, “You get the f--k out of here or I’ll throw you out the window.”

Other controversies include singling out “Jewish colleagues" for blame for the Persian Gulf War. In 1995, in a meeting with Rep. Nancy Johnson (D-CT) he called her a "whore for the insurance industry" and suggested that her knowledge of health care came solely from “pillow talk” with her doctor-husband. In 1999, he said of former California Welfare Director Eloise Anderson, herself a former welfare mother, that she would "kill children if she had her way" because she advocated for welfare reform. At a hearing on abstinence promotion, he referred to Rep. JC Watts (R-OK) as the Republican Conference chairman, whose children were all born out of wedlock." He almost had his face rearranged someone commented of the incident which drew the police.

There are many other incidents of this type that could be recounted here but these should suffice to present a picture of unlimited abuse of his office. Just one more: In 2007, Stark accused President Bush of sending troops to Iraq "to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."

What has he accomplished in Congress since 1972, you ask? Statistically, he missed 20% of all votes during his tenure and when he did vote it was 94% with the Democrat Party. He missed the vote on the Homeland Security Act but voted against the amendment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which gives U.S. spy agencies expanded power to eavesdrop on foreign suspects. He voted to increase taxes on oil companies and for subsidies for various “alternative” energy subsidies. He voted for increases in the minimum wage and against any spending cuts for welfare or student loans. I could find no time when he voted against any spending reduction but he consistently votes for increased taxes, opposing the Bush tax cuts and extension of them in 2006 and now. The net result of his votes have been to increase the size and scope of FedGov which is consistent with his socialist commitment.

Socialist-statist nations like the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Venezuela, N. Korea, et al, are not known for their concerns about pollution, global warming, the environment or of " endangered species” but Stark is for all of that. Socialists use these programs to expand the State through regulations and taxes.

We must have term limits on congress if we are to survive as Constitutional Republic. Go to www.termlimits.org and vote for Jim DeMint’s proposed Amendment to end unlimited terms in Congress. And mark your calendar for Nov 2nd to: take out the trash.

Bringin’ Home the Bacon Turns Deadly

There are so many candidates for the next Poster Child one hardly knows which to choose next. Three-term Sen. Bob Bennett, our March Poster Boy, lost his Utah Republican primary last week. Our headline -- Thanks for Your Service. Good-Bye-- came true. It is our heartfelt wish that each Poster Child would be promptly retired. But, alas, the entrenched pols resist leaving their cushy positions even when at an advanced age.

We have several of the “worst of a bad lot” in a queue but when one is brought to our attention as this one was in a new documentary we had to move 18-term Minnesota Democrat, James Oberstar up to the front line. The movie has a funny premise --Greg Knapp calls on a career politician to get an earmark to build an earmark museum-- but it is dead serious as it illuminates the egregious practice of “earmarks.” The segment on Oberstar is titled “The Human Toll” because it shows how his earmarks have contributed to human tragedy. For more information on the documentary titled Bringin’ Home the Bacon, contact produces Jim and Ellen Hubbbard 571-721-8868 or americanfilmfest@aol.com . Every taxpayer should see this film. (I would like to say that every voter should see this film but the 50% or so who vote but do not pay taxes have little reason to be concerned.)

Oberstar, the chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, has jurisdiction over bridge maintenance. Instead of maintaining infrastructure and roads from the $500 billion Highway Bill which is really a huge collection of earmarks used by the career pols to spread around to insure their reelections. This gives the chairman enormous power which he clearly relishes and uses for his own purpose.

When asked by the Star Tribune about a disastrous bridge collapse in his own State: Q You have an initiative in mind? A “Yes. We have 597,000 bridges in America, of which 154,000 are deficient, either structurally or functionally. This is an opportunity. Instead of making Minnesota as a poster child for bridge failure, we should make this tragedy a springboard for action and attack in a focused way those most-vulnerable bridges ... (I) propose a 5-cent increase of the user fee [gas tax] for three years, generating about $8.5 billion a year…”

The taxpayers’ watchdog, Citizens Against Government Waste, named Oberstar "Porker of the Month" for his proposal for a 5-cent gas tax increase to raise $25 billion within three years for a new bridge trust fund. CAGW said that Chairman Oberstar was part of the "earmark melee" where "nearly 6,500 pork barrel projects worth more than $24 billion" were added to the 2005 bill. Rather than send funds to repair and restore bridges in his state, he added five projects totaling $14.6 million for Duluth including $3.2 million for the Munger State Trail, the longest paved recreational trail in the nation. Bringin’ Home the Bacon shows a poignant interview with a young woman, 31, who was driving home from work on a day she got a promotion. She was recently engaged to be married, happy and thinking how good life was. Moments later she suffered a broken back and crushed legs. While she thanked god that she was alive and sympathized with the dead and their families, she wondered why the money went for a teapot museum and other earmarks instead of preventative maintenance. Why indeed!

One pundit remarked at that: “Oberstar has a solution for aging interstate bridges–a new program and new tax dollars. What else is new? He wants to create a Bridge Reconstruction Trust Fund separate from the Highway Trust Fund which was created in 1956 to fund highways and bridges. Why is a separate fund needed? Politicians will misuse a new fund just as they have misused the Highway Trust Fund.…We don’t need a new program and new money. We need new people in (Congress) … There will be plenty of money…once the waste and pork is eliminated.” Amen, brother.

What makes this so sickening is that Oberstar, an avid cyclist, took money from the Highway bill to build a $24 billion bike bridge just five miles from the I-35W bridge that collapsed over the Mississippi River in his own state killing 13 –about the same amount it would have cost to repair the bridge.
He is seen in the documentary riding on the bridge in full cyclist regalia. Regarding another Oberstar earmark, the Bikes Belong Foundation estimates Oberstar’s bill would increase funding for bicycling to more than $1 billion annually. “We think it is transformational, visionary,” said their executive director. Really, is that a proper function of the U.S. government?

This from a Wall Street Journal editorial in 2007: Minnesota's transportation auditors warned as long ago as 1990 that there was a "backlog of bridges that are classified as having structural deficiencies." In 1999 engineers declared that cracks found in the bridge that collapsed were "a major concern." Bike paths were deemed a higher priority by Congress, however, including its powerful Minnesota representatives….. Mr. Oberstar sent out a press release boasting that he had "secured more than $12 million in funding" for his state in a recent federal transportation and housing bill. But $10 million of that was dedicated to a commuter rail line, $250,000 for the "Isanti Bike/Walk Trail," $200,000 to bus services in Duluth, and $150,000 for the Mesabi Academy of Kidspeace in Buhl. None of it went for bridge repair...”

In its 2009 REPORK Card, the Club for Growth noted that 211 career pols voted against all 68 bills that would have curtailed some earmarks. No surprise, our Poster Boy James Oberstar was one of them. The Club also rates Congress on economic growth issues such as tax rates, limiting FedGov spending, expanding free trade, limiting lawsuit abuse, school choice, regulatory reform, and reforming social security. Our Poster boy ranked dead last, with others, 435 out of 435 reps.

The non-partisan National Taxpayers Union (NTU) rated U.S. Representatives on their actual votes--every vote that affects taxes, spending, and debt. On a scale of zero to 100, Oberstar is in single digits which earned a failing “F” grade and their “Big Spender” designation.

Bringin’ home the bacon has been Oberstar's bottom line since he arrived in Washington in 1975. Before being elected himself, he worked for his predecessor, Rep. Blatnick, for 12 years. So, he has been there for most of his life and never had to live under his laws, taxes and regulations and he clearly never intends to. So adamantly against any reduction in FedGov spending he and another Poster Boy, John Conyers, filed a lawsuit against President Bush in the passing of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. The case (Conyers v. Bush) was, of course, dismissed. Isn’t it time Oberstar was dismissed?

The above just begins to tell how bad these career politicians can get. You won’t believe this argument he makes in defending the indefensible: http://www.redcounty.com/congressman-oberstar-it%E2%80%99s-spending-stupid

Think about how much better off the country would be if we had six -or eight- year term limits on representatives. Better late than never –Minnesota, please term limit this disgrace to MN and the country.

Two More Strong Arguments for Term Limits

Updated last 4/1/2014 re the term limits vote below and also WSJ article re Caterpillar )

 So many of our poster children have similar backgrounds in that they get law degrees and then go right into politics without any real world experience to base their lawmaking decisions on. How can they relate to citizens who have to live under their laws? Many laws are made from the pressure of lobbyists and groups that give them support for reelection and who often actually write the laws for them. The high pay and FedGov pensions that most of us could only dream about further keep them isolated from the impact of their spending and tax policies. They should be made to come back home after a period to live under those laws and taxes and regulations, too.

Patrick Leahy from Vermont and Carl Levin from Michigan are two who fit the description. Leahy graduated law school in 1964 and at age 34 was elected to the Senate where he has been ever since. Levin got his degree in 1959 and held several government jobs between 1964 until elected to the Senate in 1978.
Both regularly vote with the liberal-left of their party (Democrat) 95% to 100% in most sessions and that means both vote for virtually every spending, regulating and taxing bill that comes up.

So, it is no surprise that both Poster Boys voted on 2/2/12 AGAINST the proposed amendment to limit the terms of Congress even though they know full well that their constitutents are overwhlemingly in favor of the reform. See how your Senator voted: http://senateconservatives.com/site/votes/112/2/11?c=5R4F2B4F9B3A137 hint: All Democrats but Joe Manchin of WV voted AGAINST.

Caterpillar's Senate Show Trial

By JAMES FREEMAN

Caterpillar Inc. will be dragged before the Senate Permanent Investigations Subcommittee today because committee Chairman Carl Levin wishes the company had a higher tax bill. The Michigan senator, who has helped make the corporate tax code the complicated mess that it is, enjoys bashing corporations for lawfully trying to navigate this mess.
Caterpillar will therefore join a distinguished list of firms, including Apple, that have taken turns appearing before the panel to be condemned for seeking to maximize returns to shareholders.
Today's alleged outrage is that Caterpillar pays an effective income tax rate of roughly 29%, which is more than most companies pay but not enough for Mr. Levin. The senator is ticked off that some of Cat's overseas profits are taxed at around 5% by Switzerland. Would he prefer that U.S. shareholders pay more taxes to foreign governments?
Perhaps Mr. Levin would like every business to pay the combined U.S. state and federal headline rate of 39.1%, which is the highest in the developed world, and a major reason the U.S. economy isn't growing faster. But it's not clear even that would satisfy his thirst for more federal revenues.
If last year's show trial with Apple is any guide, today Mr. Levin will slam Cat's tax strategies as "alchemy" and "gimmickry," but offer no evidence that the company is doing anything illegal or even unethical.
He will probably refer to the results of his staff's "investigation," but there's not much to investigate. Large corporations like Caterpillar are constantly audited by the IRS, and the firm has been doing its taxes the same way for more than a decade.
The real outrage, as unemployment remains high and GDP growth remains slow, is for Mr. Levin to suggest that the solution is to extract more cash from U.S. employers.WSJ 4/1/2014


The non-partisan National Taxpayers Union rates congress from A –taxpayer friendly- to F –Big Spender. Both of our poster boys are consistently rated F. Citizens Against Government Waste (CSAGW), another non-partisan taxpayer group, has bestowed on both boys their “Porker of the Month” award over their years in office. Porker of the Month is a dubious honor given to lawmakers, government officials, and political candidates who have shown a blatant disregard for the interests of taxpayers. When you look at the huge deficits being racked up each year, these two are right up there among the most responsible for the high taxes, numerous counter-productive regulations and a debt that steals from future generations that will stifle their aspirations for the American Dream.

Last September when CAGW named Leahy as their “Porker of the Month” they also noted that he was one of “Seven Nutty Senators Supporting ACORN…” (Poster Boy Sen. Durbin of Illinois was also one of the seven.) “Cutting off funds to ACORN should have been the easiest vote of the year, yet these senators could not bring themselves to do it,” said CAGW President Tom Schatz. “Taxpayers should not be accomplices in the rampant malfeasance of ACORN.” ACORN has received at least $53.6 million in taxpayer-funded grants since 1994, not including millions more from states and localities, as well as foundations. Fannie Mae, for example, which was taken over by the federal government a year ago, bestowed millions in grants on ACORN over the years. For more updated detail on ACORN see the blog alongside A Bite at a Time.Sen. Leahy worked closely with the late Senator Edward Kennedy, another of our Poster Boys, to advance the Hate Crimes Prevention Act as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act. Said Leahy, “This historic hate crimes provision will improve existing law by making it easier for Federal authorities to investigate and prosecute crimes of racial, ethnic, or religious violence.” Sen. Levin as Chairman of the Senate Armed Forces Committee, defended his reasoning for including the provision within the Defense bill: “This is domestic terrorism… When you attack someone because of membership in a group, you are attacking this country itself. This belongs in the Defense Reauthorization Bill!.” Not to mention that virtually all of the crimes covered are already unlawful under present law. This is in response to lobbies who want special recognition and treatment for their particular groups. Do you think it fits in the Defense Bill? When defense outlays are calculated they include much that is not really for the defense of our nation. Poster Children often get their way by inserting unrelated subjects in critical bills that have to pass and thus avoid losing if their special interest legislation couldn’t pass on its own.

Both Senators also responded to recent actions by Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to include a public option in the Senate’s health care bill. The Senators argued that a public option was very important in that it would represent progress in the legislation, but noted that any such provision must include an op-out for states, which they said would promote competition. They didn’t explain how there would even be any competiton after the FedGov takeover. Sure, compete with FedGov.
Our poster children have no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their method is to search out groups or the groups search them out to get something from FedGov and by promising to give it to them our Poster Children get campaign contributions and support for reelection. How they accomplish the payoff is to loot taxpayers. As HL Mencken put it, “In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.”

Earmarks are a measure of profligate spending for self-promotion among the recipients. It is also called bribery if done in the private sector but business-as-usual in congress. Check out details at this most informative site: http://www.legistorm.com/earmarks/details/member/62/Sen_Patrick_Leahy/page/1/sort/amount/type/desc/year/all.html Legistorm is dedicated to providing a variety of important information about the US Congress. The information is provided in a strictly factual, non-partisan fashion. They have no political affiliations and no political purpose except to make the workings of Congress as transparent as possible. This is how you get to a $16+ trillion debt.

Leahy’s loot:
Fiscal Year(s) 2008-2010 Number Cost
Solo Earmarks 185 $228,063,385
With Other Members 115 $260,805,250
All Sponsored Earmarks 300 $488,868,635


Levin’s loot:

Year(s) 2008-2010 Number Cost
Solo Earmarks 33 $124,900,000
With Other Members 678 $804,423,593
All Sponsored Earmarks 711 $929,323,593


The more I study these career politicians the more I fear for the future of freedom in our United States of America and consequently for the freedom of the world. Sen. Jim DeMint originally and now Sen Vitter is making an effort to turn back to a citizen-legislature by offering a proposed constitutional amendment to term limit congress. You can help by going to www.termlimits.org and sign the petition. And then, ask your friends to sign it, too. We'll have another vote in the next session.

Hello? Anybody home?

[Updated 12/15/2012]
All of our poster children so far have been in office for decades but we had to make an exception for this guy. For Hank Johnson (4th-GA) four terms are plenty. You have to see this to believe it:  http://tinyurl.com/bmpfanp

You can't make this up Even after this video went viral he was reelected without opposition in 2010 and again in 2012. (See comments for a funnier version of this YouTube video.)

The latest from this strange duck was commented on by The Daily Callers' Caroline May:
"Georgia Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson — notable for saying he feared that Guam might capsize if it became too populated during a 2010 House Armed Services Committee hearing — apologized Thursday in a rambling floor speech for using the 'm-word.' According to Johnson, the 'm-word,' which he will never say again (though accidentally slipped in the middle of his apology), is 'midget.' 'Last night I used an analogy that some find offensive, and I certainly was not meaning to be offensive or use a derogatory term,' he said." You've got to see this one, too.  http://tinyurl.com/d2u32wb

He’s a lawyer, a former assistant judge and a practicing Buddhist.

He votes the party line without deviation  Heritage Action gives him 12% on the conservative scale which is 88% on th liberal scale --Big Spender by any scale.

In 2009, Johnson demanded censure of Rep. Joe Wilson's "you lie" remark, arguing that the comment had an “unseen racial undertone” and that, if Wilson was not formally rebuked, "We will have people with white hoods running through the countryside again." (Wikipedia)

This will be our shortest tenured and shortest poster child write-up. What else could we say for term limits than pointing out that he will likely be in congress as long as he lives given the gerrymandered district and advantages of incumbency? Unless we can get Sen. DeMint’s proposed constitutional amendment to term limit congress passed. Please help by going to www.termlimits.org and add your name to the petition for term limits on congress. Thank you.