their salary $174,000 a year. This puts them in the top 6% of US households.
6 Jan - Vice President Dick Cheney is quoted in the LT that 'nobody knew the economic
troubles were coming'. He is quickly contradicted by the PBS Newshour which
does a story saying that Robert Shiller, Dean Baker, Martin Feldstein, and Joseph
Stiglitz, among others, warned of the troubles. Feldstein, a conservative, warned
about it two years ago.
12 Jan - So far, of the six votes listed in the Journal World, Jenkins has voted just like
Moran and the opposite of Moore. Two bills have passed on wage discrimination
with Jenkins voting against. Next weeks agenda includes SCHIP (State Childrens
Health Insurance Plan) and the other $350 billion of bailout money (or TARP).
19 Jan - Jenkins votes against increased funding for SCHIP (State Children's Health
Insurance Plan) claiming that increased funding will hurt children in poor
families. The American Association of Family Physicians is in favor of the bill,
which did pass the House. 40 Republicans voted for it, which is 23% of House
Republicans, including Jerry Moran.
19 Jan - Nancy Boyda's schedule from January 2007
19 Jan - Topeka's 14th annual Martin Luther King celebration
20 Jan - Retired Military Personnel meeting in Iola
Angel Food ministries in Iola
VFW meeting in Fort Scott
Ladies Night Out in Leavenworth
22 Jan - Outpatient Clinic ribbon cutting in Lawrence
Near as this reporter can tell, Jenkins only Kansas event is the opening of her
Pittsburg office next week.
27 Jan - Republicans complaining about the Democratic stimulus plan, that it involves too
much 'pork'. They want more and bigger tax cuts, and also want to eliminate tax
cuts for lower income working people. They claim we lower income people 'do
not pay taxes'. While it is true that I, for example, do not pay federal income
taxes because of my low income and because I also put over $500 in my IRA
account. It is simply not true that I 'do not pay taxes'. Last year, for example, I
paid $1,314 in property taxes, $1,928 in FICA taxes (are these 'taxes'? My w-2 says
they are.) about $170 in Kansas income taxes and at least $450 in sales taxes. For
a grand total of $3,862 on taxable income of $11,968. This, to Brownback,
Roberts and Jenkins is 'paying no taxes' and they would oppose a tax plan that
gives every working American a $500 tax credit in favor of a plan that gives tax
breaks to people with higher incomes. Compassionate conservatism strikes
again. This from Congresspeople who got a $4,700 raise this year and make more money than 90% of American households.
28 Jan - Obama stimulus plan passes the House without a single Republican vote.
Jenkins voted against it and voted for all three Republican amendments. She
complains about pork, usings $50 million to the National Endowment for the
Arts as an example. Yet the Bush tax cuts, that she wants to keep permanent,
give about $40 million to Alice Walton and huge amounts to other billionaires.
Why object to money going to artists but support money going to billionaires?
With just the dividend tax cuts $46.6 BILLION goes to just about 100,000
Americans who make more than $2,000,000.
Further, Economists at the CBPP say that the Obama tax cuts will create
more stimulus than the Republican plan, and also that the Republican plan
provides more benefits for wealthier households.
5 Feb - Senate delays the stimulus bill. The media has been pushing the Republican
message that the bill is a spending bill, not a stimulus bill. Now the media is
blaming Obama for not being prepared for Republican obstruction. Perhaps he
naively thought they would put their "country first" in a time of crisis. Perhaps
he thought the media would tell the truth instead of spreading Republican spin.
The truth is that spending is economic stimulus. A CBO economist testified to
Congress and was asked by a Republican Robert Aderholt of Alabama what
percentage of the spending will stimulate the economy? Mr. Elmendorf replied
"So I think all of the $800 billion provides some stimulative effect. The extent of
stimulus varies by category, but it all matters, all of it."
12 Feb - Senate passes stimulus bill. Many in the media are still working against it. Brian
Williams of NBC calls it a "so called stimulus". Congresswoman Jenkins writes
against it on her website, saying that "spending got us into this mess."
Presumably the mess was caused by the deficit and national debt. However, the
debt has not been caused primarily by spending. In 1980 the national debt was
$909 billion, by 1990 it was $3,206 billion. By 2000 it was $5,629 billion and by
2007 it was $8,950.7. $2.3 trillion of debt was created in the 1980s and $3.3
trillion under JR Bush.
Did that happen because of spending increases? In real terms, spending went
up by 35% in the 1980s and by 26.5% in the last seven years. However, spending
went up by 57% in the 1960s and by 42% in the 1970s when the debt did not
increase nearly as much. The trouble is on the income tax side. In the 1960s,
income tax revenues grew by 122% and in the 1970s by 170%. That is partly due
to inflation and partly to a growing economy. In the 1980s, income taxes only
grew by 91%. Revenue didn't keep up with spending because spending did not
grow fast enough. This was due to tax cuts, most of which went to wealthier
people. The same was true in the recent Bush terms. Income tax revenues only
grew by 15.8% from 2000 until 2007. The economy itself grew by 26% from 2000
until 2005 while income tax revenues went down by 7.7%.
We have a massive national debt today mainly because Reagan and GW Bush
gave huge tax breaks to rich people (so did Clinton in 1996, caving to the
Republican Congress). Tax breaks Jenkins wants to make permanent while
claiming that the deficit is a cause of our problem.
14 Feb - Somewhat troubling letter to the editor in Today's Leavenworth Times.
Responding to a Matt Nowak column from two weeks earlier (the delay is not
necessarily the fault of the letter writer). First, the writer claims that Nowak
did not know what he was talking about in his column, and yet the writer
provides no examples of facts that were mistaken (or distorted). Second, the
writer takes great umbrage at Nowak's use of the word "dittohead" but that is a
word Rush Limbaugh coined to describe fans of his show.
Finally, he characterizes Nowak (and other liberals and Democrats) as people
who "rely heavily on irrational and mean-spirited attacks". Never mind the giant
irony of someone making such a charge in an irrational and mean-spirited
attack. The less humorous part is people unwilling to listen across partisan
divides, but quite willing to demonize the other side. In my experience, the
internet fosters these kinds of divisions and hostile feelings. The feeling that
the other side is not just wrong, or misinformed (and stubborn about it), but
evil.
16 Feb - All three Kansas Republicans vote against delaying the transition to digital TV.
I am not sure why that would be a partisan issue. I also don't have a converter
box and just got rid of cable.
24 Feb - Obama gives a speech to Congress outlining our problems and what he plans to
do to solve them. He said some are skeptical whether the stimulus will work and
that he has appointed Vice President Biden to lead an oversight task force. Also
he said that there will be no recovery without fixing the financial system, that
the flow of credit is the lifeblood of our economy.
ABC news gave the Republican response to the President, featuring George
Will saying Obama made many impossible promises. This was followed by a
speech by Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal. Here's a response to Jindal.
27 Feb - FairTax.org has a table at the Washington Days convention. Puzzling since
Reaganomics on steroids is not typically part of the Democratic Platform. Here
are the Fundamentals of the UnFairTax, summary
"1) The UnFairTax is not fair
2) The UnFairTax is not progressive
3) The UnFairTax increases taxes on the poor
4) The UnFairTax is a huge tax cut for the rich
5) The accuracy of the promoters at FairTax.org is not to be trusted"
#3 may not be true any more, since the plan has apparently changed with the
prebate being increased and the plan includes eliminating FICA taxes and not
just income taxes. However, the information on what a $20,000 couple came
from their site and it shows an increase. The UnFairTaxers use the travesty of
the Bush tax cuts to argue against the income tax. Back in 1996, those with
incomes over $1 million paid an average rate of 30.9. Even in 2005 those making
between $1 and 2 million paid an average rate of 24.6 in income taxes. The
UnFairTaxers propose reducing it to less than 23%. Even from Bush, that would
be a tax cut of $32,000 for people making $2 million. From Clinton, it would be a
cut of $158,000. If it is revenue neutral then somebody must pay more to make
up for those cuts to rich people.
The UnFairTax bill, HR 25, has 47 co-sponsors, all of them Republicans,
including all three Kansas Republicans in the House. As Bush joked, his base is
"the haves and the have-mores".
14 Mar - Lynn Jenkins says "During this recession, it is irresponsible for the federal
government to increase its budget ..." She calls for fiscal discipline. Here's
what economist Dean Baker says about that on his blog "Beat the Press".
"The most obvious effect of reducing the budget deficit right now would be to
raise the unemployment rate, slow economic growth, and lower investment,
thereby leaving a less productive economy for our children and grandchildren.
While some deficit reduction cults may view this as a positive economic path,
there are not many economists who would agree with this position."
Lynn Jenkins also opposes Democratic plans to raise taxes on people with incomes over $250,000. So to summarize, spending money on schools, roads, health care for children, feeding hungry people, helping unemployed people, and so on, that is bad because it increases the deficit. At the same time, over $56 billion in tax cuts that go to people with incomes over $2,000,000 is apparently a good way to increase the deficit.
Leavenworth Times of March 12. Brownback says he secured $100 million in
funding for Kansas, but he also voted against the bill that would provide that
funding. His own earmarks are 'worthwhile projects'. How many of the other
earmarks would be considered worthwhile? Either way, as Dean says above,
being stingy with spending now will prolong and deepen the recession.
15 Mar - Dean Baker comments on the current deficit
"Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of the budget deficit that the
Republicans are now complaining about is directly attributable to President
Bush's policies. The additional deficit for 2009 that is attributable to President
Obama's efforts to fix the disastrous economy that he was handed by President
Bush is trivial in comparison,..."
29 Mar - House and Senate pass a bi-partisan bill to increase funding for Americorps,
providing more opportunities for volunteer service. The bill passes by 321-105 in
the House with 70 Republicans voting for it and by 79-19 in the Senate. All 5 of
Kansas Republicans in Congress vote against it.
1 Apr - Jenkins joins the GOP proposing "solutions to help Americans rebuild their
savings". In an unprecedented move for Republicans, their plan relies on tax
cuts, and unlike previous Republican plans, rich people get most of the tax cuts.
The last line is an April Fools joke. It should not be a surprise that Republicans
are proposing more tax cuts, nor that their tax cuts primarily benefit rich
people. They propose, among other things, to raise the contribution limits on
IRA accounts. The contribution limit is already $10,000 for a couple. In 2004,
only 6.5% of those making less than $25,000 made a contribution to an IRA, and
their average contribution was $1,854. Whereas 28% of those making over
$500,000 made an IRA contribution and their average contribution was $9,241.
They also propose "suspending the taxes on dividends until 2011." So much for
their concern about the deficit. Currently dividends are taxed at a top rate of
15%. According to IRS figures from 2005, 90% of taxpayers making less than
$50,000 received no benefit from this tax cut while about $64 billion in tax cuts
went to people with incomes over $500,000 (this includes capital gains tax cuts,
which is another part of the Republican proposal.) This small group of people
got 70% of the benefits.
These are the same Republicans who reduced Obama's tax cut from $500 per
person to $400 per person because they said they were worried about the
deficit. Now they propose a $3 billion tax cut for people with incomes over
$10,000,000.
21 Apr - Jenkins participates in taxpayer tea parties in Iola and Pittsburg and gets her
facts wrong again. She writes: "In the 220 years between President George
Washington and President George W. Bush, our nation accrued $5.8 trillion in
public debt."
Well, total debt in 2007 was almost $9 trillion, since something like $4 trillion is
owed to the baby boom generation for their retirement. More noteworthy is
that between George Washington and 1980, our nation accrued $909 billion in
debt. Then Reagan was elected, promising tax cuts that would increase
revenue. By 1990 our national debt had more than tripled, to $3,206 billion.
President Clinton and the Republican Congress "only" added $1.41 trillion to the
debt. Then JR Bush was elected, promising tax cuts that he said would use only
1/4 of the projected surplus. In the six years between 2001 and 2007, Bush and
the Republican Congress added almost $3.2 trillion to the debt.
So 72% of that $9 trillion in debt comes from Presidents Reagan, Bush and JR
Bush. Just 18 years of Reaganomics added more to the debt than WWI, WWII,
the Great Depression, the Great Society, the Vietnam war, the Apollo project,
the Marshall Plan, the Louisiana purchase, the Civil War and everything else
before 1980. Isn't it time for people like Jenkins to stop promoting the policy of
Reaganomics that got us into this mess?
28 Apr - Senator Arlen Specter switches from the Republican Party to the Democratic
Party. Just another moderate conservative who no longer feels welcome in the
Republican Party.
28 Apr - Still waiting to see the moderate in Congresswoman Jenkins. She joins just 77
Republicans in voting against expansion of the COPS program. Even Tiahrt joined
93 other Republicans voting for it, but not Jenkins.
15 June - Still waiting for the moderate Jenkins to appear. There are 178 Republicans in
this House of Representatives. 70 of them voted for FDA regulation of tobacco.
All three Kansas Republicans were part of the 97 voting against it. It passed
overwhelmingly 307-97.
Another bill that passed overwhelmingly (298-119) was the bill to create a $3500
voucher for people who trade in used cars for more fuel efficient new cars. 59
Republicans voted for it, but none of them from Kansas.
30 June - Apparently Jenkins is less moderate than Tiahrt and Moran. They both voted
for the $44 billion budget for Homeland Security, and she voted against it. The
budget passed by a vote of 389-37 and our 'moderate' was one of only 37 to
vote against it. Republican alternatives that got voted down cut $41 million
from the Air Marshal's budget and another one that cut $2.7 billion (or 6%) from
the whole Department's Budget. Republican reasoning was that Homeland
Security already got $2.7 billion in stimulus funds. However, since the economy
is still not very strong, why vote to undo part of the stimulus? They cannot
claim to be worried about the deficit if they keep proposing more tax cuts
(mostly for the wealthy. Remember they opposed the $500 tax credit and cut it
to $400 because it went to poorer people.)
23 July - Jenkins votes to cut farm spending by 5% or $1.1 billion
2 Aug - Jenkins votes against an extra $2 billion for the Cash For Clunkers program. 77
Republicans voted for it, including Tiahrt. Jenkins, the missing moderate, was one
of 95 Republicans who voted against yet another bi-partisan bill that passed with
a huge majority, 316 - 109. Also, note the $2 billion would not add to the deficit
because it was already part of the stimulus and was just being re-allocated.
Republicans compare it to dropping money from planes. Except that would not
provide jobs for auto workers and income for auto dealers, nor would it improve
gas mileage by 9 miles per gallon (as reported by ABC News).
6 Aug - Sonia Sotomayor confirmed to the Supreme Court by a 68-31 vote. Only 9
Republicans voted for her. How did we get so divided? Roberts was confirmed by
a vote of 78-22 and unlike Sotomayor, Roberts is an extremist and had very little
experience. Sotomayor is more of a centrist and with many years of judicial
experience. Plus she had the support of a growing voting bloc. Support for her
should have been nearly unanimous. Consider the recent past.
Ruth Ginsburg was confirmed by 96-3 in 1993.
Sandra Day O'Connor was confirmed by 99-0 in the 1980s
Breyer was confirmed by 87-9 in 1994
Souter was confirmed by 90-9 in 1990
Kennedy was confirmed by 97-0 in 1988
Scalia was confirmed by 98-0 in 1986
Stevens was confirmed by 99-0 in 1975
Seems like we used to be more united, but Republican leadership is determined
to be divisive. Is that what their supporters want? I hope not. The first, and
greatest Republican President gave his 'last full measure of devotion' to keep our
country a UNITED States of America, and so did two of my great-great-
grandfathers. Now the party of Lincoln seems determined to divide us. Kudos to
the 9 Republicans, including Missouri's Kit Bond and shame on the others,
including Roberts and Brownback.
6 Aug - Senate votes to extend Cash For Clunkers program. Vote is 60-37 with Roberts
voting against it and Brownback voting for it.
13 Aug - I attended a townhall in Oskaloosa along with over 60 others. Congresswoman
Jenkins said she has embraced the 'No" label and was applauded for voting no.
Most people in the crowd seemed to be over age 60. A few Democrats spoke in
support of health care reform and said that Medicare and Tri-Care were good
programs.
Some of the Republicans there were concerned that Jenkins had voted against
the Pence amendment. She was only one of 9 Republicans to do so.
Jenkins closed by saying that her top 3 priorities were deficits, spending and
deficits. However, if deficits are such a big concern, wouldn't it make sense to
increase taxes on those making over $250,000 a year? Instead Jenkins complains
that Health Care Reform means "record high taxes for Small Businesses". So
typical of a dishonest politician she writes that "the TOP small business and
individual tax rate ... will be 53.09%". I emphasize the word TOP in her statement.
The fact that the TOP rate does not kick in until you make more than $357,700
means that it is not relevant to most small businesses. Less than 2% of
households make more than $250,000 so the vast majority of us are not paying
the top rate. It is time for politicians like Jenkins to stop pretending that an
increase in taxes for the richest 2% means a tax increase for all of us. She
cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
3 Sep - Lynn Jenkins held a townhall meeting in Leavenworth at the Riverfront
Community Center. About 115 people attended, with some standing in the
back and some empty chairs in the middle. She gave pretty much the same
stump speech that she gave in Oskaloosa, although it seemed a little longer
and included a bit about Fort Leavenworth and Gitmo. Once again, she said
she has embraced the label of 'saying no' as if that is something to be proud
of, and said that she has been saying yes to Republican alternatives.
That's fine, except for two points. First, that the
Republican alternatives are
usually worse than the Democratic ones. On the stimulus bill, for example.
Jenkins complained that not enough of the bill that passed was infrastructure
spending. Well, that was because of Republicans. They wanted less spending
and more tax cuts, and Democrats compromised, cutting the infrastructure
spending and including more tax cuts. But Republicans still did not vote for
it. As discussed here in January and February their alternative provided
more benefits for wealthier households and was less effective as a stimulus.
usually worse than the Democratic ones. On the stimulus bill, for example.
Jenkins complained that not enough of the bill that passed was infrastructure
spending. Well, that was because of Republicans. They wanted less spending
and more tax cuts, and Democrats compromised, cutting the infrastructure
spending and including more tax cuts. But Republicans still did not vote for
it. As discussed here in January and February their alternative provided
more benefits for wealthier households and was less effective as a stimulus.
The second point is the matter of compromise. A
bill usually has ten or more
parts to it. Instead of wasting time offering a completely different Republican
alternative which will just be voted down, why not offer a compromise
alternative that might get bi-partisan support? Take the original ten provisions
and remove the one you think is the worst part and then add something else
you think is good. Ask the Democrats to give up something and to give
something in return for your support.
parts to it. Instead of wasting time offering a completely different Republican
alternative which will just be voted down, why not offer a compromise
alternative that might get bi-partisan support? Take the original ten provisions
and remove the one you think is the worst part and then add something else
you think is good. Ask the Democrats to give up something and to give
something in return for your support.
Actually this is what happens in the Senate where
compromise is required in
order to break the fillibuster. The final bills are compromise versions that lots
of Republicans are voting for. Things we all should be able to agree on, like
healthcare for children and the budget for homeland security - that passed
with only 37 Republicans voting against it. One of few saying no even to
Homeland Security was Lynn Jenkins. 93 Republicans voted to expand the
COPS program, but Jenkins was one of the 77 who voted no.
order to break the fillibuster. The final bills are compromise versions that lots
of Republicans are voting for. Things we all should be able to agree on, like
healthcare for children and the budget for homeland security - that passed
with only 37 Republicans voting against it. One of few saying no even to
Homeland Security was Lynn Jenkins. 93 Republicans voted to expand the
COPS program, but Jenkins was one of the 77 who voted no.
Jenkins is apparently proud of saying no even to
bills that most Republicans
supported. She said she felt she was elected to help 'change the way
Washington does business'. How is being a hyper-partisan who refuses to find
common ground a change? Unlless Kansans want more gridlock, Jenkins is
making a promise here that she has not kept.
supported. She said she felt she was elected to help 'change the way
Washington does business'. How is being a hyper-partisan who refuses to find
common ground a change? Unlless Kansans want more gridlock, Jenkins is
making a promise here that she has not kept.
3 Sep - A couple other things from the meeting. Jenkins took eleven questions from
the audience, some of them being as much statement as question. One
person apparently wanted to bring back the days of Joe McCarthy which I
always learned as one of the most shameful in our history, McCarthy finally
being shamed by somebody who asked him sincerely 'Have you no
decency?' Yet the McCarthyite suggestion that Obama, who is barely to the
left of Richard Nixon, is surrounded by communists was loudly applauded.
Jenkins also held up a copy of the Constitution as
her excuse for voting
against the Pence Amendment. Yet when the 4th questioner mentioned
Congressional pay raises, Jenkins did not seem familiar with the 27th
Amendment, which says that Congressional pay raises can only take place
after an election. That is, a pay raise passed in 2009 would not take effect
until after the election of 2010. The Constitution can be found online here.
against the Pence Amendment. Yet when the 4th questioner mentioned
Congressional pay raises, Jenkins did not seem familiar with the 27th
Amendment, which says that Congressional pay raises can only take place
after an election. That is, a pay raise passed in 2009 would not take effect
until after the election of 2010. The Constitution can be found online here.
Nov. 4 - Somebody should call Ike Skelton and tell him that Kansas Citians are
being lied to. The US Chamber of Commerce ads are very deceptive.
They talk about "crushing new taxes, mostly on small businesses" The
bill HR 3962 does include a 5.4% surcharge on INCOMES OVER $500,000.
I don't really think a business can be considered 'small' if it provides its
owner with $500,000 in income. According to IRS statistics for 2007
there were 23 million tax filers with business income (other than
farms). Their average net income was $12,134. Of the 16 million
businesses that did not lose money, their average net income was
$19,796. Most small businesses are not making $500,000.
On the other hand, the 46,000 tax filers with incomes over $5 million
had interest income that averaged $1,002,043 and also averaged
$1,048,145 in dividend income and $640,413 in short term capital gains.
They don't "work hard for the money", their money works for them.
p.s. Skelton's office reports they are flooded with calls and that
Skelton is voting against the bill. Apparently having lots of money to
spend on lies is very effective.
Dec. 28 - Congresswoman Jenkins announces that she did not miss a single
vote in 2009. She claims that she is representing her district by
making every vote, but just voting is only half the picture. If she is
not voting the way Kansans want, then we would probably rather
have her miss some votes then always be there to vote the wrong
way. Did we want her to vote against the Farm Bill? Against the
budget for homeland security?
It is almost tax time again, which is only fun if you are getting a
refund. Something new this year is the "making work pay credit" on
line 63 of the 1040. It is $400 for most working people. Jenkins voted
against that too.
6 Aug - Kaiser Family Foundation comparison of health care proposals
AARP takes on health care myths
3 March - links to the text of health care bills
House - click on the PDF of the bill that passed
Senate
3 March - Jenkins attacks the stimulus bill. She points out that Kansas has lost
47,100 jobs over the past year. The economic downturn has been
worse than people, including Obama, predicted. After losing 4.39
million jobs in 2008 (after the Republican stimulus checks of May
2008), the economy lost another 4 million jobs in 2009. However,
compare the last 3 months of 2008 to the last 3 months of 2009. At
the end of 2008 the economy lost 2.18 million jobs in the last
quarter. This was after the Bush stimulus of 2008, which was tax
rebate checks. Compare this to the last quarter of 2009 when the
economy only lost 106,000 jobs. Things are looking up even if
Jenkins does not want to admit it and would rather use the bad
times for political purposes.
Also, for all her supposed concern about the unemployed, Jenkins
joined 180 of her fellow Republicans to vote against extension of
unemployment benefits. Which passed the house on 9 December of
last year and has been delayed in the Senate by Republicans like
Bunning.
3 March - Both Cheryl Hudspeth of Girard and Kyle Kessler of Topeka are
mentioned as possible candidates for the 2nd district Congressional
seat.
24 March - A health care bill is finally passed and signed. Some disgruntled
people respond by throwing bricks at windows of Democratic
Headquarters in Tuscon, Arizona; Rochester, NY; and also Wichita.
One quoted Goldwater saying "Extremism in defense of liberty is no
vice." They might remember that Goldwater was defeated by a
landslide as over 61% voted against his extremism and LBJ went all
the way.
I am also reminded of a Reagan quote "Any jackass can kick down a
barn, it takes a carpenter to build one." We are better off building
America rather than smashing things with bricks.
April 12 - Lisa Johnston announces she is running for the Senate creating
a primary with Charles Schollenberger.
April 15 - Thomas Koch files for the 2nd district seat
April 20 - A little bit funny to watch a story on KMBC about the importance
of the Fairfax plant and then to see an ad for Jerry Moran where
he boasts that he voted "against every bailout". Ah well, he is
probably not expecting to win Wyandotte county anyway. His claim
that he voted against every stimulus is not true though. Moran
voted for the $154 billion stimulus of Feb. 2008 (the one that
clearly did not work) and he also voted for the Camp amendment
to the Obama stimulus which would have replaced the Obama tax
credit of $500 per worker with income tax cuts which would
benefit higher income workers.
April 27 - Republican Senators continue to block debate on Wall Street
Reform.
May 5 - State Senator David Haley announces he is running for the US Senate,
making for a three way primary.
Nov. 20 - House votes against unemployment extension, Senate votes against expanding the equal pay act - both measures blocked by Republicans.
Nov. 22 - Paul Krugman predicts that the Republican-controlled house will shut down the Government in April. "the debt limit must be raised to avoid a government shutdown. But Republicans will probably try to blackmail the president into policy concessions by, in effect, holding the government hostage; they’ve done it before."
2011
May 22 - Congress still has not increased the debt ceiling, and Treasury has begun extraordinary measures to keep the Government running. To my surprise when I researched this issue, this has happened before - quite recently, in both 2001 and 2003, the Government was a few days from shutdown and Treasury again had to resort to extraordinary measures.
June 30 - Still nothing on the debt ceiling. Republicans still insisting on deep, permanent cuts before they will raise the debt ceiling. This after 8 years of borrowing by the Bush administration which squandered the Clinton surplus on tax cuts and wars. Now, even after Republicans insisted that rich people should not lose their Bush tax cuts, and even while they propose even more tax cuts for the rich, Republicans say that the deficit is serious. Not serious enough to ask the rich to pay more taxes, but still very, very serious.
July15 - Watching Congress in action is worse than watching paint dry. Still nothing on the debt ceiling. Some people blame 'partisan bickering' but Republicans say they are 'standing by their principles'. The question is whether 'total indulgence of the rich' is really a principle. Why push for $2 trillion in cuts when you just gave $2 trillion in tax cuts to the rich and upper middle class? Republican politicians continue to put the greed of the rich ahead of the needs of the country, so Democrats are right to 'bicker' with them instead of going along. The problem is not bi-partisan here.