Blog @ MoreWhat.com

This is not political rhetoric or some lobbyist’s scheme to support a strategy not in the public interest. It is what this country has been missing lately. Plain, everyday, good old-fashioned American common sense.

An excerpt from a WaPo report on health reform provides a reasonable introduction to what’s wrong and why a step by step approach to reform the wise choice.

Their efforts suggest a return to the frenzied pace of last year’s health-care debate, which prompted more than $200 million in advocacy ads and broke records for lobbying. Companies and trade groups last year hired more than 4,500 lobbyists to influence health reform — amounting to about eight lobbyists for each member of Congress, according to an analysis released last week by the Center for Public Integrity.

Reacting to President Obama’s recent statements that he will move ahead with legislation, health insurance companies have enlisted hundreds of lobbyists in a full-court press against the proposed overhaul, which would force dramatic cuts and increased regulation on the industry. At the same time, insurers are pushing back against a separate bill approved by the House last week that would remove the industry’s antitrust exemption.

Assuming the article’s facts are straight, ‘eight lobbyists for each member of Congress’ should tell you all you need to know. But add to that all the talk of ‘agendas’ and what some POLS are obviously trying to do and it becomes clear there is little in the way of public interest included in this legislative nightmare.

For instance, by itself in the spirit of ’step by step’ do you suppose anyone would object to a ban on deals between drug manufacturers to keep generics off the market? That’s right. The only ones who would object are the drug manufacturers and their lobbyists.

Would anyone object to allowing insurance companies to compete across statelines? Sure, state and local POLS who claim their legislation protects the public by allowing only approved players to participate. Do you suppose any of the same political shenanigans are involved at the state level?

These are some of the cost-cutting ideas that may come from either side of the aisle and appear to have merit without benefit of reading specific legislative language that may render them less than ideal. But the point is without taking unthinkable risk with national debt and deficits in addition to what already exists, doing things step by step would remove the all or nothing pitfalls from what is otherwise just more politcal theatre.

Our nation needs to address health issues. But the manner in which it is being done currently does not resemble anything close to the word reform. You might want to tell your elected representative we should take a break, eliminate the insanity and take a common sense step by step approach to solving health issues.

Sure, the step by step idea has been a GOP mantra for some time now. So if you are a liberal you naturally oppose it. But this post does not suggest all the GOP talk is correct. But there is no benefit to dismissing all the GOP or the Democrats say just to present an argument. The generic deals ban mentioned above may quite possibly be a Democrat’s idea. It seems reasonable. Step by step was proposed by the GOP. Another reasonable idea.

So let’s scrap these reform bills that are nothing more than political agendas. And do it right one piece at a time.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Dec 24 2009

Dec 21 2009

Dec 15 2009

To Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell…..

OUTSTANDING!!!

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Republican Leader discusses health care, Afghanistan, economy

‘If the majority is hell-bent on ignoring the wishes of the American people, they have 60 votes in the Senate’

related: text on this story at Republican.Senate.Gov

related: Health Care Debate is Now Officially Underway (a text version)

related: The Vote Tonight (a text version)

related: 10 Things You Should Know About this Bill (a text version)

Another example of how political motivation blurs the lines in the GOP on being a politician or standing for conservative values.

Republicans are unanimously opposed to the sweeping legislation.

Signaling the unease of some freshman Democrats in swing districts, Rep. John Adler of New Jersey said Friday he will vote against the bill. Mr. Adler, who won his first term in 2008 with 52% of the vote, said the House bill “does not do enough to contain costs.”

He added, “Congress should not pass a bill that costs more than $1 trillion” over 10 years.

Are Republicans unanimously opposed to HR3962 and the other healthcare reform plans proposed by the Democrats for purely political reasons or because this reform violates conservative principles? There is the distinct possibility current reforms violate sections of the US Constitution as well but that’s another story for another time. As is the question of why this unanimous GOP opposition is not demonstrated on other issues like illegal immigration?

The Democratic majority has been unable to produce party unity on healthcare reform as reports indicate the Saturday vote on HR3962 may be delayed. Vulnerable Democrats are worried about the 2010 elections. The GOP has similar concerns about their possible comeback in those same elections. And yet both parties seem unwilling to accept widespread rejection by the public and respond responsibly. The fight is purely political.

The Senate may not be able to arrange a vote until next year. That would take a toll on Obama’s first term. The liberal agenda now seems destined to ride completely on the outcome of healthcare reform legislation. If incomplete into next year their 2010 aspirations are vulnerable. But the GOP may suffer along with them as voters express their anger at the ballot box.

As this fiasco continues other issues suffer from neglect, incompetence or both. The President’s support is fading. Congressional approval ratings are still in the tank. There is no economic recovery. Unemployment has reached a new high above 10% and some say it is actually higher. And all politicians can do is play politics with an issue most regard as secondary at best.

Shelve the damn healthcare issue for now. Attend to national security, national defense, border control, immigration enforcement and domestic policy related to economic matters. In other words, limited government that reduces taxes, national debt, deficits and spending. If those items are ever effectively solved then revisit healthcare reform if anyone other than liberal politicians is interested.

Until then, get conservative or get out.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has a press release, presented below, that expresses concern related to the so-called Recovery Act or stimulus or porkulus bill and GAO reports indicating earlier skepticism by opponents of the plan may be justified.

The GAO reports that 16 states and DC account for about 65% of the US population as well as an equal % of the ’stimulus’ funding under their scrutiny in this second report. Links to the information are provided below. This blog’s summary is short and sweet.

Three areas of government spending are covered. Medicaid, DOT highway infrastructure and education programs are the target of these billions of taxpayer dollars. With the possible exception of DOT projects the other two areas will not likely result in new jobs. Education funding is simply being used to ‘retain staff’ and ‘continue programs’.

And GAO is concerned that transparency and accountability measures will not meet the stated goals of ‘following the money’. They offer numerous recommendations dealing with the need for more accountability.

The view from this blog has not changed. Billions in ‘recovery’ funds provided by the taxpayer will be used as expected to fund government programs. What’s new? It is unlikely many jobs will be created but saving jobs of those protected by the Obama administration will occur. You are paying for their continued support of the current administration. For all of you being layed off in the private sector the recovery act will do nothing for you to this point. Elections have consequences.

Here’s an excerpt from the GAO reports that may whet your appetite for more information.

Accountability States have implemented various internal control programs; however, federal Single Audit guidance and reporting does not fully address Recovery Act risk. The Single Audit reporting deadline is too late to provide audit results in time for the audited entity to take action on deficiencies noted in Recovery Act programs. Moreover, current guidance does not achieve the level of accountability needed to effectively respond to Recovery Act risks. Finally, state auditors need additional flexibility and funding to undertake the added Single Audit responsibilities under the Recovery Act.

Here is the link for GAO on the Recovery Act….

http://www.gao.gov/recovery/bimonthly/index.php

Here is McConnell’s press release….

GAO Report Validates Stimulus Concerns

from the Office of Senator Mitch McConnell

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

‘Americans should be skeptical anytime someone in Washington downplays scrutiny and overplays speed’

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement Wednesday regarding the GAO report on the stimulus bill and the lack of transparency and accountability:

“This week’s GAO report on the administration’s Economic Stimulus plan validates the serious concerns that many of us repeatedly expressed prior to its passage. This trillion-dollar spending plan was neither timely, targeted, nor temporary, and funds were extremely difficult to track. This is precisely the result that concerned us when advocates short-changed the debate and overpromised on results, including assurances that unemployment, now approaching 10%, wouldn’t rise above 8 percent.

“According to the report, assurances on transparency were off base, as was the promise that we’d be able to accurately track jobs. The GAO report should add to growing public concerns about the Administration’s tendency to rush and to overpromise on results when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars and increasing the national debt. But it shouldn’t surprise anyone who followed the debate.

“Americans should be skeptical anytime someone in Washington downplays scrutiny and overplays speed. They have even more reason to be skeptical now.”

###

If you are or were concerned about government spending and specifically the bailouts and porkulus scams you have reason to be.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

As early as June 8, 2009 a formal restart of the shamnesty movement will occur in the Obama White House. At least one report confirms what most of us already knew. Shamnesty will once again be the top issue in Washington later in 2009. But you had better get your opposition strategy activated long before then as it may only be a matter of 60 liberal votes along with any mindless RINOs that decides the issue if pressure is not applied starting now. 2010 is not far off and we all know politicians like only one thing better than getting elected. That is getting re-elected. And a vote for shamnesty is just one more reason to throw the bums out.

Immigration reform could emerge again in the fall
By Steve Stoddard and J. Taylor Rushing
Posted: 05/25/09 09:31 AM [ET]

Senate Democrats may be close to 60 votes on a measure that would represent the first step towards immigration reform under President Obama.

The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act is a concept dear to Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin’s (D-Ill.) heart, and while health care reform may get this summer’s headlines in Washington, the DREAM Act may be a sleeper.

The Dream Act has been around for a while and like the shamnesty defeat in the summer of 2007 it has been shot down once. Together with yes votes on bailouts any member of Congress voting for shamnesty risks defeat in 2010 unless they are secure in a liberal saturated district willing to open all borders and ignore the rule of law.

All the Dream Act does is give illegals one more reason to violate the law and enter this country without lawfully engaging the process. Rather than offer an unnecessary carrot to break the law, Congress should encourage and assist the executive branch or law enforcement with the stick they need to eliminate illegal immigration. This is not a call to abolish immigration but illegal immigration. There is a big difference. But liberals for open borders and unregulated immigration prefer to label those opposed to illegal immigration as xenophobic. Yes, there is no shortage of liberal labels to muddy the water on issues.

So far it is no surprise that Arlen Specter, RINO extraordinaire and now GOP defector, will support whatever the Democrats propose. Other notable RINO looking Senators are Lugar, Lott and Wicker.

It will be tougher this time than the last to defeat shamnesty. But that is not reason for concern but increased effort and attitude.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Although the report below can be characterized as disappointing is it really a surprise or shock? You don’t really believe most campaign promises do you? And when is the last time a politician told you there would be transparency, open government, oversight, accountability, disclosure or ethics in government that actually came to pass? (the next story while expected is of more consequence)

Obama ducks promise to delay bill signings

It seemed among the easiest of his transparency pledges and is entirely under his control, but President Obama is finagling his promise to post bills on the White House Web site for comment for five days before he signs them.

Given the most recent example of a SCOTUS nominee who did not perform as predicted as in David Souter does it really matter who is chosen? But it is certain that if a white male SCOTUS nominee were to say ‘ I would hope that a wise white American male with the richness of his experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life’ the screams of racist or biggot or xenophobe would be heard clear into the next century. You know what you can do with the race card or diversity appeal which is nothing more than a political tactic used against those worried about being labeled racist or xenophobic. That worry doesn’t live on this blog.

As for Sotomayor being nominated by Obama and once claiming she will more often than not reach a better conclusion than her white male counterpart….. in this case that is Latina-speak for the decisions I make will favor those I favor. How’s that for reverse discrimination?

Barack Obama nominates Sonia Sotomayor for Supreme Court

Even before news of her nomination emerged, conservatives had highlighted a statement by her that the Court of Appeal was “where policy is made” – an indication she would see her role as being much more than strict interpretation of the constitution, which conservatives insist on.

A racially-charged statement in which she argued that her minority status made her more effective than white male colleagues was also being highlighted by conservatives.

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” she said in a lecture at the University of California in 2001.

And as for the leaders of the US Senate who will take up the nomination of Sotomayor…..

Reid Statement On President Obama’s Nomination Of Sonia Sotomayor To Supreme Court

Washington, DC—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made the following statement today after President Obama nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court seat soon to be vacated by Justice David Souter:

“As Majority Leader, I will do all I can to ensure Judge Sonia Sotomayor receives a fair and respectful hearing and the Senate’s quick confirmation.

“I commend the President for selecting such an accomplished, qualified and experienced nominee to replace Justice Souter on the Supreme Court. Judge Sotomayor has had wide-ranging experience not only in the legal world, but in the real world as well, which has helped to ensure that her understanding of the law is grounded not only in theory, but also in practice.

“Both Democratic and Republican Presidents have nominated Judge Sotomayor to the federal bench, and the Senate has confirmed her with strong bipartisan support in the past. I look forward to working with both Democrats and Republicans on the Judiciary Committee to confirm Judge Sotomayor as the first Hispanic and the third woman to sit on the Court.

“Justice Souter has been a friend of mine for a long time and powerful defender of our constitutional rights. Americans everywhere again thank him for his decades of service to the nation.”

McConnell Statement on Judge Sonia Sotomayor

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement Tuesday regarding the President’s announcement of his intent to nominate Judge Sonia Sotomayor to fill the upcoming vacancy on the Supreme Court:

“Senate Republicans will treat Judge Sotomayor fairly. But we will thoroughly examine her record to ensure she understands that the role of a jurist in our democracy is to apply the law even-handedly, despite their own feelings or personal or political preferences.

“Our Democratic colleagues have often remarked that the Senate is not a ‘rubber stamp.’ Accordingly, we trust they will ensure there is adequate time to prepare for this nomination, and a full and fair opportunity to question the nominee and debate her qualifications.”

.
.

It is fair to say that Dems will vote for Obama’s pick and Republicans will not. But then it is never quite that predictable is it? So to defeat the Obama pick the GOP will need ‘no’ votes from across the aisle. One might expect that won’t happen. And what value is a filibuster worth?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

A combination of typical misleading information, at least headlines, from the MSM, the political celebrity which is Gov Sarah Palin, Democrats and Republicans, the pork stimulus bill and an organization with a willingness to do anything for a drink. How can you not love a story like that? The jury here is still out on whether or not the opening line in the first piece below is correct or not. Are ‘most Republican governors’ pushing for pork in the massive Obamessiah pork package? On the one hand it would seem a needless slap at their own party with the recent House vote in which every GOP Congressman voted NO. On the other hand the most frequent abuse at the state level in politics (rather than government) is to please local constituents by stealing all the federal dollars possible. By the success found in that ploy one can only assume voters are too stupid to realize that money is also public revenue from their tax dollars. And it also steals from taxpayers in other states as it is part their money too.

The last sentence in the first piece below suggest Palin is going to Washington for pork. This post began with an interest in checking on the claims of the statement that ‘most Republican governors’ are targeting the pork. So go figure, if you’re starting to check governors and while Alaska isn’t the first state by alphabetical order who comes to mind when you think GOP governor? For others Palin might not be the first to come to mind but it was here and that was the first stop. The second piece below suggests with its title that ALL Alaska lawmakers question Palin’s focus. C’mon, when the terms Alaska and lawmakers (plural) are used together does it not suggest all of them? Oh no, you say, it only suggests more than one. Point is at least in that piece the author provides examples of those who do and those who do not. The best part is it begins with the leader of the political opposition in Alaska driving by the mansion and wondering why the place is not all lit up? Was he hoping it was so he could bash her on global warming or greenhouse gases or her carbon emissions? But it made him wonder if she’s focused? How absurd that is. And to anyone wondering, the piece itself says the legislative session started on January 20 and it is only the 31st. Criticism comes quickly in Alaska.

Questions abound with Sarah Palin’s weekend trip to Washington DC. You can guess what they are. The first paragraph in Gov Palin’s press release ‘Non-Partisan Events in the Nation’s Capital certainly suggests although mildly vague that the Governor and her legislature are pushing for federal pork. The one who rose to fame on her self-promoted maverick and reform reputation even with questions on the bridge that wasn’t too far but went to nowhere and connections to other scandalous politicians is now going to campaign for pork????

Her state of the state near the end of the post suggests they were successful in bolstering the state of Alaska and storing some cash for this rainy day. As asked below, what is their condition and do they need help? Along with other 49 states one has to expect all cannot be saved by the Fed. And it all ends up being tested amidst members of an organization who will do anything for a drink.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

GOP governors press Congress to pass stimulus bill

NEW YORK (AP) - Most Republican governors have broken with their GOP colleagues in Congress and are pushing for passage of President Barack Obama’s economic aid plan that would send billions to states for education, public works and health care.

Their state treasuries drained by the financial crisis, governors would welcome the money from Capitol Hill, where GOP lawmakers are more skeptical of Obama’s spending priorities.

The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, scheduled meetings in Washington this weekend with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other senators to press for her state’s share of the package.

Alaska lawmakers question Sarah Palin’s focus

By ANNE SUTTON – 11 hours ago

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Driving home at night from her Capitol office, the leader of Alaska’s House Democrats often passes the governor’s white-columned mansion and wonders why more lights aren’t on.

Rep. Beth Kerttula assumes Gov. Sarah Palin is out of town, though Palin’s staffers say so far their boss has been there for most of the legislative session that began Jan. 20.

Non-Partisan Events in Nation’s Capital

Governor Sarah Palin to Attend

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 09-12

Governor Palin to Attend Non-Partisan Events in Nation’s Capital

January 28, 2009, Juneau, Alaska - Governor Sarah Palin is traveling to Washington, D.C. this weekend to attend a number of non-partisan functions while also visiting with her D.C. staff to continue discussions concerning the president’s stimulus package and Alaska dollars. The Alaska Legislature is working on a joint resolution urging the Obama Administration to pass a fair stimulus package, a point Governor Palin will stress while in the nation’s capital.

Governor Palin will first attend a dinner at the residence of Fred and Marlene Malek Friday evening. Fred Malek is a prominent business leader and the founder and Chairman of Thayer Capital Partners. In addition to his work in the private sector, Mr. Malek has had a distinguished career in public service. The governor is honored to have received the invitation and to have the chance to speak about Alaska and other issues impacting our state. A number of high-profile business and economic leaders are expected, as well as political leaders who will be making decisions on the stimulus package, including U.S. Senators Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), Dianne Feinstein (D-California), and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan will also be attending. On Saturday, in addition to the official meeting with her staff, the governor will attend the Center for Strategic and International Studies luncheon, which is a pre-Alfalfa event. Governor Palin will attend the Alfalfa Club Dinner.

These non-partisan and high-profile events provide Governor Palin with the perfect opportunity to speak further about not only Alaska’s needs, but how Alaska should be allowed to develop its natural resources in order to contribute to America’s quest toward energy independence. In keeping with tradition, President Obama is also expected to attend the Alfalfa Club Dinner.

The governor will return to Alaska on Sunday.

Contrary to published reports, the governor will neither be speaking at the RNC Winter Meeting, nor attending it.

###

editor’s note: The Alfalfa Club is an exclusive Washington, D.C. social organization which exists only to hold an annual banquet on the last Saturday of January. The group’s moniker is reference to the plant’s willingness to do anything for a drink.

from Gov Palin’s State of the State Address:

At a time when other state legislatures are staring at multi-billion-dollar deficits, and when our federal government proposes a deficit in excess of a trillion dollars this year alone, we have all the cautionary examples we need in the virtues of living within our means. With less revenue, we have an obligation to spend less money.

With our share of federal funds and Congress’ stimulus package, our obligation is equally clear: we must ensure these public funds serve vital needs – as is the case of infrastructure for our gas pipeline, needed by the nation; and the Kodiak Launch Facility, adding to national defense. President Obama pledged not to let this stimulus package devolve into the past familiar scene of politicians lining up for obscure earmarks. This is reform at work.

The excerpt below raises the question of how well positioned is Alaska to meet the current fiscal nightmare?

Two years ago at this podium, I urged spending restraint. I asked that billions of surplus funds be deposited in state savings. This struck me as a simple precaution against, as I described it, massive single-year cuts down the road, if and when we faced tougher times. You legislators agreed, so we can now meet our challenge in a stronger position.

Damn! I miss Sarah Palin (Sister Toldjah) 

The GOP through the voice of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell does not provide a convincing argument that Republican leadership supports bankruptcy for the auto industry rather than a taxpayer funded bailout. Simply arguing over the details of a bailout does not protect the American taxpayer. If the auto industry is unable or unwilling to formulate a radical approach to solve the industry’s problems no amount of taxpayer money will succeed in solving the problem.

As for others who may be affected by an auto industry failure what is different about that then all the past failures of other businesses. Are businesses that tied themselves to the auto industry incapable of transitioning to a different industry? Are workers displaced by failure in the auto industry incapable of doing what others do when they lose a job? Isn’t labeling a business as too big to fail just rhetoric for believing you have enough political influence to have someone else pay for your mistakes?

When animals dominated the American landscape of transportation in the ‘horse and buggy’ days what happened to all the people and jobs involved in that arrangement when the internal combustion engine and mechanically powered vehicles arrived on the scene? Did the government bail someone out then? Or did people adjust to changing times and develop their own solutions?

A more recent McConnell response on video is only currently available in Windows Media at republican.senate.gov won’t be linked here as this blog will not promote MS products. But the text version is here. (click)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com