Saturday, November 05, 2011

Scott Brown, Mitch McConnell and the ideological Hhouse are toxic to the principles of democracy.

Scott Brown is as slick as they come.  Setting aside the obvious alliance with Wall Street that now views him as a 'darling' Senator, a favorite son even; the recent rantings of Scott Brown are more hostile to bipartisanship than ever before.

"...I spoke personally with (click title to entry - thank you) Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, urging him to take out parts of the jobs bill that both parties could agree upon, and get those passed immediately. I also wrote a letter on October 6th to leaders Reid and McConnell on the then-upcoming jobs bill vote, outlining my concerns and suggestions...."

Scott Brown wants to dissect The American Jobs Act and vote on the 'pieces' of the bill that would allow for bipartisan MAJORITIES.  That was majorities, not 60 votes.  Brown is assuming he can prevent a filibuster if he can pass the Republican 'pieces' to The American Jobs Act seeking the support of enough Democrats.  That isn't bipartisanship, that is blackmail, intimidation and seeks to cause more problems with the National Debt than resolution of PAYING for the bill through a tax on the most wealthiest Americans.

Scott Brown states, "If we can begin to agree on one aspect of legislation, there is every reason based on past history of the Senate, we can agree on more than one."  Something like that.  The new Republican Party was never in the Senate before or the House for that matter.  The country has never faced the current economic tragedy ever before, except, for the Great Depression.  Ideology divides the Senate and House.  The most grotesque ideology is by the Repubican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell stating his ideological goal is to make Obama a one term President.  A rhetorical ideology spawned and inspired by Shawn Hannity.  That speaks to the 'best mentor' McConnell can find.

There is no reason for any of the provisions Brown is advocating to pass as PARTIAL measures of The American Job Act.  He proposes extending the tax cuts without paying for them and seeks to remove a Contractors' Withholding Tax  (click here) as is advocated by US Chamber of Commerce.  The 3 percent withholding was enacted in 2005 to take effect in 2009 until President Obama put a hold on it in the original American Recovery and Reconstruction Act of 2009.  President Obama has recommended in The American Jobs Act to place a hold on it again. 
The reason the 2005 Congress passed it in the first place is because so many contractors don't pay their taxes, including Medicare.  The 3% tax applies to the entire payment of the check issued to a contractor and not simply the anticipated profit intended by the contractor.  In return the amount withheld would be applied to all owed taxes to the government, be it federal, state and local.  The bill is expected to bring in $12 billion in revenues, while costing a potential $20 billion in infrastructure to monitor and account for the withheld funds while returns for credit are applied to the contractors overall tax burden for the year.  It is my estimation the 3% is less than what will or should be the taxes paid. 

What this bill primarily does is state the USA at any level of government cannot efficiently 'administer' these fund to benefit the government so 'go ahead' and cheat the government out of all the monies a contractor cares to.  I cannot fathom spending $20 billion in infrastructure to an anticipated $12 billion in revenue.  I haven't seen the balance sheets, but, that also means $20 billion in new jobs, hardware and software along the way that would have its own return of income to the USA Treasury.  Additionally, it would pay to the country monies owned the Treasury of which we would never see without this bill.  But, what is really interesting is that Scott Brown proposes to pay for the loss of $12 billion in revenue by eliminating the need for the additional costs and WHATEVER 'uncommitted' discretionary funds are available in the budget.

There are uncommitted discretionary funds in the USA budget?  Really?  Why then isn't The American Jobs Act receiving those funds to initiate the return of teachers, police and emergency workers back to work? 

At any rate, the sly Mr. Scott Brown is not the man he would like for us to believe he is.  He is willing to gut the sincere provisions of The American Jobs Act while seeking more relief for his Wall Street cronies.  Repealing the 3% Withholding may be a good idea, especially now, but what happens to the monies owned the US Treasury now and in the future by these contractors?  Why are we seeking to allow hiring of contractors that don't pay their taxes?  Pay into Medicare as the rest of us do?  If not this bill, then what?  Nothing? 

Mr. Brown takes his direction from Wall Street and no more understands the needs of the citizens of this country or their national debt.  It seems to me with Republicans taking only advise from Wall Street cronies there is a sincere lack of expertise to know how best to serve the citizens and the best interest of the country.  Anyone, even Joe the Faux Plumber can carry out legislation from ALEC or Wall Street Bosses, but, it takes sincere talent to actually legislate and commit to the priorities of The People. 

President Obama wrote the American Jobs Act as a committment to both sides of the aisle.  It is all the more obvious now that Scott Brown can't and/or won't commit to cooperation and respect of other collegues.  He is a divider and not a uniter.  Splitting up the American Jobs Act is hostile to the citizen and shows profound disregard for all Americans so much as the wealthiest Americans.  The American Jobs Act wasn't meant to be divided into pieces that can marginally reach an uncontested majority in the Senate with Republicans making up the primary votes.  It was intended to bring both parties together in a spirit of cooperation for the benefit of the country.  It is more than obvious Republicans don';t have the capacity to work with Democrats or even respect them.  They utilize such divisive strategies to influence adverse opinion regarding President Obama and Democrats in the House and Seante.  They are incapable of sincere leadership. 

The 3% Contractors Withholding was just as much a burden when it was voted for in 2005 as it is today, so what exactly was the problem in realizing the final results when it was passed in the first place?  There needs to be CHANGES in the law to reduce overhead to carry out the withholding tax, as well as an understanding that if contractors don't pay their taxes in a reasonable period of time they will no longer be awarded contracts in the first place.  Where is the US Chamber of Commerce on that or Scott Brown for that matter?  They would rather the USA government have sand kicked in its face by the contractors it hires then actually solve the problem.  THAT is a problem and Scott Brown is at the heart of problem.

I guess there are all sorts of ways of getting through college if one can't obtain scholarships.  Charisma in politics is an adjunct to what it sincerely takes to legislate.  It makes the candidate more palatable, but, no better qualified.

By Bernie Becker
11/01/11 11:31 AM ET

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) (click here) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are pressing Senate Democrats to move quickly on a bill that would repeal a measure that requires governments to keep a share of certain payments to contractors.

Brown said Tuesday that passing a repeal of the 3 percent withholding provision would send a reassuring signal to voters amid partisan sniping over how to spark the economy....

AAA  Nov. 5, 2011 9:11 AM ET
Biden warns GOP on stalling Obama jobs measure (click here)

(AP) — Vice President Joe Biden says the White House will keep acting on its own to find ways to help the economy if congressional Republicans don't pass the administration's jobs bill.
Filling in for President Barack Obama in the weekly radio and Internet address, Biden asked listeners to press Republicans "to step up" and send approve the plan.
"Tell them to stop worrying about their jobs and start worrying about yours because we're all in this together, and together is the way we're going to bring America back even stronger than it was before," Biden said....

Deregulation and its faux promise of job creation. Regulation drives innovation.

Quite some time ago there was a dairy farm in Pennington, New Jersey that gave up the mission of producing milk and decided instead to simply produce quality dairy cows for sale.

Why did this farm stop producing milk for consumption?  Because the federal govenrment wanted 'risk free' milk in their populous that protected children and delivered necessary vitamins into the diet.  So the farm either had to comply with new regulations for stainless steel milking equipment from 'utter' to 'tanker truck' leaving the process free of human hand contact or get out of the buesiness.

Is there anyone in the USA that wants to return to deregulation endangering the entire country and their health?Risking disease and providing venues of contamination into the diets of Americans?  Of course not.  We are witnessing a lysteria virus that have killled innocent people.  No one wants to die for the job they have or wants others to die for it either.  The Pennington farm survived in a differnt way, contributed to the dairy community in the northeast USA and the FAMILY farm prospered with grain crops and through other venues of 'agri-business.'  The owners of the farm and livestock became millionaires nearly overnight for the cows they sold and subsequently raised and the soybean, corn and wheat they grew and harvested instead of feeding cows.  In actuality, the community, the people involved in the farming operations opened up new opportunities for employment of others than ever before. 

The farmer was quite a billiant man and went to work for an experiemental concept developed to spread 'liquid fertilizer' freeing up time other dairymen needed to tend to their pursuits. The agri-business blossomed and put many people to work.  Many.  There were liquid fertilizer trucks all over southern New Jersey and opportunity abounded.

The farmer's son, then eleven years old at the time, had an award winning Holstein Calf and Cow every year at the 4-H fair.  Their roots were intact.

If regulation of the nation's milk supply hadn't come along there would have been less employment opportunity for those outside the family farm circle, the opportunity to diversify and growth of a new ag-business would not have happened for many years or a decade later and the family farm would not see millions of income to their lives which were changed forever.  The farmer worked with the farming community not just in spreading liquid fertilizer, but, in advice regarding excellent farming practices and until today those agricultural lands in New Jersey are highly productive.  Except if they are flooded due to the Climate Crisis.

This is true story. 

Regulations never intend to destroy jobs, their intent is to bring safety and well being to the American people.  Can anyone honestly say that the BP Gulf Oil Disaster would have happened if the industry was properly regulated, the USA had a Minerals Management Commission that worked rather than partied and the industry was INSPECTED enough to provide a LARGE margin of safety to any mishap?  No one in the USA can make the claim BP would have never happened IF all the regulations and regulators were working.  Quite the contrary. We would not see shrimp beds collapsing through ecosystem degradation and disaster off the coast of Louisiana.

Regulaitons in a society of over 300 milion people are necessary.  When the country was the thirteen colonies and the forests were 'old growth forests' everywhere, the impact of disease and health risks were never a concern.  The human footprint was never noticed.  That is completely opposite today.  As the country grows and seeks ways of life, quality of life and employment or OPPORTUNITY that will sustain; the need for protective and pertinent regulation is always necessary.  It is the place of the government to fact find, protect the citizen and legislate in ways that matter to sustain LIFE, but, also quality of life. 

Regulations can be draconian, but, not when it means there is no mercury in the air we breath, the water we drink, bath or wash clothes, reasonable leverls of all the NOX and SOX, lower levels of surface ozone that literally burn the 'epithelium' of lungs and compromise gas exchange at the alveoli, insists on CO2 levels that provide a safe and sane troposphere which fosters lives rather than endangers it, clean water, not just CLEAR water, but, water without danger to human body chemistry.

Regulations brings 'state of the art' demands to the public and private sector.  If the USA Military was nearly the first INDUSTRY to power itself with biofuels, what then is the problem?  If the USA military runs on regulation and innovation while providing prosperity to Americans within its industrial complex, there can't be much wrong.  Not that there aren't issues, but, as a rule USA military bases protect some of the most endangered and threatened species of the USA. 

Rolling back regulations destroys the moral content of the USA, stops innovation rather than demanding it. compromises The Clean Air Act and The Clean Water Act and sets the USA back decades in international relationships and trade.  What prevents the WHO, the UN, the G7, 8 or 20 from demanding control of CO2 levels within their trade and international agreements.  What makes anyone believe being BEHIND the innovation and compliance curve is a good place for the world's largest economy? Doing so is simply double standards and greed.  Those 'characters' of the USA economy and government breeds far less good will than holding a national 'esteem' which includes the dignity of fighting for a common cause such as stopping droughts in Africa and Texas.

There are always complaints from citizens when new regulations are written or there is tighter ENFORCEMENT of existing regulations, but, that doesn't mean it isn't good for the country, its poeple, its international standing and its regard for human life and the asthetics of quality of life. 

This is a perfect time to 'exact' the regulations and compliance and enforcement needed.  Returning manufacturing to the USA has to be about viability, employment, expanding tax bases and qualify of life with asthetics intact.  The people of the USA know they can do this, they don't have to settle while realizing dereguation is about wealth and not well being.

There are reasons, sound reasons for the standards of regulation in the USA.  They are not fabricated for wealth interruption by government.  The government is in place for a reason and it isn't just to invade countries illegally to control their carbon resources.  Deregulation is not the answer, it is however, the problem.

Here is some more "HI Tech" lynching. Racism, Stereotyping, Aggression and Sexism abound.

"Hi Tech Lyching" with material from his own imagineering.

If the "Honey and Chicken" stood up for herself and refused 'the hero on horseback' I might even have respect for all those involved. 

The labeling of stereotypes, the overt agression, the vicitimized, misunderstood pansey with flowers is all nonsense, has absolutely no relevance to any problem the USA faces and is biased emotinonally to 'incur' sympathy for a 'man of color.'

Cain is a sympathetic figure to those that surround him.  A victim that was not of his choosing.  If this is the best a Presidential hopeful has to offer for nominating him, then the commercial simply states Cain has nothing to offer besides a 'sly smile of masked understanding,' a secret agenda of understood values, entertainment of domination vs difficult odds and an empty candidate that seeks approval through 'Hollywood stunts' of which the Left is always condemned. 

Where are the ads without the sly smile, the sarcasm, the social jokes which speak to policy, knowledge and expertise? I haven't seen any SUBSTANCE in any ads for Cain other than alcohol, tobacco and firearms.

Evidently, the Cain Campaign has more than one angry man.