Balance?

About two weeks ago I sent facsimiles to my Congressmen imploring them to resist knee jerk legislation that is focused on limiting 2nd Amendment freedom.  This is the response that was received from our Democratic Representative David Scott

Dear Mr. Man:  (not really)

Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent tragic shootings in our country. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.  

Let me emphasize, like you, I am deeply troubled and saddened with the recent violent shootings that have occurred from Aurora, Colorado to Sandy Hook, Connecticut and anywhere else in our nation . Such senseless tragedies are of grave concern to me and I strongly feel that sound investigations must occur so that our legal system can act appropriately. Many citizens and lawmakers have raised deep concern regarding gun control and I would like to address my views and recent developments in the gun control debate. 

A careful balance between Second Amendment rights and safety in gun ownership is necessary in crafting any policy toward gun control, and I am sensitive to both sides of the issue. In the past, I have worked toward making guns safer by requiring that they include safety locks. During my many years in the Georgia General Assembly, I helped create legislation that holds adults responsible for the safekeeping of guns around children. Moreover, I continue to support efforts to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. We must work to ensure that gangs and malicious groups or disturbed individuals are not allowed access to guns, and with them, the means to conduct violent acts within our communities. However, I also understand the right of Americans to protect themselves, and I have worked on bills that ensure this right will continue to be safe-guarded. As the 113th Congress continues with its legislative agenda, I will be sure to keep your views in mind.  

Again, I thank you for sharing your views with me. I hope you will continue to give me the benefit of your opinion in the future. In addition, I encourage you to visit my web site at http://davidscott.house.gov, where you can view the latest news and obtain information on issues and legislation that is important to you. You can also sign up for my electronic newsletter, and receive periodic updates on my activities as your representative in Washington. Thank you again for contacting me, and I look forward to continuing to serve you. 

Sincerely, 

David Scott 

Member of Congress

A nice enough response, that suggests that a balance between 2nd Amendments rights and government restrictions is needed. To this congressman, balance means there will have to be more restrictions on gun ownership rights. Balance if properly applied would mean that the government would have to somehow restrict itself in a manner equal to way it intends to restrict law abiding gun owners.  We all know there there is no intent to do that.  Balance is a farce, just look at past immigration promises, the government never delivers to completion the promises they make in order to get the deal they want.  They are liars.

More

Send Me A Story

OK, how about Pinocchio?

Because I signed a petition at the White House web site, a futile statement of secession, something central politicos consider heresy, they have assumed that I am interested in following the President's political aspirations.
Truth be told, if there was a properly adult manner that all of his policies could be thwarted, that would be what I would support.  Here is the email I received last week, I had to made a few spelling corrections so if I changed the mean by that, tough......

Hi all --

Today, Republicans in the House of Representatives are going to come together, cast a vote, and try to repeal the Affordable Care Act just as they've done nearly 40 times before.

Don't expect much to come of it.

The health care law was passed by Congress, signed by the President, and upheld by the Supreme Court. It's been the law of the land for more than three years. It's not going anywhere. We know that, and so do the lawmakers on Capitol Hill. But instead of creating jobs and growing the economy, some of them want to make yet another gesture of protest -- even if it's meaningless.

So we're responding with a little gesture of our own, and we need your help.

We're asking people like you to speak out, to let us know if you're one of the 85 percent of Americans who've already benefited from the health care law, and make a public stand in support of Obamacare.

Lend your name now.

Repealing the Affordable Care Act would mean that 6.6 million young adults would lose the option of staying on their parent's health insurance. It would mean that 34.1 million seniors would pay more for preventive care like mammograms and colonoscopies, and 18 million middle-class families lose the opportunity to save money on their monthly premiums starting in 2014. But this isn't about numbers; this is about our families’ lives.

And we're not just asking you to share your stories for the sake of speaking out. We're building a network of people to help make sure that everyone has the information they need as we implement the law. We'll keep you in the loop as we reach important milestones. We'll make sure you have all the key facts so that you can share them in your communities.

If you lend your name, we'll make sure you're part of that network. This is a chance to do more than send a message about your support for the Affordable Care Act. It's an opportunity to be part of making the law a success.

Show your support for the health care law today:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/healthreform/stories

Thanks,

David

David Simas

Deputy Senior Advisor

The White House

I sent a return response that no doubt will fall on deaf ears.  More than half the country is against this thing.  There is growing evidence that many of the objections dismissed during the debates are coming true.  Costs are already rising at rates greater than before the legislation, preferred political groups are being given exemptions to the system, talk of restrictions on services applied is coming out of the government. The crowning glory, now the IRS as the future enforcer of the legislation has been revealed as morally bankrupt.
I am scared of the economic impact this program will have on all business and how the welfare component of the system will become yet another incomplete promise to help those purported to be most in need.
In the end it is a power grab by the government seeking to control a greater amount of the economy while fostering dependence of citizens on an central government.
  

More

Throwing Open the Doors to Unions

The Federal government helping unions enter non-union shop with the help of OSHA.
As an engineer for a non-union plant, I've always thought OSHA treated us pretty fairly, problems only arise when disgruntled worked created problems they then reported, or disgruntled workers extending benefits through dishonest testimony. As far as the safety stuff goes the company is very involved and reaches beyond the regulations.
Bringing a union representative in on a shop inspection offers no resemblance to  being an integrated purpose visit. This is simply somebody helping somebody else get in the door.

Throwing Open the Doors to Unions

More

And Then There Was....

My bride's niece sent this to me on Facebook. Always happy to have people offering up content.

Hamilton's Curse

Received this book as a gift from from one of my engineer's.
Was written by Thomas J. DiLorenzo and published in 2008, as a paperback it is 209 pages long and  has another 23 page of footnotes.
Having read and enjoyed Alexander Hamilton written by Ron Chernow released in 2004, I was somewhat taken aback by the more candid approach to this historic figure.
Basically it describes how Hamilton was an advocate of the mercantile system of England, a system that favored keeping those with money over those without.  A perpetuation of power if you will.
During the Constitutional Convention Hamilton pushed for a permanent Presidential post and all power emanating from a central government.  The followers of Jefferson prevailed at the convention and constructed a document based on limiting and balancing the powers of government. Hamilton circumvented the Constitution by participating in the creation of the Federalist papers, documents meant to explain the background reasons for the what the Constitution was meant to be.  Placed in power during the Presidency of Washington, Hamilton built a central banking system and a standing army both of which were not allowable by the Constitution but instead based on expansive expression of the the need to govern i the general interest of citizens.
Hamilton was killed in a dual with Aaron Burr, but his principle lived on in the Supreme Court and within the Whig and later Republican parties.  New England's dominance of national politics, excepting the periods of the Virginians and Andrew Jackson favored the mercantile system and the process that restricts growth of business in favor of existing business. It is an old idea that continues today.
The culminating blow came in 1913, when Woodrow Wilson, a Georgian, fostered the start of the current income tax, the 17th amendment which granted stated to directly elect senators and lastly the creation of the Federal Reserve system.  All were sold as what was good for the general welfare, all have delivered the negatively to the object of their intent.
DiLorenzo explains that today members of both major political parties claim intelligence to the ideals of Hamilton. The Republicans agree with his philosophy to build policies that favor business.  The Democrats agree with the notion that strong central government is best. Both principles are in dominant application today and the result is big business likes the regulation of big government because it protects them from entrepreneurship.
The book is very good and I recommend for those who wish to enrich their conservative-libertarian knowledge.

More

What is the opposite of comp time?

When considering the actions of Congress, they bicker, practice hyperbole and generally fuck thing over. Some of them do not want businesses to use the payment method of comp time. In  my opinion many of our politicians owe us comp time for the confiscation of our only real resources, time effort and intelligence. They take that to expend on glorified waste.

Congress.org presents: MEGAVOTE, May 13, 2013
In this MegaVote for Georgia's 13th Congressional District:

Recent Congressional Votes

• Senate: Internet Sales Tax  Final Passage
• Senate: Water Infrastructure Projects  Amendment Vote
• House: Private Sector Comp Time  Final Passage
• House: Debt Payment Prioritization  Final Passage

Upcoming Congressional Bills

• Senate: Water Resources Development Act of 2013
• Senate: Nominations
• House: To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care-related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
• House: SEC Regulatory Accountability Act

Recent Senate Votes:

Internet Sales Tax  Final Passage
Vote Passed (69-27, 4 Not Voting)
Last week the Senate completed action on bipartisan but controversial Internet sales tax legislation. More than two-thirds of senators (all but five Democrats and about half of Republicans) agreed that states should be allowed to require online firms to collect the same sales taxes as their domiciled brick-and-mortar businesses. States would be required to provide free tax-calculation software to affected businesses. Firms with gross annual receipts of $1 million or less would be exempted from the new requirements. Prior to final passage the Senate adopted an amendment from Wyoming Republican Mike Enzi, one of the measures co-sponsors, which would extend the implementation timeline from three to six months and specify that requirements for filing returns and making tax payments must be the same for online and offline firms. President Obama supports S. 743, but House Speaker John Boehner and Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., have both expressed skepticism toward the legislation.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss voted YES
Sen. Johnny Isakson voted YES
I sent letters to both Senators asking that they vote no on this subject.  Received a response from Chambliss stating that it was done in the interest of fairness placing businesses that sell through "brick and mortar" stores on an even footing. Surely they never considered the possibility of reducing sales taxes on the store fronts did they. Government NEVER taxes people in the interest of fairness, they ALWAYS tax to get more money.  Isakson sent a canned request that was an answer to the wrong issue, he no doubt never read or cared.

Water Infrastructure Projects  Amendment Vote
Vote Rejected (56-43, 1 Not Voting)
After passing the Internet sales tax bill, the Senate moved on to the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), a catch-all piece of legislation usually passed every five years dealing with everything from dams and levees to port dredging. Traditionally one of the biggest magnets for pork barrel projects, this version of WRDA is the first since both chambers of Congress adopted earmark moratoria. Similar to last years highway bill, WRDA makes various changes to existing law in order to speed up project approval, including the imposition of financial penalties on tardy agencies. The bill also attempts to capture a larger share of the revenue that accrues to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund each year for actual harbor maintenance  a seemingly novel concept, yet one that Senate appropriators initially objected to, as they have grown accustomed to diverting much of the trust funds receipts to unrelated accounts. Several amendments were voted on last week, including this one from Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn that would enable individuals to bring guns on to Army Corps of Engineers-administered water projects. The amendment failed due to a 60-vote requirement. At weeks end the legislation had stalled over Louisiana Democrat Mary Landrieus insistence on a vote for her amendment that would prevent a rise in flood insurance premiums. Though a cloture vote is currently scheduled for May 14, it appears that there is some agreement on a vote for the Landrieu amendment. The White House leveled several criticisms of the bill in its policy statement , though a managers amendment from Barbara Boxer and David Vitter, the chair and ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, may have addressed some of these issues.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss voted YES
Sen. Johnny Isakson voted YES
Georgia Senators voted correctly on this one, Savannah has been struggling for share of the pie for upgrades and been rejected, not doubt Democrat purposeful restrictions.

Recent House Votes:

Private Sector Comp Time  Final Passage
Vote Passed (223-204, 5 Not Voting)
The House passed a measure last week to allow private sector employers to provide comp time to their workers in lieu of overtime pay. Under current law, such an arrangement exists for most workers in the public sector and a few in the private sector. Republicans classified the measure as providing flexibility to both employers and employees, while Democrats and their allies in the labor movement suspect an attempt to weaken workers rights. In particular, they claim that there is no guarantee an individual will receive time off when he desires it and that employers could put pressure on workers to accept comp time instead of overtime.  The White House seems to agree with these critiques, as it has threatened to veto the bill.
Rep. David Scott voted NO
You have to consider that a real reason for Democratic intransigence is the fact that companies and individuals who are involved in overtime pay, pay more taxes. What worker have you ever known to not keep track of comp hours, I've got an assistant that keeps it to the minute.  What is more, this is a state issue not federal. 

Debt Payment Prioritization  Final Passage
Vote Passed (221-207, 4 Not Voting)
In its final action of the week, the House took another foray into debt limit politics. The "Full Faith and Credit Act" would mandate that in the event of the government hitting the debt limit, the Treasury Secretary would prioritize payment to holders of government debt and to Social Security recipients above all other obligations. These payments would in fact be exempt from the debt limit, such that the government could theoretically continue functioning, if only in order to issue Social Security checks and service the debt. No Democrats backed the measure, and the administration has threatened a veto.
Rep. David Scott voted NO
An interesting little bill, an attempt to make sure the receivers of federal welfare do not have their money flow interrupted and the Democrats vote against. If the President  vetoes that bill it sort of proves that he interest is in frightening the people that vote for him.

Upcoming Votes:

Water Resources Development Act of 2013 - S.601
The Senate will continue debating the water infrastructure bill this week. If no agreement on amendments is reached beforehand, a cloture vote on the measure will take place May 14.
Dead in its tracks, water flows downhill dudes and you can't push a rope.

Nominations 
The Senate may vote on the nominations of Ernest Moniz for Energy secretary and Marilyn Tavenner to oversee the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which manages the two health care programs.
To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care-related provisions in the Health
Probably disguised communists.

Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 - H.R.45
The House is scheduled to vote on a bill to repeal "Obamacare." Curiously the bill as currently written appears not to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a body created by the law to make binding recommendations on Medicare cuts, which congressional Republicans have previously targeted individually for repeal.
Obamacare is likely screw up your health care options, get rid of it.

SEC Regulatory Accountability Act - H.R.1062
The House is also scheduled to take up a measure that would amend the charter of the SEC to force the agency to conduct cost-benefit analyses before issuing new regulations.
A bill designed towards thoughtfulness and subject to the whims of any later House over-reacting to some natural event.

MegaVote is powered by the CQ-Roll Call Group (http://corporate.cqrollcall.com)
Copyright (c) 2013.

More

Think Tank

Tank Think

During the Sandy Hook aftermath, there were multiple instances of 2nd Amendment enemies making statements about how individuals do not have a real need to possess semi-automatic weapons, of which they suggest are the equivalent of automatic weapons.  Over and over I heard different politicians arguing that there was no plausible end to the 2nd Amendment right and that citizens could claim the right to own a tank.
A nonsensical argument without a doubt, but now I've received an email from my Republican Senator explaining how it was right for the DHS to be hoarding ammunition and required 16 armored vehicles.

Dear Mr. Man:  (not my real name) 

Thank you for contacting me regarding bullet and armored vehicle purchases by the Department of Homeland Security. I appreciate hearing from you and am grateful for the opportunity to respond.  I apologize for my delayed response to you.  I have received a high volume of letters in the last few months and that is the reason for the delay.  Please know that your opinion was taken into consideration at the time your letter was received. 

In March 2012, the Department of Homeland Security awarded an open-ended contract in which a company will supply the agency with up to 90 million bullets per year for five years, adding up to a potential maximum of 450 million bullets at the end of five years.  This supply of bullets is to be used by all of the 20-plus DHS firearm carrying agencies, including the Secret Service, Customs and Border Patrol, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement.  This contract is part of DHS' strategic efforts to combine multiple previous contracts in order to leverage the purchasing power of the entire department, including the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), which has its main facility in Georgia.  Additionally, in February 2013, DHS issued a one-time solicitation for 240,000 rounds to cover the ammunition requirements at FLETC while a larger, department-wide contract is finalized. 

In 2008 alone, DHS fired 33.6 million bullets alone at the three FLETC training ranges across the United States, including the facility in Brunswick, Georgia. The vast majority of these rounds are fired during training and practice. Each of the depatment's roughly 130,000 sworn law enforcement officers going through basic firearms training will fire over 1,000 rounds. Officers are also required to qualify with their weapon every year, accounting for a few hundred rounds, and will often go through additional firearms training programs, each of which can use over 1,000 rounds. There are concerns over the legality of purchasing hollow-point bullets, but U.S. law enforcement has always used this type of bullet and they are legal.  

Finally, I understand your concerns surrounding the purchase of armored vehicles by DHS.  The department has described the purpose of these vehicles to be used for serving high-risk warrants against drug traffickers and smugglers.  Nationwide, DHS has 16 armored vehicles that were transferred to them from the Department of Defense.  The vehicles have been modified and are used by the DHS Special Response Team.  The team is only dispatched during the most high-risk situations. 

I understand your concerns relating to the ammunition and vehicle's use and the cost of the purchases.  Just as local law enforcement agencies must train their officers to protect local communities, federal agencies must train their agents to effectively and safely enforce federal laws and protect our nation's borders, coastlines, and waterways.  Rest assured, I will keep your thoughts in mind as I work on issues related to the Department of Homeland Security. 

Thank you again for contacting me.  Please visit my webpage at http://www.isakson.senate.gov/ for more information on the issues important to you and to sign up for my e-newsletter. 

Sincerely,

Johnny Isakson

United States Senator

I do feel "assured", after having been delivered a rationalization for equipment purchased to control citizens with force. Republicans are just as much for a powerful central government and Democrats.  In many, many ways they are hard to tell apart.  

 

More

Peeing on IRS Sign

As an eighteen year old, the night before I went to Georgia for college, my friends took a picture of me peeing on the Clinton police department sign.  That was after many beers and an historic baseball game at Fenway Park.

This is something many of us would like to do.
Photo: Eagles Evan Mathis Peeing on IRS Building Sign | Robert Littal Presents BlackSportsOnline

More

Abstract Reform BS

When you sign a petition at White House website, that is the cue you are one of them. I guess.  Periodically, emails such as this come to me.

Hi, everyone --

This is the start of a national debate. Across the country, we're having a serious discussion about how we can build a fair and effective immigration system that lives up to our heritage as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.

And we need your help to make sure that genuine, personal perspectives are part of the conversation. The truth is, that if we go back far enough, nearly every American story begins somewhere else -- so often with ancestors setting out in search of a different life, carving out a future for their children in this place that all of us now call home.

We want to make sure that idea isn't far from the minds of policymakers here in Washington as we work to reach an agreement to reform immigration.

To kick things off, one of the President's senior advisors sat down to share his story with you.

Watch David Simas tell his American story, then tell us yours.

When Americans from all over the country -- each with different backgrounds, each from different circumstances -- all speak out with the same voice, it's powerful in a way that's hard to ignore. We've seen it again and again, in debate after debate.

And this is the kind of issue where putting a face on the push for reform takes an abstract concept and makes it real. So share your American stories with us, and we'll put them to use.

We'll publish them on the White House website. We'll share them on Facebook and Twitter. We'll do everything we can to make sure they're part of the debate around immigration reform.

Get started here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration/stories 

Thanks,

Cecilia

Cecilia Muñoz

Director, Domestic Policy Council

The White House 

My opinion of this is that the White House is using government resources to foster the spread of a political position.  I guess that is nothing new, but the intimacy of an email combined with respect for the importance of the presidency, make it seem overtly political and over-reaching, perhaps inappropriate.  

Truth is, the central government always wants the population to be growing as an excuse for the Federal Reserve System to expand the money supply which is used to buy more political power. The fact that Democrats endorse converting illegal aliens to citizenry can be construed as racist because it requires the presumption that these new citizens will carry a lower proportional economic earning load than increase in money supply. 

The fact that poor citizens tend to vote for Democrats is just a happy by-product.  The government wants inflation, this gives them an excuse to do it.

More

Brick-and-Mortar Fairness BS

Last week I sent a facsimile to my three Congressional representatives asking they resist the internet sales tax.  Both of my Senators voted for it, have not check on the work of David Scott if he has yet the chance to vote.
Yesterday I received this tender response to my petition from the soon to be retired Senator Saxby Chambliss. The text is proofed but contextually unchanged.

From: Senator Saxby Chambliss

Sent: Thu, May 9, 2013 9:52:16 AM

Subject: Responding to your message

Dear  Mr. Man:  that is not really my name

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding federal tax policy.  Your taking the time to contact me is appreciated. 

Over 20 years have passed since the Supreme Court found (Quill v. North Dakota) that current state and local sales tax rules were too complicated to require retailers to collect sales taxes unles s they had a physical presence in the state of the consumer. This decision resulted in legislative responses at both the state and Federal level. 

States responded by adopting, the "Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement," a comprehensive interstate system to streamline and harmonize their tax rules and administrative requirements. This agreement was approved by 34 states and the District of Columbia, and became effective in 2005.   Georgia became a full member state in 2012. 

Congress' attempted responses to the Supreme Court's decision have been varied. While some proposals have been drafted to simply sanction the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement, other proposals have attempted to create new "internet sales taxes," a course of action that I do not support. 

Earlier this year, S. 336, the Marketplace Fairness Act, was introduced and referred to t he Senate Committee on Finance.  S. 336 was not passed out of committee for consideration by the full Senate , though identical legislation, S. 743, was recently considered by the full Senate . 

On  May 6 , I , along with   68 of my colleagues voted on  S. 743 , the  new Marketplace Fairness  bill ,  which would sanction the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement that the State o f Georgia has already adopted.  S. 743 ultimately passed the Senate with a 69-27 vote margin.  I believe Congress should enable brick-and-mortar retailers to operate on the same playing field as e-commerce retailers. This bill ensures that local businesses are not placed at an unfair disadvantage compared to their online competitors. 

Whenever legislation regarding internet taxation or the collection and remittance of local sales taxes is considered by the full Senate, I will certainly keep your views in mind.

If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at:  www.chambliss.senate.gov .  Please let me know how I may be of assistance.  

Well, to get to the point of it, I have been ready a new book on Alexander Hamilton's wishes to circumvent the Constitution for the creation of a strong centralized government that is hyper-involved in business transactions, the Senator's vote pissed me off.  The real reason for the vote is, the federal government has to collect more tax money because it is spending more than it is bringing in. Never in the equation is the consideration they not spend so much.  During the current sequester, people have not been laid off, just taken down a pay notch ready to bounce back first catastrophe the politicians grab as an excuse.  So I sent him a letter back, we'll see if it bounces.

Senator Chambliss,

You have thanked me for correspondence regarding federal tax policy.  This was followed by an arcane set of reasons you applied to justify endorsing a new tax.  

I find it amusing that a Senator who has made a promise to not create taxes uses the excuse that the application was to foster greater fairness.  Taxes add expense to goods which in turn reduce the amount of good that can be purchased.  Taxes are never fair to the consumer no matter how dishonestly portrayed.  

Speaking on the matter of fairness, if individual states have difficulty collecting taxes on internet sales and now the federal government is collecting those monies, is it within the plan that those monies collected will be distributed to the states? Of course not. 

When our central government creates new regulation on business, in this case in the form of taxes, the resultant regulation is a designed by the business leaders of the current dominant participants in that business, this is a construct that promotes business inefficiency by way of constricted competition.

You sir have broken your promise and helped create something that is anything but "fair".

Sorely disappointed,

Mr. Man

Mableton Georgia

I am glad that Senator Chambliss is retiring, his actions in the last few years have not been in the interests of his entire state, excluding the farmers of south Georgia, he has become a good example of the failure of the 17th Amendment to citizens (not the point of view of the Senate for sure).
.

More

So Proud

It looks like Otis Nixon is off the wagon again.
Pulled over for weaving, crack cocaine was seen in the driver's seat of his truck.
Read the messages at the local newspaper site, it appears that some  typical position comments are made and rather brusque retorts.
http://canton-ga.patch.com/articles/former-atlanta-braves-center-fielder-otis-nixon-arrested-in-cherokee-084ab8fe
The dumb bastard is going to end up killing somebody, lets hope it's not an innocent.

More

Smart Lady

"The freedom of speech of private individuals includes the right to not agree, not to listen, and not to finance one's own antagonists."

Ayn Rand

Save the Helium

Congress.org (congress.org) presents: MEGAVOTE,  April 29, 2013 for Georgia's 13th Congressional District:

Recent Congressional Votes:

• Senate: OMB Director  Confirmation
• Senate: Internet Sales Tax  Cloture Motion
• House: High-Risk Insurance Pools  Rule Vote
• House: FAA Furloughs  Suspension Vote
• House: Federal Helium Sales  Suspension Vote

Congress is in recess until Monday, May 6.

Maybe we can recess appoint a new Congress?

Recent Senate Votes:

OMB Director  Confirmation
Vote Confirmed (96-0, 4 Not Voting)
Last week, the Senate unanimously confirmed Sylvia Matthews Burwell to be the next director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The office oversees development of the presidents annual budget proposals and oversees the performance of federal agencies.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss voted YES
Sen. Johnny Isakson voted YES
If they all voted together, it must be inconsequential.

Internet Sales Tax  Cloture Motion
Vote Agreed to (63-30, 7 Not Voting)
Before leaving for a week-long recess, the Senate also approved a motion to invoke cloture on S. 743, the Marketplace Fairness Act of 2013. S. 743 would allow states to require online retailers to collect sales and use taxes on purchases made by their residents. President Obama supports the measure, saying it would "level the playing field" for brick-and-mortar retailers. The bill is expected to pass when the Senate returns; House action is uncertain.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss voted NO
Sen. Johnny Isakson voted YES
Resist all new taxes. When a politician talks about leveling the playing field you better watch the bubble because some poor bastard is about to get fucked.

Recent House Votes:

High-Risk Insurance Pools  Rule Vote
Vote Passed (225-189, 18 Not Voting)
The House was expected to pass a bill to transfer funds from one Obamacare-created program to another last week, but after agreeing to a framework for debating the measure with this vote, Republican leaders concluded they did not have enough votes and pulled it from the floor. H.R. 1549 would transfer approximately $3.6 billion from the Prevention and Public Health Fund, which was created to fund various eponymous initiatives, to the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, which was created to provide health insurance coverage to individuals who could not obtain such insurance until 2014, when another Obamacare program, the health insurance exchanges, are scheduled to begin operation. President Obama has threatened to veto the bill if and when it does come up again.
Rep. David Scott voted NO

See the representative already do not have the courage to risk being labeled as anti health care.  The shit storm is gathering on the horizon, these politicians have created a mess and will absolutely let the    people take the hit.  

FAA Furloughs  Suspension Vote
Vote Passed (361-41, 30 Not Voting)
Responding to rising anger with flight delays around the country, Congress acted with rare celerity to avert further furloughs at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA had been forced to reduce the hours of its air traffic controllers as a result of the sequester. After several days of thousands of passengers experiencing delays (and presumably well aware that they would hear about it from constituents during the recess), the Senate passed a bill (S. 853) by unanimous consent allowing FAA to transfer up to $253 million to prevent reduced operations and staffing. Because the bill could be seen as a spending measure (though it spends no new funds), Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. secured unanimous consent that a House-passed bill with identical text to S. 853 would automatically pass the Senate as well. The House passed such a bill last Friday; it is expected to clear the Senate when that body meets in pro forma session on Tuesday, April 30. The White House stated last week that the President will sign the bill when it reaches his desk.
Rep. David Scott voted YES

The FAA and other departments have not laid anybody off.  Any temporary operational savings will evaporate as soon and the sequester is resolved.  The government has not been reduced at all.

Federal Helium Sales  Suspension Vote
Vote Passed (394-1, 37 Not Voting)
In its final action of the week, the House passed a bill creating a framework for winding down operation of the Federal Helium Reserve. Under current law, the Reserve is mandated to cease commercial helium sales once it pays off its debt, which is expected to occur by October 2013. According to the House Natural Resources committee, the scheduled closure would cut domestic helium supplies in half. H.R. 527 would keep the reserve open with new operating instructions until its capacity is 3 billion cubic feet (down from 10 billion cubic feet at present), at which time commercial sales will no longer be authorized and remaining supplies will only be available for national security and scientific needs. Neither the administration nor Senate leaders have staked out positions on the measure.
Rep. David Scott voted YES
Will the little children have gas for their balloons? Who speaks for the children? Let's do a sequester on the gas, simply cool it down so the volume constricts ten percent, then when there is plenty of money (maybe next week) we can heat it up again to get the full desired volume.  

MegaVote is powered by the CQ-Roll Call Group
Copyright (c) 2013.

More

Look for the Union Label

For over 25 years I have been driving past this business. The business sold desired products at competitive prices. A union insisted on pay and benefits that impinged on the owners bottom line in manner that made it more attractive to shutter the business.
This building has been empty for months, people that worked here lost their jobs, owners of the business lost their investment, owners of the property have lost a revenue stream.
Workers need to realize, unless they work for the government, that in spite of hidden inflation, there is universal business pressure to freeze controllable costs.  That means the poorer choices that businesses encounter get passed down to the workers.  There are ominous signs that the new health care program will be another such burden that employers will have to financially hoist onto their employees backs.  This concept is not understood by leaders of organized labor, that or they just don't give a shit.
It is, in the end, the result of economic Darwinism. Perhaps without the union, the business could survived.
All I know is there won't be any more of those Hostess Cupcakes with the white scroll, or Twinkies that never loose their color.

Look for the union label.