IRS to Enforce Ban on Abortion-Related Expenses

Everytime I hear of Republicans/Conservatives doing something extreme that I think there is no way they can top, they go ahead and top it. An incredible piece of legislation, HR3, has been introduced with 221 mostly Republican co-sponsors (actually 212 Republicans and 9 Democrats). The text of the bill can be viewed here:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr3ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr3ih.pdf

This bill prohibits anyone from claiming an itemized deduction on their income tax return for any medical expenses associated with an abortion, or any insurance premium that includes coverage for an abortion, with the only exceptions being for a pregnancy that is aborted due to "forcible rape," "incest" relating to a minor child, or one that "place(s) the pregnant female in danger of death" as certified by a physician. The bill also prohibits any Federal health program, insurance program or funds from being used for an abortion unless it falls within these exceptions. The language, which is more restrictive than any previous Federal law, is very much a problem. "Forcible" rape excludes any rape that is not forcible, for example, statutory rape, or possibly rape of a woman who has been drugged. So here we go again, a woman can only deduct medical expenses related to abortion if she fights her attacker off forcibly enough. "Incest" relating to a minor child excludes incest relating to an adult with diminished capacity. Pregnancy that "place(s) the female in danger of death" excludes a woman whose pregnancy places her in danger of serious bodily harm.

Can you imagine what it will be like during an IRS audit when the IRS agent requires the person being audited to provide documentation of abortion-related medical expenses to ensure they fall within the narrow range of these exceptions?

What the hell are these people thinking? These are the same people who lie, lie, lie claiming they are in favor of small government and government staying out of our business, yet they want IRS agents to grill people regarding details of their personal medical conditions and the specifics of being raped?

These hypocrites support government so small that it fits in the examination room of every gynecologist in the country. They support government staying out of our business, unless that business is the most private medical decisions many women will ever make in their entire lives. They want to abolish the IRS, but until they do they want to use the IRS to torment women who they think should be punished for their personal sexual behavior.

Don't buy their lies!

New Rules for the Blog - Sad But Necessary

The main purpose of this blog is for me to have a place to talk to myself. Because I spend so much time away from home working, I decided to create a site where I could share my thoughts and share all of the original source information I gather in my research. What I did not intend was to create a place where anonymous people could attack me, or call people names. I didn't think anyone was paying attention until last night when I noticed, for the first time, that some were reading my posts and commenting. Unfortunately, most of the posts were unacceptable. I know the difference. In another forum, I debate with "conservatives" all day long without this happening. We never agree with each other, but we respect each other. Maybe the difference is that we know each other. It is sad to see that so many people say so many hateful things under the cover of anonymity. On this site, there is a bit of a solution. Since I am the Administrator, I can remove posts that violate the rules, and I have done so. Just to be clear the rules are:

1. No name-calling
2. No personal attacks
3. Stay on topic

Please continue to read my posts, and comment if you like, but with respect, or the comment will be removed. Have a good day!

This is What is Really Going On!

Every day we hear about the Federal deficit/debt - morning, noon and night. For some reason, it was not Topic #1 when Reagan tripled it in 8 years. It was not all we talked about when George W. Bush doubled it in 8 years. It didn't seem to matter when President Bush arranged the prescription drug benefit in 2003 that gave half a trillion dollars to the pharma industry with borrowed funds. It sure didn't seem to matter when the largest tax cuts in history were passed in 2001 and 2003 that increased the debt by more than $2 trillion. For some reason, we barely talked about it when we launched two wars with borrowed funds that has added $1.1 trillion to the debt as of last month and continues to add $1 billion every 3 days. Now, although it is all anyone seems to want to talk about, we are preparing to pass an extension of the "Bush tax cuts" that appear to have created no jobs in 5 years, in order to allegedly create jobs, and add yet another $4 trillion to the debt over the next 10 years, with $700 billion of that for millionaires. By the way, do you know what happens when you give a millionaire a tax cut? No, they don't create jobs, they go buy a Rembrandt painting for $5 million, stash the money in an offshore bank account, or buy a 4th vacation home in a foreign country, that's what they do. So President Bush, just on the topics of his tax cuts, prescription drug benefit, two wars, plus interest, raised the debt by over $4 trillion. President Obama inherited a situation that every sane economist agreed was the worst economy since the Great Depression. Everyone agreed that if we didn't do something, we would end up in a worldwide depression that would last 10 years. We are not out of the woods yet. Due to TARP and Stimulus, the economy and unemployment has stablized, although at an unacceptable level. Remember, there are two things any economist will tell you that you do not do during a recession, raise taxes or cut spending. There is no risk of raising taxes, since Republicans cannot utter the T word. I am beginning to think that if an asteroid was approaching Earth that would destroy all life on the planet, Republicans would refuse to raise taxes to build a laser to destroy it. Remember the second part of the equation? Don't cut spending! Apparently we are going to do just that. Why? Because of the Federal deficit. Now we have 8.6 million Americans drawing unemployment or extended benefits. That is costing us $100 billion a year. If they had jobs and were paying taxes, that would generate another $75 billion a year. So we are talking about adding $175 billion to the deficit in the next year because of our unemployment problem. If we care about the debt, the best way to fix it is to get people back to work. But instead, we are talking about cutting Government spending which every single economist on earth will admit will reduce jobs, not increase them.

Any politician who says they care about unemployment/jobs, then supports cutting government spending at the time of a recession is either lying or stupid, or both.

Any politician who says they care about the deficit/debt, then supports cutting government spending during the time of a recession is either lying or stupid, or both, because they just effectively cut jobs, which drives the deficit up, not down.

Did you know that President Kennedy dropped the top tax rate from 91% to 70%?
Did you know that President Reagan dropped the top tax rate from 70% to 50%?
Did you know that President Clinton dropped the top tax rate to 39.6%
Did you know that the Co-Chairs of the Deficit Commission want the top tax rate dropped to 23%?

We now have reached a point where the very richest Americans are paying the lowest taxes they ever have, and some want to cut that record low rate almost in half. We, as a nation, have the lowest total tax as a percentage of GDP, at 28%, of any developed nation on earth. The reason we have a deficit is because we don't pay for what we buy, we borrow rather than have a reasonable tax rate. I know, I know, you are convinced that we pay obscenely high taxes. The fact is - we don't.

Is it any surprise that the initial recommendations from the Co-Chairs of the Deficit Commission are to cut Social Security benefits, cut Medicare benefits, freeze federal pay, reduce government employees, and...... to cut taxes? Everything is on the table, except actually paying for what we use!

Professor George Lakoff predicted years ago that conservatives were so determined to dismantle the social net we have created in society, that they would intentionally create huge budget deficits so that, other than national security, we would all agree that we could no longer afford government programs. That day is not here yet, but conservatives have become impatient. They have fulfilled the first part of Professor Lakoff's prediction of busting the budget on purpose, now they are screaming about the deficit they themselves created as justification for slashing the programs that made us the great nation that we are. They have made it impossible for any politician to even mention taxes as part of any deficit solution by demonizing the word to the point where the mere mention is political death. They have created a nation of people who have become too irresponsible to even consider paying for what they use. They have engineered a moment in time when they think they can win the argument, because they have spent 20 years framing the argument with every speech they give.

I would like to ask everyone to read my post "The 'Good Old Days' Are Today." The facts I cite are the facts. The greatest nation in history was created AFTER the Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid were put in place, not before. Our income increased 4-fold since the days of FDR. We are the result of Public Education, Public Health, Public Welfare and Public Safety programs put in place by FDR and LBJ, not in spite of those programs.

What to do? Pay attention. Some very well-intended people, many, but not all, in the so-called "Tea Party" are being misused to further goals that are not in their best interests. How can Republican, and some Democratic politicians, look you in the eye, invoke death-like comparisons when they describe the FEDERAL BUDGET DEFICIT, and then talk about tax cuts that will raise the deficit even higher in the next breath?

Make them tell you the truth. Keep asking questions until you get a straight answer. Don't vote for or support people who lie to you. Be grown-up enough to take responsibility. If you buy something, pay for it. If the Government buys something, insist they pay for it....but after the recession, not during.

We are the greatest nation in history. We can work this out. We don't have to throw in the towel. Keep the faith!

The "Good Old Days" are Today!

Some politicians and others have decided to distort the facts, re-write history, and claim that we are now a socialist country, getting more socialist all the time, and that everything would be better if we would just return to our capitalist roots, you know, the way it was in the "Good Old Days," and eliminate Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Public Schools, Interstate Highways, Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Aviation Administration, US Department of Education...you get the idea. (A few people who support this rollback plan tell the truth, they know things were much worse in the "Good Old Days" but still think we should return to those days for some unfathomable reason). These people talk about "taking our country back." It is a little unclear who they want to take it back from, but I can only assume they want to take it back from our democratically elected representatives.

I thought I would let you know what things were like in the US in 1930, you know, before Social Security, Medicare, and most of the programs that define who we are in the year 2009 were created, before the systems and programs we have inplace in 2009 that make us the greatest country in history were implemented. I picked 1930 to be fair, since the Great Depression had not taken hold, and, in fact, the economic boom of the "Roaring 1920's" when there was little or no regulation had peaked.

Trust me, those "Good Old Days" were not all that good. Just a few facts:

Per Capita Income (IN 2009 DOLLARS, in other words, CORRECTED FOR INFLATION)

1930 $11,338 2009 $46,381

Life Expectancy

1930 54.2 years 2009 78.1 years

Miles of Paved Highway in the US

1930 387,000 miles (it took 13 days to drive from New York to LA)

2009 2,734,102 miles; including the Interstate Highway System (you can now drive from New York to LA in 2 days (42 hours total))

Did You Know That:

In 1952 there were 58,000 cases of polio in the US (I went to elementary school with a polio victim, so it wasn't that long ago, or I am getting old, or both).

Due to Public Health and Government sponsored vaccinations, there hasn't been a case of polio in the US since 1979.

From 1958-1961 there were tens of thousands of babies born with severe birth defects around the world due to mothers taking a drug called thalidomide.

There were virtually no thalidomide victims in the US because the FDA wouldn't approve its use without further testing.

In summary, there is a small, but very noisy, group of people and political candidates in the US today who are championing a false history and promoting a false vision for the US. They talk about "Good Old Days" that never existed. The "Good Old Days" are now. Sure we have some problems to be solved that will require serious, even painful, solutions. But the solution is not to go back to a time when personal income was 1/4 of what it is today, when our life expectancy was 24 years less than it is today, when it took longer to drive from New York to Los Angeles than it does for an astronaut today to fly to the moon and back. Somehow, the "Socialist/Marxist" fiction that these people claim our country has become since 1935 when Social Security was passed and 1965 when Medicare was passed, that country, not the distortion they have invented, has managed to grow unimaginable wealth, invent unbelievable things, cure many diseases, and create a nation that is the envy of the world. We don't have walled cities guarded by soldiers surrounded by seas of poverty and despair. We have a land where you can drive from Key West, Florida to Eastport, Maine; from Norfolk, Virginia to Arcata, California and know every minute you are in the greatest country in history. Just remember, while all these wonderful accomplishments have taken place, Social Security, Medicare, and all the agencies regulating finance, safety, and health in this country were firmly established. The false timeline being promoted by the Far Right, is just that...false. Use your brain, don't give in to their cliches', don't be manipulated by their repetitive slogans or their tens of millions of dollars in media advertising, think for yourself! The facts in this Note took me two hours to gather and compute. I challenge each of you to put two hours into thinking about our future.


I don't think you will decide to return to the "Bad Old Days!"

Republicans Would Rather Kill Jobs Than Do the Right Thing

Just look at who is killing jobs now

Republicans like to denounce President Obama and congressional Democrats for what they describe as "job-killing" policies. But in those red-hot rhetorical terms, congressional Republicans are guilty of mass murder when it comes to job creation.
They left town for their pre-election recess having blocked the extension of a successful jobs program, praised by conservatives from Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour to economist Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute, that provided 250,000 jobs for low-income parents and youths. A $2.5 billion version of the extension passed the House, twice. The Senate whittled it back to $1.5 billion but still could not dislodge Republican opposition even though the cost would have been fully paid for. The program was a sliver of the giant stimulus measure, but one of the most effective in terms of job creation. And it sounded as if it came straight out of the GOP playbook. The money was used overwhelmingly for private-sector jobs. It went to employers, to subsidize - depending on the state - all or part of wages for newly hired workers who would otherwise have been on unemployment rolls or receiving welfare. It was a particular boon to small business, helping them expand at a time when they would not have otherwise had the financial leeway to do so. The stimulus included a $5 billion pot of money to help states with welfare programs stretched by the recession. One of the permitted uses was for job subsidies, and ultimately 37 states and the District of Columbia ended up launching such efforts. Barbour, for example, used the federal money to create a program called Mississippi STEPS (Subsidized Transitional Employment Program and Services) that subsidized wages for new employees; the subsidy diminished over six months. Barbour described it as "much-needed aid during this recession by enabling businesses to hire new workers, thus enhancing the economic engines of our local communities." Hassett, an economic adviser to the campaigns of George W. Bush and John McCain, urged that the program be significantly expanded. "After all, a worker participating in the program gets a job," he testified in February. "A firm gets an extended period of production from the worker at a heavily subsidized cost. This low cost input should increase the firm's profits, and increase the chances that they will lift their capital investments. It is like an indirect tax cut from the perspective of the firm." Did I hear tax cut? Republicans should have been leaping on this opportunity. Except that the program was part of the stimulus plan, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). And ARRA is a four-letter word to Republicans, who - like the church dealing with Galileo - refuse to acknowledge that it had any positive effect on job creation. Job subsidies aren't a perfect answer. Some firms may use the money for jobs they would have filled anyway, but that risk is offset by the fact that the subsidy is targeted to people in greatest need of work. There is no guarantee that the jobs will continue once the subsidy is withdrawn, but even so, there is a benefit from having worked. As Hassett explained, "The literature is clear. Someone separated from the labor force runs the real risk of permanently separating from the normal economy. It is crucial that we reconnect as many people as possible before it is too late." That would be now. There's a slim chance the program could be revived in a lame-duck session. Otherwise, Republicans can pontificate, as in the Pledge to America, about how "joblessness is the single most important challenge facing America today" and extol the "pride and dignity that comes with an honest day's work and a steady paycheck." But laid-off workers forced onto welfare because of unthinking obstructionism will know better.

The Truth About TARP

TARP has become a dirty word in our nation's political discourse. Few terms elicit such anger from voters and politicians. In many ways, that's understandable. No one wanted to bail out Wall Street. No one wanted to use taxpayer dollars to rescue an industry that helped cause the worst economic crisis in a generation.

It was unfair. It was appalling. But it was necessary. We had no other choice.

Two years ago, we stood at the brink of an economic catastrophe. Ordinary American families were questioning whether their money was safe in banks. A growing financial panic threatened to sink our nation into an economic downturn that rivaled the Great Depression.

A bi-partisan majority in Congress responded by enacting the Troubled Asset Relief Program. The debate over this issue was heated. On October 3, 2008, when TARP became law, one member of Congress even went so far as to say, "I don't think it is too much of a stretch to say this may be the day America died."

Two years later, with TARP officially set to expire today, it's an appropriate time to look back and evaluate that program's effectiveness. And now that the fog of an intense financial panic has lifted, it's clear that the critics and cynics were wrong. TARP has proven remarkably successful at stabilizing the economy and laying the foundation for future growth.

Today, our economy is healing. Because of the enormity of the challenges we faced, unemployment is still unacceptably high and growth has not yet reached an acceptable pace. But we're on the path to recovery. Businesses have added jobs for eight straight months. Private investment and confidence in banks have returned. The cost of borrowing for businesses, municipalities and individuals has declined dramatically.

The TARP investments that the Bush and Obama administrations made in GM and Chrysler, as well as the hard decisions that those companies made to adapt and compete, turned those automakers around and saved at least one million jobs. Since GM and Chrysler emerged from bankruptcy, the auto industry has added 76,300 jobs - the strongest growth in 10 years - and for the first time since 2004, all of the big three American auto companies are operating profitably.

In fact, independent experts have estimated that overall, without the federal government's response to the financial crisis, including TARP, there would be nearly 8.5 million fewer jobs today and the unemployment rate would exceed 15 percent.

The question, then, is why does TARP remain unpopular, despite its success? I believe, in great part, it's because a number of myths about the program stubbornly persist.

Many people think that TARP cost $700 billion. But Treasury is now confident that the lifetime cost to taxpayers will be less than $50 billion. Repayments have continued to exceed expectations. Three-fourths of the TARP funds provided to banks have already been returned. And the exit strategy AIG announced last week puts taxpayers in a considerably stronger position to recoup our investment in that company.

Many people think that TARP funds only went to Wall Street. But more than 450 small and community banks participated in TARP, which helped them deliver credit to local small businesses and families. Additionally, more than 3.3 million struggling homeowners have had an opportunity to stay in their homes or find more affordable alternatives because of foreclosure prevention programs either financed by TARP or created as a result of TARP in the private sector.

Many people think that TARP created a precedent for future bailouts. But President Obama and Treasury Secretary Geithner worked tirelessly with Congress to enact the Dodd-Frank Act, which will ensure that the American people are never again put on the hook for the reckless acts of a few financial firms. That law gives the government new tools to shut down and dismember failing institutions rather than bail them out with taxpayer dollars.

Unfortunately, the untold story of TARP's success has been lost in the heated rhetoric of today's politics.

TARP was enacted in an all-too-rare moment of bipartisan cooperation in Washington - with support from both sides of the aisle, including from Republican leaders Representative John Boehner and Senator Mitch McConnell. The Bush Administration began the implementation of TARP and the Obama Administration is finishing the job.

Now, many of those who supported TARP have decided that, politically, they need to be against it. But removed from the pressures of a November election, these individuals should be proud of the hard choices they made to help save our economy from a devastating collapse.

And perhaps someday they'll say what is now, for them, the unspeakable: TARP was a success.

Do I Have a Dream?

I am trying, for the life of me, to figure out the strategy of the Far Right for this election cycle, and for the future. The policies they articulate, and I use the terms "policies" and "articulate" very, very loosely, are hostile to: 1) African Americans; 2) Hispanics; 3) Emigrants; 4) Gays and lesbians; 5) Women; 6) Muslims; 7) Atheists and agnostics; 8) People who earn less than $75,000 per year; 9) People who care about others who are less fortunate; 10) People who believe, as the Supreme Court and Constitution does, that women have a right to privacy/choice; 11) People who would like to see stem cell research that might lead to cures for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other neurological disease; 12) People who do not believe that public school teachers should be responsible for the religious indoctrination of our children, but that that should be left to churches and parents; 13) People who think Social Security and Medicare are good ideas; 14) People who believe that it is a bad idea to pollute the one and only earth we live on; 15) People who believe in the Constitution (Republicans have introduced 44 proposed amendments to the Constitution in the past year, so they must not like the document the "Founding Fathers" created).

just to name a few...

This only leaves around 20-25% of the population that is not on their "hate" list. So how do they succeed in elections? How do they get people to vote against their own best interests?

1. Diversionary tactics: tapping into the emotions of people in desperate times
2. Fear: people are afraid of economic failure, losing their jobs, not being able to provide for the families, and can easily be manipulated into blaming/hating "others" for this insecurity
3. Language: defining terms, lie, be repetitive (for example, the "Ground Zero Mosque" is not at Ground Zero)