Sunday, March 14, 2010
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
GraniteGrok: Health Dare Update
GraniteGrok: Health Dare Update: "Health Dare Update
From NRCC Code Red, the current list of congressional tragets on the Health Dare Vote.
The 11/7/09 vote is their original vote, followed by where they last claimed to stand on the next vote."
I took the liberty of reformatting the data and sorting it so it is easier to read. I DID NOT CHANGE ANY VALUES.
| Congressional Targets | 11/7/09 Vote | Y / N / U |
| Boswell (IA-03) | Yes | Yes |
| Mollohan (WV-01) | Yes | Yes |
| Altmire (PA-04) | No | Yes |
| Gordon (TN-06) | No | Yes |
| Kosmas (FL-24) | No | Yes |
| Peterson (MN-07) | No | Yes |
| Arcuri (NY-24) | Yes | No |
| Lipinski (IL-03) | Yes | No |
| Stupak (MI-01) | Yes | No |
| A. Davis (AL-07) | No | No |
| Boren (OK-02) | No | No |
| Bright (AL-02) | No | No |
| Herseth Sandlin (SD-AL) | No | No |
| Kissell (NC-08) | No | No |
| Kratovil (MD-01) | No | No |
| Kucinich | No | No |
| Melancon (LA-03) | No | No |
| Minnick (ID-01) | No | No |
| Ross (AR-04) | No | No |
| Skelton (MO-04) | No | No |
| Taylor (MS-04) | No | No |
| Bishop (NY-01) | Yes | Undecided |
| Cardoza (CA-18) | Yes | Undecided |
| Carney (PA-10) | Yes | Undecided |
| Connolly (VA-11) | Yes | Undecided |
| Costa (CA-20) | Yes | Undecided |
| Dahlkemper (PA-03) | Yes | Undecided |
| Donnelly (IN-02) | Yes | Undecided |
| Driehaus (OH-01) | Yes | Undecided |
| Giffords (AZ-08) | Yes | Undecided |
| Heinrich (NM-01) | Yes | Undecided |
| Hill (IN-09) | Yes | Undecided |
| Kanjorski (PA-11) | Yes | Undecided |
| Kirkpatrick (AZ-01) | Yes | Undecided |
| Mitchell (AZ-05) | Yes | Undecided |
| Obey (WI-07) | Yes | Undecided |
| Owens (NY-23) | Yes | Undecided |
| Perriello (VA-05) | Yes | Undecided |
| Pomeroy (ND-AL) | Yes | Undecided |
| Rahall (WV-03) | Yes | Undecided |
| Schauer (MI-07) | Yes | Undecided |
| Schrader (OR-05) | Yes | Undecided |
| Space (OH-18) | Yes | Undecided |
| Spratt (SC-05) | Yes | Undecided |
| Sutton (OH-13) | Yes | Undecided |
| Titus (NV-03) | Yes | Undecided |
| Wilson (OH-06) | Yes | Undecided |
| Adler (NJ-03) | No | Undecided |
| Baird (WA-03) | No | Undecided |
| Barrow (GA-12) | No | Undecided |
| Boccieri (OH-16) | No | Undecided |
| Boucher (VA-09) | No | Undecided |
| Boyd (FL-02) | No | Undecided |
| Chandler (KY-06) | No | Undecided |
| Childers (MS-01) | No | Undecided |
| Davis (TN-04) | No | Undecided |
| Edwards (TX-17) | No | Undecided |
| Holden (PA-17) | No | Undecided |
| Markey (CO-04) | No | Undecided |
| Marshall (GA-08) | No | Undecided |
| Matheson (UT-02) | No | Undecided |
| McIntyre (NC-07) | No | Undecided |
| McMahon (NY-13) | No | Undecided |
| Murphy (NY-20) | No | Undecided |
| Nye (VA-02) | No | Undecided |
| Shuler (NC-11) | No | Undecided |
| Tanner (TN-08) | No | Undecided |
| Teague (NM-02) | No | Undecided |
Robert Mann-ism "Queen of the birth baggers Sarah Palin"
The Forum: News from the Towns around Pawtuckaway: "Phony-genic
Robert Mann 13.MAR.10
Queen of the birth baggers Sarah Palin admits that she used to scuttle over the boarder from Alaska into Canada to take advantage of their government run health care system. Don't you just love it? Guess socialism is situation specific. Itj's okay for her and her family but not for you. That horrible government run health care that is regarded highly by every single other developed nation is better than ours (WHO rates us as #37) and it costs us 40 percent more than it does them. Perhaps a little music will make it clear.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVgOl3cETb4&feature=player_embedded#at=25.
Robert W. Mann
Deerfield, NH"
Mr. Mann has got to be kidding. My guess is that he is just repeating what he probably read on the daily beast or some other far left leaning “news” outlet.
I took the liberty of going to the article that sourced the following quote from Sarah Palin.
“My first five years of life we spent in Skagway, Alaska, right there by Whitehorse,” Palin said during a speech in Calgary on Saturday. “Believe it or not — this was in the ‘60s — we used to hustle on over the border for health care that we would receive in Whitehorse. I remember my brother, he burned his ankle in some little kid accident thing and my parents had to put him on a train and rush him over to Whitehorse and I think, isn’t that kind of ironic now. Zooming over the border, getting health care from Canada."
If Mr. Mann were to take a second and research things he would know that it looks like Whitehorse may have been the closest medical facility in the 60's. Just in case, here is a map.
View Larger Map
View Larger Map
Imagine traveling in that area back in the 60’s you go where you can when you need medical attention.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
U.S. considers some free wireless broadband service - Yahoo! News
When are we going to learn there is no such thing as FREE!!!!
U.S. considers some free wireless broadband service - Yahoo! News: "WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. regulators may dedicate spectrum to free wireless Internet service for some Americans to increase affordable broadband service nationwide, the Federal Communications Commission said on Tuesday.
The FCC provided few details about how it would carry out such a plan and who would qualify, but will make a recommendation under the National Broadband Plan set for release next week. The agency will determine details later.
One way of making broadband more affordable is to 'consider use of spectrum for a free or a very low cost wireless broadband service,' the FCC said in a statement.
The FCC statement was released during a Digital Inclusion Summit aimed at connecting one-third of Americans without home broadband service.
The FCC also said there would also be a recommendation in the broadband blueprint to launch a Digital Literacy Corps of volunteers who would provide training to communities with low rates of adoption.
(Reporting by John Poirier; Editing by Lisa Von Ahn)"
Friday, March 5, 2010
Federal vs. Private Pay Scale
We all know that the Federal government is inefficient. This article goes to the pay scales of different occupations and compares it to private pay. I highlighted just a few occupations that one has to question why WE pay a premium.
Average federal salaries exceed average private-sector pay in 83% of comparable occupations. A sampling of average annnual salaries in 2008, the most recent data
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, USA TODAY analysis
NOTE: I took the liberty of adding a percentage column to the USA TODAY analysis and sorting on that. I believe this is a better way to fully appreciate the data.
| Job | Federal | Private | Difference | Percentage |
| Recreation worker | $43,630 | $21,671 | $21,959 | 201.3% |
| Broadcast technician | $90,310 | $49,265 | $41,045 | 183.3% |
| Clergy | $70,460 | $39,247 | $31,213 | 179.5% |
| Laundry, dry-cleaning worker | $33,100 | $19,945 | $13,155 | 166.0% |
| Cook | $38,400 | $23,279 | $15,121 | 165.0% |
| Graphic designer | $70,820 | $46,565 | $24,255 | 152.1% |
| Public relations manager | $132,410 | $88,241 | $44,169 | 150.1% |
| Pest control worker | $48,670 | $33,675 | $14,995 | 144.5% |
| Landscape architects | $80,830 | $58,380 | $22,450 | 138.5% |
| Highway maintenance worker | $42,720 | $31,376 | $11,344 | 136.2% |
| Chemist | $98,060 | $72,120 | $25,940 | 136.0% |
| Secretary | $44,500 | $33,829 | $10,671 | 131.5% |
| Crane, tower operator | $54,900 | $44,044 | $10,856 | 124.6% |
| Janitor | $30,110 | $24,188 | $5,922 | 124.5% |
| Paralegals | $60,340 | $48,890 | $11,450 | 123.4% |
| Librarian | $76,110 | $63,284 | $12,826 | 120.3% |
| Procurement clerk | $40,640 | $34,082 | $6,558 | 119.2% |
| Surveyor | $78,710 | $67,336 | $11,374 | 116.9% |
| Registered nurse | $74,460 | $63,780 | $10,680 | 116.7% |
| Machinist | $51,530 | $44,315 | $7,215 | 116.3% |
| Office clerk | $34,260 | $29,863 | $4,397 | 114.7% |
| Mechanical engineer | $88,690 | $77,554 | $11,136 | 114.4% |
| Sheet metal worker | $49,700 | $43,725 | $5,975 | 113.7% |
| Statistician | $88,520 | $78,065 | $10,455 | 113.4% |
| Civil engineer | $85,970 | $76,184 | $9,786 | 112.8% |
| Dental assistant | $36,170 | $32,069 | $4,101 | 112.8% |
| Budget analyst | $73,140 | $65,532 | $7,608 | 111.6% |
| Economist | $101,020 | $91,065 | $9,955 | 110.9% |
| Financial analysts | $87,400 | $81,232 | $6,168 | 107.6% |
| Computer, information systems manager | $122,020 | $115,705 | $6,315 | 105.5% |
| Electrical engineer | $86,400 | $84,653 | $1,747 | 102.1% |
| Physicians, surgeons | $176,050 | $177,102 | ($1,052) | 99.4% |
| Lawyer | $123,660 | $126,763 | ($3,103) | 97.6% |
| Respiratory therapist | $46,740 | $50,443 | ($3,703) | 92.7% |
| Physician assistant | $77,770 | $87,783 | ($10,013) | 88.6% |
| Computer support specialist | $45,830 | $54,875 | ($9,045) | 83.5% |
| Airline pilot, copilot, flight engineer | $93,690 | $120,012 | ($26,322) | 78.1% |
| Editors | $42,210 | $54,803 | ($12,593) | 77.0% |
| Locomotive engineer | $48,440 | $63,125 | ($14,685) | 76.7% |
| Optometrist | $61,530 | $106,665 | ($45,135) | 57.7% |
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Reconciliation Farce
So as I understand it, and I could be wrong, the House has to pass the Senate bill as it stands and the President has to sign it into law. Then, and only then, can the Senate take up the issue under "reconciliation".
So here is the problem as I see it. Once the house votes for the Senate bill as written and the President signs it into LAW, what motivation is there to revisit the issues the house democrats have with the bill? This is a big wink and nod from a President that does not have a very good reputation of telling the truth or acting consistently on any issue. Do you really think the Senate is going to spend any political capital on a bill that is already law?
In the end the Senate may just give in an stop trying and guess what? The Senate bill will be law. That is of course if the house democrats that have issues with the Senate bill are stupid enough to buy the wink and nod.
So here is the problem as I see it. Once the house votes for the Senate bill as written and the President signs it into LAW, what motivation is there to revisit the issues the house democrats have with the bill? This is a big wink and nod from a President that does not have a very good reputation of telling the truth or acting consistently on any issue. Do you really think the Senate is going to spend any political capital on a bill that is already law?
In the end the Senate may just give in an stop trying and guess what? The Senate bill will be law. That is of course if the house democrats that have issues with the Senate bill are stupid enough to buy the wink and nod.
The Reconciliation Game | Erick's blog: "The Reconciliation Game
Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)
Thursday, March 4th at 10:27AM EST
19 Comments
For all the talk about the Republicans having used reconciliation more than the Democrats, it is important to remember a few things:
* Each time reconciliation was used, it was used to fix legislation already enacted into law.
* What the Democrats want to do is use reconciliation to fix legislation before it is enacted into law.
And guess what? The Senate Parliamentarian is telling everybody that won’t work. According to the Parliamentarian, reconciliation can only apply to fix legislation already signed into law by the President.
In other words, Blue Dogs in the House are going to have to actually pass the Senate legislation, have Barack Obama sign it into law, then hope the Democrats still want to fix the legislation and that the fix is deemed only a deficit neutral financial fix for purposes of reconciliation.
There are a lot of ifs in that scenario."
Can Tax Credits "Create" Jobs?
When will politicians learn that one time tax credits will not create jobs!
Lets take a second and see why this makes so little sense...
Lets say I own a small business and decide to "create" a job paying 1.5 times minimum wage so that I can receive the tax credit. That would work out to $10.88 per hour X 40 hours per week X 50 weeks a year = $21,700 per year and as such my company would be "eligible" for a tax credit or $750 X 5years = $3750. So in 5 years I will have paid that person $108,500 just to receive a $3750 tax credit.
No lets say I am generous and create a job at 2x minimum wage or $14.50 per hour X 40 hours per week X 50 weeks per year = $29,000 per year just to get $1000 X 5 years = $5000 in tax credits. So I would pay $145,000 to get $5000 in tax credits.
Businesses are in business to be in business. Any manager or small business owner that made hiring decisions based on the economics of a tax credit would not be in business long. In each of the above examples the business would have to justify the new job with a corresponding jump in revenue.
The real way to "create" jobs is to create an environment where companies have a NEED for more labor.
Union Leader:
"'The lousy economy, which not only was in Coos County but all over the world, had a lot to do with the fact jobs weren't created and companies were not growing,' Lynch told the AP.
Lynch stands behind the credit as a tool that still could bring jobs to the county once the economy improves. He points out that the credit does not cost the state anything unless jobs are created.
Lynch had not estimated the number of jobs he expected the credit to create, but admitted he was surprised at the small number.
'It's not clear that it couldn't work,' Lynch said.
The credit is given to businesses for each new, full-time, year-round employee hired in the county. A business that creates a job paying at least 150 percent of minimum wage would be eligible for a $750 credit against its business taxes for each of the next five years, while a company that creates a job paying twice the minimum wage would receive a $1,000 credit. Health benefits can be added to the wage to determine whether the job qualifies."
Lets take a second and see why this makes so little sense...
Lets say I own a small business and decide to "create" a job paying 1.5 times minimum wage so that I can receive the tax credit. That would work out to $10.88 per hour X 40 hours per week X 50 weeks a year = $21,700 per year and as such my company would be "eligible" for a tax credit or $750 X 5years = $3750. So in 5 years I will have paid that person $108,500 just to receive a $3750 tax credit.
No lets say I am generous and create a job at 2x minimum wage or $14.50 per hour X 40 hours per week X 50 weeks per year = $29,000 per year just to get $1000 X 5 years = $5000 in tax credits. So I would pay $145,000 to get $5000 in tax credits.
Businesses are in business to be in business. Any manager or small business owner that made hiring decisions based on the economics of a tax credit would not be in business long. In each of the above examples the business would have to justify the new job with a corresponding jump in revenue.
The real way to "create" jobs is to create an environment where companies have a NEED for more labor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)