Herman Cain Plans Announcement for May 21

Herman Cain will announce his decision regarding a potential White House bid on Saturday, May 21, 2011 at "High Noon" at Centennial Olympic Park in Atlanta, Georgia.

Source:  Friends of Herman Cain

-----

Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG @FayetteFP

Wrights takes Stop All War message to Kentucky, Georgia

Potential Libertarian presidential candidate R. Lee Wrights will be in taking his stop all war message to the state Libertarian Party conventions in Kentucky and Georgia over the next two weekends.

Wrights will be he luncheon speaker at the Kentucky LP convention in Maysville March 5. The convention will be held at the French Quarter Inn, 25 E. McDonald Parkway.

The following weekend, Wrights will attend the Georgia state convention which will be held March 11 and 12 at the Atlanta Airport Westin, 4736 Best Rd.

Wrights, 52, is a longtime libertarian writer, political activist, a lifetime member of the Libertarian Party, and a past vice chair of the Libertarian National Committee. He is considering seeking the presidential nomination because he’s determined that the Libertarian message in 2012 be a loud, clear and unequivocal call to stop all war. To that end, Wrights has pledged that 10 percent of all donations to his campaign will go toward ballot access so that the stop all war message can be heard in all 50 states.

Wrights is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. He is also co-founder and president of the Foundation for a Free Society, an educational organization dedicated to promoting the principles of liberty, personal sovereignty, private property, and free markets in order to create a more free and prosperous society. Born in Winston-Salem, N.C., Wrights now lives in Texas.

-----
Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG @FayetteFP

Massachusetts Senate Sends National Popular Vote Bill to Governor

(BUSINESS WIRE)--National Popular Vote convincingly earned second passage in the Massachusetts Senate Tuesday, placing the bill before the Governor for signature and enactment. If signed, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will be the sixth state to enact the legislation that guarantees the presidency to the candidate who wins the most votes in all fifty states.

“On the heels of our huge bi-partisan win in the New York Senate, this continues our momentum on behalf of Republicans, Democrats and Independents who support this legislation.”

“We are pleased with the decisive legislative vote from the house and senate bringing Massachusetts that much closer to giving voters a stronger voice in electing the President of the United States,” said John Koza, Chairman of National Popular Vote. “On the heels of our huge bi-partisan win in the New York Senate, this continues our momentum on behalf of Republicans, Democrats and Independents who support this legislation.”

National Popular Vote recently passed the New York Senate with 22 of 27 Republicans and 30 of 32 Democrats voting in favor of the bill. The Massachusetts House and Senate moved the bill with overwhelming majorities.

“We want to extend a warm thank you to the supporters of our legislation and encourage others to closely consider our bill,” said Koza. “We will continue our state-by-state efforts to give every voter – right, center and left - a stronger and more relevant voice in electing the President.”

National Popular Vote legislation replaces current winner-take-all rules, where presidential candidates receive all of a state’s Electoral votes for winning the most popular votes in a given state. Winner-take-all rules result in a system where candidates campaign only to closely divided “battleground” states, while ignoring two-thirds of the states often termed “fly-over”.

When states totaling 270 Electoral Votes pass the legislation, National Popular Vote will award a majority of Electoral Votes to the candidate who wins the most popular votes in all fifty states, guaranteeing the presidency.

“We want to create a system where candidates campaign for every vote, not just battleground votes,” concluded Koza. “National Popular Vote does that while preserving the Electoral College and the intent of the Founding Fathers.” For more information visit www.nationalpopularvote.com.

-----
Community News You Can Use
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter:  @GAFrontPage

President Obama Announces More Key Administration Posts

Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individuals to key administration posts:

· Elizabeth “Beth” Robinson, Chief Financial Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
· Michael F. Mundaca, Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, Department of the Treasury

President Obama also appointed three individuals to serve on the President's Committee on the Arts and Humanities. Their names and bios are below.

President Obama said, “My administration is committed to economic recovery, pushing the boundaries of science and space exploration and investing in the future of arts and the humanities, and these individuals will serve my team well as we work to accomplish these goals. I look forward to working with them in the months and years ahead.”

President Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individuals today:

Elizabeth “Beth” Robinson, Nominee for Chief Financial Officer, National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationBeth Robinson is currently the Assistant Director for Budget at the Office of Management and Budget, where she leads the Budget Review Division to oversee the development, enactment and execution of the President's budget. From 2003 to 2005, she was the Deputy Director for the Congressional Budget Office, where she guided the development of cost estimates for legislation and reports on legislative options. She previously worked at OMB from 1998 to 2003, where she began as a Program Examiner on energy issues and ended as the Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Review and Concepts. Prior to that, Dr. Robinson worked on Capitol Hill for several years as a Professional Staff Member on the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, where she crafted legislation on various science and energy policy issues. She received a Ph.D. in Geophysics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Bachelor of Science in Physics from Reed College.

Michael F. Mundaca, Nominee for Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, Department of the TreasuryMichael F. Mundaca currently is Senior Advisor for Policy within the Treasury Department's Office of Tax Policy and the Acting Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy. Mr. Mundaca served in the Treasury Department during the Clinton Administration and returned to the Treasury Department in 2007, as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Tax Affairs. Before that appointment, he was a partner for five years in the International Tax Services group of Ernst & Young's National Tax Department, in Washington, D.C. His practice focused on cross-border planning and structuring, including especially tax treaty issues, and on international legislative and regulatory monitoring and consulting. Before joining Ernst & Young, Mr. Mundaca served for over five years in Treasury's Office of the International Tax Counsel, leaving as the Deputy International Tax Counsel. He was also Treasury's Senior Advisor on Electronic Commerce. Prior to that first stint in Treasury, he was an associate at Sullivan & Cromwell, a law firm in New York. Mr. Mundaca has been an adjunct professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, teaching a seminar on tax treaties. Mr. Mundaca received a B.A. in philosophy and in physics from Columbia University, in 1986, and an M.A.in philosophy from the University of Chicago, in 1988. He received a J.D. from the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law (Boalt Hall), in 1992, where he was Senior Executive Editor of The California Law Review and a member of the Order of the Coif. He also has an LL.M., in taxation (international tax specialization), from the University of Miami.

President Obama also announced that he has appointed the following individuals today to serve on the President’s Committee on the Arts and Humanities:

Margo Lion, Co-Chairman, President's Committee on the Arts and HumanitiesMargo Lion’s career has spanned theatre, politics, and education. Starting out as an intern on Capitol Hill for Senator Daniel B. Brewster (D-Maryland) and then as a special cultural projects coordinator in Senator Robert F. Kennedy’s New York office, Lion shifted her career to teaching elementary school in the years following Senator Kennedy’s death. In 1977, Lion began producing theater for the not-for-profit company, Music-Theater Group/Lenox Arts Center, and in 1982 began her work as a commercial theatre producer. Lion has worked with the pre-eminent theater writers of our time including: Tony Kushner, David Mamet, Arthur Miller, August Wilson and George C. Wolfe. Her shows on Broadway include: HAIRSPRAY; CAROLINE, OR CHANGE; and ANGELS IN AMERICA. Lion’s productions have garnered 20 Tony Awards, 4 Olivier Awards and 1 Pulitzer Prize. Lion is an adjunct professor and a member of the Dean's Council at the NYU-Tisch School of the Arts. She also serves on the Board of Directors of the LAByrinth Theatre and Broadway Cares/Equity Fights Aids, and on the advisory boards of the Baltimore Young Women’s Leadership School, the Alliance for Inclusion in the Arts and PUBLICOLOR.

George Stevens, Jr., Co-Chairman, President's Committee on the Arts and HumanitiesIn a career spanning fifty years George Stevens, Jr. has created a legacy of distinguished work as a writer, director, producer of motion pictures and television. In 1962 he became the head of the Motion Picture Service of the U.S. Information Agency under Edward R. Murrow, and in 1967 founded the American Film Institute. He continues to serve on the AFI Board. As a writer and producer Stevens has earned 11 Emmys, two George Foster Peabody Awards for Meritorious Service to Broadcasting and nine awards from the Writers Guild of America. Among his honored productions are The Kennedy Center Honors which he launched in 1978; the mini-series Separate But Equal and The Murder of Mary Phagan; George Stevens: A Filmmaker’s Journey; We Are One: The Obama Inaugural Celebration from the Lincoln Memorial; and the feature film The Thin Red Line which was nominated for seven Academy Awards including Best Picture. In 2008 he made his debut as a playwright on Broadway with Thurgood which earned a Tony nomination for its star Laurence Fishburne. He is also a successful author. Conversations with the Great Moviemakers of Hollywood’s Golden Age was published in 2005. Currently, Stevens is producing the thirty-second annual Kennedy Center Honors, a feature length documentary on the famed political cartoonist Herb Block, and writing a new book on film for Knopf.

Mary Schmidt Campbell, Vice Chairman, President's Committee on the Arts and HumanitiesMary Schmidt Campbell has been dean of New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts since 1991. Dean Campbell began her career in New York as the executive director of the Studio Museum in Harlem. Under her leadership, the Studio Museum in Harlem emerged as a major national and international cultural institution and a lynchpin of the economic revival of Harlem. In 1987, Mayor Edward I. Koch invited Dr. Campbell to serve as Commissioner of Cultural Affairs of the City of New York. Dean Campbell holds a B.A. degree in English literature from Swarthmore College, an M.A. in art history from Syracuse University, and a Ph.D. in humanities, also from Syracuse. She is co-author of Harlem Renaissance: Art of Black America (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1987) and Memory and Metaphor: The Art of Romare Bearden, 1940-1987 (New York: Oxford University Press & The Studio Museum in Harlem, 1991). She is the co-editor of Artistic Citizenship: A Public Voice for the Arts (New York: Routledge, 2006.) She is currently working on a book on Romare Bearden for Oxford University Press, (2011 expected publication date). She sits on the board of The American Academy in Rome and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. In the fall of 2001 she was inducted into the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She served in the voluntary position of Chair of the New York State Council on the Arts from 2007-2009. She also serves as the Chairman of the Board of Tisch Asia, the Tisch School of the Arts Singapore campus.
---
Community News You Can Use
Follow us on Twitter: @gafrontpage
www.FayetteFrontPage.com
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
www.PoliticalPotluck.com
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
---

Senators Express Concern With Number of Czars in Administration

/PRNewswire/ -- In a letter to the President, Senator Susan Collins, Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, questions the number of "czars" within the Executive Office. In the letter, Senator Collins expresses concern that the growing number of czars may be undermining the constitutional oversight responsibilities of Congress. The letter was also signed by Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Kit Bond (R-MO), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Bob Bennett (R-UT).

The full text of the letter is as follows:

The President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:


We write to express our growing concern with the proliferation of "czars" in your Administration. These positions raise serious issues of accountability, transparency, and oversight. The creation of "czars," particularly within the Executive Office of the President, circumvents the constitutionally established process of "advise and consent," greatly diminishes the ability of Congress to conduct oversight and hold officials accountable, and creates confusion about which officials are responsible for policy decisions.

To be clear, we do not consider every position identified in various reports as a "czar" to be problematic. Positions established by law or subject to Senate confirmation, such as the Director of National Intelligence, the Homeland Security Advisor, and the Chairman of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, do not raise the same kinds of concerns as positions that you have established within the Executive Office of the President that are largely insulated from effective Congressional oversight. We also recognize that Presidents are entitled to surround themselves with experts who can serve as senior advisors.

Many "czars" you have appointed, however, either duplicate or dilute the statutory authority and responsibilities that Congress has conferred upon Cabinet-level officers and other senior Executive branch officials. When established within the White House, these "czars" can hinder the ability of Congress to oversee the complex substantive issues that you have unilaterally entrusted to their leadership. Whether in the White House or elsewhere, the authorities of these advisors are essentially undefined. They are not subject to the Senate's constitutional "advice and consent" role, including the Senate's careful review of the character and qualifications of the individuals nominated by the President to fill the most senior positions within our government. Indeed, many of these new "czars" appear to occupy positions of greater responsibility and authority than many of the officials who have been confirmed by the Senate to fill positions within your Administration.

With these concerns in mind, we have identified at least 18 "czar" positions created by your Administration whose reported responsibilities may be undermining the constitutional oversight responsibilities of Congress or express statutory assignments of responsibility to other Executive branch officials. With regard to each of these positions, we ask that you explain:

-- the specific authorities and responsibilities of the position,
including any limitations you have placed on the position to ensure
that it does not encroach on the legitimate statutory responsibilities
of other Executive branch officials;
-- the process by which the Administration examines the character and
qualifications of the individuals appointed by the President to fill
the position; and,
-- whether the individual occupying the position will agree to any
reasonable request to appear before, or provide information to,
Congress.

We also urge you to refrain from creating similar additional positions or making appointments to any vacant "czar" positions until you have fully consulted with the appropriate Congressional committees.

Finally, we ask that you reconsider your approach of centralizing authority at the White House. Congress has grappled repeatedly with the question of how to organize the federal government. We have worked to improve the Department of Homeland Security and bring together the disparate law enforcement, intelligence, emergency response, and security components that form its core. We established the Director of National Intelligence to coordinate the activities of the 16 elements of the Intelligence Community, breaking down barriers to cooperation that led to intelligence failures before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The bipartisan review by the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee of the failures associated with the response to Hurricane Katrina led to fundamental reforms of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, improving our nation's preparedness and ability to respond to disasters. In each of these cases, the Congress's proposed solution did not consolidate power in a single czar locked away in a White House office. Instead, working in a bipartisan fashion, we created a transparent framework of accountable leaders with the authorities necessary to accomplish their vital missions.

If you believe action is needed to address other failures or impediments to successful coordination within the Executive branch, we ask that you consult carefully with Congress prior to establishing any additional "czar" positions or filling any existing vacancies in these positions. We stand ready to work with you to address these challenges and to provide our nation's most senior leaders with the legitimacy necessary to do their jobs - without furthering the accountability, oversight, vetting, and transparency shortcomings associated with "czars."

Sincerely,


Susan M. Collins
U.S. Senator

Lamar Alexander
U.S. Senator

Christopher S. Bond
U.S. Senator

Mike Crapo
U.S. Senator

Pat Roberts
U.S. Senator

Robert F. Bennett
U.S. Senator

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Statement of Robert Greenstein, Executive Director, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, on the New Report From the Congressional Budget Office

/PRNewswire/ -- The following is a statement by Robert Greenstein, Executive Director, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities on the new report from the Congressional Budget Office:

Today's disturbing report from the Congressional Budget Office projects larger budget deficits over the next ten years than the President's budget estimates, mainly because the economy is weaker than the Obama Administration and many private forecasters projected just a few months ago.

These findings should send two messages to policymakers: First, they should not make the recession, which CBO now projects will be the worst since World War II, even deeper by reducing federal expenditures in 2010 well below the levels that President Obama has proposed. Doing so would result in less demand for goods and services at a time when the CBO report makes clear the economy will continue to need a large boost. Second, policymakers should adopt measures now -- to take effect when the economy recovers -- to begin addressing the vast projected deficits of future years and decades and moving us off a fiscally unsustainable path.

While deficits will decline after this year's record level, they will not shrink to economically sustainable levels without significant changes in policy. That ought to encourage policymakers to step up to the plate and adopt the President's proposals to rein in costly and unproductive subsidies in both the spending and tax sides of the budget -- such as by eliminating Medicare Advantage overpayments and achieving other Medicare savings, and by curbing a plethora of special-interest tax loopholes -- or to come up with alternative proposals that save as much, are as sound economically, and are as fair.

The new CBO figures also underscore the need for policymakers not to go beyond the President's proposals for extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and for making the estate tax permanent at its 2009 parameters. Extending costly tax cuts for people above $250,000 or further eviscerating the estate tax would swell deficits even more, while benefiting only a tiny fraction of Americans at the top of the income scale.

Finally, based on today's report, policymakers should view the Obama proposals as just the first step on the path of deficit reduction. In the not-too-distant future, policymakers will need to move well beyond their current positions on both taxes and spending and put everything on the table, in order to achieve deficit reduction that will be necessary -- and unavoidable -- if we are to avert serious long-term economic damage.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Boehner: The American People Deserve to Get 100 Percent of Their Money Back

Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today delivered remarks on the House floor condemning taxpayer-funded bonuses for AIG executives and calling for passage of legislation that will allow American taxpayers to get 100 percent of their money back immediately. Full transcript of Boehner's remarks follow:



“Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, I caught a little grief five weeks ago when we had the stimulus bill on the floor. Remember the 1,100-page bill that no one had time to read and that no one did read? Obviously the President didn’t have time to read it either because in that bill was this one sentence. This one sentence that made it clear that someone knew that these AIG bonuses were about to be paid and they didn’t want them stopped. So somehow in the dark of night this one sentence was added to the bill so that AIG would pay these bonuses to their executives.

“This language wasn’t in the House bill. This language wasn’t in the Senate bill. This language showed up in the dead of night and no one got to see it. I’m wondering where did the language come from? Who wrote it? Who asked the conferees to put it in the bill? What conferees on the part of the House agreed to this? I’m looking for somebody to put their hand up.

“That’s the whole issue. This political circus that’s going on here today with this bill is not getting to the bottom of the questions of who knew what and when did they know it. Somebody was responsible to draw up this language. Someone brought it to the conferees. Someone brought it to the Democrat Leadership who wrote this bill in secret and put this language in there. But we have no idea who it was.

“Secondly, the bill before us tempts to recoup 90 percent of these bonuses. Why 90 percent? The American people are outraged. I’m outraged. And we just voted down an opportunity to bring a bill to the floor from our freshmen members that said, real simple, we ought to get 100 percent of this money back. We can get 100 percent back because the Treasury Secretary has the ability to get it all back. The Administration has the ability to get it all back. Why don’t we just get it all back? Why are we bringing this bill to the floor today to give members political cover when in fact the Treasury Secretary has the authority, the Administration has the authority to get all of it back? But, no, that got voted down. Our bill would have been a better bill.

“Thirdly, our colleagues, Mr. LaTourette and Mr. McCotter, have introduced a resolution of inquiry to get all of the documents surrounding communications between the Treasury, the Fed, and AIG to understand who was in the middle of this conversation? People have known about this for months and yet we just found out about it over the last 48 hours. And so we want this resolution of inquiry to be passed by the committee. We want to get to the bottom of all of this. But in the meantime do we have to have this political charade of bringing this bill out here? I don’t think so. I think this is a bad bill with bad consequences. We didn’t see the bill until last night. Nobody in the committee marked it up. Nobody debated it. And nobody understands the consequences of what we are about to do. How can we possibly vote yes on a bill like this? I yield back.”

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Blunt Backs Legislation to Curb Wasteful Government Spending, Allow for Public Debate

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Missouri Congressman Roy Blunt is a cosponsor of bipartisan legislation -- H.R. 1294, The Congressional Accountability and Line-Item Veto Act of 2009 -- introduced late yesterday to give the president authority to strike spending provisions from a bill without vetoing the entire legislation.

"I've supported similar efforts in the past and I can't think of a more appropriate time than now to force a level of fiscal responsibility in Washington," Blunt said. "It's time that Congress follows the example of hard-working American families and exercises some spending discipline. Everyone should support this legislation as a final backstop against wasteful and rash government spending."

The bill, Blunt said, allows Congress a chance to publicly review the merits of questionable programs or projects that are rejected by the president, therefore weeding out unfounded requests while allowing only necessary funding to remain intact.

This is the fifth time Blunt has sponsored such legislation. The current provision, if adopted, gives the president 30 days to omit spending requests from bills sent to the White House for his signature prior to becoming law. This process is known as a line-item veto.

If the president uses the new power to remove a funding provision from the bill, the House and Senate will have 12 days to approve the president's action or the funds will be released.

Specifically, the Line-Item Veto Act:
-- Ensures timely consideration by setting deadlines for action.
-- Maintains Congress's Constitutional "power of the purse" by requiring
the House and Senate to approve specific funding rescissions.
-- Limits the number or rescission requests Congress must act on to help
limit gridlock.
-- Expires at the end of 2014 so Congress can review the legislation
before renewing it.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Statement by Robert Greenstein, Executive Director, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, on the President's 2010 Budget Proposal

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a statement by Robert Greenstein, Executive Director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:

The President's budget represents a bold and courageous proposal to make progress in restoring fiscal discipline while addressing two central problems of our time -- a broken health care system and the threat of catastrophic global warming -- and other national needs.

Particularly courageous are several proposals that take on vested interests to fully pay for the costs of health care reform and tackling global warming, including:

-- Instituting major cost-saving reforms in Medicare that also hold
promise for slowing private-sector health care costs and are
consistent with recommendations of Congress' expert advisory body, the
Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Faced with intense opposition
from insurance companies and other interests, Congress has shied away
from such proposals, but the new Administration has embraced them.
The budget also includes a sound, longstanding Republican proposal --
to increase the premiums that affluent Medicare beneficiaries pay for
the prescription drug benefit that Medicare provides them.
-- Limiting various tax subsidies to the most affluent Americans to 28
cents on the dollar. Currently, middle-income Americans receive a tax
subsidy equal to 10 cents or 15 cents for each dollar of their
deductible expenses (if they itemize deductions at all), while
affluent Americans get a subsidy of 35 cents for each dollar of the
same expenses. The budget would cap the subsidy at 28 cents on the
dollar for those with incomes over $250,000, the same rate at which
those expenses could be deducted in the final Reagan years, when the
top tax rates were lower. As a result, incentives to incur those
expenses would be the same as under President Reagan.
-- Auctioning all emissions permits under the Administration's proposed
cap-and-trade system to address global warming, rather than conferring
windfall profits on energy companies and others that pollute by giving
them tens of billions of dollars' worth of permits for free. The
proposal would then use auction proceeds to offset the impact on
working families of the resulting increases in energy prices, by
extending the Making Work Pay tax cut. (This tax cut is similar to
tax-reduction proposals of recent years by a number of analysts,
including those here at CBPP, to efficiently provide middle-income
consumers with relief from the increased energy costs that an
emissions cap would trigger.) Additional measures will be required to
provide adequate relief to low-income consumers; the budget envisions
using some of the remaining auction proceeds for that.


The budget also makes a significant commitment to restoring fiscal responsibility while meeting high priority national needs, by:

-- Reducing deficits to 3 percent of the Gross Domestic Product by 2013,
about the level needed to keep the federal debt from rising much
faster than the economy and thus leading to an explosion of debt that
swamps the budget and the economy.
-- Pledging to offset the costs over the next ten years of health care
reforms that initially will raise costs by providing universal
coverage but that will set the stage for reducing public- and
private-sector health care costs in subsequent decades by gradually
slowing the rate at which those costs grow. The high rate of growth
of health-care costs is at the root of the nation's long-term fiscal
problem.


By themselves, these budget proposals would prove insufficient to keep deficits at 3 percent of GDP indefinitely. Policymakers will need to take additional steps in subsequent years, as President Obama noted at his "fiscal summit" on Monday.

The budget also deserves high marks for transparency and honesty. Gone are the gimmicks that have been an annual feature of both Presidential and Congressional budgets, under which policymakers pretended to reduce deficits markedly over time by omitting costs in the "out years" for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, natural disasters, and continued relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax and the scheduled reductions in Medicare fees for doctors -- and by printing in the budget numbers for the costs of discretionary programs in the out years that everyone knew were unrealistically low.

Those gimmicks, sleights-of-hand, and convenient omissions are absent from this budget. Its greater realism and transparency makes the President's pledge to cut the deficit in half in four years a meaningful one; we will now know each year whether we are on course to meet that goal.

The budget also provides needed investments in key areas for long-term economic growth, such as energy efficiency and early childhood education. And it proposes savings from lower priority programs such as bloated agricultural subsidies and from unwarranted tax breaks, such as one that millionaire equity fund managers have exploited to pay taxes at lower rates than many middle-income families and others that benefit oil companies. The budget also follows in the tradition of the 1990 and 1993 deficit-reduction laws in both shrinking the deficit and reducing poverty, which is higher in the United States than in other Western nations.

Predictable but Unfounded Criticisms

The budget already is facing several lines of attack that rest on inaccurate or misleading charges. Chief among them is the claim that the tax increases for people who make over $250,000 will seriously injure small businesses.

In fact, small businesses would win under this budget. Tax Policy Center data show that fewer than one in every ten people with small business income have incomes over $250,000, the only group that faces higher taxes under this budget. Moreover, many people with small business income who are in this category are wealthy individuals who have invested in businesses, but who are not proprietors and have little or nothing to do with running those businesses. The vast majority of small business owners are middle-income individuals who would receive tax cuts under the budget; many of them would also benefit from its universal coverage and health care cost containment reforms.

To be sure, many will oppose various proposals to close tax loopholes, the Medicare and agricultural subsidy reforms, and the cap on the value of itemized deductions for the most affluent Americans -- while saying that they, too, favor universal health coverage, curbing global warming, improvements in education, and the like. This budget challenges them to propose their own ways to finance such measures.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

House Republicans Urge President Obama to Reverse Plans for White House Census Takeover

House Republican leaders today sent a letter to President Barack Obama urging him to reconsider an unprecedented plan by the White House to move control of the Census Bureau and the 2010 Census from the Commerce Department to political operatives on the White House staff. Politicization of the Census will “undermine the goal of a fair and accurate Census count” and “open the door to massive waste and abuse in the expenditure of taxpayer funds,” GOP leaders warned. An estimated $300 billion in federal funds are distributed annually on the basis of U.S. Census data, according to Census officials.

The letter was signed by Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and the entire House GOP elected leadership team, Oversight & Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Darrel Issa (R-CA), Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Lamar Smith (R-TX), House Administration Ranking Member Dan Lungren (R-CA), Information Policy, Census, and National Archives Subcommittee Ranking Member Patrick McHenry (R-NC), and Census Task Force Chairman Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA).

“Placing the Census under the control of political operatives in the White House will inevitably corrupt the independence [of] critical Census functions, and could result in a dramatic increase in abuse and misallocation of taxpayer funds at a time when both parties should be working together to eliminate such waste,” House Republicans warned in the letter.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s own website, “Census data are used to distribute Congressional seats to states, to make decisions about what community services to provide, and to distribute $300 billion in federal funds to local, state and tribal governments each year.”

NOTE: Former Census Bureau Director Bruce Chapman recently penned an op-ed in which he noted, “[T]he White House and its Congressional allies are wrong in asserting that the Census in the past has reported directly to the president through his staff. Directors of the Bureau often brief presidents and their staffs, but, as a former director (under President Reagan), I don’t know of any cases where the conduct of the Bureau was directly under White House supervision. That includes Clinton in 2000, Bush 41 in 1990 and Carter in 1980.”

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

National Day of Renewal and Reconciliation, 2009

A proclamation by the President of the United States


As I take the sacred oath of the highest office in the land, I am humbled by the responsibility placed upon my shoulders, renewed by the courage and decency of the American people, and fortified by my faith in an awesome God.

We are in the midst of a season of trial. Our Nation is being tested, and our people know great uncertainty. Yet the story of America is one of renewal in the face of adversity, reconciliation in a time of discord, and we know that there is a purpose for everything under heaven.

On this Inauguration Day, we are reminded that we are heirs to over two centuries of American democracy, and that this legacy is not simply a birthright -- it is a glorious burden. Now it falls to us to come together as a people to carry it forward once more.

So in the words of President Abraham Lincoln, let us remember that: "The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature."

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 20, 2009, a National Day of Renewal and Reconciliation, and call upon all of our citizens to serve one another and the common purpose of remaking this Nation for our new century.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Libertarian Party Congratulates President Barack Obama

“Congratulations to President Barack Obama on his inauguration as the 44th President of the United States," says Libertarian Party National Chairman William Redpath. "I think all Americans ultimately want what libertarians want—peace, prosperity and freedom. If President Obama and the 111th and 112th Congresses succeed in bringing us all that, they will truly be heroes to this nation."

“However, because so many people, including libertarians, are skeptical that they will do so with the current and proposed public policies," says Redpath, "the Libertarian Party will continue to exist and grow, and propose and diligently work for the policies that we think will bring this nation peace, prosperity and freedom.”

“I hope President Obama is extremely serious about terminating government programs that are found to be ineffective, as he stated in his inaugural address," Redpath continues. "He’ll have to be to succeed in doing that. If fair judgments are made about all federal government programs, we should see a reduction in the size of the federal government that the Republican Party was never able to achieve.”

“I also was heartened to see President Obama speak of respect for market economies and responsibility to oneself before responsibility to the nation and the world," says Redpath. "But, to induce the American people to be more responsible, they will need to be given more freedom from government coercion. Responsibility and freedom are the two sides of the same coin.”

“President Obama has distinguished himself as a great orator, and in that regard, I respectfully ask him to do one thing: not to cheapen the word ‘freedom,’ as so many of his predecessors have done. While I am not suggesting that the United States become something other than a democratic republic, past presidents have suggested that because we have a democracy that we are 'free.' Freedom means living one’s life as one chooses, as long as one does not harm other people or their property, and the simple existence of democracy does not guarantee that. Only proper public policies will," Redpath explains.

“If President Obama pursues policies of economic freedom, which is the historical fundamental reason of this world’s prosperity, and personal freedom, we will have a prosperous, harmonious and just society—and he would go down as a great President,” says Redpath.

----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Bush Bails Out Autos

President Bush announced he will use executive power to bailout the U.S. automakers in a plan similar to the legislation which died in the Senate.

Transcript of speech:

BUSH: Good morning.

For years, America's automakers have faced serious challenges; burdensome costs, shrinking share of the market and declining profits. In recent months, the global financial crisis has made these challenges even more severe.

Now, some U.S. auto executives say that their companies are nearing collapse and that the only way they can buy time to restructure is with help from the federal government. It's a difficult situation that involves fundamental questions about the proper role of government.

On the one hand, government has the responsibility not to undermine the private enterprise system. On the other hand, government has a responsibility to safeguard the broader health and stability of our economy.

Addressing the challenges in the auto industry requires us to balance these two responsibilities. If we were to allow the free market to take its course now, it would almost certainly lead to disorderly bankruptcy and liquidation for the automakers.

Under ordinary economic circumstances, I would say this is the price that failed companies must pay. And I would not favor intervening to prevent the automakers from going out of business. But these are not ordinary circumstances.

In the midst of a financial crisis and a recession, allowing the U.S. auto industry to collapse is not a responsible course of action. The question is how we can best give it a chance to succeed.
Some argue the wisest path is to allow the auto companies to reorganize through Chapter 11 provisions of our bankruptcy laws and provide federal loans to keep them operating while they try to restructure under the supervision of a bankruptcy court.

But given the current state of the auto industry and the economy, Chapter 11 is unlikely to work for American automakers at this time. American consumers understand why. If you hear that a car company is suddenly going into bankruptcy, you worry that parts and servicing will not be available and you question the value of your warranty.

With consumers hesitant to buy new cars from struggling automakers, it would be more difficult for auto companies to recover. Additionally, the financial crisis brought the auto companies to the brink of bankruptcy much faster than they could have anticipated. And they have not made the legal and financial preparations necessary to carry out an orderly bankruptcy proceeding that could lead to a successful restructuring.

The convergence of these factors means there is too great a risk that bankruptcy now would lead to a disorderly liquidation of American auto companies. My economic advisers believe that such a collapse would deal an unacceptably painful blow to hardworking Americans far beyond the auto industry. It would worsen a weak job market and exacerbate the financial crisis. It could send our suffering economy into a deeper and longer recession.

And it would leave the next president to confront the demise of a major American industry in his first days of office.

The more responsible option is to give the auto companies an incentive to restructure outside of bankruptcy and a brief window in which to do it. And that is why my administration worked with Congress on a bill to provide automakers with loans to stave off bankruptcy while they develop plans for viability.

This legislation earned bipartisan support from majorities in both houses of Congress. Unfortunately, despite extensive debate and agreement that we should prevent disorderly bankruptcies in the American auto industry, Congress was unable to get a bill to my desk before adjourning this year.

This means the only way to avoid a collapse of the U.S. auto industry is for the executive branch to step in. The American people want the auto companies to succeed and so do I.

So today I'm announcing that the federal government will grant loans to all the companies under conditions similar to those Congress considered last week. These loans will provide help in two ways. First, they will give automakers three months to put in place plans to restructure into viable companies which we believe they are capable of doing.

Second, if restructuring cannot be accomplished outside of bankruptcy, the loans will provide time for companies to make the legal and financial preparations necessary for an orderly Chapter 11 process that offers a better prospect of long-term success and gives consumer confidence that they can continue to buy American cars.

Because Congress failed to make funds available for these loans, the plan I'm announcing today will be drawn from the financial rescue package Congress approved earlier this fall. The terms of the loans will require auto companies to demonstrate how they would become viable.

They must pay back all their loans to the government and show that their firms can earn a profit and achieve a positive net worth. This restructuring will require meaningful concessions from all involved in the auto industry — management, labor unions, creditors, bond holders, dealers, and suppliers.

In particular, automakers must meet conditions that experts agree are necessary for long-term viability, including putting their retirement plans on a sustainable footing, persuading bond holders to convert their debt into capital that companies need to address immediate financial shortfalls, and making their compensation competitive with foreign automakers who have major operations in the United States.

If a company fails to come up with a viable plan by March 31st, it would be required to repay its federal loans. The automakers and unions must understand what is at stake and make hard decisions necessary to reform.

These conditions send a clear message to everyone involved in the future of American automakers. The time to make hard decisions to become viable is now. Or the only option will be bankruptcy.

The actions I'm announcing today represent a step that we wish were not necessary. But given the situation, it is the most effective and responsible way to address this challenge facing our nation. By giving the auto companies a chance to restructure, we will shield the American people from a harsh economic blow at a vulnerable time and we will give American workers an opportunity to show the world, once again, they can meet challenges with ingenuity and determination and bounce back from tough times and emerge stronger than before.

Thank you.

President Bush Discusses Administration's Plan to Assist Automakers

9:01 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. For years, America's automakers have faced serious challenges -- burdensome costs, a shrinking share of the market, and declining profits. In recent months, the global financial crisis has made these challenges even more severe. Now some U.S. auto executives say that their companies are nearing collapse -- and that the only way they can buy time to restructure is with help from the federal government.

This is a difficult situation that involves fundamental questions about the proper role of government. On the one hand, government has a responsibility not to undermine the private enterprise system. On the other hand, government has a responsibility to safeguard the broader health and stability of our economy.

Addressing the challenges in the auto industry requires us to balance these two responsibilities. If we were to allow the free market to take its course now, it would almost certainly lead to disorderly bankruptcy and liquidation for the automakers. Under ordinary economic circumstances, I would say this is the price that failed companies must pay -- and I would not favor intervening to prevent the automakers from going out of business.

But these are not ordinary circumstances. In the midst of a financial crisis and a recession, allowing the U.S. auto industry to collapse is not a responsible course of action. The question is how we can best give it a chance to succeed. Some argue the wisest path is to allow the auto companies to reorganize through Chapter 11 provisions of our bankruptcy laws -- and provide federal loans to keep them operating while they try to restructure under the supervision of a bankruptcy court. But given the current state of the auto industry and the economy, Chapter 11 is unlikely to work for American automakers at this time.

American consumers understand why: If you hear that a car company is suddenly going into bankruptcy, you worry that parts and servicing will not be available, and you question the value of your warranty. And with consumers hesitant to buy new cars from struggling automakers, it would be more difficult for auto companies to recover.

Additionally, the financial crisis brought the auto companies to the brink of bankruptcy much faster than they could have anticipated -- and they have not made the legal and financial preparations necessary to carry out an orderly bankruptcy proceeding that could lead to a successful restructuring.

The convergence of these factors means there's too great a risk that bankruptcy now would lead to a disorderly liquidation of American auto companies. My economic advisors believe that such a collapse would deal an unacceptably painful blow to hardworking Americans far beyond the auto industry. It would worsen a weak job market and exacerbate the financial crisis. It could send our suffering economy into a deeper and longer recession. And it would leave the next President to confront the demise of a major American industry in his first days of office.

A more responsible option is to give the auto companies an incentive to restructure outside of bankruptcy -- and a brief window in which to do it. And that is why my administration worked with Congress on a bill to provide automakers with loans to stave off bankruptcy while they develop plans for viability. This legislation earned bipartisan support from majorities in both houses of Congress.

Unfortunately, despite extensive debate and agreement that we should prevent disorderly bankruptcies in the American auto industry, Congress was unable to get a bill to my desk before adjourning this year.

This means the only way to avoid a collapse of the U.S. auto industry is for the executive branch to step in. The American people want the auto companies to succeed, and so do I. So today, I'm announcing that the federal government will grant loans to auto companies under conditions similar to those Congress considered last week.

These loans will provide help in two ways. First, they will give automakers three months to put in place plans to restructure into viable companies -- which we believe they are capable of doing. Second, if restructuring cannot be accomplished outside of bankruptcy, the loans will provide time for companies to make the legal and financial preparations necessary for an orderly Chapter 11 process that offers a better prospect of long-term success -- and gives consumers confidence that they can continue to buy American cars.

Because Congress failed to make funds available for these loans, the plan I'm announcing today will be drawn from the financial rescue package Congress approved earlier this fall. The terms of the loans will require auto companies to demonstrate how they would become viable. They must pay back all their loans to the government, and show that their firms can earn a profit and achieve a positive net worth. This restructuring will require meaningful concessions from all involved in the auto industry -- management, labor unions, creditors, bondholders, dealers, and suppliers.

In particular, automakers must meet conditions that experts agree are necessary for long-term viability -- including putting their retirement plans on a sustainable footing, persuading bondholders to convert their debt into capital the companies need to address immediate financial shortfalls, and making their compensation competitive with foreign automakers who have major operations in the United States. If a company fails to come up with a viable plan by March 31st, it will be required to repay its federal loans.

The automakers and unions must understand what is at stake, and make hard decisions necessary to reform, These conditions send a clear message to everyone involved in the future of American automakers: The time to make the hard decisions to become viable is now -- or the only option will be bankruptcy.

The actions I'm announcing today represent a step that we wish were not necessary. But given the situation, it is the most effective and responsible way to address this challenge facing our nation. By giving the auto companies a chance to restructure, we will shield the American people from a harsh economic blow at a vulnerable time. And we will give American workers an opportunity to show the world once again they can meet challenges with ingenuity and determination, and bounce back from tough times, and emerge stronger than before.

Thank you.

END 9:08 A.M. EST

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page