Sunday, May 29, 2011

Barack Obama: A Nixon, Not A Carter

US President Barack Obama (C), accompanied by ...
Image via
by Ralph Benko, Contributing Author: President Barack Obama’s critics who liken him to the feckless Jimmy Carter have it all wrong. The Obama White House is engaged in a campaign to override and overrun Congress with executive power the likes of which haven’t been seen since President Richard Nixon.

The Obama administration is using the Labor Department to ram through something like Card Check (repeatedly failed to pass the Senate), the Environmental Protection Agency to impose something like Kyoto Treaty protocols (voted down by the Senate 95-0), the NLRB shutting down Boeing’s $2 billion Dreamliner factory in South Carolina and other initiatives, many of dubious constitutionality. It’s a lengthening list. My fellow columnist Charles Kadlec reviews a choice few “executive actions” this week here at Don’t miss it!

Alarm bells really began sounding when the New York Times reported that the IRS is looking into reversing a 30-year-old policy to apply a gift tax to donors to social welfare organizations. There is almost no chance that this tax came from career staff alone.

Sen. Orin Hatch and five other members of the Senate Finance Committee sent a letter to the IRS commissioner demanding an explanation. The IRS has a long and noble tradition of resisting White House efforts to politicize it. But politicians have, from time to time, misused the IRS.

President Nixon and his minions’ attempts to use the IRS against perceived political enemies is notorious. As noted by Stanley Kutler in The Wars of Watergate:
[White House Counsel John] Dean later prepared a memorandum.… The Service has been too “unresponsive and insensitive” to the White House. Commissioner Walters … appeared “oversensitive” in his concerns that IRS actions might be labeled political. That had to change, Dean said. … Walters “must be made to know that discreet political actions and investigations on behalf of the administration are a firm requirement and responsibility on his part. . . .” Finally, the inevitable rationale: the Democrats “used [IRS] most effectively. We have been unable.”
The Democrats “used [the IRS] most effectively?”  Of significance was the integrity shown by Treasury Secretary George Shultz, rebuffing White House pressure, and by IRS Commissioner Donald Alexander, whose obituary noted “… about 10 weeks into his job as commissioner, Mr. Alexander announced that he had shut down the Special Service Staff of the I.R.S., which had been investigating critics of Nixon and his Vietnam policies. That night Nixon made the first of several attempts to fire him. . . .”

Are Nixon-like abuses recurring? The evidence is only circumstantial. But what is known is troubling. It demands a close look … if only to dispel the suspicion that is settling upon the Internal Revenue Service. The IRS’ credibility lies in its hard earned reputation for integrity. It deserves to have its reputation cleared or, if its integrity has been violated, have Commissioner Alexander’s axiom that “political or social views are irrelevant to taxation” promptly restored.

1. The Evidence
The Senators’ letter sums up much of the circumstantial evidence:
President Obama and his White House staff have made it clear that they view these organizations with deep hostility. The President himself, in a heated political context, referred to certain 501(c)(4) organizations as “a threat to our democracy.” His White House Communications Director, Dan Pfeiffer, charged that the “powerful interests” supporting some of these organizations “are literally buying elections” . . . .

The applicability of gift taxes to 501(c)(4) contributions is ambiguous. Historically, the IRS has deliberately opted against vigorous enforcement of the gift tax on 501(c)(4) contributions. There are good reasons for this. First, it is unclear if contributions to these organizations are eligible for the gift tax given their gratuitous nature, and the fact that the donations are made with the expectation that the organization will work to advance the donor’s policy views. Moreover, these contributions are clearly not designed for tax planning purposes or to avoid the estate tax. Most importantly, however, enforcement of gift taxes on contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations engaged in public policy debate runs an unacceptable risk of chilling political speech, which receives the highest level of constitutional protection under the First Amendment.
The Senators are right. This tax appears as almost certainly constitutionally defective under the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.

2. The stakes:
The majority opinion in Citizens United held that “political speech must prevail against laws that would suppress it, whether by design or inadvertence. Laws that burden political speech are ‘subject to strict scrutiny….’ … Speech is an essential mechanism of democracy, for it is the means to hold officials accountable to the people.”

At the dawn of the Republic, in one of the most fundamental interpretations of the Constitution, Chief Justice John Marshall observed that “the power to tax involves the power to destroy.” What to make of a federal agency that brings the “power to destroy” against “an essential mechanism of democracy?”

The timing of the effort to tax political speech itself seems odd, even suspicious. Come what may this “power to destroy” will be effective during the Obama campaign’s billion dollar re-election effort, chilling individuals from funding opposition groups. Coincidence?

3. The Inquiry
Who will get to the bottom of this? First, of course, is the mainstream media. Katherine Graham showed courage by allowing Ben Bradlee to dispatch Woodward and Bernstein to go after the abuses of the Nixon White House. We can but hope that her successor, son Donald, will rise to his late mother’s stature. Perhaps the Post, or its investigative peers, The New York Times (who scooped the Post in its own back yard on this one) and the Wall Street Journal, already are on this.

Also, this matter falls under the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Government Operations, chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa, and of the House Ways and Means Committee, chaired by Rep. Dave Camp (and its Oversight Subcommittee chaired by Rep. Boustany). These have the power and duty to look into what’s going on.

Federal agencies pursuing a potentially controversial policy shift follow an elaborate process. Typically there is a set of memoranda in a file jacket, against the left side of which is stapled a “concurrence chain.” This is to be initialed by all civil servants, career and appointed, “in the loop.”

At the top of the chain are the relevant political appointees. Sen. Hatch and colleagues do well to address the Commissioner, Douglas Schulman. He was appointed by President Bush and is presumptively innocent of politicization. But the Commissioner is an administrator not a policy maker.

The relevant officials are in the Treasury Department itself. Secretary Geithner’s reputation is, at least vicariously, involved. He might wish to initiate an internal review … before Congress does. Logically, acting Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, Michael Mundaca, would know the facts. Mundaca appears to be a recess appointment … without Senate confirmation. A breach in the process?

Deputy Secretary Neal Wolin also might know something. Wolin, briefly, served as deputy counsel for economic policy in the Obama White House and thus has direct White House ties. Did he discuss this with the White House? Having served as General Counsel at the Treasury Department from 1999 to 2001 he knows how to get things done. His CIA background, not inherently sinister, is, yes, unsettling.

The upshot? President Obama is no Jimmy Carter. He is proving himself to be effective and even ruthless. Likening him to Nixon in no way implies crimes or any impeachable offense. It does suggest a certain Machiavellian ethos.

Constitutionalists of all parties, Left and Right, find having what looks like a “soft despot” in the Oval Office alarming. Obama is on track to rival Richard Milhous Nixon for that dubious status.
Ralph Benko is a senior economics advisor to The American Principles Project and author of The Websters’ Dictionary: How to Use the Web to Transform the World. He is working on a new book, called "A Golden Age: the political consequences of the peace." This article which first appeared in the Forbes was submitted by contributing author Ralph Benko to the editor of the ARRA News Service for reprint.

Tags: Ralph Benko, op-ed, politics, Barack Obama, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

The Secret to Victory: Feed The Opportunity, Starve The Problem

Image via Wikipedia
by Ralph Benko, Contributing Author: There is a secret to Victory. It is hidden in plain sight. It is contained, in full, in one sentence of Peter Drucker’s breakthrough book The Effective Executive: "In every area of effectiveness within an organization, one feeds the opportunities and starves the problem" (p. 98. Emphasis original.)

Part of why the Dow hovers at 12,000, up from around 900 when Ronald Reagan began to wrest the presidency from the hapless Jimmy Carter, is that a lot of executives got Drucker’s message. This insight radically transforms business culture. Many companies that followed the advice to feed the opportunity, starve the problem enjoyed explosive growth.

The same insight can bring about explosive growth for a presidential candidate. For a party. For America.

Forty-five years later, however, Washington still hasn’t gotten the memo. None of the candidates (nor any member of the Congressional leadership) are showing how they will feed the opportunities and starve the problem.

The Problem: A titanic federal deficit. It fixates the party, and the candidates, in much the same way that a certain great white whale obsessed Captain Ahab, dooming him and almost his entire crew. The federal government surely is overdue to be cured of its gigantism. But the way to get there is by starving the problem—shrinking the deficit down to flounder size — not by courting a fatal confrontation.

Of equal importance, the way to get there is by feeding the opportunities. There is a wistful, almost cargo-cultish, sense in the GOP that … by invoking certain ritual formulas prosperity will return. It takes more than incantations.

Prof. Gingrich, the latest entrant into the fray, has called his plan, aptly if solipsistically, The Gingrich Jobs and Prosperity Plan. Professor Gingrich? We get that this is the Gingrich plan, shrewdly designed to get you a great job, president, and, come what may, prosperity. Gentle reminder? We mere voters want an American Jobs and Prosperity Plan.

There are a few gold nuggets in your plan but more deficiencies. It reads like a pastiche of ideas that poll well (especially in the Base). It goes vague on critical specifics. What you plan to do and how you plan to do it? "[R]eturning to the Reagan-era monetary policies?" Perhaps Paul Volcker is too advanced in age to wish to resume his duties? Perhaps 20% interest rates are not appetizing to us mere voters? Both Reagan and Kemp preferred the gold standard. Why flinch?

Former CEO Herman Cain contradicts himself. He’s for the gold standard… after the national debt is paid off. Godfather? The national debt hasn’t been paid off since … 1790. The data show that restoring a strong and stable dollar through gold convertibility is the surest, simplest, recipe for economic growth and deficit reduction.

Governor Pawlenty? What’s up with this horrifying prescription of "a basket of commodities." This confuses a bank with hardware store. "Here, Ms. Bank Teller, is some cash. Fill up this bag with a sheet of tin, a few grains of gold, a gram of silver, some plywood, a pork belly and some palladium." This is a euphemism for "I will trust the Federal Reserve to manage the dollar with reference to the producer price index." Governor, sir? Trusting the Fed to manage our money for us — rather than the tried and true gold standard - is political, and policy, suicide.

Once upon a time James Carville famously pistol-whipped his candidate, Bill Clinton, who had strayed into the policy weeds, by posting a sign at campaign headquarters: "It’s the Economy, Stupid." Pay attention. Republicans enter this cycle on probation. Why? In each of the three Republican administrations since Reagan economic growth averaged in the pathetic 2% range. No prosperity there. No votes, either.

Reagan stood for across-the-board marginal tax rate cuts and a strong dollar policy. These were existential — no pastiche — and extremely controversial. He also stood for traditional values and a strong, although not belligerent, America. The critics were unmerciful. He was ridiculed by the political elites — from within his own party ("Voodoo Economics!"), by the opposing party ("Amiable Dunce!"), all amplified by the elite media.

Reagan did not flinch. He used the controversy to unseat an incumbent and used the prosperity wrought by his policies to get himself re-elected in a landslide.

A real candidate will take a strong and clear stand and will valiantly court controversy. There is a simple prescription that updates and completes the Reagan-Kemp agenda. A prosperity narrative with an authentic prescription, while championing traditional values with valor, can get any of the contenders the nomination … and the White House.

There are a lot of ways to restore economic growth from the 2% range of the past decade to a vibrant 3% or even 4%. Growth of that magnitude will set the stage for massively larger revenue and smart, popular, spending cuts: the end of the warfare/welfare state.

The surest prescription is to restore gold convertibility. Washington always is the last to get the word. Pay attention. The gold standard has achieved mainstream respectability. It no longer is a haven for social dystopians. Respected figures are arguing the case for gold—in the mainstream media, no less. Lewis E. Lehrman, Sean Fieler, Steve Forbes, Jeffrey Bell, James Grant, William Kristol, Dr. Judy Shelton, John Tamny (the editor here and at, with some of whom this writer is professionally associated. Many others — even, from the humanitarian Left, Mike Kinsley—respect gold as well.

Residual aversion to the gold standard tags you as not merely cautious but clueless. Tea Party Patriots stand for three things: fiscal responsibility, free markets, and constitutional integrity. The gold standard hits a bullseye on all three. The Iowa Tea Party actively is rallying around the gold standard. Many other tea party leaders embrace it. Political implications? Helllooo!

There are plenty of other elements for economic growth ripe for the plucking. Tax reform (lower rates!). Regulatory reform (bye bye Sarbox!). Energy policy (North America is the Saudi Arabia of shale oil). NetWorking [i.e., Telecommuting] : Pick up a cool quarter trillion!

Equally important are social values issues, especially traditional marriage. Marriage represents a principled position and a supercharged vote getter. Traditional marriage has won 31 out of … let’s see … 31 referenda. When Candidate McCain’s manager refused to let McCain campaign on it he went down to defeat in California—while straight marriage won.

Forty-five years later the GOP is badly overdue to get The Memo: "In every area of effectiveness within an organization, one feeds the opportunities and starves the problem." Time to wake up, Candidates. Trade in your harpoons for a whale-muzzle, get back to authentic, high octane, prescriptions for growth (and welcome the ridicule of the elites), real championship of traditional values, and constitutional first principles.

Do these things and Victory will be yours. You may go on to a greatness rivaling Reagan’s.
If you do not? Then call me Ishmael. For I alone am escaped to tell the tale.
Ralph Benko is a senior economics advisor to The American Principles Project and author of The Websters’ Dictionary: How to Use the Web to Transform the World. He is working on a new book, called "A Golden Age: the political consequences of the peace." This article which first appeared in the Forbes was submitted by contributing author Ralph Benko to the editor of the ARRA News Servicefor reprint in other blogs.

Tags: Ralph Benko, Federal Government, federal deficit, fiscal responsibility, free markets, and constitutional integrity, Ronald Reagan, Tax reform, Regulatory reform, Energy policy, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Monday, May 16, 2011

NLRB to Boeing: Shut up!

National Labor Relations BoardBy Bill Wilson: Every American should be afraid when their government tells them to keep their mouths shut. This is especially true when the subject relates to a matter of national public policy.

On Monday, Lafe Solomon, acting general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), seemed to forget about the right to free speech when he essentially told Boeing, and all other commentators, to shut it.

In 2009, Boeing made a rational business decision regarding the placement of one of its new production facilities. It decided to open a new plant in South Carolina, a right-to-work state. The NLRB claims that Boeing decided to locate the new facility in South Carolina as retaliation for past union strikes in Boeing’s Washington State locations. This ignores the fact that in the meantime Boeing has added over 2,000 employees to its Washington State locations.

The unions are unhappy with the Obama administration for several reasons. As a result, the administration needs to find ways to keep them happy. While unions spent tens of millions of dollars to get Obama elected, only a few union wishes have been realized. Since political opposition makes the passage of high-profile legislation like the so-called Employee Free Choice Act impossible, the administration has resorted to below-the-radar ways to appease its union supporters. Enter the NLRB.

The administration has stacked the NLRB with union operatives. The president used the recess appointment process to place Craig Becker, the former associate general counsel for the SEIU and AFL-CIO, on the board. With Mr. Becker in office, the board has embarked on an activist stint with the app

Having seen that the NLRB’s case against Boeing is weak and that the board’s position is being destroyed in analysis by anyone who has taken a serious look at the matter, Mr. Solomon, in a rather snippy letter to Boeing general counsel Michael Luttig, complained about the press coverage, saying, “We hope all interested parties respect the legal process, rather than trying to litigate this case in the media and public arena.” In other words, “keep your mouth shut.” The hypocrisy here is hard to miss given the board’s propensity to issue press releases anytime doing so will further its positions. This is case of “do as I say, not as I do.”

Boeing and all other commentators have a First Amendment right to speak freely, and all should continue to exercise that right. The fact that a high-ranking government official is telling a company and the rest of the public to shut up should send chills down everyone’s back. This type of attempted prior restraint is unacceptable in all but the most extreme circumstances, i.e., falsely yelling “fire” in a crowded building.

Since Mr. Solomon is an attorney, he could do well to take a refresher course on First Amendment law. Perhaps a continuing legal education class on the issue would be helpful for him.

In the meantime, he and all other similarly situated officials should take a step back and remember that preserving our constitutional rights is more important than saving the NLRB’s board members from suffering embarrassment as their position is taken apart by public inspection.
Bill Wilson is President of Americans for Limited Government, a non-profit dedicated to smaller government.You can follow Bill on Twitter at @BillWilsonALG. This column was originally published at The Daily Caller.

Tags: AFL-CIO, Boeing, National Labor Relations Board, NLRB, Obama Administration, SEIU, Bill Wilson, ALG To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Key Facts on the U.S. Debt Limit

by Gary Varvel
Key Facts

The US is expected to reach its statutory debt limit of $14.3 trillion on or before May 16.
  • The Debt limit was last raised in early February 2010
    - Senate vote: 60-39 (Late January)
    - House vote: 27-212 (Early February)
  • To avoid default, Congress must pay $207 billion in debt interest.
    - Federal revenue: $2.2 trillion
    - Federal spending: $3.3 trillion ($1.1 trillion more than revenue)
FY11 can be fully funded without raising the debt ceiling.
  • Congress shouldn’t be rushed or bullied into raising the debt limit.
  • No one is asking the US to default on its debt.
  • All that is needed to avoid a default is to make payments on the interest.
  • The Treasury is able to delay a default date by selling assets, shifting cash around, and borrowing money from the Fed that does not count to the debt ceiling.
Historical Context
  • Congress has never failed to increase the debt limit.
  • In the last 10 years, the debt ceiling has been raised 10 times.
  • Since 1940, the debt limit has been raised 100 times.
  • Geithner has changed the default date 4 times in 2011 alone, the latest projection being August 2.[1]
Institutional reform is needed to fix a broken system.

  • The debt ceiling does not effectively restrain spending, yet is simply raised at Washington’s whim, at a historic average of 1.5 times per year.
Cutting spending is not something to be delayed.

In the end, we are at greater risk to default under Washington’s charge card and excessive spending.
  • American families cannot just increase their credit limit when their credit card debts become too burdensom, and Congress should not either.
  • Excessive government spending has economic consequences for all Americans: higher cost of living, higher interest rates, and higher taxes.
  • Interest and mandatory spending, such as Social Security and Medicare, will consume 90 percent of the budget by 2020; leaving 10% for everything from defense to education and infrastructure.
  • Our heavy debt load is a bipartisan issue; spending doubled under President George W. Bush and is expected to double again under President Obama.
  • We have seen Washington come together to make significant cuts to spending. The debt ceiling must be handled with the same sobriety and focus.

[1] Treasury Department’s Predictions:
January 6, 2011 Debt ceiling: between March 31 and May 16, 2011.
March 1, 2011 Debt ceiling: between April 15, 2011 and May 31, 2011.
April 4, 2011 Debt ceiling: no later than May 16, 2011.
May 2, 2011 Debt ceiling: still May 16; default August 8.

Tags: facts, US Debt Limit, United States, Federal Government To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Gas Price Hypocrisy

Don Smith Show: In 2006 the Democrats and the media screamed bloody murder over the high price of gas. When Barack Obama was inaugurated, the average gas price was $1.87 a gallon. Now that the price has more than doubled, what are the Democrats and the administration saying now? If you guessed that high gas prices under Obama are somehow a good thing, give yourself a pat on the back. The liberal mindset is always an amazing thing to behold.

Tags: Don Smith, commentary, video, gas prices, hypocrisy, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelois, liberals, hillary Clinton, media, news, politics, economics To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Nullify the TSA!

ARRA News Service - The following article and video identifies action taken by some Texas law makers to stop the insanity of TSA body groping and naked scanning of Americans. Nine States have had representatives willing to take stands against the abuses of TSA. Where are the other states? 

In reference to the below video, both of Simpson body groping, body scanning bills out of committee.   Andy Hogue of The Lone State Report reported on Friday (5/5/2011): Last month, Rep. David Simpson's (R-Longview) headline-making bill, HB 1937, to prohibit "body-groping" searches by airline security workers, was approved by the House Criminal Jurisprudence committee. An accompanying bill, HB 1938, to prohibit the use of full body scanners that use backscatter X-rays to create a visual image of a person’s naked body, was voted out of the same committee this afternoon.

Both bills now await placement on the House calendar -- less than a month before the Legislature is set to adjourn. In a press release this morning, Simpson said HB 1937 is faring well. It has 87 members in support and the backing of at least three members of the Texas Congressional delegation.

“Our citizens are forced to undergo unconscionable procedures at the hands of the TSA," said Congressman John Carter. "The fact that someone is traveling is not justification to submit them to humiliating and unconstitutional invasions of their privacy. I am glad to support the efforts of Rep. David Simpson and his co-authors in the Texas Legislature to stop the TSA's abuses."

Congressman Louie Gohmert addressed personal privacy and security concerns. "Security is essential when traveling; however, airport full body scans invade very personal privacy bounds without a warrant, without probable cause, are offensive, and yet would not even detect some dangerous things," he said. "It is important that we balance individual privacy and security. ..."

Congressman Ron Paul, a 2012 GOP presidential contender, also voiced agreement. "Texans are so sick and tired of an out-of-control TSA poking, prodding and violating us that they are demanding action," Paul said. "I applaud David Simpson for his leadership on this issue and enthusiastically endorse his efforts.”

Nine state legislatures -- including Alaska, New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania -- have legislation pending to restrict the Transportation Safety Administration's search procedures at airports, Simpson noted. . . .
Tenth Amendment Center: Texas State Representative David Simpson speaks at Nullify Now! Austin on April 16th, 2011. The Nullify Now! event was sponsored by The Foundation for a Free Society and the Tenth Amendment Center.

Simpson is the lead sponsor of two bills in the Texas legislature to nullify the TSA -- HB1937 would ban groping in violation of the 4th Amendment (all of it), and HB1938 which would ban TSA scanners from all Texas airports. HB1937 has already been passed out of committee, unanimously.

"We have a runaway government because we have gone to sleep and settled for it..."

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive"
--CS Lewis

Tags: nullification, TSA, ban, body groping, HB 1937, body scanners, HB 1938, nullify-now, Tenth Amendment, 10th Amendment, David Simpson, Constitution, liberty, liberty, Texas, airports, Ron Paul To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Friday, May 6, 2011

Beyond the Headlines: Understanding the Debt Ceiling

BankRupting America: For years, the government has spent far more than it can afford. This history of overspending has left the country with a massive debt burden. But this debt is subject to a limit mandated by Congress. When the debt nears the limit, Congress usually raises it to allow the government to continue borrowing money. But as the government spends at an ever increasing pace, Congress has had to raise the limit with increasing frequency.

As we once again near the debt ceiling, what’s at stake? We go beyond the headlines for all the facts you’re not hearing. Watch the video below.

For more information on the facts in the video, see the fact sheet below.
Washington is a buzz about our nation’s heavy debt burden and the impending debate regarding the debt ceiling. Many in Washington insist that the debt limit must be raised, or the United States will default and send our economy into a downward spiral. But are these predictions based on facts?

The debt ceiling, which is the legal limit on borrowing by the federal government, was created to control and limit Washington’s spending and debt. It hasn’t worked.

Since 1940, lawmakers have increased the debt ceiling 100 times (i). And as spending exploded over the last decade, the ceiling has been raised 10 times (ii).

This overspending has saddled taxpayers with a debt of more than $14 trillion (iii), which is nearly the size of our entire economy.

Will Washington Default if We Do Not Raise the Debt Limit?
Yes and no. Washington could actually hold off on raising the debt ceiling for months (iv), before default or being unable to repay our lenders becomes a serious risk. Like a person with credit card debt, our government won’t default on its debt so long as it can continue to pay the interest payments on that debt.

And the US’s $2.2 trillion in tax revenue more than covers the $200 billion in interest owed this year. If Washington had to, they could pay for all of its bills for months by doing things like selling unused assets, shifting cash around and borrowing money from the Fed that doesn’t count toward the debt ceiling.

The Real Risk
But, that’s only a band-aid to buy us time for real reform — and it hides the real problem. Revenue still only covers 60 percent of the total bill. Unless spending is cut, we risk defaulting under an excessive debt burden.

The debt ceiling keeps increasing because of years of government overspending. Spending has increased well above its healthy historic average and, without reform, will shoot up dramatically (v).

If we really want to prevent more debt ceiling increases and defaulting on our debt, Washington should worry less about whether we have to raise the ceiling in the next few weeks
(i) The Atlantic: The US Debt Ceiling, A Historical Look. April 29, 2011
(ii) The Fiscal Times: Words Fly as Debt Ceiling Closes in on Ryan, GOP. January 6, 2011
(iii) Department of Treasury: Debt to the Penny. April 29, 2011
(iv) The Wall Street Journal: Congress Has Time and Options on Debt Limit. February 2, 2011
(v) The President’s FY12 Budget

Tags: beyond the headlines, debt, debt ceiling, debt limit, federal debt, federal debt ceiling, Government Overspending, Government Spending, national debt, new video, spending cuts, video To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Obama's Anti-Energy Policies Are Bankrupting America

Heritage Foundation: Randall Stilley has witnessed firsthand the Obama administration's job-killing agenda. As the president and chief executive of Seahawk Drilling, he had to lay off 632 employees before filing for bankruptcy — a direct result of President Obama's anti-energy policies.

"As an American," he told us, "you never want to look at your own government and say they're hurting you personally, they're hurting your business and they're doing it in a way that's irresponsible. I'm not very proud of our government right now and the way they handled this." Watch the Below Video:

Tags: seahawk drilling, Heritage, Heritage Foundation, IER, Institute for Energy Research, permitorium, moratorium gulf oil, spill To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to Conservative Voices. Thanks!