June 2008


New video from the Institute for Energy Research hits the streets to ask why people thought gas prices were so high, who was to blame, and what could be done to lower them.

read more | digg story

About I.E.R.:

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

It looks like there is an update to the post I made back in April, Where ‘States Rights’ Sometimes Get Complicated.

Even though the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the death penalty was too severe of a sentence for those found guilty of child rape, it appears that many state legislatures will remain steadfast in introducing and attempting to pass laws that provide these offenders with the toughest possible sentencing guidelines.

I was quite surprised Supreme Court was able to develop a majority opinion (5-4) that essentially removed the rights of individual states to determine what is ‘just punishment.’

Even though this was a huge victory for many on the far-left and certain religious types, I was pleased to see how John McCain and Barack Obama addressed this case:

Republican Sen. John McCain called the ruling “an assault on law enforcement’s efforts to punish these heinous felons for the most despicable crime.” Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said there should be no blanket prohibition of the death penalty for the rape of children if states want to apply it in those cases.

I have to admit, I was quite pleased to see Barack Obama make this statement. All too often to Democratic candidates succumb to the pull of the far-left fringe, and it usually comes back to haunt them, especially in middle America.

Obama’s statement makes me wonder what how he would prioritize the view of states rights when it comes to picking his Supreme Court Justice should he be elected. Would it be more important than a potential nominees stance on abortion? Gay rights?

I think it would be an interesting question to be presented to the candidates in a debate, “if you were given the task of picking a Supreme Court nominee during your presidency, list the top three ideological viewpoints that you would be looking for, in order, based on priority.”

Hopefully if they do another YouTube debate, someone can sneak in a question like this. Maybe the snowman.

 

Stop Chuck Grassley

For more what Chuck Grassley is trying to do, click here to read more.

Even though it was inevitable that the Democrats would get the cloture vote that Harry Reid was seeking on the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 (aka: Housing Bailout Bill), I have to admit that I was quite surprised to see it get the overwhelming support that it did.

The final vote on H.R. 3221 was 83 yea’s, 9 nay’s, and then there were 8 member of the Senate who were either running for President, recovering from surgery, or simply didn’t want to show the American people that they had a pair and stand up for what is right.

Regardless of how this vote turned out, there are 9 members of the Senate who deserve our thanks and gratitude for standing up and speaking out against this horrible piece of legislation.

Senators who have a pair:

 

Senator John Barrasso, Wyoming

John Barrasso

Senator Christopher Bond, Missouri

Christopher Bond

Senator James Bunning, Kentucky

James Bunning

Senator Michael Crapo, Idaho

Michael Crapo

Senator Jim DeMint, South Carolina

Jim DeMint

Senator John Ensign, Nevada

John Ensign

Senator Michael Enzi, Wyoming

Michael Enzi

Senator Jon Kyl, Arizona

John Kyl

Senator David Vitter, Louisiana

David Vitter

 

And then there are those Senators who simply don’t get it:

Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)

Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)

Craig (R-ID)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)

Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)

Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)

 

 

Blogs covering this:

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2008/06/senate_key_vote_doddshelby_hou.php

http://usmegatrends.blogspot.com/2008/06/is-there-goat-in-house.html

http://www.mathies.com/weblog/?p=1319

http://rubechat.kfan.com/forums/thread/3139831.aspx

http://senatus.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/another-emergency-spending-bill-possible-housing-bill-may-be-pushed-back/

http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-sns-ap-congress-housing,0,2396621.story?track=rss

http://thekansascitian.blogspot.com/2008/06/senate-housing-bailout-further-erodes.html

If you’re covering the post-cloture segments of the Housing Bailout Bill, let me know, I’d be more than happy to add your link to the list.

Sadly, its one of our own that has come up with one of the most ludicrous amendments to what is already seen by many as one horrible package of legislation.

It’s none other than Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa that has developed the language that would essentially open the door to online merchants like Ebay, Amazon, Google Checkout, etc. reporting all of their transaction activity to the government.

First of all, it’s important to note that this provision was packaged in the Housing Bill, which has absolutely nothing to do with online merchants. The provision was buried amongst 600+ pages of legislation, making it more likely to be overlooked by tired Hill staffers. For those who haven’t read the language, here it is (source):

Payment Card and Third Party Network Information Reporting. The proposal requires information reporting on payment card and third party network transactions. Payment settlement entities, including merchant acquiring banks and third party settlement organizations, or third party payment facilitators acting on their behalf, will be required to report the annual gross amount of reportable transactions to the IRS and to the participating payee. Reportable transactions include any payment card transaction and any third party network transaction. Participating payees include persons who accept a payment card as payment and third party networks who accept payment from a third party settlement organization in settlement of transactions. A payment card means any card issued pursuant to an agreement or arrangement which provides for standards and mechanisms for settling the transactions. Use of an account number or other indicia associated with a payment card will be treated in the same manner as a payment card. A de minimis exception for transactions of $10,000 or less and 200 transactions or less applies to payments by third party settlement organizations. The proposal applies to returns for calendar years beginning after December 31, 2010. Back-up withholding provisions apply to amounts paid after December 31, 2011. This proposal is estimated to raise $9.802 billion over ten years.

It’s quite clear to see the many problems that could be created if this piece of legislation was enacted.

Of course, after this was exposed, Kate Szostak, a staffer on the Banking Committee quickly tried to kill any doubts and/or concerns people had with the legislation:

“This is not a controversial provision or a new one. Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee have supported it for months, and it has been included in the Administration’s budget proposal for years. This provision simply requires banks–not small businesses–to report sales transactions to the IRS each year and to merchants at the end of each day. It makes the tax system fair for everyone, without burdening small businesses and without putting consumers’ privacy rights at risk.”

With all due respect to Kate, this is indeed a very controversial provision that could greatly effect how business is done online.

For example, let’s say I sell 500 widgets on Ebay every month and at the end of each month, $20,000 or so is transferred into my bank account. Stop. That is basically what is going to be reported to the IRS and filed away under your EIN or SSN and it should be no surprise that they are going to be there at the end of the year waiting for you to pay taxes on it.

However, if you’re a business owner, there is much more to this equation than the IRS would be seeing. Nowhere in this reporting would Ebay or the IRS have any idea how much each of these widgets cost you. Sure, you might have had $20,000 transferred to your account, but what if you had to spend $19,500 on acquisition and shipping of the widgets?

This number has to first be deducted from the $20,000 before any accurate representation of income can be generated. When you tack on other things like operating costs, it’s even easier to see how the IRS is going to have skewed numbers.

I’m sure many of you are now asking, so what, you’ll report all of this on your tax forms and pay taxes based on that.

The reality is that even if this is the case, with the IRS having all of this data, they are going to be looking harder than ever for anyone that is cheating the system. Any discrepancy on either end could potentially throw up a red flag and lead to an audit. No matter what criteria they create, there is always going to be a discrepancy in numbers, simply because each small business operates in a different way, having different pricing structures, sales models, operating costs, exposure, etc.

With this legislation, I don’t see how the IRS would be able to operate without a major expansion, and that’s just to cover the oversight of this data. There are many other arguments that people have brought up over this legislation, including privacy concerns and other important logistics, but for some reason, some of our elected officials don’t want to bring this up for more debate and are hoping to end discussion of this in the next 48 hours.

So, that’s where we come in and help disseminate information exposing America’s #1 R.I.N.O., Senator Chuck Grassley.

Here are some other bloggers that are also covering this topic, and have made excellent posts.

http://techliberation.com/2008/06/23/senate-housing-bill-to-require-collecting-of-online-payment-information/

http://blogs.courant.com/on_background/2008/06/credit-card-tracking-slipped-i.html

http://www.infowars.com/?p=2785

http://papundits.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/housing-bailout-bill-new-provision-report

http://osispeaks.com/

http://fetchingjen.blogspot.com/

http://www.oregonconservative.com

http://www.conservativerecord.com

A clever speech by House Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thad McCotter.

read more | digg story

It looks like the Democrats decided to go a bit too far this time, trying to slip in some last minute provisions into the mortgage bailout bill that had absolutely nothing to do with mortgages. Here is just a taste, but check out the rest of the story at the link below:

“This is a provision with huge reach, and was slipped into the bill this week. Not only does it affect nearly every credit card transaction, such as Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and American Express, but the bill specifically targets payment systems like eBay’s PayPal, Amazon, and Google Checkout, that are used by many online businesses.”

read more | digg story

FreedomWorks interns at their finest, showing the DC and the country what grassroots activism is all about (@ approx. 2:00 into the video). Watch out Chris Dodd, not only will ethics investigators be breathing down your neck, but you’ll also have to deal with the 5′10″, 180lb. Panda.

More coverage of the Dodd/Countrywide Scandal:
Commentary: Be honest, we all wish to be VIPs
Major Networks Avoid Dem Senators’ Countrywide Loan Scandals
UPDATE 1-US Senate presses ahead on housing, delay rejected

I guess this is just my overly-analytic mind in action once again, but doesn’t it seem odd to release these two stories (1, 2) at the same time? (see image below)

Odd News Sequence
digg story

In the past, I have been very critical of campaigns at all levels, primarily going after their lack of effort in trying to capture the young, energetic and willing base of the GOP.

Fortunately, I haven’t been the only one who has noticed these problems, and for many of the campaigns they have made strides in the right direction in terms of using technology in their favor (see Bob Schaffer for on example).

However, as candidates are starting to finally get their websites and campaign structures in order to accommodate volunteers and activists, I’ve started to see what seems like a withdrawal from campaigns on all levels, even by those who would be classified as “campaign die-hards.”

I know that things like this are bound to happen when your party has a sitting two-term President. For many, there seems to be an assumption that simply writing a check to Senator McCain or the Republican National Committee is going to take care of securing a victory come November.

Even though check writing isn’t going to make someone President (though it helps), lets just pretend that their logic is correct. Let’s assume that each of these Republicans writes their check to Senator McCain and he is able to work the right states and win the election, then what? Was this a win for the GOP?

There are many Republicans that I have spoken with who seem to believe that the only victory that the Party has to worry about is the presidency, assuming that once John McCain is in office, he’ll simply veto every piece of earmark-laden piece of legislation that comes across his desk.

Unfortunately, those who make that assumption need to understand that if the GOP doesn’t pick up some key seats, or loses just a few, having a veto-proof majority is something that wont be too far out of reach for the Democrats.

Just look at what happened with the Farm Bill, even without the Democrats having a veto-proof majority, they were able to override President Bush’s veto and pass one of the most earmark-packed pieces of legislation I’ve ever seen.

As the Democratic majority in the House continues on its likely path of growth, why would anyone assume that the addiction to earmarks is going to lessen on either side? For the Demcrats, they know that the more votes they have, the more secure they become. For some Republicans, the assumptions sets in that even if they try to stop earmarks, the Democrats will just override them, so they might as well take what they can get for their districts.

Basically what I’m saying is that the only way that the prospects of a McCain presidency can be successful in terms of fulfilling the pledges he’s making now, is by having a strong effort to get likeminded Republicans elected with him.

While the House is probably a lost cause for at least another cycle, I think that the GOP can keep or pickup some key seats in the Senate. In my opinion, Virginia (Jim Gilmore), New Mexico (Steve Pearce), Louisiana (John Kennedy), Colorado (Bob Schaffer) and New Hampshire (John Sununu) are the states that we should focus on doing whatever we can to keep in, or bring to Republican control.

In order for any of these seats to be won, Republicans need to start helping these campaigns in conjunction with their efforts to get Senator McCain elected. Furthermore, if the means are available, we need to contribute money to these campaigns and get our friends to do the same. In fact, you can even create your own fundraising page at Slatecard.com and give to the candidates you want to see win. Just talk to Joe Mansour, and he’ll help you get started.

I’m not saying that everyone should stop helping the McCain campaign. In fact, I’d suggest just the opposite and encourage more people to help him win, but at the same time also consider helping candidates in your area who might also have a chance to bring or keep a conservative voice in Congress.

It’s going to be an ugly battle this cycle, but with the right amount of foot soldiers on the ground, I’m confident that those conservatives who deserve to stay in Congress or get elected will.

Next Page »