DCRepublican.com

When President Bush announced his economic stimulus in January, he bragged that his package was the “right size” and would “boost” the economy. It sure has led to “higher consumer spending,” but not where Bush had probably hoped. The adult pornography industry reports that has seen a huge uptick in business thanks to Bush’s package.

Of  course, this is also a great opportunity to bring back one of my favorite videos from ht

digg story

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

Senator Christopher Bond, Missouri

Senator James Bunning, Kentucky

Senator Michael Crapo, Idaho

Senator Jim DeMint, South Carolina

Senator John Ensign, Nevada

Senator Michael Enzi, Wyoming

Senator Jon Kyl, Arizona

Senator David Vitter, Louisiana

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

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

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

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.

Eerie video of a giant panda showing up at Senator Chris Dodd’s house in DC. Looks like he had an agenda: exposing Dodd’s Countrywide Financial scandal. Watch the video!

read more | digg story

Even before gas prices started to inch near the $4.00 mark, one of the hot items in Washington has been a Democrat-pushed effort to try and pass a “windfall profit tax” on big oil companies.

If you work on the Hill or read the news regularly, odds are you’ve heard the concept of this tax tossed around dozens of times. However, one thing that you never hear when this is discussed is what does “windfall profits” actually mean?

Yes, I know that this effort has been blocked by Republicans in the Senate (thanks, guys), however I’m quite confident that this isn’t the last you’re going to see of this, or something similar. Take note that Harry Reid voted against this bill, just so they would have the issue back on the floor.

So the question what are “windfall profits?”

Instead of me trying to explain it, I think the Economist does it best:

A controversial concept, often used by politicians to justify imposing a tax on profit that in theory is earned unexpectedly, through circumstances beyond the control of the company concerned, and is thus deemed undeserved and ripe for the taking by the tax authorities. As the profits were neither expected nor a result of the efforts of the firm, taxing them should not harm the firm’s incentives to maximize future profits.

The problem comes when greedy politicians start claiming that profits are windfalls when in fact they are deserved and expected. Then taxing them sends a signal to firms that they should not try too hard to make profits, as if they do too well they will not get to keep the profits anyway. If this became widely believed, effort would probably decline and economic growth would be slower.

Why on earth would the government ever want to present a proposal that would suggest that if something happens beyond your control and you make money on it, you should be taxed more excessively than if they were planned occurrences? Since when was America about the government telling you what profit is reasonable?

To make this issue resonate and make it more comfortable amongst constituents, Democrats paint a nice picture of these tax dollars going towards advancements in energy independence. They make it sound like taxing evil big oil is going to save the world and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

If it wasn’t so ridiculous, their logic would be funny to me. From what I gather, the Democrats model to energy independence runs something like this:

1. Excessively tax oil companies who happen to make a profit off of selling a product to American consumers.
2. Prevent any attempts to tap into American oil reserves
3. Propose some ridiculous new government program
4. Blame the Republicans for our current energy and economic problems
5. Take a long recess

Both House and Senate Democrats (and even a few Republicans) need to get together and take a crash course in basic economic concepts. The principles of supply and demand are very powerful, and it should be no surprise to anyone that they play more of a factor in the price of oil than any executive.

Instead of listening to what the pundits are saying about the price of oil, I recommend that anyone who is interested in this issue start following what the business news channels are saying. For example, here is what you won’t hear the pundits talk about:

Citigroup raised its 2008 oil price forecast to $117 from $95 a barrel, and boosted its estimate for 2009 to $122 from $88 a barrel, citing fundamental reasons for the upward trend, driven by continued erosion of non-OPEC supply estimates, and the fact that demand, while softening, is by no means falling low enough to materially offset tightening supply. (Source: BusinessWeek.com)

When you follow the business side of the news, you often see things from a different perspective than what is being presented to you by the network news. Furthermore, if you follow international headlines, like this one from two weeks ago:

Nigerian militants warn of attacks on oil facilities

You’ll start to get a better glimpse into why we’re in the position we’re in today, as well as a better argument for why we should start tapping into some of the oil that we have here as a means to offset these unpredictable situations that are increasing the price we pay at the pump.

I know that there is a lot more to this issue; however, I’ve noticed that there are a lot of people, including many Hill staffers and Members of Congress who have resorted to simply using the talking points that the majority leadership has put together, without addressing the real issues we’re facing.

Sadly, the only reason that their talking points are able to work is because the American public is so uninformed, and reliant on news outlets to digest complex stories for them.

Maybe $5.00 per gallon gasoline will lead people to start doing their homework?

—

Of course, I can’t write about oil and gas prices without providing a shameless plug to a great petition that I urge you all to sign: GasPriceProtest.com

Odds are, if you’re a commuter, there is one thing that is more painful these days than any traffic jam - gas prices.

Obviously, you’re not alone when it comes to resenting these extremely high fuel costs. However for most folks, it’s just assumed that there is nothing that they can do to lower these costs.

For some, people have changed their routines to make their drive times as efficient as possible. For others, they have decided to take public transportation to work instead of driving. Then there are those who simply want to avoid the stress and cost altogether and give up driving completely.

It’s not just a small handful of people who are making these various adjustments to save a buck either, just check out these statistics from CNN.com:

The Department of Transportation said Monday it had seen the sharpest monthly drop in driving since it began keeping records. In March, Americans drove 11 billion fewer miles than in March of 2007.

I have no doubt that when the data is released for April and May, the number of miles driven will continue to decline significantly.

While I think it’s great that Americans are driving less, there are many who simply can’t make these adjustments, whether that be due to location, schedule, etc. What about these people? How do they fight the pain at the pump?

The truth is, the American people DO have the ability to lobby their members of Congress to fight more aggressively to reduce the price we pay at the pump.

Just today, a new website was launched serving that very purpose - giving Americans the ability to sign a petition that urges Congress to suspend the federal gas tax, increase American oil production, and expand U.S. refineries.

If you’re tired of high gas prices, and want those you have elected to take action, you should sign this petition.

I’m confident that this petition will take off soon, and hopefully, instead of Congress spending hours questioning oil executives, they will use their power and creativity to pass legislation that eases gas prices immediately.