Freedom Line Blog

Washington Post – Barack Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize
London Times – Absurd Decision Makes a Mockery of the Prize
WSJ – ObamaCare: The Greatest Show on Earth
The Examiner – Health Care Tab to be Paid by Taxpayers, Businesses, Seniors
CNSNews.com — Hoyer Won’t Rule Out Voting on Senate Health Bill Without Changes and Sending it Directly to President
Washington Times — Key Democrats Align With Military on Buildup
Michelle Malkin – Crime, Census and Censorship

The U.S. House Ethics Committee unanimously voted  today to expand its investigation into the finances and reporting thereof by Charlie Rangel, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

Well, that’s good, all of you who believe that corruption by public officials is an important issue (the most important based on a Rasmussen Poll that got little notice last week) might say.

Maybe.  But the Ethics Committee investigation has been going on for a year already, and the House Democrats, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have made it abundantly clear that there will be no move to  remove Rangel from his Chairmanship until the investigation is complete, and he has no inclination to voluntarily step aside.

That investigation will now take longer.  Much longer.

Due process and thoroughness are important, but one sometimes wonders, particularly with Congressional ethics investigations, if those worthy considerations are actually the motivations driving the ship.  The investigation will now take longer.  Much longer.

According to The Hill, criminals may have been hired to conduct door-to-door census canvassing, based on a GAO report.

Hi.  I’m here to take your census.  Oh, that’s a nice watch you’re wearing.  Is your wallet handy so I can check your identification?

Earlier this week, we got an Afghan Taliban press release courtesy of the Associated Press.  It assured us that all the Taliban want is “independence and establishment of an Islamic system” and don’t want to harm other countries or any other bad stuff if only all of us would simply go away and leave them alone to do with the indigenous people as they will.  (Perhaps you are familiar with how the Taliban go about establishing an Islamic system.)

Well, good to know and thanks for sharing, we thought.

Then we got a UPI story, which led with, “U.S. officials say al-Qaida is seen as a greater threat than the Afghan Taliban in the emerging war strategy formulations of President Barack Obama. … After the president met with top advisers Wednesday for three hours, officials said the new strategy may focus more on a campaign against al-Qaida in Pakistan than on the Taliban in Afghanistan.”

And then, sure enough, we got another Associated Press story that began, “President Obama is prepared to accept some Taliban involvement in Afganistan’s political future and appears inclined to send only as many more U.S. troops as needed to keep al-Qaida at bay, a senior administration official said Thursday.”

You do see what is happening here, with President Obama’s “War of Necessity,” don’t you?  If not, don’t worry, you soon will.

“Health Care Bill Gets Green Light in Cost Analysis”

That is the gift proponents of government-run health care received this morning in the form of a New York Times headline.  That headline, however, along with its accompanying story about the Congressional Budget Office’s preliminary cost analysis of the Baucus bill, is about as deceptive as the ObamaCare sales job Washington politicians have been employing for months.

CBO’s preliminary cost analysis is just that – a preliminary estimate based on a theoretical framework of ideas approved by the Senate Finance Committee.  It’s preliminary because the actual bill hasn’t been written yet, much less been combined with at least five other, more expensive versions of “reform” circulating in the House and Senate.  As Chris Frates of Politico.com noted yesterday:

While the media and lawmakers often shorthand a CBO letter as a ‘score’ or ‘cost estimate,’ today’s CBO letter is neither. Because the bill is still in ‘conceptual,’ or layman’s terms, CBO’s letter today was a ‘preliminary analysis.’  For it to be an official cost estimate, the bill has to be translated into legislative language.

“And CBO goes to great pains in its letter to make the distinction:

“‘CBO and JCT’s analysis is preliminary in large part because the Chairman’s mark, as amended, has not yet been embodied in legislative language,’ the letter says.”

In other words, is anyone prepared to believe that the most recent CBO cost estimate will even come close to resembling reality once the Baucus bill is combined with the budget-busting provisions of the various other versions of ObamaCare?  After Reid and Pelosi are through with their parliamentary tricks outlined here and here?

Yet liberals and the mainstream media today are giddy with excitement.  Why?  Because regardless of the fact that the CBO letter means nothing in the grand scheme of things, something at which the CBO itself hints, for the first time in this debate they have something – anything – that supports their dream of government-run health care.   Reality be damned. 

Our guess is that the large majority of Americans are still not ready to join their party.  Even taken at face value, CBO’s preliminary claim that the Baucus bill will actually reduce the budget deficit by $81 billion over 10 years simply means that the legislation raises taxes on businesses and individuals and cuts benefits only slightly more than it increases spending, while still leaving 25 million people uninsured.  And the more expensive the final bill gets – don’t believe for a moment that it won’t get more expensive – the greater the tax increases and benefit cuts will become in order to square with the President’s pledge to not sign a bill that adds “one dime” to the deficit.

Isn’t “change” grand?

Sales of regular soft drinks have declined by almost 10% during the past decade according to Beverage Digest, but since when are facts an impediment to Barack Obama’s smug foolishness?

In a recent interview with Men’s Health Magazine, Obama conveniently scapegoats soft drinks, saying that a soda tax is “an idea that we should be exploring.”  He added, incorrectly, that “there’s no doubt that our kids drink way too much soda. And every study that’s been done about obesity shows that there is as high a correlation between increased soda consumption and obesity as just about anything else.”

Except that there’s not.  In a devastating commentary today, Coca-Cola CEO Muhtar Kent notes that sales of regular soda have actually declined, as has consumption of added sugar as a percentage of daily calories, even as obesity rates increased.  He shows that America’s increasing obesity is actually attributable to declines in exercise, as well as to increased fat and flour/cereal consumption.  Facts, however, are small hurdles for Obama in his campaign to dictate every aspect of our lives and tax us in every conceivable way.

A column in the Kansas City Star reports that former Senate Majority Leader and presidential candidate Bob Dole is urging Republican members of Congress to vote for President Obama’s healthcare reform plan. The piece quotes Dole as saying “I want this to pass. I don’t agree with everything Obama is presenting, but we’ve got to do something.”

The last five words of that sentence should be anathema to any red-blooded conservative. Is there any other serious situation in life where you could justifiably invoke a similar rationale? Is that the sort of thing you’d like to hear your surgeon say?

How about “doing something” effective? How about “doing something” that solves rather than compounds a problem? Caring about actions makes you a politician. But caring about outcomes makes you a statesmen. That puts Bob Dole’s record at 1-1.

The Congressional Budget Office has released its preliminary cost estimate for the Baucus Bill.  Here is the link.  The CBO estimates the total cost over ten years will be $829 billion.

UPDATE:

Most of the actual expenditures and mandates do not take effect until 2013-14.  In other words, CBO’s 10-year preliminary cost estimate only accounts for six or seven years worth of the expensive provisions.

The House of Representatives protected one of its own today by voting only to refer Rep. Charles Rangel to the House Ethics Committee; he will remain the Chair of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.

Rangel, as the NY Times has revealed, has taken many liberties in his position of power.  The Times discovered that Rangel has four rent-controlled apartments, and actually uses one as his campaign office, likely in violation of House rules.  In addition, Rangel recently revealed that he failed to disclose assets from his swanky beach home in the Dominican Republic, leading to over $10,000 in back taxes.

Being an elected official has been prosperous for the New York Congressman, as Rangel lists his net worth in the millions.  Apparently there are perks to writing the nation’s tax laws, and subsequently failing to follow them.  His published ethical improprieties are just the tip of the iceberg, which is why newspapers across the country are calling for Rangel to step down. See here and here.

Today, Representative John Carter from Texas introduced a resolution that would have referred Rangel’s case to the House Ethics Committee and stripped Rangel of his Chairmanship.  The vote failed 153-246, with six Republicans voting with Rangel (King (NY), Rohrabacher (CA), Paul (TX), Murphy (PA), Jones (NC) and Young (AK).

So, as of today the New York Times and the Washington Post are investigating Rangel but Congress is not.  It looks like it will take an indictment or two to get things rolling in America’s most expensive sausage factory.

CFIF has written about and commented on the crushing blow that forced expansion of Medicaid, as called for in the health care reform bills making their way through Congress, will have on state budgets.

But don’t take our word for it.  Here is what Democrat Governors are saying about the issue, as compiled by the Senate Republican Communications Center:

Dem Health Care Angst Beyond The Beltway

Democrat Governors Say Their States Can’t Shoulder Burden Of New Democrat Health Care Mandates

GOV. TED STRICKLAND (D-OH): “The States, With Our Financial Challenges Right Now, Are Not In A Position To Accept Additional Medicaid Responsibilities.” “Still, Strickland warned on a recent visit to Washington that ‘the states, with our financial challenges right now, are not in a position to accept additional Medicaid responsibilities.’ Strickland said that he wants ‘a health-care package that is inclusive and provides for all citizens,’ but he added that if Medicaid is expanded, he hopes to ‘see the federal government assume the greater portion of the costs, if not the total costs.’” (“Expansion Of Medicaid Could Impose Costs On Ohio,” Columbus Dispatch, 10/7/09)

GOV. JOHN LYNCH (D-NH): Did Not Sign A Letter Supporting Health Care Reform Because It Failed To “Address Concerns Regarding Potential Cost Shifting To The States.” “Last week, Democratic governors sent a letter to congressional leaders proclaiming that ‘the status quo is no longer an option’ and urging passage of a healthcare bill this year. Six Democratic governors did not sign the letter for various reasons. In the case of New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch, he did not sign because the letter failed to ‘address concerns regarding potential cost shifting to the states,’ said Colin Manning, a spokesman for the governor. ‘And this concern has been shared by a number of governors that Gov. Lynch has spoken to across the country,’ Manning said.” (“Obama Finds Support Outside Party And Washington For Healthcare Plan,” Los Angeles Times, 10/7/09)

GOV. PHIL BREDESEN (D-TN): “My Guess Is That Most Other States Would Face A Similarly Painful Situation If These Costs Are Passed Down.” “In his letter to Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), Bredesen also urged the senator and his fellow lawmakers to temper down their proposed changes to the low-income healthcare entitlement — an expansion Corker later described as an ‘unfunded mandate’ that could overburden states at a time when many are struggling to manage the recession. ‘My guess is that most other states would face a similarly painful situation if these costs are passed down,’ Corker explained in his own statement on Tuesday.” (“Tenn. Gov Bredesen: Medicaid Expansion Could Cost State Millions,” The Hill’s “Briefing Room” Blog, 10/6/09)

Govs. Mike Beebe (D-AR), Jay Nixon (D-MO), Bev Perdue (D-NC), John Lynch (D-NH) And Dave Freudenthal (D-WY) Held Out From Signing A Letter On Health Care Reform With Other Democrat Governors. “It’s a standard letter addressed to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker Pelosi and Minority Leader Boehner, telling them states ‘will only achieve the health care security and stability they need if we succeed in working together with the Congress and the President to achieve health care reform.’ But missing from the signatures at the bottom are six governors: Mike Beebe (AR), Jay Nixon (MO), Bev Perdue (NC), John Lynch (NH), Dave Freudenthal (WY) and Brad Henry (OK).” (“Six Dem Governors Hold Out On Health Care Letter,” TPMDC, 10/5/09)

GOV. DAVE FREUDENTHAL (D-WY):“Freudenthal Said Expanding Medicaid May Be A Quick Way To Get Coverage For The Uninsured, But It’s Far From The Most Cost- Effective Or Efficient.He added that any health-reform plans must include steps to hold down costs. ‘That’s why I think you find governors interested in cost savings, reform and wellness activities,’ Freudenthal said. … ‘You know, you only have so much money, and this is the basic math: If you have 47 million people who don’t have coverage in the country, and your goal is to get coverage for those people, you can’t come to us and say that it’s not going to cost society anything.’” (“Medicaid Expansion May Be Budget Buster,” Wyoming Tribune Eagle, 7/27/09)

GOV. BEV PERDUE (D-NC): “The Absolute Deal Breaker For Me As Governor Is A Federal Plan That Shifts Costs To The States.” “We are all hungry for a solution, but the absolute deal breaker for me as governor is a federal plan that shifts costs to the states.” (“Perdue: Don’t Give States The Bill,” [Raleigh, NC] News & Observer, 7/21/09)

GOV. ED RENDELL (D-PA): “I Don’t Think It’s An Accounting Trick, I Think It’s An Unfunded Mandate … We Just Don’t Have The Wherewithal To Absorb That Without Some New Revenue Source …” (CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” 9/3/09)

GOV. BILL RICHARDSON (D-NM):  “We Can’t Afford That, And That’s Not Acceptable.” (“Govs Resist Added Federal Expenses From Congress,” The Associated Press, 7/19/09)

GOV. CHRISTINE GREGOIRE (D-WA): “As A Governor, My Concern Is That If We Try To Cost-Shift To The States We’re Not Going To Be In A Position To Pick Up The Tab.” (“Governors Fear Medicaid Costs In Health Plan,” The New York Times, 7/20/09)

GOV. BILL RITTER (D-CO): “Our Only Point Was That A Significant Medicaid Expansion Should Not Operate As An Unfunded Mandate For The States.” (“Ritter Fears Federal Expenses May Hit Colorado,” The Denver Post, 7/20/09)

GOV. BRIAN SCHWEITZER (D-MT): “The Governors Are Concerned About Unfunded Mandates, Another Situation Where The Federal Government Says You Must Do X And You Must Pay For It. Well if they want to reform health care, they should figure out what the rules are and how they are going to pay for it.” (“Many Governors Against Health Care Bill, Label It Unfunded Mandate,” Fox News, 7/19/09)

GOV. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): “They Thought The Best Way, The Federal Government Thought The Best Way Is By Expanding Medicaid To Make That Happen. But We Have Said, ‘Under No Conditions Can We Take Unfunded Mandates.’ You can’t raise the eligibility of Medicaid 133% and put a $100 billion back on the states to pick up.” (“Governor Manchin Joins Counterparts In Mississippi,” [West Virginia] Metro News, 7/20/09)

###

SENATE REPUBLICAN COMMUNICATIONS CENTER
202.228.NEWS

Below is the latest from Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist Michael Ramirez.

View more of Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website.

When it comes to reducing carbon emissions to avoid what Al Gore and others refer to as Environmental Armageddon, we thought we had heard it all.  
 
The big bad oil companies, soccer moms and their SUVs, incandescent light bulbs, Al Gore himself… heck, even cows and pigs are contributing to the apparent destruction of mankind. 

But a story out today just may take the cake.  According to eTurboNews:

Sure, one person’s deposits into an airplane toilet don’t weigh much, but what about the pee from 200 people? Japanese airline ANA thinks full bladders lead to airplanes being weighed down by excrement, so it is implementing a wacky new policy: pee before you fly.

“The airline is putting up signs at airport gates asking passengers to go to the bathroom. So-called ‘loo attendants’ stand guard as well, asking potential pee-ers if they need to take a trip to the restroom. Bathrooms will still be on the plane, of course, in case of bathroom emergency. But ANA hopes that its shaming tactics will cut down on passengers’ overall weight, in turn reducing the weight of the plane and lowering fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions.”

Any bets on how long it will take Sen. Barbara Boxer or Rep. Henry Waxman to propose legislation requiring Americans to pee before driving?

Rep. Steny Hoyer – House Schedule
Political Wire – Obama Approval on the Rise
Washington Post – Paging All Doctors
Rep. Tom Price – The Ugly Side of Mandates

NY Times – Did TARP Increase Lending
The Hill – Baucus Not Worried About CBO Score
Politico – Dems: ‘Don’t Tax Cadillac Plans’
Dana Milbank – The Forest, the Trees and ACORN

Federal Debt: $11.926 trillion

In a new report, the International Energy Agency (IEA) says that we must “invest” $10 trillion over the upcoming 20 years to stop global warming.  That’s $500 billion per year, and we’ll give you one guess as to which nation will be asked to shoulder that crippling new burden…

Shamelessly, this amount is 37% higher than the IEA said was necessary just one year ago.  The IEA also demands that developed nations such as the United States reduce carbon emissions even further than the economically destructive levels already being pushed by left-wing special interests and liberal politicians through such abominations as the Waxman-Markey bill, which will cost American families thousands of dollars each year and punish American business.  This IEA report also comes just as global temperatures continue their cooling plateau over the past ten years, meaning that the global warming hysteria may be today’s equivalent of the discredited global cooling craze of the 1970s.  But what’s a trifling $10 trillion, right?

The University of East Anglia is a taxpayer-supported university whose Climate Research Unit (CRU) has produced data serving as the basis for international studies alleging a global warming crisis.  That includes our own Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has proposed draconian, unnecessary and costly regulation of carbon dioxide. But in August of this year, the CRU admitted that it destroyed the original raw data for its global surface temperature set, claiming a lack of storage space.

In other words, the dog ate its homework?

Unfortunately, but conveniently for global warming alarmists, the EPA stopped accepting public comments on its proposed carbon dioxide regulation back in June.  But fortunately, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) filed a petition with the EPA yesterday to re-open debate.  As stated by CEI’s General Counsel Sam Kazman, “the EPA is resting its case on international studies that in turn relied on CRU data.  But CRU’s suspicious destruction of its original data, disclosed at this late date, makes that information totally unreliable.  If the EPA doesn’t reexamine the implications of this, it’s stumbling blindly into the most important regulatory issue we face.”

Dennis the Menace couldn’t get away with this excuse, and neither should the CRU or EPA bureaucrats.

In a recent interview with Charlie Rose, Speaker Pelosi not only hinted at a Value-Added Tax (VAT) to pay for health care “reform,” she practically endorsed the idea as a way to equalize tax treatment between the U.S. and Europe.

Pelosi stated, “Somewhere along the way, a value-added tax plays into this.  Of course, we want to take down the health care cost, that’s one part of it.  But in the scheme of things, I think it’s fair to look at a value-added tax as well.”

The implementation of a VAT would assuredly break President Obama’s pledge that no one making under $250,000 would see a tax increase of any kind.  A VAT is essentially a massive sales tax (over 20% in some countries) on all consumers.  What’s worse, a VAT is typically not transparent, that is, prices go up but consumers don’t see the tax when they’re at the checkout counter.

See below for Obama’s pledge.  Studies on the regressive and horrible idea of a VAT here and here.

Roman Polanski lost Round 1 in his effort to continue evading justice, as the Swiss Justice Ministry rejected his petition to be freed on bail while awaiting extradition.  According to news reports, Polanski could actually remain in his Swiss jail cell for months while the process unfolds.  In a dry irony, Ministry spokesman Folco Galli said that, “we continue to be of the opinion that there is a high risk of flight.”  Really?  By a fugitive who has remained in flight for over 30 years?  You don’t say…  Regardless, it’s nice to see a victory for the forces of justice over the forces of celebrity.

As if the Obama Administration’s campaign to bureaucratize the Internet through Net “Neutrality” wasn’t absurd and dangerous enough, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is now going to regulate blogging for the first time.  You read that correctly.

Under threat of $11,000 fine, injunction and other damages per each violation, online writers must now meticulously disclose any free product or other gratuity from any company whose products they have reviewed.  So before you decide to pick or pan some product from the comfort of your computer, you’d better ensure that you haven’t received some gift from the subject company.  

This obviously opens the door to any number of potential prosecutions by the new federal blog police, just as McCain/Feingold laws literally create the possibility of jail time for citizens who actually dare to criticize a candidate within 30 days of an election, First Amendment be damned.  So before you go on Facebook and speak positively of your new favorite brand of bubble gum, you’d better make sure that you didn’t receive it for free in your mailbox or as you exited the supermarket.

Rarely does Congress ever get anything right.  Two weeks ago, the Senate Finance Committee decided to hold a vote on the Baucus Bill before the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) had a chance to put a price tag on the legislation.

Well, today the committee has decided that it should wait at least 24 hours before voting on the bill, in order to allow the CBO a chance to examine the legislation.  Most of the senators still haven’t read the entire monstrosity, but at least they’ll know the price tag.