Could America Be Facing A Far Left Liberal Triumverate?

Something that the GOP has been talking about in recent days is a unified democratic government.  Can you imagine how liberal of an agenda could be passed with Barack Obama as President and with Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, and Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader?  I don’t want to even begin to imagine the far left agenda that we’ll be looking at potentially this time next week.  Let’s briefly go down the list of possibilities:

• Higher Taxes, check
• Government subsided universal health care, check
• Democrats guaranteeing retirement, possible check
• Increased national debt, check
• Bigger government, check

This list only names 5 items of a laundry list that the Dems are hoping to ram down our throats.  In my opinion, the problem with where the Democratic party has gone today, is that they have become extreme believers in an entitlement society, and that big federal government, in Washington, is more capable of taking care of our everyday needs than ourselves.  I feel they have lost all faith in Americans to figure it out on their own.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a big fan of an overly conservative agenda either.  I see what 6 years of unified government under Republicans has gotten us, and I’m definitely not a very big fan.  Unified government presents just as many cons, as it does benefits.  This time around; however, I think, overall, we have gotten royally hosed.  With the exception of the midterm elections of 2006, generally speaking, you should be able to see work across the aisle.  These past two years, we have seen anything but that.  We have seen one of my biggest pet peeves ever, gotcha politics.  I can’t stand gotcha politics.  But that’s a topic for another post.

Given the fact that we could be facing a far left liberal triumverate, I have located a pretty funny video that the Republican National Committee has released.  Take a look, pretty funny stuff!

What’s the Number, Barack? $250,000 or $200,000

So I just saw another Barack Obama campaign ad and it was about his tax plan.  In this ad, and unfortunately, I cannot find it on youtube, or anywhere else for that matter, he indicates that any family making LESS THAN $200,000 per year will not see their taxes increase.  Well, gee, and I wrote about this very issue the other day, according to Barack Obama’s website, his plan, which can be seen here, is as follows:

• Middle class families will see their taxes cut – and no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase.
• Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s.
• Obama’s plan will cut taxes overall, reducing revenues to below levels that prevailed under Ronald Reagan.

So, Senator, which number is it?  I also raise this question again tonight, because I was reading on The Politico, Ben Smith’s blog, about how New Mexico’s governor, Bill Richardson, has defined the middle class as people making less than $120,000 per year.  Here’s a video of it:

I personally am concerned with how the number is decreasing as we’re moving forward.  I say, let’s set a number and stick to it, Senator.  Stop confusing us voters which number it really is.  I, for one, already believe that the number is going to be significantly lower than the $250,000 that you indicate on YOUR website.  Barack, let’s have some straight talk about this issue, and nail down this number!

Immigration: Strangely Absent From The Debate Part 2 of 2

This post is the second, and final post, in a two part series that I started yesterday on immigration.  Yesterday, I took a look at Barack Obama’s immigration stance, and today, I will look at John McCain’s.  I have taken the liberty of pulling, from John McCain’s website, the key points of his immigration plan below, which can be seen here:

• Secure our borders
• Prosecute “Bad-Actor” employers
• Meet America’s labor needs
• Address the undocumented
• Eliminate the family backlog

It is strangely interesting that both candidates have similar key points in their respective plans.

First, let’s look at securing our borders.  Both McCain and Obama are in favor of adding increased funds to assist in shoring up border security issues.  Definitely not a bad idea, and it’s good to see that both candidates have similar views on securing our borders; although, I can’t help but wonder if Senator Obama is against a physical fence along our borders.

Secondly, prosecute “bad-actor” employers.  Both candidates support ensuring that employers are hiring, and retaining, legal, documented workers.  However, I feel that Senator McCain has a more robust policy of prosecuting those firms that refuse to comply with immigration employment laws.  I don’t believe that Senator Obama will take the controversial steps, when employers don’t wish to comply, to raid work sites that are suspected of employing undocumented workers.  If deterrence will not work, than harsher measures should be taken to discourage the employment of undocumented illegal aliens.

Thirdly, meeting America’s labor needs.  I do believe, like Senator McCain, that we need a temporary worker program in place, that is monitored, so that temporary workers do not “slip” through the cracks and stay longer than their work visas permit them.  We should employ a simple tracking system, and then verify, that these temporary workers are indeed working where they say they’re working, and living where they say they’re living.  This no nonsense step, of course, will require additional manpower, but with immigration being such a serious national security issue, we should take these measures, to ensure these workers are not staying here beyond their legally devoted time.

Fourthly, addressing undocumented aliens.  Senator McCain is in favor of having undocumented immigrants enroll in a program.  This program will perform background checks on these individuals to determine if they should be deported or not.  Sorry, I don’t think we should be performing background checks, these people have already broken the law!  I do like the fact that these people, who came out of the shadows, as Barack Obama says, will not receive green cards prior to those who have followed the rules, but it sure does sound like some form of amnesty.  Also, McCain indicates a fine should be levied on these individuals as well, along with the payment of any background tests, and to take a citizenship test.  What will this fine be?  Does this stance also mean that we will consider illegal immigration some form of federal misdemeanor, instead of a felony?  I do agree with McCain that we do need to resolve the status of these individuals; however, off them a path to citizenship?  I’m not so sure I’m keen on that idea or not.  I will need to see what this final plan entails prior to making any final judgment.

Finally, eliminate the family backlog.  Senator McCain makes a very good point here.  There needs to be reform in this area if persons, who are legally attempting to receive green cards, shouldn’t have to wait for 20 years for their number to come up.  We need some serious specifications and procedures on how green cards should be acquired, and what these people, who are legally doing the right thing, can follow to expedite the process.

With the exception of the fines for being here illegally, I cannot find too much to disagree with on McCain’s immigration policy.  However, I can see that both candidates have similar viewpoints on this all important national security issue.  As I mentioned in my first post, I really am not in favor of a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, but I do realize something needs to be done with the status of these people.  This policy should be fair, first off, to those who have followed all the rules and laws to come here legally.  We also shouldn’t be giving any sort of amnesty, because then that sets an equally bad precedent, that, in my point of view, just increases the odds that even more people will come here illegally, especially if they know they’re going to be forgiven of violating our immigration laws.

Immigration is definitely an issue that should be discussed in more detail.  It should be included in our national security, and homeland security debate.  We should come up with a robust policy, and reform an ancient system to suit the needs of the 21st century.  Until we can address this politically complex issue, who knows who exactly is coming across our borders.  For all we know, terrorists from Al Qaeda and other such organizations, could be illegally, and secretly, coming across our southern border.  The time to address this issue is here and now!

Immigration: Strangely Absent From The Debate Part One of Two

As I have been listening to the national debate this presidential election, I have noticed one significant issue has been absent, immigration and immigration reform.  Especially after 9/11, immigration is most definitely a national security issue.  I will discuss my thoughts on immigration reform in two distinct posts.  One post concerning my thoughts on Barack Obama’s immigration plan, and the second on John McCain’s.  I have taken the liberty of pulling from Barack Obama’s website, the key points of his immigration plan below, which can be seen here:

• Create secure borders
• Improve our immigration system
• Remove incentives to enter illegally
• Bring people out of the shadows
• Work with Mexico

It’s good to see that both candidates support securing our borders.  Both candidates wish to throw extra money at border security initiatives and providing CBP agents the tools they need, so I have no problem with securing the borders, and I generally agree with both candidate’s thoughts on securing the borders.  Now I will discuss my thoughts on the other areas of each candidate’s plans.

One issue I have with Obama’s plan is the idea of bringing illegal immigrants out of the shadows.  What he suggests is that those who have come here illegally, and have been here in good standing, could pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for citizenship purposes.  So let me get this straight, we’re going to reward people who have broken immigration laws to pay a fine and become citizens?  So let’s go ahead and reward illegal behavior…  Sounds like the basis of a good plan to me!

On the learning English portion of bringing illegals out of the shadows:  Does this mean that Obama supports a concept where we ensure English is the official language of this country?  I think this is an issue that really bears discussion.  We should have a requirement that in order to become a citizen, you should speak English, because that’s the only language the test should be given in!  There should be no expectation that the government will translate any government documents into any other language!  So, Senator Obama, I hope you can get on board with naming an official language.

On Obama’s thoughts on revising the immigration application fees, that’s something I don’t have any issue with for improving the immigration system.  If high fees are a detractor and is a root cause of illegal immigration, then, perhaps, this is a good route to take.

I am also in agreement with Obama’s thoughts on discouraging employers from hiring illegal immigrants.  This is an area where ICE needs to increase enforcement of.  Now, as the media has reported, there has been an increase in work site enforcement raids, in Iowa and Mississippi, just to name a couple, that have made people very upset; however, in the long run, I think these raids will begin to show employers that the government means business on ensuring one, proper documentation, and secondly, that the government will not tolerate employers to employ undocumented workers.

Work site enforcement is another area where I disagree with Barack Obama, and I am convinced, if he is elected president, he will decrease efforts in work site enforcement.  According to Barack Obama, and you can see this quote directly here:

Immigration raids are ineffective: Despite a sevenfold increase in recent years, immigration raids only netted 3,600 arrests in 2006 and have placed all the burdens of a broken system onto immigrant families.

Now, I find it very difficult to believe that immigration raids are ineffective.  Do they place a burden onto immigrant familes, that’s something I can definitely buy.  Especially the children when they’re more than likely American citizens to lose their breadwinner.  To this I say, you shouldn’t have broken the law.  I know, that sounds really insensitive, but, are we supposed to make exceptions to breaking immigration law because you have a family?  I don’t know, and I’m glad I don’t have to determine a solution to that issue.

One area I can definitely get behind Obama on is making it easier for immigrant soldiers to quicken their path to naturalization.  Senator Obama, you’re right on, that we should make it easy for those who are fighting to protect our freedoms to become citizens quicker.  They are paying the ultimate sacrifice, and showing up front, before receiving citizenship, that they’re prepared to die for something they don’t have.

Finally, on the issue of working with Mexico, I completely disagree with Senator Obama with.  How would you propose that we work with Mexico?  Mexico has no interest in curbing their citizens from entering the United States illegally!  As a matter of fact, the Mexican government publishes pamphlets encouraging citizens to do so, and the best ways to not get caught!  Interesting that the Mexican government would be in favor of illegally entering the United States when Mexico has the strictest immigration laws in the world!  The Mexicans have no interest in assisting us with securing our borders and always, ALWAYS, throw a fit when we attempt to even begin talk of securing our borders, or increased border patrols.  I don’t think the Mexicans can be trusted as partners in this regard, and working with them will be a huge waste of our time and effort.

Overall, with the exception of his “Bringing illegals out of the shadows,” a decrease in work site enforcement, and working with Mexico, I largely agree with Senator Obama’s plan; however, I will reserve judgment until a comprehensive plan has been introduced with the final proposed language.

In my next post, I will go over my thoughts on John McCain’s immigration plan.

Obama’s Tax Plan: Are the Numbers Changing?

Barack Obama has spent a significant amount of time promoting his comprehensive tax plan to voters.  Senator Obama has been saying for months now, that under his plan, families making under $250,000 a year, would not see their taxes increase under his administration.  Yet, during a radio interview on Monday, Senator Biden had this to say about taxes:

“Under the old tax policy that was put in by George Bush, people making an average of $1.4 million a year, good people, decent people, patriotic, they’re going to get an $87 billion tax break.  What we’re saying is that $87 billion tax break doesn’t need to go to people making an average of $14. million, it should go like it used to – it should go to middle-class people, people making under $150,000 a year.”

Now, I must say, that reasoning, conflicts with what is the official policy on Barack Obama’s website under the Obama Plan, which can all be found at Barack Obama’s website in full, and I quote:

• Middle Class families will see their taxes cut – and no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase.
• Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s.
• Obama’s plan will cut taxes overall, reducing revenues to below the levels that prevailed under Ronald Reagan.

So what does all this mean?  Is this yet another gaffe by Senator Biden or is this a sign of things to come?

I know it’s been well reported on that Barack Obama has lot of spending he wants to do once he gets to the White House, if he’s fortunate to serve.  With that being said, does this mean that his tax plan is undergoing some serious revisions?  To me, this wouldn’t be an earth shattering development because, of course, the plan will need to change!  Why do you ask?  Because there aren’t enough of the extremely wealthy out there to support all of his spending measures.

There are a couple of things in Obama’s plan that causes my eyebrows to raise:

• Putting aside the monetary classification of this plan, what is a middle class family?  Is a family just a husband and a wife?  Or do you need to have a certain amount of children to qualify under middle class?  Interesting on how the mainstream media just seems to leave out this all important point.  It kind of reminds me of the 2000 campaign when Al Gore said there would be “targeted” tax cuts.  Could the language in the Obama plan be misleading?  Perhaps, I’d have to wait and see the final plan when and if he wins the Oval Office.
• Under this plan, Obama will, quote,

“Ask the wealthiest 2% of families to give back a portion of the taxes they have received over the past eight years to ensure we are restoring fairness and returning to fiscal responsibility.” 

• What exactly does this mean?  A lot has been said about Obama and redistributing the wealth, and I won’t rehash any of that here.  Does this mean, that the wealthiest 2% will have to revise their previous tax returns and pay back taxes?  And what’s this about restoring fairness to the tax system?  Apparently someone is asleep at the switch here, since when is any tax policy fair??  Hello????  Anyone home????  There is no way for a tax system to be fair.  There are always going to be special interests, some people will want deductions for x, and y.  The only way a tax system can be fair is for their to be a flat tax where everyone pays the same percentage, but that’s something I’m convinced will never see the light of day.  Steve Forbes is really onto something here, but I digress.
• How does this plan address small business owners who file their taxes on a standard form 1040?  Now, I don’t claim to know anything about the tax code, but if small business owners are filing the 1040, and they provide jobs, does this mean they will pay a higher tax rate?  This loophole needs to be figured out in this comprehensive plan.

However you want to cut the pie, it sounds to me that Barack Obama is suggesting raising taxes during an economic downturn.  That stance is definitely not good for a struggling economy, and it has the potential to backfire on you significantly.  Quick, someone needs to ask Herbert Hoover about that.

I went to Obama’s website and used his nifty tax calculator and it showed that I would get a $1,000 tax credit, rebate, refund, whatever you want to call it.  However, I also realize, that these things can change significantly between election day, and an actual, finalized package is presented to Congress.  Until then, I am going to remain skeptical about this, and John McCain’s plan.

What I can tell you though is that I’m personally against using the phrase “Redistribution of Wealth”, and I also don’t approve of punishing successful people with higher taxes, so that those who don’t work as hard are given free handouts.  To me, that penalizes you for successfully pursuing the American Dream, something citizens of our country strove for from the very beginning, and still do today.

References:

ABC News:  “McCain Jumps on Another Biden Interview for Hit on Taxes”
Barack Obama:  Taxes

Will Democrats Guarantee Retirement?

So, today, I was reading various mainstream media sites, and I came across something interesting on ABC News’ site.  A column by David McPherson, entitled, “Movement to Scrap 401(k)s Gains Traction.” 

Now, myself, and I realize, many others, have lost a lot of money in their retirement accounts over the course of this calendar year.  The fact that your retirement account balances can decrease should not come as any surprise to anyone.  However, just the events of the past few weeks have caused our Congressional leaders, to really delve into the situation.

According to the House Committee on Education and Labor, “American workers have lost as much as $2 trillion in retirement savings over the last year.”  As a result of this situation, a plan, that was developed by Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research, is being touted on the Hill.

These plans are called “Guaranteed Retirement Accounts.”  The basics, are as follows, and I have quoted this from David McPherson’s article on ABC News.com:

• Employees would make mandatory contributions equal to at least 5 percent of their earnings.  Workers could contribute higher amounts if they wish.
• Those contributions would be offset by a $600 federal tax credit each participant would receive.
• As with a 401(k) plan, workers would have individual accounts they could track.  The balance of each account would depend on each worker’s contributions and income level.
• The Social Security Administration would handle account management, and the Thrift Savings Plan — a well-regarded retirement plan for federal employees — would manage the money.
• Participants would be guaranteed a fixed rate of return that exceeds inflation by 3 percent.
• At retirement, participants’ account balances would be converted into a lifetime stream of income that adjusts for inflation.  There would be options to take partial lump sum payments, opt for lower payments in return for survivor benefits and, upon death, leave a portion of a financial account balance.

As I mentioned earlier, this plan was proposed on October 7th, in a hearing of the House Committee on Education and Labor.  Additional information on the result of that hearing, plus an archived webcast, can be found here.  A detailed version of Dr. Ghilarducci’s plan can also be found at the same location.

Part of this plan, requires changes to the tax credits that are received by 401(k) providers.  Now, from first hand experience, I can tell you that fees are high with 401(k)s, Dr. Ghilarducci will get no argument from me there; however, that is pretty much where we cease to agree.  She’s talking about $80 billion in tax credits, and these credits would be rolled back to pay for the $600 tax credit for each worker.  Now, I won’t claim to know how many actual workers there are in our economy; however, something tells me that the money she’s proposing would greatly exceed $80 billion. 

Another issue I have with this proposal, is the idea that it would be ran by the Social Security Administration.  First off, Social Security is in dire straits.  A program that is ideal in theory has not worked in practice.  If Congress were to guarantee retirements, like Social Security is supposed to be, well, this program will be ran in the red as well.  Do we really want to trust Uncle Sam with more of our money?  We’re also talking about a mandatory 5%.  Sounds like an additional payroll tax to me.

Another problem I have with this plan is this.  What if we go through a period of very low inflation?  For the sake of argument, let’s say we have around 1% inflation.  So we’re talking about a 4% return on investment.  Now, why would I want to have 4% return, when I know, in a period of low inflation, I could probably see somewhere around 7%?  (These numbers are for the sake of argument only.)

Another item I may have a problem with is the choice of funds.  My guess would be is that these would be very safe funds, and that we would not have a choice.  The government would choose which funds the money would go into, and we could check our balances whenever we wish.

This smacks of lack of trust.  Lack of trust in ordinary Americans to freely choose what is best for them.  Are we entitled to income during retirement?  I am of the opinion that we are not entitled to anything!  Plan and prepare well enough, and you can have enough income for retirement.  It’s tough out there, I know, but we can’t have the government coming to our rescue.  If people choose not to save, that’s not Uncle Sam’s problem. 

If this plan is enacted, you can say goodbye to 401(k) plans as you know it.  Now, questions I have about this plan, and they are not in any particular order are:

1. Will employers match the required 5% into these Guaranteed Retirement Funds?
2. Will these benefits be taxed during the distribution period?
3. What will happen to other retirement based accounts, such as Traditional and ROTH IRAs?
4. What will keep the government from tapping into these funds for their pet projects like they have with the Social Security Trust Fund?
5. What about Social Security?  It has been argued this pension will supplement social security.  Well, if we’re talking about guaranteed retirement accounts, how will this fix social security?

We all know the social security system is broken, and that our Congressional leaders are scared to even talk about it, that’s how politically divisive this issue is.  I would argue, that if we move to guaranteed retirement accounts, that perhaps social security needs to be phased out, instead of having TWO separate plans.  Instead, this time set the system up right in the first place!

NM Newspaper Declares Obama Winner??

You’ve got to be kidding me, right?  I saw this article on CNN’s Political Ticker Blog.  You can read it here.  The New Mexico Sun News, a liberal rag that is publised bi-monthly, has the following headline story:  “Obama Wins!”

Now, I can definitely understand that this paper is published on a bi-monthly basis, however, I don’t think this sort of article should be published before an election even has taken place!  Now is this prediction a leap of faith, a la, Dewey Beats Truman of 1948, or is there some accuracy in this article?  Are they jumping the gun?  Perhaps, but given the current state of the polls, and where Obama stands, I can see some truth in this article, however, I do think the timing is awfully poor with such journalistic opportunism.

Countdown to the Election… 8 Days and Counting

I, for one, have got to say, that I’m glad that we’re in the home stretch for this election cycle.  I don’t know about anyone else, but it seems like this election has gone on longer than any other in history.  It appears as if the writing is on the wall for the GOP and McCain.  To be perfectly honest, I won’t be overly surprised if it does turn out that way.

I have surmised, since the mid-term elections of 2006, that the Democrats could put Mickey Mouse at the top of their ticket, and they would still beat out whoever the GOP nominee would be.  There are a few things about this election that have taken me by surprise, and I’ll list these in no particular order of importance.

First, I was really surprised that John McCain came back and won the GOP nomination.  I was a huge fan of McCain’s back in the 2000 campaign, before I felt he was railroaded by the GOP establishment.  However, this time around, something seems to be lacking from his message.  This cycle, I’m not seeing the John McCain of 2000.

Second, I never would have thought that a freshman senator would defeat the heavily favored Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary.  This turn of events really caught me by surprise.  Now, mind you, I’m not a Hillary supporter by any stretch of the imagination, but, I think she, and her campaign, didn’t take Obama seriously enough.

Third, not in a million years did I think I would see John McCain pick a woman to be his running mate.  Granted, there has been a lot of negative press regarding Sarah Palin, but I think a lot of it is unwarranted.  Is she qualified to be president?  Perhaps not, however, I will argue, that she reminds me a lot of Bill Clinton when people said he didn’t have the experience, in particular, in the area of foreign policy, and yet, he was elected president.  In my opinion, governors are more equipped to handle the task of being president than a senator.  I firmly believe there is a very specific reason why our country doesn’t elect sitting legislators to be president.  If we elect Obama to the White House, we’ll all see soon enough, and will get a strong reinforcement of a lesson we need to relearn.  This would be the case even if we elect McCain.

Fourth, I am really dismayed with how the media has been in the tank for Barack Obama.  He, nor his running mate Joe Biden, seem to get any tough questions from the media.  I’m not saying they’re getting a free pass, but come on.  Biden’s interview with a local Orlando news station should speak volumes.  Tough questions aren’t expected by the campaign, and if you do ask those questions, you’re blacklisted.  I think it may be a precursor of how open an Obama administration would be to critical and in depth questions that actually require some thought.

Something that really confuses me is the perception that the Democrats are going to win a landslide victory, not only for the White House, but the Congress as well.  This democratically controlled Congress has passed no meaningful legislation in two years.  I should know, I subscribe to the house majority leader’s weekly legislative schedule.  This Congress is also has the lowest approval rating of any Congress in history!  Yet, despite this approval rating, people are going to elect even MORE Democrats to Congress.  I suppose the biggest question of the day is whether or not the Democrats will get the magical number 60 in the Senate.

I’ve grown particularly tired of the gotcha politics that have embroiled this country during most of the Bush presidency.  I’m not so sure that having a unified government will completely eliminate gotcha politics, all that it will mean, is a highly liberal agenda that will be run by Speaker Pelosi, Leader Reid, and a possible President Obama.  I’m personally not a big fan of a far left liberal agenda, nor a far right agenda, for that matter, however, we’ve gone the path of a divided government, perhaps, our country needs to see what these folks can do, see if they can improve the situation, or make it a lot worse. 

Well, we’ll find out in the next week.  As I mentioned earlier, I will be so glad when it is over, and then we can start talking about solutions to problems, very serious problems that need to be resolved.

First Post

Hello!  This blog is going to be a place where I ramble about whatever interests me at the current time.  My blog will serve as a living, breathing conversation on a variety of topics.  Mainly for my own purpose and for my friends and family to read, but I welcome others to read and comment on anything that I have to say!