* 2/1/11--WASHINGTON -- A federal judge in Florida yesterday struck down President Obama's health-care overhaul, ruling that it is unconstitutional and that "the entire act must be declared void."
The decision by US District Judge Roger Vinson delivered the most devastating legal blow yet to Obama's prize legislative accomplishment, but the judge stopped short of ordering the programs shut down. The Obama administration almost immediately declared it would appeal the decision. Senate Democrats announced they would hold a hearing tomorrow on the constitutionality of the laws. Vinson ruled the law's "individual mandate," the central feature of ObamaCare that forces every American to buy health insurance by 2014, is unconstitutional. The matter now looks destined for the US Supreme Court.--NY Post
* 2/1/11--Hey, you’d think that Barack Hussein Obama’s middle name would’ve come in handy in the Arab world by now, huh? Nope. It turns out that even an Obama speech can’t curb Egypt being set ablaze. And that’s a blow to the brother’s confidence, no doubt. Obama’s ego aside, how surprised would you be if I told you that the White House is cozying up to the idea of Egypt being run by Muslim terrorists? Not even a teensy-weensy bit surprised? Me neither. The Los Angeles Times reports that the Obama administration “supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood” to participate in a “reformed Egyptian government." But don’t let the word “reform” fool you. In the Middle East, a “reform” occurs when Arab strongmen are ousted and replaced with bloodthirsty terrorist outfits instead, a la Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. So, as Egypt immolates itself during its eighth day of protests, I wanted to highlight three famous alums of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is what you have to look forward to, people: Let’s start with Abdullah Azzam of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood. Azzam taught at Saudi Arabia’s King Abdul Aziz University, where he mentored Osama bin Laden, who was one of his students. Then there’s bin Laden’s deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Did I mention he’s bin Laden’s right-hand man? But that’s not all. Now let’s bring to the stage Mr. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, whose hobbies include head slicing, Jew killing, and plotting September 11, 2001. He was part of the Kuwaiti Muslim Brotherhood. I could go on and on with terrorist scum buckets who got their start in the Muslim Brotherhood, but I’m getting tired of writing names that begin with Zawahiri and end with Mohammed. Bottom line is this: President Obama is even more dangerous than we thought if he thinks America’s interests are served better by the Muslim Brotherhood controlling Egypt rather than Hosni Mubarak, an ally of ours for 30 years. This is the same Muslim Brotherhood that, according to our own government’s investigation, views America as a “grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within." Hey, who’s up for supporting Mubarak?--Jason Mattera, Human Events
* 2/2/11--"To this day, the [Muslim] Brotherhood's motto remains, 'Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, Jihad is our way, and dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu akbar!' Still, our see-no-Islamic-evil foreign-policy establishment blathers on about the Brotherhood's purported renunciation of violence and never you mind that, with or without violence, its commitment is ... to 'conquer America' and 'conquer Europe.' It is necessary to whitewash the Ikhwan's brutal legacy and its tyrannical designs in order to fit it into the experts' paradigm: history for simpletons." --columnist Andrew McCarthy
--"No one can tell where this [the situation in Egypt] will all end, but it is already clear that President Obama, who was so eager to re-set America's relationships with the rest of the world is finding out that (a) it is tougher to be President than to run for President and (b) Bush's policies made more sense than Obama thought they did." --political analyst Rich Galen (From Patriot Post Chronicle)
* 2/2/11--The Senate voted Wednesday for the first time to repeal a piece of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, rolling back a new tax reporting requirement that’s been universally panned by business owners. The amendment to repeal the 1099 reporting requirement passed 81-17 with broad bipartisan support. The provision was one that Obama identified in his State of the Union speech as something that Democrats were willing to change. The Senate voted several times last year on repealing the requirement, but all the attempts failed amid partisan bickering over how to pay for it. Republicans made an attempt to repeal the provision by taking money from the health reform law’s prevention and wellness fund. Democrats tried to repeal it without paying for it. The provision would have required business owners to file 1099 tax documents on all cumulative purchases from a single vendor that total more than $600 in a year. It was included in the health law because it would have raised about $17 billion in previously uncollected taxes. A bipartisan collection of business groups have opposed the provision, arguing that it would bury them in paperwork.--politico.com
* 2/2/11--"Federal Judge Roger Vinson opens his decision declaring ObamaCare unconstitutional with that citation from Federalist No. 51, written by James Madison in 1788. His exhaustive and erudite opinion is an important moment for American liberty, and [Monday] may well stand as the moment the political branches were obliged to return to the government of limited and enumerated powers that the framers envisioned. As Judge Vinson took pains to emphasize, the case is not really about health care at all, or the wisdom -- we would argue the destructiveness -- of the newest entitlement. Rather, the Florida case goes to the core of the architecture of the American system, and whether there are any remaining limits on federal control. Judge Vinson's 78-page ruling in favor of 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business, among others, is by far the best legal vindication to date of Constitutional principles that form the outer boundaries of federal power. At the heart of the states' lawsuit is the individual mandate, which requires everyone to purchase health insurance or be penalized for not doing so. 'Never before has Congress required that everyone buy a product from a private company (essentially for life) just for being alive and residing in the United States,' Judge Vinson writes. ... Unlike Judge Henry Hudson in Virginia, who also found ObamaCare to be unconstitutional, Judge Vinson addresses the Administration's fallback argument that the Constitution's Necessary and Proper Clause justifies the law even if the Commerce Clause doesn't. He writes that this clause 'is not an independent source of federal power' and 'would vitiate the enumerated powers principle.' In other words, the clause can't justify inherently unconstitutional actions....Judge Vinson's learned opinion has put down a Constitutional argument that will reverberate all the way to the Supreme Court."-- The Wall Street Journal(From Patriot Post Chronicle)
* 2/3/11--JERUSALEM (AP) - President Barack Obama's response to the crisis in Egypt is drawing fierce criticism in Israel, where many view the U.S. leader as a political naif whose pressure on a stalwart ally to hand over power is liable to backfire. Critics - including senior Israeli officials who have shied from saying so publicly - say Obama is repeating the same mistakes of predecessors whose calls for human rights and democracy in the Middle East have often backfired by bringing anti-West regimes to power. Israeli officials, while refraining from open criticism of Obama, have made no secret of their view that shunning Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and pushing for swift elections in Egypt could bring unintended results. "I don't think the Americans understand yet the disaster they have pushed the Middle East into," said lawmaker Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, who until recently was a Cabinet minister and who is a longtime friend of Mubarak. "If there are elections like the Americans want, I wouldn't be surprised if the Muslim Brotherhood didn't win a majority, it would win half of the seats in parliament," he told Army Radio. "It will be a new Middle East, extremist radical Islam." Three decades ago, President Jimmy Carter urged another staunch American ally - the shah of Iran - to loosen his grip on power, only to see his autocratic regime replaced by the Islamic Republic. More recently, U.S.-supported elections have strengthened such groups as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Palestinian territories and anti-American radicals in Iran. "Jimmy Carter will go down in American history as 'the president who lost Iran,'" the analyst Aluf Benn wrote in the daily Haaretz this week. "Barack Obama will be remembered as the president who 'lost' Turkey, Lebanon and Egypt, and during whose tenure America's alliances in the Middle East crumbled," Benn wrote. Israel has tremendous respect for Mubarak, who carefully honored his country's peace agreement with Israel after taking power nearly 30 years ago. While relations were often cool, Mubarak maintained a stable situation that has allowed Israel to greatly reduce its military spending and troop presence along the border with Egypt. He also worked with Israel to contain the Gaza Strip's Hamas government and served as a bridge to the broader Arab world. Israeli leaders have said it is essential that whoever emerges as Egypt's next leader continue to honor the peace agreement.--myway.com
* 2/3/11--WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats yesterday defeated a repeal of President Obama's health-care overhaul in a party-line vote, likely leaving the fate of the embattled law up to the courts. Democrats nixed the repeal with a procedural challenge that erasing the entire act would increase the deficit. All 47 Republicans supported repeal, and 51 Democrats voted against it. Repeal needed 60 votes to survive. The Republican-led House passed the repeal last month. But the real fight will be in the Supreme Court. A federal judge in Florida this week ruled that the law's "individual mandate" -- the central feature of ObamaCare that forces every American to buy health insurance by 2014 -- is unconstitutional. The Obama administration appealed, and the matter looks headed for the highest court. Democrats did show that they were willing to tweak ObamaCare, joining an 81-17 vote to repeal the wildly unpopular 1099 provision that requires most business to file paperwork with the IRS for every purchase from a vendor totaling $600 or more.--NY Post
* 2/3/11--ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) -- Shell Alaska has dropped plans to drill in the Arctic waters of the Beaufort Sea this year and will concentrate on obtaining permits for the 2012 season, company Vice President Pete Slaiby said Thursday. The recent remand of air permits issued by the Environmental Protection Agency was the final driver behind the decision, Slaiby said at a news conference. Alaska receives upward of 90 percent of its general fund revenue from the petroleum industry, and top state officials reacted strongly to the decision. U.S. Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, blamed the Obama administration and the EPA. "Their foot dragging means the loss of another exploration season in Alaska, the loss of nearly 800 direct jobs and many more indirect jobs," Begich said. "That doesn't count the millions of dollars in contracting that won't happen either at a time when our economy needs the investment."--yahoo.com
* 2/3/11--The rolling blackouts now being implemented in Texas and across the country as record cold weather grips the United States are a direct consequence of the Obama administration’s agenda to lay siege to the coal industry, launch a takeover of infrastructure under the contrived global warming scam, and help usher in the post-industrial collapse of America....The inability of power companies to meet demand is almost exclusively a consequence of the Obama administration’s publicly stated goal to bankrupt the coal industry and in turn ram through the de-industrialization of America under the guise of the phony global warming mantra. Even as China and Mexico are allowed to build dozens of new power plants every year, the United States is barely permitted to construct a handful, as the Environmental Protection Agency takes control of refineries and power plants under the completely fraudulent pretext of preventing global warming even as the country experiences some of the coldest weather seen for decades. Texas has been the epicenter in a battle over the Obama administration’s drive to have the EPA regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Texas is the only state that has refused to implement a permit process. “Austin said it would not establish such a scheme for greenhouse gas emissions because the US Environmental Protection Agency had no authority to regulate them as of January 2,” reported the Financial Times. “Twelve other states are mounting a legal challenge to the federal government’s authority but they, unlike Texas, are implementing the new measures while the dispute makes its way through the courts.--prisonplanet.com
* 2/4/11--Forget 15 minutes of fame. It took under 11 minutes for undercover investigators equipped with a hidden camera to put Planned Parenthood in the spotlight. The video, shot at Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey and released this week by Live Action, shows a Planned Parenthood manager advising a pair posing as a pimp and prostitute how to get abortions for underage, trafficked girls in a sex ring, as well as suggesting that the girls lie about their ages to avoid reporting laws. The worker was fired, but the same thing was soon repeated in Richmond, Virginia, and as many as three other locations to be released soon. This latest example of disdain for the law by the nation's largest abortion mill joins a string of others. National Review Online notes Planned Parenthood workers have been caught "willing to accept a donation specifically earmarked to abort a black baby ... willing to violate parental-involvement laws, and ... unwilling to report statutory rape when an underage girl admits to engaging in sexual activity with a man in his 30s." According to Planned Parenthood Federation of America's 2008-2009 Annual Report, $363.2 million of its $1.1 billion in revenue came from government grants and contracts. This isn't the first time tax dollars have funded criminal activity. In 2009, we spotlighted the ACORN bust, in which undercover conservatives, posing as a pimp and prostitute, were able to get advice on securing a home loan to fund a brothel. Readers will recall that ACORN had received more than $50 million in taxpayer dollars since 1994. Congress subsequently voted to defund ACORN. It's high time they do the same to the abortionists Planned Parenthood.--Patriot Post Digest
* 2/4/11--It’s never the action, it’s the cover up. Yesterday RedState broke a significant story which points to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the nation’s premier public health organization, making a conscious decision to stop publishing the only federal report on abortion. To briefly recap, for 40 years the CDC has published the Abortion Surveillance Report. For 40 years that report has appeared in the last November or first December issue of CDC’s journal, the Morbidity and Mortality Report Weekly Report. This year it didn’t. A RedState tradition has been to use this report for our annual retrospective on abortion. When it didn’t appear in November… or December… or in January we decided to ask why. That inquiry and its response led to our article yesterday. The internet is an amazing thing. After weeks of checking and phone calls and emails … no report. Then one blog post at RedState later, and suddenly the CDC is falling over themselves to produce something. Funny how that works. Two hours and six minutes after the post went live we had an official response from CDC. The full response is posted below the fold. According to the CDC we should move along because there is nothing to see here. Really? We’re not so sure. One thing the government does well is routine. If you have any doubt witness the difference between how the government reacts to an emergency and how it delivers Social Security checks or collects taxes. A low intensity statistical report that has been produced at the same time for the past 40 years would strike most of us as the epitome of routine. “Wait,” says their reply, “it isn’t that simple”. Here is their “explanation”: My understanding is the population data needed to develop rate/ratio statistics was not available at the time we normally prepare the ASR. It is these data that are often desired by many to track trends and changes in a most precise way possible. Possible. But is it likely? Another key fact is that the report in question covers abortions conducted in the United States in 2007. So the population data has been extant for at least two years because the Census Bureau - which has done routine real well for, oh, 200 years - had that particular data aggregated on July 1, 2008. That’s pretty “available” by our standards. But let’s just pretend for a moment the data was somehow not “available” to the CDC. Why? It was available to the Census. Indeed, it was available to anyone with internet access. But somehow the CDC was out of the loop? A more likely and obvious reason the data weren’t available is that a decision had been made to not acquire the data. Now we’re assured that the 2007 Abortion Surveillance Report is “tentatively” – CDC’s response has this word in bold so we’re assuming the real context is “not going to happen but we’re counting on you guys forgetting about it” – scheduled to be published this month. By “this month” they are saying that it will appear in one of the next three issues of the MMWR. But wait. The response also says the editorial calendar is booked “well in advance.” Most of us would assume “well in advance” is more than three weeks, especially as the report in question will have to proceed through various levels of clearance from the authors through final approval at the Department of Health and Human Services. So if it isn’t on the calendar… which is implied by the CDC response… and the calendar is locked in well in advance … how do we make the trip from there to here? The short answer is that now CDC is about to do the other thing bureaucracies do frequently but not well: panic. After all, the CDC told us last week there were ‘no plans’ to release the data. The CDC now says (at least as of late yesterday) it is scheduled for ‘this month’. Did the CDC just not bother looking at the editorial calendar it now tells us is booked ‘well in advance’? We have very little doubt what happened it this case. An inconvenient report was quietly killed. The interview we had with the CDC press office confirmed that not only had the report not been written but that there were no plans to do so. This was confirmed by the CDC. The person who confirmed it was not confused. She did not misunderstand. She answered that the report hadn’t been produced, that she didn’t know why, and that she would find out. She then later called back to confirm that it was not an oversight, and that the report would not be forthcoming. The distance between that response and the current position of it being ready to go to press at seemingly a moment’s notice is difficult to bridge without a skyhook. The CDC did not run the report. They confirmed that they were not going to run the report. Only after we brought attention to it have they begun scrambling to appear as if they were going to do it all along. At RedState, we’re reminded of the guy who trips on a curb and, embarassed, explains, “totally meant to do that.”--redstate.com
* 2/5/11--The United States is stabbing Britain in the back with a nuclear missile. In order to get Russia to agree to the New START nuclear-weapons treaty, the United States reportedly agreed to tell the Russians secrets about Britain's nuclear arsenal, according to diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks. The United States told Russia that it would hand over the serial numbers of the Trident missiles it supplies Britain, one of America's closest allies. The serial numbers would give Russia a good handle on just how many missiles are in the hands of Britain, which has long refused to give any details of its nuclear-weapons program, according to The Telegraph newspaper. It's not clear if the agreement will apply only to the missiles supplied from now on or to all of the Trident missiles in the UK's arsenal. America had asked the Britain to give up more detailed data on its nukes. The United States and Russia both reveal to each other such information about their own arsenals. But Britain steadfastly refused, since it has such a comparatively small stockpile, the paper reported. The country's foreign secretary last year said that "up to 160" warheads are generally active, but wouldn't divulge the number of missiles.--NY Post
* 2/9/11--"An administration that has no respect for Congress, the courts or the Constitution has been found in contempt for reissuing a drilling moratorium that a U.S. district judge found overly broad. The Obama administration's trouble with the courts has continued with a judge's ruling last week that the Interior Department's reinstating of a drilling moratorium followed by a de facto moratorium via an overly restrictive permitting process constituted contempt. The administration had issued a drilling moratorium in May in waters deeper than 500 feet after the explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig off Louisiana that resulted in the spill of more than 4.1 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. In June, Martin Feldman of the Eastern District Court of Louisiana struck down Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's original moratorium, saying it was overkill based on flawed reasoning. ... So the administration went back, rearranged a few words and a few deck chairs, and reissued its moratorium. That one was officially lifted in October, although the permitting process, which mysteriously includes shallow-water wells, has had the effect of continuing the moratorium. Feldman was not amused. 'Each step the government took following the court's imposition of a preliminary injunction showcases its defiance,' the judge said in his ruling. 'Such dismissive conduct, viewed in tandem with the reimposition of a second moratorium ... provides this court with clear and convincing evidence of its contempt.' ... It is not so much that the Obama administration differs with the law, but that it considers itself above it -- even above the Constitution." -- Investor's Business Daily (From Patriot Post Chronicle).
* 2/9/11--Obama's deal with the devil--And so quietly, almost off-handedly, the Rubicon has been crossed. The United States of America, whose blood and treasure have been spilled fighting terrorism, is jumping into bed with radical Islamists. By approving a role for the Muslim Brotherhood in a new Egyptian government, the White House is taking its engagement policy to a dangerous level. American taxpayer dollars will now help sustain the oldest Islamist group, one that helped launch Osama bin Laden on his murderous quest. Perhaps this day was inevitable for an administration that refuses to say "Islamic terrorists," and claims "jihad" can be a good thing and Hezbollah has "moderate" elements. But it is hardly inevitable that the Kumbaya approach will bring peace to the Middle East. More likely, it will be seen as Western weakness and beget even more violence against America and our allies. The decision applies to Egypt, but it won't stay in Egypt. Nearly every Arab government is fighting radical groups that aim to eliminate our presence, Israel and Western-friendly leaders. Imagine what those leaders think about our willingness to endorse the Muslim Brotherhood, which helped spawn Hamas and similar groups. We have pulled the rug out from under our allies. They have staked their lives and countries on our commitment to battle terrorists, and now we appear ready to make a deal that will put pressure on them to do the same. Yes, I know, the Muslim Brotherhood insists it is no longer a radical group and doesn't advocate violence. But what they say is not always what they do. Days after a leader of the group said Egyptians "should be prepared for war against Israel" and urged the country to stop sending natural gas to Israel, attackers blew up a gas pipeline to Jordan. The one to Israel immediately was shut down. Not exactly the start of a beautiful relationship. But perfectly predictable.--Michael Goodwin, NY Post
* 2/11/11--CAIRO – Egypt exploded with joy, tears, and relief after pro-democracy protesters brought down President Hosni Mubarek with a momentous march on his palaces and state TV. Mubarak, who until the end seemed unable to grasp the depth of resentment over his three decades of authoritarian rule, finally resigned Friday and handed power to the military. The people ousted the regime," rang out chants from crowds of hundreds of thousands massed in Cairo's central Tahrir Square and outside Mubarak's main palace several miles away in a northern district of the capital. The crowds in Cairo, the Mediterranean city of Alexandria and other cities around the country burst into pandemonium. They danced, chanted "goodbye, goodbye," and raised their hands in prayer as fireworks and car horns sounded after Vice President Omar Suleiman made the announcement on national TV just after nightfall. "Finally we are free," said Safwan Abou Stat, a 60-year-old in the crowd of protesters at the palace. "From now on anyone who is going to rule will know that these people are great." The protests have already echoed around the Middle East, with several of the region's autocratic rulers making pre-emptive gestures of democratic reform to avert their own protest movements. The lesson many took: If it could happen in three weeks in Egypt, where Mubarak's lock on power had appeared unshakable, it could happen anywhere. The United States at times seemed overwhelmed trying to keep up with the rapidly changing crisis, fumbling to juggle its advocacy of democracy and the right to protest, its loyalty to longtime ally Mubarak and its fears of Muslim fundamentalists gaining a foothold. Neighboring Israel watched with growing unease, worried that their 1979 peace treaty could be in danger. It quickly demanded on Friday that post-Mubarak Egypt continue to adhere to it. Mubarak, a former air force commander came to power after the 1981 assassination of his predecessor Anwar Sadat by Islamic radicals. Throughout his rule, he showed a near obsession with stability, using rigged elections and a hated police force accused of widespread torture to ensure his control. He resisted calls for reform even as public bitterness grew over corruption, deteriorating infrastructure and rampant poverty in a country where 40 percent live below or near the poverty line. --yahoo.com
* 2/11/11--WASHINGTON -- Tea Party members roared and House Republican leaders listened yesterday, agreeing to more spending cuts to hit the promised $100 billion reduction for the rest of the budget year. The original bill slashed spending $74 billion from President Obama's budget request for 2011, but outraged conservatives at a party meeting convinced the leaders to go further. "It will be done," said freshman Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), a member of the new Tea Party Caucus. "We will meet our pledge to America," House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said. He added that the new package of cuts will "send a signal that we're serious about cutting spending here in Washington." The added cuts will delay the bill, but GOP leaders said it would be ready for a House vote next week. The cuts will pull together the Republican caucus -- quelling a revolt among freshman members unwilling to break their campaign promise of a $100 billion cut. It also sets up a fierce fight with Obama and a Democratic-run Senate bent on killing the legislation, though they have acknowledged the need to trim spending as the national debt heads for a record $1.5 trillion.--NY Post
* 2/11/11--Can this administration do anything right — particularly on foreign policy? At the beginning of the administration, a situation in Honduras occurred where the socialist president decided to cling to power. The president was ousted on orders from the Honduran Supreme Court. The Obama Administration joined Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro to demand that president be reinstated. Eventually, Mr. Obama backed down. The Honduran people kept their country dictator free. Now, Mr. Obama and his administration seem to be handling Egypt in the most incompetent way. They appointed a special envoy who they promptly started disagreeing with. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden were all three giving different statements. Now CIA Director Leon Panetta admits he got his intelligence from watching TV. Worse, the head of National Intelligence claims the Muslim Brotherhood is a secular organization. Can these people do anything right? Erick Erickson--Human Events
* 2/15/11--WASHINGTON -- President Obama yesterday released a new $3.73 trillion budget proposal that projects another deficit topping $1 trillion for next year -- and includes more than $1.6 trillion in new taxes over the next decade. On the eve of a bitter clash with newly empowered House Republicans over government spending and debt, Obama bared a fiscal-year 2012 budget that forecasts a $1.65 trillion deficit, which, as a percentage of the budget, is the highest since World War II. Only in 2013 would the annual deficit drop below $1 trillion when, by the president's calculations, it would be a projected $768 billion. "We're going to reach a sustainable deficit by the middle of the decade," said Jacob Lew, Obama's budget director, predicting that annual deficits will drop to 3 percent of economic output by that point. The budget calls for about $730 billion over 10 years in new taxes on business and the wealthy, who would face tighter limits on deductions they make in their tax filings, including charitable gifts. But it is unlikely all, if any, of the tax hikes could win approval of the GOP-dominated House of Representatives. An additional $709 billion in taxes would come over the next decade from letting the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy expire at the end of 2012, according to the budget proposal -- a move that is not expected to pass the GOP-controlled House, either. "Rather than setting the stage for broad-based, pro-growth tax reform, this budget goes in the opposite direction with more tax hikes," said Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), the House Ways and Means Committee chairman. Obama has called for spending cuts, including eliminating or paring more than 200 programs for a savings of $1 trillion. But many of these programs -- including a second engine for the military's Joint Strike Fighter and the C-17 transport plane -- have loyal supporters in Congress. Education Pell Grants and community-development grants also would be cut back. Obama has called for a spending freeze on most agencies, too. The administration said even what it called worthwhile programs -- such as home-heating assistance for the poor in cold states -- had to be trimmed. While touting cuts to many agencies, Obama wants to increase funding for what he calls "investments" in education, broadband infrastructure, green technology and other programs. Republicans were unimpressed with the budget blueprint. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called it a "huge disappointment," saying, "It's a plan that says fulfilling the president's vision of a future of trains and windmills is more important than a balanced checkbook."--NY Post
* 2/16/11-[A]s you pore over Obama's new budget, beware the budgeters' tricky talk. When you hear liberal journalists in the mainstream media repeat the line that Obama's new budget 'reduces the deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years,' don't believe it for a second. Obama is not actually reducing the current $1.65 trillion deficit by $1.1 trillion. Rather, Obama plans to borrow $1.1 trillion less than he would have under earlier projections. Those projections, contained on page 174 of the document the White House released Monday, assumed vast expenditures -- trillion or near-trillion-dollar deficits every year through 2021 -- so Obama is clearing a very low bar. Here is a more accurate description of what Obama's 2012 budget plan does: It adds $8.8 trillion in new debt between today and October 2021. That number would be even larger, except that Obama's budget also raises taxes by $1.5 trillion on corporations and high-income earners, imposing higher marginal rates and new limits on charitable and mortgage deductions. In Obama's fiscal 2012 budget, no hard choices are made on the key issue of entitlements, but individuals, families and business owners will still see their taxes go up. And Obama's plan for next year actually includes more discretionary spending than last year at the height of stimulus expenditures. ... Three months after Americans expressed their deep anxiety over the unwarranted and dangerous explosion of federal spending and power under Obama by giving Republicans their biggest midterm congressional election victory since 1938, Obama is still demonstrating that he doesn't get it -- Americans want government spending cut, government debt eliminated and Washington politicians in both parties to wise up or be replaced." -- The Washington Examiner (From Patriot Post Chronicle)
--"Jaws dropped across the nation's capital at the audacious annihilation of the truth on the front page of the Feb. 15 Washington Post. The top headline read, 'Obama budget makes deep cuts, cautious trades.' It's another day at the Post, where every day is an April Fool's joke." --columnist L. Brent Bozell
* 2/16/17--Now, [Hosni] Mubarak is gone [in Egypt]. And with President Obama's penchant for both engaging Islamist organizations in the U.S. and indulging even the ruthless Islamist leaders in Tehran, the [Muslim] Brotherhood knows the current administration won't dare use the lush U.S. financial support of Egypt as leverage to deny the Brotherhood a powerful role in the new government. Nobody knows this better than James Clapper. He cannot possibly believe the Brotherhood is secular. He can believe only that you can be duped into thinking the Brotherhood is secular. The administration has to do something because, in Egypt, a Brotherhood-influenced government is now inevitable. And we've seen in Turkey how Brotherhood-influenced becomes Brotherhood-dominated in short order. The Obama administration is preparing the political ground for failure." --columnist Andrew McCarthy (From Patriot Post Chronicle)
* 2/17/11--PRINCETON, NJ -- Unemployment, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment, hit 10.0% in mid-February -- up from 9.8% at the end of January.--Gallup.com
* 2/17/11-- The Wisconsin GOP has put together a quick video of union attacks on Governor Scott Walker, which include: signs calling him a Nazi (and a dictator generally); signs calling him a rapist; and signs calling for his death. What makes this a particularly hard-hitting video is that it’s interspersed with solemn quotes from Democrats who claim that their side never, ever, ever does such things: which is of course a lie, but a lot of these people haven’t internalized yet the notion that it’s harder to lie about this sort of thing these days. Background, for those who need it: Scott Walker's call for (limited) reforms of Wisconsin’s frankly out-of-control collective bargaining system for public sector union employees has caused a good deal of controversy, and by ‘controversy’ I mean 'death threats.' Excuse me: alleged death threats. Anyway, as I noted earlier Lakeshore Laments is a Wisconsin blog covering this: note in particular the way that the ’spontaneous’ sickouts seem to be mostly targeting Republican state districts. It’s going to be a real interesting day in Wisconsin.--redstate.com
* 2/18/11--Wisconsin's Republican Gov. Scott Walker introduced a proposal to the state's legislature this week that would eliminate collective bargaining rights for state employees, as well as require employees to pay for half of their pensions and at least 12.6 percent of their health insurance. Wage increases would be tied to the Consumer Price Index. The goal is to save $300 million over two years as the state deals with a $3.6 billion budget deficit over that span. Ironically, Wisconsin was the first state to grant public employees collective bargaining rights in 1959. How in the world did they survive prior to then? Reaction was swift and angry. By Thursday afternoon, 25,000 people had gathered at the state capitol to protest the legislation. About 40 percent of Madison's public school teachers protested by calling in "sick," forcing the superintendent to cancel classes. (Think, for a moment, about the lesson that they're teaching our children: If you don't like the way things are going at work, stay home. Then make high-minded excuses about why you're doing so. Nice lesson.) In the state senate, all 14 Democrats left the state in order to deny the 19 majority Republicans the needed quorum for a vote. "The story around the world is the rush to democracy," wailed Democrat Sen. Bob Jauch. "The story in Wisconsin is the end of the democratic process." Funny how Democrats fled the state rather than participate in the "democratic process." Furthermore, the protests are fueled by an arm of the Democrat National Committee, Organizing for America, which is what's left of Obama's 2008 presidential campaign. Unions did contribute heftily to his campaign, after all. The president even waded into the fray, calling Walker's bill "an assault on unions." Gov. Walker responded, "I think we're focused on balancing our budget. It would be wise for the president and others in Washington to focus on balancing their budget, which they're a long ways from doing." Nazi comparisons and other violent imagery also abound among protesters. What ever happened to toning down the political rhetoric post-Tucson?--Patriot Post Digest
* 2/18/11--There's war in Wisconsin. Voters, disgusted with big spending Democrats and out of control unions, handed the whole state over to Republicans. Seizing the voter mandate, Republican Governor Scott Walker is intent on pushing through legislation to end the ability of public sector unions to have collective bargaining rights on behalf of public employees. Democrat lawmakers in the State Senate have fled Wisconsin for Illinois to ensure there is no quorum in the Senate. While only 17 votes are needed, 20 of the 33 senators must be present for the body to conduct business. Public sector union members have stormed the state capitol. Teachers have staged a ‘sick in' putting their union privileges ahead of educating children — bolstering Gov. Walker's point that union abuse needs to be reined in. Naturally, Barack Obama has sided with the union goons. His Organizing for America is sending protestors to astroturf Wisconsin in favor of more bloat and corruption. This is as much about saving him politically in 2012 as it is actually defending unionization. Democrats and unions are comparing what is happening to Wisconsin to the Alamo. It puts me in the unusual position of backing the Mexicans.--Erick Ericksen, redstate.com
* 2/19/11--Today is the third straight day of protests in Madison, Wisconsin as Barack Obama’s shock troops storm the state capitol to fight Governor Walker’s plan to reform the public-sector scam that has ravaged that state for decades. As Democrats fled the statehouse (to an apparently non-union hotel in Illinois) to avoid doing the duties they were elected for and capitol staffers were told to lock their doors, the impression that the rest of America may have is that this is a “spontaneous” uprising (sort of like Tunisia and Egypt were supposed to be spontaneous). However, if that’s what you’re thinking, you couldn’t be more mistaken. Despite his feigning ignorance on the situation in Wisconsin, the President’s background is as a “community organizer,” working with groups like ACORN and the SEIU. As a community organizer, their modus operandi is to make it seem as though marches and protests are “popular uprisings” [yeah, Mubarek got pwned]. Because of this background, this should come as no surprise to you…According to the DNC's activist arm OFA, “Organizing for America is mobilizing on the ground in Wisconsin…” That’s right. The Democrat National Committee’s Organizing for America (along with their union boss buddies) are helping to orchestrate the “uprising” in Madison.--redstate.com
* 2/20/11--Thousands of Tea Party protesters and union boosters faced off in Wisconsin yesterday in the epic compensation and benefits battle between Gov. Scott Walker and public employees. It was the first time Walker backers joined the demonstrations that began last week at the state capitol. "Sorry we're late, Scott. We work for a living," said one sign carried by a Tea Party member. "Welcome to the Recession," and "Your Gravy Train is Over," said two other signs sported by Walker backers, an indication of the bitterness that has erupted over the GOP governor's proposal to curb public-employee pay, benefits and negotiating rights. Police stood between the pro-GOP protesters and their pro-union opponents, who traded chants of "Pass the bill!" and "Kill the bill!" Nearly 70,000 protesters from all sides showed up. That eclipsed the 40,000 mostly pro-union protesters who showed up on Friday. Walker, who has said his budget changes are non-negotiable, wants public employees to contribute 5.8 percent of their pay to their pensions. Most currently contribute nothing. He also wants state workers to pay at least 12 percent of their health-care premiums -- currently they pay 6 percent. The national average is 29 percent for health-care premiums. Pay and benefits for state and local government workers cost an average of $40.10 per hour worked, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics found last year. That's 44 percent more than the $27.88 per hour private workers' pay and benefits typically run. Overall, Walker's proposed changes would cut Wisconsin state workers' take-home pay by about 7 percent. The GOP plan would also do away with collective bargaining for health care, vacations and benefits -- only wages would be negotiable. Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald reaffirmed that Republicans -- who took control of both the state Senate and Assembly in November -- have the votes needed pass the measure. The Senate is ready to act on the so-called "budget repair" bill just as soon as the 14 Democratic senators who fled the state on Thursday return to the statehouse, said Fitzgerald. The missing Democrats have threatened to stay away for weeks unless Walker agrees to negotiate.--NY Post
* 2/20/11--From Washington to Wisconsin, the battles over government spending are clarifying which party is the real Party of No. It's Democrats in a landslide. They say no to deficit and debt reduction. No to bringing sanity to public-employee costs. And Hell No to voters who want smaller, less-expensive government. So much for President Obama's plea for an "adult conversation" on entitlements. Maybe he meant "adult" as in XXX. His was an especially cynical posture because his partymates were helping to whip up a frenzy among teachers and others in Wisconsin. A proposal there for unions to agree to givebacks in their Cadillac benefit plans and lose the right to negotiate future benefits was met with a near-riot. Obama supported the unions and Dem legislators are hiding in other states to avoid voting. Meanwhile, schools were shut so teachers could march to prove their dedication to themselves, err, children. Wisconsin's new GOP governor, Scott Walker, invited Obama to butt out. "We're focused on balancing our budget," he told reporters. "It would be wise for the president and others in Washington to focus on balancing their budget, which they are a long way from doing." No kidding.--Michael Goodwin, NY Post
* 2/20/11--The Muslim world is exploding, riots and bloody crackdowns are spreading, and Iranian warships are on the move. And the White House thinks it's a good time to blast Israel at the United Nations. Like a dog with a bone, Team Obama won't drop its fixation that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are the reason peace remains elusive. Right, and the sun rises because the rooster crows. Because it continues to confuse cause with effect, the United States joined Palestinians and terrorist-ruled states like Lebanon in denouncing Israel. Even though it vetoed a Security Council resolution that called settlements "illegal," the United States piled on with such vehemence that there is no practical difference. Ambassador Susan Rice regretted the veto, and said, "For more than four decades, Israeli settlement activity has corroded hopes for peace and stability in the region." That is the party line of Israel's enemies, and it turns truth on its head. Successive Israeli governments offered peace deals that would create a Palestinian state, but no Palestinian leader, including current President Mahmoud Abbas, has the courage to make a final deal because it requires acceptance of Israel's right to exist. Moreover, Rice's timing was as flawed as her logic. She turned on our closest ally and the one enduring democracy in the region during unprecedented turmoil. Israel lost its closest Arab leader in Hosni Mubarak, and now fears a hostile Egypt next door. And Abbas is no Jeffersonian democrat. He recently canceled elections scheduled for September, and his security forces blocked marchers from showing support for protesters in other countries. Given the chaos and the rising potential for war, it is unconscionable for America to undercut our ally and give Israel's enemies an iota of aid and comfort.--Michael Goodwin, NY Post
* 2/21/11--"Let no one be confused, the stakes in Wisconsin are high and the Badger state could turn into the crucial battle ground between progressivism and the new Tea Party majority in the country. ... What is really at stake in Wisconsin today ... is the future of American competitiveness. According to the latest Pew polling, the American people understand that unions make it harder for America to compete globally. Government unions are simply a parasite on the U.S. economy. When President Obama came into office, he shielded government unions from transparency by ending their reporting requirements to the Department of Labor. As a result it is impossible for the American people to know for sure how much of their taxpayer revenue is being diverted into union coffers. ... If government employees want to voluntarily form associations and lobby the government for higher pay, better benefits, and working conditions, that is their constitutional right. But they have no right to force all employees to join their organization and take money from their paychecks every week." --Heritage Foundation's Conn Carroll--Patriot Post Brief
* 2/22/11--This wasn't the sort of "change" President Obama had in mind during his 2008 campaign. Since Obama's election, the number of states classified as "solid Democratic" has plummeted from 30 to just 14, a Gallup analysis of voter data revealed yesterday. The analysis of voter shifts reveals a nation that has undergone a political sea change in just two years, with the number of states representing political battlegrounds going from 10 in 2008 to 18 late last year -- and states that "lean Republican" or are "solid Republican" doubling from five to 10. Every state showed a drop in Democratic support. But the most startling swing was in New Hampshire, where the number of self-proclaimed Democrats dropped 11.3 percent -- switching the state from "solid Democrat" to "lean Republican." New York now has 6.7 percent fewer Democratic voters, but it is still "solid Democrat" and among the most solidly Democratic states in the country. "The United States, both nationally and in every state, has moved in a more Republican direction during the last two years," the Gallup pollsters concluded. They noted that when the drop in Democratic fortunes began in 2008, the party was at its highest level of support in at least two decades. The balance of power between the two parties has now reverted to a political landscape resembling the mid-2000s. But Democratic states still outnumbered Republican states 23 to 10 last year, and there were 14 solidly Democratic states compared with five solidly Republican states. In addition to New York, the most solidly Democratic states are Maryland, Massachusetts, Vermont, Hawaii and Rhode Island, as well as the District of Columbia. The largest defection of Democrats was in Rhode Island, which saw a 12.3 percent decline in the number of Democrat voters but remained a "solid Democrat" state. The most solidly Republican states are Wyoming, Utah and Idaho.--NY Post
* 2/23/11--Indiana Democrats took a page from the Wisconsin political playbook yesterday, turning tail and running from their state to avoid a vote on a Republican-backed budget bill that would weaken municipal unions. The absence of the more than 30 Democrats denied Indiana's Republican-controlled House the quorum it needs to take action on legislation, including a bill that "prohibits employees from being required to pay union dues or representation fees as a condition of employment." Many of the AWOL Hoosier Democrats are rumored to be in Illinois, where Wisconsin state senators fled to avoid a similar anti-union bill. "The House Democrats are firm and resolute," said Indiana Rep. Terri Austin, one of three Democrats who stayed behind. "They are not going to stand idly by and let these attacks on the middle class continue. We are trying to figure out a way to save the state from this radical agenda." Indiana's House needs 67 members to conduct business, and only 63 were in attendance. House Speaker Brian Bosma said he did not know whether he would ask the Indiana State Police to compel the lawmakers to attend -- if they can be found. "They are shirking the job that they were hired to do," Bosma said. A similar debate in Ohio drew thousands of union protesters yesterday, prompting officials there to lock the doors to the Statehouse. Meanwhile in Wisconsin, Tea Party-backed Republican Gov. Scott Walker warned that state employees could start receiving layoff notices as early as next week if a controversial bill eliminating most collective-bargaining rights for unions isn't passed soon. Walker didn't say which workers would be targeted, but he has warned that up to 1,500 could lose their jobs by July if his proposal isn't passed. "Hopefully, we don't get to that point," he said. Walker said there is no room for compromise. "We're broke," he told reporters. "You really can't negotiate when you don't have money to negotiate with." The Wisconsin Senate's 14 Democrats hightailed it out of the state to avoid a vote on Walker's bill, which would force public workers to pay more for their benefits and eliminate collective bargaining for nearly all workers on every issue except salary increases. The proposal, designed to help Wisconsin plug a projected $3.6 billion budget gap, has led to eight straight days of massive protests that grew as large as 68,000 people on Saturday. Wisconsin -- the first state to enact a comprehensive collective-bargaining law in 1959 -- has a Republican governor and Republican majorities in the Senate and state Assembly. Oddly, if the bill passes, the state could actually lose as much as $46 million in federal funds, The Huffington Post reported. That's because there's a federal regulation that states risk losing money if they eliminate "collective bargaining rights" that were in place when the money was allotted, the site said. Assembly members already began debate on the bill, with Democrats voicing their opposition. Democrats in that chamber stayed put because their absence would not block a vote. But there are enough Democrats in Wisconsin's Senate -- as is the case in Indiana's House -- to block a quorum, and a potential vote. The Wisconsin Senate can pass legislation without them, but not on issues as crucial as fiscal matters. That leaves the Senate limited to voting on inane resolutions like commending the Green Bay Packers for winning Super Bowl XLV. The session commenced amid raucous demonstrations in and around the state Capitol in Madison. Extra security was in place to handle massive crowds. Security officers searched backpacks of visitors, and large areas of the Capitol building were cordoned off with yellow crime-scene tape. Some of the missing Wisconsin Democrats shared with various media outlets stories about their lives on the lam. "Each day brings its own challenges," Sen. Spencer Coggs told a reporter without revealing his location. "Somebody will need an electric shaver or somebody will need provisions. It's just roughing it, like staying in a college dorm all over again. It's sort of like being a refugee."--NY Post
* 2/23/11--The Wisconsin showdown between a determined Republican governor and spoiled public unions is shaping up as a crucial test of state and municipal solvency. But the financial stakes represent only part of the much larger conflict engulfing America. The real war is over the entitlement culture itself. And while government spending is the most visible part, the ultimate issues are the character and fate of our nation. Any serious conversation about American decline must start with the fact that too many of our countrymen have lost the plot about how the United States became the beacon of the free world, the world's largest economy, and the lone superpower. For those who have no sense or interest in how we got here, it is easy to believe we are immune from the laws of history that inevitably reduce empires to dust. From that willful ignorance, it's perfectly acceptable to demand pay without work, or, almost as insidious, pay and pensions that dwarf those of your neighbors who foot the bill. It is also perfectly acceptable to assume that, if you have a house you can't afford, the government -- again, your neighbors -- should be dunned to help you keep it. If your business is failing, the government's deep pockets are there to bail you out, no? Or if your child can't read, it's not your fault. It's the teacher or the school system or the mayor. Any scapegoat will do, as long as it's not you. This is the noise of the entitlement culture as it plays out every day. It is contagious and so ingrained in how we live and think -- somebody else is to blame and must pay -- that we no longer think twice before demanding total satisfaction and expressing outrage when we don't get it. We are entitled to it now because we want it, whatever it is. If somebody else has it first, then we have been cheated and are doubly furious. As for giving it back, or taking less, what are you, a sucker? This is America, man, a free country. Indeed it is, and that's the problem. We are free to be endlessly selfish, and nobody dares to tell us no. Certainly, politicians won't do it. The entitlement scam has dominated public life for the better part of 50 years. John F. Kennedy's famous inaugural line of "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" turns out to have been the high-water mark of self-restraint. Pretty much ever since, the "tax eaters" have been multiplying faster than the taxpayers. The balance has tilted so far that the great liberal lights of yesteryear, from FDR to JFK to LBJ, might well look at the Wisconsin unions and wonder what planet they're from. They certainly wouldn't recognize them as Democrats. How dare the teachers skip school to protest? How dare they get fake doctor's notes to avoid consequences? Easy -- they're entitled. Soon, other states will be facing the same choice and, as voters made clear in last year's election, the war over Big Government will be settled in Washington. It's not a comforting thought. The best politicians have been unable to stop the entitlement culture. Most are happy to stoke the demands for more, more, more as the easiest path to power. We can't say we weren't warned. Thomas Jefferson, naturally, foresaw the consequences of unchecked entitlement. "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."--Michael Goodwin, NY Post
* 2/24/11--Remember all that highfalutin rhetoric from Barack Obama about not doing business with lobbyists, etc? Well, we already knew it was a lie given the number of lobbyists he let into the White House to work after saying he wouldn’t. But it appears the lie is a serial lie. Obama is having his minion take meetings with lobbyists routinely, but they are doing it outside the White House across the street. Why? Because he can say no lobbyists have been to the White House. At the facility where they are meeting the secret service does not keep logs. So there is no way to really track who is going into and out of the meetings with the White House. In other words, we know the White House is happy to have routine visits from the AFL-CIO and SEIU. And if they want those to be known, who exactly are they ashamed of you knowing about? Or scared? This, my friends, is the most transparent administration ever! --humanevents.com
* 2/25/11--WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats yesterday blasted Republicans for daring to offer any immediate spending cuts and refused to budge from their no-cuts-now stance in a budget fight that seems headed toward a March 4 government shutdown. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said she didn't trust the new proposal from House Republicans to cut $4 billion over two weeks to extend the deadline. "This 'new' proposal is nothing more than a Trojan horse for the extreme and reckless legislation [for deeper cuts]," said Murray, the No. 4 Democrat in the Senate. "It would pull the rug out from our economic recovery and devastate millions of families and small-business owners across the country." The Republican-led House is expected to vote on the $4 billion in cuts when Congress returns from its Presidents Day break next week, sending it to the Senate just days before the shutdown deadline. The Democrats want a stopgap spending bill with no cuts while they negotiate funding for the rest of the current fiscal year. The Republicans demand cuts in any new spending bills and call $2 billion a week "reasonable," considering the record $1.6 trillion deficit and $14 trillion national debt.--NY Post
* 2/25/11--Just what is it about the rule of law that President Obama doesn't get? The Justice Department announced Wednesday that it now believes the federal Defense of Marriage Act -- which defines marriage as being a legal union between one man and one woman -- is unconstitutional, and said it will no longer defend the law in court. So, just like that, Obama & Co. effectively declare null a law duly passed by Congress, signed by a previous president -- and presumptively binding on the government until either the courts or Congress declare otherwise. It's a breathtaking act of arrogance, a precedent so fraught that it threatens one of the nation's bedrock founding principles: That America was to be ruled by law, not by individuals. Presidents have found particular laws vexatious for as long as there have been presidents. Still, when Franklin Roosevelt decided he didn't like legislation forced on him by Congress, he had sufficient respect for the law itself to attempt to pack the Supreme Court with friendly justices. He lost. He should have. And it's not as if Obama, et al., don't understand the basic issue: Last October, the administration got it right in similar circumstances. While disagreeing with the "Don't ask, don't tell" law blocking gays from serving openly in the military -- and despite objections from his left-wing base -- the president declared that he was obliged to follow and defend the law. He added that he wanted DADT repealed by Congress rather than by the courts -- which is exactly what happened two months later. But now this. It's hard to see anything other than politics driving the announcement: Obama is pandering to his lefty base, because the newly Republican House won't be doing away with DOMA on its own. It's a dangerous game. What happens if -- a few years from now, should ObamaCare finally be fully installed as the law of the land -- a different president deems that law unconstitutional and refuses to defend it? That president could just point to Obama's DOMA precedent -- and would he be wrong? Precedent matters, after all. Not that Obama seems to care.--NY Post Editorial
* 2/25/11-- MADISON, Wis. - Republicans in the Wisconsin Assembly took the first significant action on their plan to strip collective bargaining rights from most public workers, abruptly passing the measure early Friday morning before sleep-deprived Democrats realized what was happening. The vote ended three straight days of punishing debate in the Assembly. But the political standoff over the bill - and the monumental protests at the state Capitol against it - appear far from over. Republicans in the Wisconsin Assembly early Friday passed Gov. Scott Walker's bill that strips most public workers of their collective bargaining rights.The Assembly's vote sent the bill on to the Senate, but minority Democrats in that house have fled to Illinois to prevent a vote. No one knows when they will return from hiding. Republicans who control the chamber sent state troopers out looking for them at their homes on Thursday, but they turned up nothing. "I applaud the Democrats in the Assembly for earnestly debating this bill and urge their counterparts in the state Senate to return to work and do the same," Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald, R-Horicon, said in a statement issued moments after the vote. The plan from Republican Gov. Scott Walker contains a number of provisions he says are designed to fill the state's $137 million deficit and lay the groundwork for fixing a projected $3.6 billion shortfall in the upcoming 2011-13 budget. The flashpoint is language that would require public workers to contribute more to their pensions and health insurance and strip them of their right to collectively bargain benefits and work conditions.--aolnews
No comments:
Post a Comment