Thursday, April 28, 2011

May 24th CLTP Townhall Meeting: TEXAS FREEDOM!

CLEAR LAKE TEA PARTY
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Town Hall Meeting
TEXAS FREEDOM!

TOPICS
Fair Tax For Texas – Marv Kuhn Replacing Property Taxes with a Consumption Tax
 
Energy, Climate & The Progressive Threat - Lyle Henderson 

Question & Answer Session after each Speaker
 
Date: Tuesday, May 24, 2011
 
Location: WebsterCivicCenter 311 Pennsylvania Ave, Webster, TX 77598 Time: 6:30 PM
 
Bring your family, neighbors and friends!
 
E-Mail: info@clearlaketeaparty.com 
Web: www.clearlaketeaparty.com

Monday, April 25, 2011

Van trip to Austin rescheduled for Thursday, April 28th

Our van trip to Austin had to be rescheduled because the State Legislature canceled all their meetings on Monday and will be in recess until Tuesday, April 26th.  We did not get word of this until late Saturday afternoon.  Everyone who reserved a seat in the van was notified immediately.
 
We have rescheduled our van trip to Austin for Thursday, April 28th.  There is still room available if you would like to go.  As before, the Clear Lake Tea Party will pay for the van rental and gas.  You will only need to pay for your food.  We will leave Houston at 7:00 am and arrive back from Austin at approximately 7:00 pm.   

We will be lobbying for immigration reform.  It seems that all of the bills that were introduced concerning immigration reform have been blocked and are not being released from their committees.  We need to visit key legislative offices and tell them what we think about this.
 
If you are able to come with us to Austin this Thursday, please respond to Lgonzo8@verizon.net as soon as possible with your name, phone number and email address and you will be contacted with all the details.  Please put "Austin Trip" in the subject line of your response.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

TRIP TO AUSTIN AS CITIZEN LOBBYISTS

The Clear Lake Tea Party will be taking Patriots to Austin on Monday, April 25, 2011 to meet with State Legislators about the upcoming redistricting vote in the State of Texas. It has been revealed to us by a conservative State Representative that the timing of this vote is to prevent a grassroots effort from influencing the Texas House redistricting effort. Read full story here. This will be the first of several trips to Austin while the State Legislature is still in session.

The Clear Lake Tea Party will pay for the van rental and gas.  You will only need to pay for your food.  We will leave Houston at 7:00 am on Monday morning and arrive in Austin at 10:00 am.  We will spend all day visiting our Representative's offices and letting them know how we feel about the redistricting issue.  We can also attend any committee meetings that may be going on.  We will depart Austin at 4:00 pm and arrive in Houston at 7:00 pm.

If you would like to come with us to Austin on Monday, April 25th, as a Citizen Lobbyist, please respond to this email and put "Austin Trip" in the subject line.  We will need your name and telephone number and the number of people coming with you in the van.  You will then be contacted to confirm your reservation.

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

CLTP Watch Dog Alarm!

The Calendars Committee met Tuesday evening and set CSHB 150, the Texas House redistricting map passed by committee, for the House calendar on Tuesday, April 26 Wednesday, April 27th*This has been changed due to the number of amendments being prepared and submitted.  The deadline for all amendments is 5pm on Monday; Reps to review on Tuesday; and the debate/vote is scheduled for Wednesday.

It has been revealed to the grassroots by a conservative State Representative that the timing of this vote is to prevent a grassroots effort to influence the Texas House redistricting effort.  Rep. Solomons, a Straus lieutenant, presented an initial House redistricting map (H153) that is expected to elect about 80 Republicans in the next election.   This is more moderate “fairness” from Speaker Straus’ camp.  In fact, it is rumored that the Speaker is reaching out again to Democrats for help in pushing this redistricting plan.  Forget the fact that the overwhelming majority of Texans voted for Republicans in the hope that they would pass legislation based on conservative principles.  Again, as the Speaker did in the last session when he appointed Committee Chairs to be “representational” of the Texas vote, he is at it again to ensure the progressive Democrats get a better shot at winning elections than they deserve.  This quick scheduling of a vote is to slip this in as soon as possible while the conservative grassroots are busy with observing the Easter Weekend.

Again, it is with mixed emotions that the Tea Parties can claim “we told you so.”  We are sad to note that the Solomons/Straus House Redistricting Plan does include retribution regarding the several House conservatives who challenged Straus in the Speaker’s Race earlier this year.  At the time, Rep. Hughes put out a press notice that Rep. Larry Phillips indicated to him that the Speaker would use redistricting as a weapon against conservative House members.  Well, that is exactly what has happened.  The Speaker’s map pits 14 conservative incumbent Republicans against each other while only forcing 4 Democrats to face each other.  Of special note, this plan pairs conservatives Erwin Cain and Dan Flynn, and Jim Landtroop and Charles Perry - four gentlemen who opposed Speaker Straus.

However, there is hope.  The conservative House members are starting to coalesce behind an alternative plan put forth by Rep. Joe Nixon (see below).  The Nixon House Proposal Plan H155 holds down the number of Republican pairing to only 2 districts and is expected to elect 99 Republicans in the next election.  This is a far better plan than Solomons' which is expected to be voted on next Tuesday.  You can view both the Solomons and Nixon plans online at http://gis1.tlc.state.tx.us  (click "Base Plan" and go from there). 

It is imperative that we help defeat House Redistricting Plan H153 (CSHB 150) to ensure that the gains we made in 2010 are not frittered away by RINOs who hope to continue their rule with Democratic support and to show the Speaker that the Tea Party grassroots is still alive and kicking.

We need each and every Tea Party Conservative who gives a damn about Texas to pick up the phone AND send an email to let the Republican House Representatives know that we do not support an anti-conservative House redistricting plan.  This must be done every day until next Wednesday’s vote.  This is not a time to be “fair” or “moderate”, the future of our State, and indeed our country, is at stake.  We must be partisan in order to hold the gains we have made and to continue the push towards limited government, fiscally responsible, and free market solutions.

It is critical that Republican Legislators hear from the conservative grassroots Tea Party movement.  You must take a personal responsibility in charting the legislative course for Texas.  Make your calls, send your emails, and if you can visit their local offices in person.  Thank you and please keep up the good fight.  I’m off to make a call!

Representative, Larry Taylor: (District 24):
Capitol Office (512)  463-0729  Fax (512) 474-2398
District Office (281) 338-0924  - Fax (281) 554-9240
Email:  larry.taylor@house.state.tx.us

Representative, John Davis:  (District 129)
Capitol Office (512) 463-0734)  Fax (512) 479-6955
District Office  (281) 333-1350  Fax (281) 335-9101
Email:  john.davis@house.state.tx.us

Representative, Randy Weber:  (District 29)
Capitol Office  (512) 463-0707  Fax (512) 463-8717
District Office  (281) 485-0616  Fax (281) 485-1106
Email:  district29.weber@house.state.tx.us

Take a minute to call and express your thoughts to your representatives. Please copy us (info@clearlaketeaparty.com) on any letters you email to your Rep so that we can keep a record.  Too often they try and claim they haven't heard from us.  If you copy us, there's an irrefutable record.

They vote on Tuesday, April 26th! Act now!

UPDATE from Rep. Wayne Christian:

Urgent Texas Legislative Update: New House Map

A new Texas House map has been released, "Plan H155," that can be viewed here, http://gis1.tlc.state.tx.us.

The new map H155 accomplishes the following:

  • Is more reflective of the voting patterns of the state
  • Is fair and legal
  • Accurately reflects the voters intent
  • Includes a minimal amount of pairings
  • Consistently compact where possible
  • Is in compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
  • Elects 99 Republicans, compared to the committee map electing 92 Republicans
  • Protects conservative House members
  • Reelects the conservative freshman House members that the voters elected in an overwhelming mandate in 2010

To view the map go to http://gis1.tlc.state.tx.us.

Click on "select plans," and select "base plan."

Select "PlanH155- NIXON STATEWIDE HOUSE PROPOSAL"

The ask is that the grassroots call their State Representatives and ask them to not vote for the house map passed out of the redistricting committee and to vote for the new map as an amendment on the House floor on Tuesday. 

Reference "Plan H155."  As of today the vote will be on Tuesday April 26th Wednesday, April 27th.  Plan H155 will be introduced as an amendment to HB 150, the map passed by the committee.

Time is of the essence here, the House will adjourn on Thursday afternoon and all of the Representatives will return home to their districts for Easter weekend.

**Note- The map you see live on the website today will be slightly different from the map that is introduced as an amendment, the lawyers are fine tuning the map as we speak.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Conservatives Need To Take Over The GOP Precincts

Original article at RedState

Folks, we need to win the next round of elections, no? And we need to elect constitutional conservatives, no? Well, they need to run on a party ballot. And they have to win the primary election. And that’s the EASIEST one to win because turnout is so low. If we can raise the turnout in our neighborhoods — our “political neighborhoods” — our precincts, we can cause constitutional conservatives to win those all-important, traditionally-very-low-turnout primary elections.

As Judson Phillips over at Tea Party Nation has advised, we (that means YOU and me — each one of us) have to DO two critical things simultaneously: become precinct committeemen in the Republican Party AND become poll watchers and poll workers to make sure the vote is not stolen.

We are weakest where we should be strongest, and most of us don’t know it. At the precinct level, from which all power within the Republican Party comes, over half of the precinct committeeman slots are VACANT.
This chart shows where the real power lies.


Where all the power comes from, over half of the positions are vacant. And that is where THE opportunity for constitutional conservatives exists — to take back the Republican Party and use it as the tool for winning the elections.

This next chart shows how the “power” chart should be drawn — with the citizen on top. But the citizen has been sitting up in the bleachers for generations. We need to become ball players. And in the real ball game of politics, which is PARTY POLITICS, if you want to be on the ball field and play the game, you’ve got to become a precinct committeeman.






This next chart shows that about half of the Republican Party precinct committeeman slots are vacant. And that the filled slots have been split, ideologically, about 50-50 between conservatives and Republicans In Name Only. The elections of Michael Steele as RNC Chairman, and then Reince Priebus, reflect that ideological split. In Arizona, where I live, it’s been even worse. In 2008, fewer than one-third of the PC slots were filled. We are not even up to half strength yet. But in two years we’ve completely changed the Party, because almost all of the new PCs are conservatives from the grass roots conservative groups. Now they are UNITING inside a real political party where they can actually BECOME the leaders of the Party and determine the outcome of the primary elections.



Here’s an article about what we achieved in Maricopa County in two years by UNITING POLITICALLY INSIDE A POLITICAL PARTY.


This next chart shows, again, that the Party is weakest where it should be strongest. All of the “upper level” officer slots are filled, but only about 44 per cent of the most important slots, the “we the people” slots, are filled. And if “we the conservative people” fill them up, we can take over the Party and determine the outcome of the elections.



(The numbers for the “upper level” officer slots are estimates; the point is there’s almost 10,000 precinct committeeman slots state-wide, that not even half are filled, and the number of precinct committeemen dwarfs the number of officer slots “below” them.)

This next chart shows what we have, and what we could have. Which Republican Party do you want? What will YOU DO to make the full-strength, 75 % solidly conservative landslide-win-producing political powerhouse of a party happen?



One more graphic. This one shows HOW we can get to a full-strength, solidly-conservative Republican Party IF we will all UNITE INSIDE the Republican Party as precinct committeeman. United we stand. Divided we fall. Let’s unite, no?



Let’s get it done, shall we? Who’s with me?

For Liberty,
Cold Warrior

Cross-posted at Unified Patriots.
—–
Will YOU help make 2011 “The Year of the Precinct Committeeman?”
Where it all started.

Robin Hood Toll Tax Up for House Vote TOMORROW

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Terri Hall, Founder, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom or Texas TURF, (210) 275-0640, WEB: http://www.texasturf.org EMAIL: terri_2@commonsensecitizens.net

HB 1112, Robin Hood toll tax in perpetuity, up for House vote tomorrow

(Austin, TX) House bill HB 1112 by Texas State Rep. Larry Phillips (R - Sherman) is on the General State Calendar in the House for Wednesday, April 20. TURF is urging lawmakers to VOTE NO on HB 1112, which amount to toll taxes in perpetuity.

"Raiding toll money from one segment to be used for another amounts to a Robin Hood hidden tax. Regional Mobility Authorities (RMAs) are unelected boards. So this is taxation without representation, too," noted Terri Hall, Founder of Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom.

"HB 1112 is a vote for Robin Hood toll schemes and toll taxes in PERPETUITY. This bill makes 'system financing' permissible for Regional Mobility Authorities (or RMAs), which is stealing toll taxes from one corridor and giving it to another corridor (that those same users may not use) as well as to increase the toll on one segment to gain "surplus revenue" to pledge to another and so on, making it virtually impossible to take the tolls off the road."

Under HB 1112, there would no longer be a requirement that toll rates be based on the cost of building the road and retiring the debt nor strictly dedicated to paying the cost of construction and retiring the debt. Also, based on testimony during an exchange between RMA lobbyist Brian Cassidy and Senator Juan Hinojosa in the Senate Transportation Committee March 9, "system financing" indeed means tolls in perpetuity. The Texas Constitution prohibits perpetuities in Art I, Sec. 26. So under "system financing," tolls become a hidden, permanent tax, not a "user fee."

The bill also allows RMAs to borrow money using borrowed money, which are the same multi-leveraging schemes that caused the subprime mortgage crisis and global financial meltdown.

It's like building roads with credit cards," says Hall. "It's dangerous and very risky business, putting the taxpayers on the hook for any bailouts if the traffic doesn't show up. With gas nearing $4 a gallon, toll roads are bleeding traffic. So future bailouts of this multi-leveraged debt is more likely by the day."

HB 1112 also broadens the authority of RMAs to have all the powers of TxDOT, including eminent domain, and Comprehensive Development Agreements (selling off Texas roads to private toll operators) if that authority is granted to the Department. The bill also broadens its authority for toll collection, which has been problematic in every area of the state. HB 1112 allows RMAs to build parking structures and collect "fees" or tolls on parking and parking meters. Phillips argues it's for the Grayson Airport, but the bill doesn't limit it to airport parking.

It would allow the RMAs to raid property tax appraisal increases for its projects, and use toll revenues for "economic development" (which is eminent domain for private gain) and for just about anything it likes. It would also repeal Section 370.317(d), Transportation Code which requires the Department to approve any agreements between a local government and private entity.

It would also let RMAs participate in the State Travel Program. Why would a LOCAL entity to need travel? Perhaps for junkets to "conventions" in Austria as the NTTA did at a cost to taxpayers of $7,000 a ticket? All of this would be done by UN-elected bureaucrats, not elected officials.

"This bill is far from being fiscally responsible much less fiscally conservative," concludes Hall.

Two other organizations besides TURF testified against this bill, Texas Public Interest Research Group and Texans for Accountable Government. Only the RMA lobbyist testified in favor.

Texas TURF is a non-partisan, grassroots, all-volunteer group defending Texans’ concerns with toll road policy, Trans Texas Corridor-style projects like public private partnerships, and eminent domain abuses. TURF promotes non-toll transportation solutions.

###

Monday, April 18, 2011

Do Texans Care about Border Security and Immigration Bills?

Immigration is a costly burden on the state.  How much?  We do not even know.  Excellent pieces of legislation have been drafted but are not moving out of committee to the floor for a vote.

Please read the following letter and sign the petition if you'd like to let our representatives know you're concerned about Texas's lack of border security and immigration related problems.

Best regards,
Rachel Delgado
President, Galveston County TEA Party

Fellow Grassroots Activists:

A few of us have prepared a NEW open letter to the Texas State House Leadership.

This letter draws attention to the many immigration-related bills currently languishing in House Committees (sound familiar)?

In any event, please review the letter, and if you support the message, please sign.

Saturday, April 16, 2011

HOUSE FRESHMEN FLUNK THE FIRST TEST

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on April 15, 2011

Three-quarters of the freshman class of Republican Congressmen – the group that was going to change America – succumbed to party pressure and voted to accept the Boehner sellout deal he struck with President Obama. How disappointing for those of us who worked hard to elect them and vested such hopes for change in their candidacies.

Please go to DickMorris.com for a list of the House freshmen who voted for the Boehner deal – sixty-one of them. The link is in the top left column. Also, please find on our site the names of the 59 men and women of courage and conviction who voted against the sellout compromise.


We cannot read the names of those who folded without a sense of exquisite pain. These were the people who were going to change Washington. Now it is evident that Washington is changing them.
It is not only the paltry nature of the $39 billion in cuts they accepted or even that they broke the basic campaign promise – and premise – on which they were elected, but that they were too frightened to use the lever available to them – shutting down the government. The Republicans would have won that fight. We had hoped that those freshmen who battled the odds so bravely to secure their seats would continue to fight just as vigorously to save America from fiscal ruin, but it was not to be.

Please go to DickMorris.com and read the names of the freshmen Republicans who voted for this deal. Again, the link is in the top left column. It is very important that you write or call them to give them a simple message: either they show more backbone next time or you will withdraw your support.

Theodore Roosevelt said of William Howard Taft that he had the “backbone of a chocolate éclair.” The same could be said for three-quarters of our freshmen.

Let’s salute the Congressmen who showed that they would keep their word to their voters. Freshmen Scott Rigells (Va), Steve Chabot (Ohio), Cory Gardener (Col), Morgan Griffith (Va), Andy Harris (Md), Robert Hurt (Va), Raul Labrador, Steve Pearce (NM), Scott Tipton (Col), Alan West (Fla) and Ben Quayle (Ariz).

Engraved beside each name, in our minds, is the time we spent campaigning for them and we cannot but feel a warm glow that we helped to put them in office. Those of you who donated to their campaigns should feel especial pride.

For the others, we apologize. If they continue to act as pawns for the Speaker, we need to admit that we should not have asked you to donate funds to them or to help them get elected. And we won’t again.

Of course, there is still room for redemption. There will soon be bitter fights over the 2012 budget and legislation to raise the debt limit. Our straying freshmen may yet discover their courage. Your calls and letters to them will help. Please, if you recognize the name of your Congressmen on the list of compliant freshmen or the name of someone to whom you have donated, please call them and express your shock and chagrin. Maybe, maybe they will get the message.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Locating liberals and conservatives in the Texas House after 90 days

By Mark P. Jones, James A. Baker Institute For Public Policy


The Texas House has now been in session for 90 days, with a total of 266 roll call votes that were at least minimally contested taking place during this period. Here I utilize these votes to provide an update of a previous analysis (conducted at the 60 day mark) locating the members of the Texas House of Representatives on the Liberal-Conservative ideological dimension along which most votes in the Texas House take place.

As was the case with the prior analysis, these ideological locations should be considered tentative, and are likely to change somewhat over the next six weeks as additional votes are held.

The three downloadable documents (All Representatives, Republicans, Democrats) provide the representatives' respective locations on this Liberal-Conservative dimension (which ranges here from the liberal extreme of -1.6 to the conservative extreme of 1.9) as well as a 95 percent credible interval (CI) for this point estimate. Only when a representative's CI does not overlap with that of another representative can we say with any real certainty that their respective locations on the Liberal-Conservative dimension are credibly distinct.
Click image to enlarge, and then zoom in.
As the figure for all representatives makes abundantly clear, the Texas House is highly polarized along partisan lines. Not only is every Democrat located at a more liberal location on this ideological dimension than every Republican, but there is absolutely no overlap of the CIs of any Democrat and Republican. As a result, we can, for instance, state with considerable certainty that at present the voting record of the most liberal Republican (former Democrat Aaron Peña) is more conservative than that of that of the most conservative Democrat (Joe Pickett).

Within the Republican Party there exists a considerable amount of ideological homogeneity, with 69 members of the delegation (out of a total of 100; Speaker Joe Straus does not normally vote) possessing an ideological location that does not differ significantly from four-fifths or more of their Republican colleagues. The remaining 31 representatives fall into either the conservative or moderate wings of the Republican delegation in Austin.

The conservative wing of the Republican Party (arbitrarily defined as those members who are significantly more conservative than one-fifth or more of the delegation) contains 17 legislators (ranging from Bill Zedler to Bryan Hughes in the figures). Within this group, six representatives stand out for their distinctive (i.e., significantly more conservative) voting behavior compared to their fellow Republicans, with over half of the delegation possessing voting records that are more moderate or less conservative. These six legislators (ranging from most to least conservative) are: Bill Zedler (87), Ken Paxton (81), Jodie Laubenberg (63), Tan Parker (58), Erwin Cain (51) and Leo Berman (50).

At the other end of the spectrum are 14 legislators (ranging from Aaron Peña to Larry Gonzales in the figures) who, at present, form the moderate wing of the Republican delegation in Austin. They have ideological scores that are significantly more liberal than one-fifth or more of their colleagues. Of note -- due perhaps to a combination of their personal ideological preferences, the ideological profile of the electorate in their projected House district and/or their future political goals -- six of these 14 representatives are either African American (Stefani Carter and James White) or Hispanic (Jose Aliseda, John Garza, Larry Gonzales and Aaron Peña). That is, at present this moderate bloc contains the Republican Party's two African American representatives and four of its six Hispanic representatives. Finally, three of these 14 House members possess an ideological location that is significantly more moderate than more than half of their fellow Republicans. They (ranging from least to most conservative) are: Aaron Peña (86), James White (68) and Sarah Davis (50).

The Democratic Party delegation is noticeably more ideologically homogenous than the Republican Party delegation, with the principal intra-party difference being the presence of a small group of conservative Democrats who have an ideological voting profile that is significantly more conservative than a large majority of their 48 Democratic colleagues. The four who stand out most as conservative within the Democratic delegation (from most to least conservative) are Joe Pickett (38), J.M. Lozano (35), Chente Quintanilla (33) and Sergio Muñoz Jr. (30). Among the party's most liberal members, only Lon Burnam has a voting record that is noticeably more liberal than that of more than one-third of his fellow Democrats.

Mark P. Jones is the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy's Fellow in Political Science as well as the Joseph D. Jamail Chair in Latin American Studies and Chair of the Department of Political Science at Rice University.

First House Redistricting Maps Presented

By Ross Ramsey and Matt Stiles, The Texas Tribune

The first House redistricting maps are out, creating one new Latino district, keeping the current number of black opportunity districts and pairing 16 incumbents in districts where they would face one of their colleagues in the 2012 elections.

"I want to thank the members of the House for working with the Redistricting Committee over the past weeks and months. We have received public testimony from across the state at hearings and submitted written materials. I deeply appreciate everyone's participation," said Redistricting Chairman Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, in a written statement. "As a member, I know this is a very personal process, and I appreciate the patience and understanding that I have received from my colleagues. The map we are proposing is a fair and legal map that represents the people of Texas and our growth over the last 10 years. And, I believe the members understand this growth resulted in some difficult decisions for me personally."

Four members got paired in East Texas (freshmen in italics):
  • Flynn/Cain
  • Ritter/Hamilton
Four got paired in West Texas:
  • Landtroop/Perry
  • Chisum/Hardcastle
Four got paired in Dallas County:
  • Driver/Burkett
  • Harper-Brown/R. Anderson
Two in Harris County:
  • Hochberg/Vo
And two in Nueces County:
  • Torres/Scott
This is just the start. The House Redistricting Committee holds its first hearings on Friday and Sunday. Other maps are expected soon. A coalition of Latino groups will unveil a map on Thursday, and individual members are certain to present — publicly and privately — their own versions of how they think the new political lines should be drawn. If lawmakers can't agree on the maps, new districts will be drawn by the Legislative Redistricting Board, a five-member panel that includes the speaker of the House, the lieutenant governor, the attorney general, the land commissioner and the comptroller. All five are Republicans.

The ideal House district in the new map will have 167,637 people in it. Left alone, the districts are way out of whack. Rep. Ken Paxton, R-McKinney, has a district with 300,801 people in it, due to growth since the current maps were drawn a decade ago. Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, has a district with 117,346 people in it.

The stats and gory details of Solomons' plan are available on the Texas Legislative Council's website (the one you want is plan 113). Here's the full announcement from Solomons about the starting map for the House, followed by the maps themselves.

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Suckers: We Were Fooled; Budget Barely Cuts Anything

Here is a good article at Ace of Spades about the "smoke and mirrors" used to pass the budget.  The article is pasted below and contains multiple links.  Here is another one at HotAir

Suckers: We Were Fooled; Budget Barely Cuts Anything
A week ago, I noted that John Boehner rejected what he called Democratic "smoke and mirrors" on the budget. "Cuts" that weren't really cuts at all, just something to present to the public as "cuts."

Win-win: You get the political benefit of cutting and you get the political benefit of not cutting, because you really didn't cut.

I urged Boehner to expose these tricks so that the public could understand what a real cut was and what a real cut wasn't. So we could not be deceived by the Democrats, or, as it really would wind up happening: So we could not be deceived by Republicans who need to show their constituents cuts but also don't really want to make those cuts.

I asked him to declare "I will not perpetrate a fraud on the American public." I'd hoped such a vow would bind him from doing just that.

I assumed, wrongly, that having taken a position against "smoke and mirrors," he would not foist upon the public a deal containing almost nothing but that.

Once again, I thought well of a Republican and am burned because of it.

Well, according to an analysis, our "$38.5 billion in cuts" is actually about $15 billion in cuts as what is counted as "cuts" is a large pile of stuff that wasn't going to be spent anyway or which (as is the case with earmarks) is about what money is spent on, not how much of it, in total, is being spent.

The specifics show that finding nearly $40 billion in cuts during the 2011 fiscal year required clever accounting and, for the White House, a willingness to concede on rhetoric to find gains on substance. 
For example, the final cuts in the deal are advertised as $38.5 billion less than was appropriated in 2010, but after removing rescissions, cuts to reserve funds and reductions in mandatory spending programs, discretionary spending will be reduced only by $14.7 billion.

As Rand Paul said -- and I didn't think he was right when I first heard this, but he was, in fact right -- we'll actually spend more in 2011 then in 2010.

This is a "cut"? In what sense?

This is absolutely horrible. You know what we've got? Another stimulus, but a covert one.

And apparently it's a stimulus that's baked in the cake and will keep getting spent year after year forever.

Boehner-Obama Deal Leaves FY11 Spending $773B Above FY08 Level—About as Big an Increase as Obama’s Stimulus
Tuesday, April 12, 2011

By Terence P. Jeffrey

(CNSNews.com) - The budget deal cut late Friday by President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) and House Speaker John Boehner (R.-Ohio) will allow $3.7555 trillion in federal spending in this fiscal year.

That is $773 billion more than federal spending was in fiscal year 2008--the fiscal year before Congress enacted a bailout for the banking industry requested by President George W. Bush and a $787-billion economic stimulus law request by President Barack Obama.

That $773 billion in spending that the federal government will do this year over and above the federal spending level of 2008 equals 98 percent of the $787 billion stimulus signed by President Obama in February 2000—on the premise that it was a one-time, short-term spending escalation needed to pump up the economy in a time of recession.

My heart is really leaving me on this. I am finding it increasingly hard to care who "wins" and who "loses." If the system is rigged against what I actually want politically, then there is no point in my engaging with the system at all.


John Podhoretz finds the cuts may even be lower than that $14 billion and change...

The total amount actually cut appears to be somewhere between $8 and $14 billion. 
And he expects there might be a populist revolt against the sham cuts -- which puts us all in a difficult spot, because Boehner and Co. have already sold this as "mission accomplished" and now we will get blamed for undoing a deal already struck.

But what choice do we have?

Could the Deal Fall Apart? My God I hope so. Several conservative Senators could abandon it, for example, and in the House, the GOP only has a 24 seat cushion. If the Tea Party representatives abandon the deal, can Boehner crib together a lump-party of GOP establishment appropriators and enough liberals to pass it?

The 15 Blue Dogs will vote for the deal, because then they can pretend to be conservative budget-cutters in purple and red districts, so Boehner will have those 15.

Extra Special Bonus: "The budget baseline," the starting baseline for the next year's funding, was moved up in this deal, above what it was in 2011, making it easier for Democrats (and Republicans!) to spend more in 2012.

You F'd Up, You Trusted Us:

Morons and moronettes, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether we broke a few promises, or took a few liberties with your money - we did. But you can't hold a whole party responsible for the behavior of a few, sick twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole two-party system? And if the whole two-party system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our political institutions in general? I put it to you - isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen! 
Thanks to Eric "Otter" Cantor.

More Details: At CBSNews.

Many of the cuts appear to have been cuts in name only, because they came from programs that had unspent funds. 
For example, $1.7 billion left over from the 2010 census; $3.5 billion in unused children's health insurance funds; $2.2 billion in subsidies for health insurance co-ops (that's something the president's new health care law is going to fund anyway); and $2.5 billion from highway programs that can't be spent because of restrictions set by other legislation.

About $10 billion of the cuts comes from targeting appropriations accounts previously used by lawmakers for so-called earmarks - pet projects like highways, water projects, community development grants and new equipment for police and fire departments. Republicans had already engineered a ban on earmarks when taking back the House this year.

Republicans also claimed $5 billion in savings by capping payments from a fund awarding compensation to crime victims. Under an arcane bookkeeping rule -- used for years by appropriators -- placing a cap on spending from the Justice Department crime victims fund allows lawmakers to claim the entire contents of the fund as "budget savings." The savings are awarded year after year.

Let's talk about earmarks first -- it has long been known (often written on the internet) that earmarks don't actually spend new money, at least not in the year they're promulgated. An earmark is not an appropriation. It is a directive to a department or agency to spend money in its general slush-fund, money that was already appropriated, on a specific measure.

Now, the conservative internet has campaigned against earmarks for two reasons: They're often a vehicle for corruption and once something gets funded once, it tends to get funded forever. So an earmark, while not actually spending new money in the year it's introduced, may wind up spending new money down the road.

But again: An earmark does not actually spend new money. It directs an agency to spent money already in its slush-fund kitty.

So cancelling earmarks is not actually cutting the budget. All it is is cutting the restrictions on an agency as to how to spend the money it has.

The $10 billion in canceled earmarks should not be considered "cuts." No less money is being spent because of such cancellations. The agency is just freer to spend as it (or the President) directs.

And this one?

Republicans also claimed $5 billion in savings by capping payments from a fund awarding compensation to crime victims. Under an arcane bookkeeping rule -- used for years by appropriators -- placing a cap on spending from the Justice Department crime victims fund allows lawmakers to claim the entire contents of the fund as "budget savings."
Just by putting a cap on the $5 billion allows you to claim the $5 billion you're spending isn't being spent? That is plainly an accounting trick.

So, so far, we have $15 billion in "cuts" which are not cuts no matter who you are.

Monday, April 11, 2011

“Tax Day Rally” Agenda

April 15th
Clear Lake Tea Party
“Tax Day Rally”

Mike Smith
Program Emcee

6:00 – 6:05pm
Invocation – Harris County Precinct 8 Constable Bill Bailey

6:06– 6:10pm
Pledge of Allegiance – CLTP Chairman John Bentley

6:10 – 6:15pm
National Anthem – Rebeca Pineda

6:16 – 6:30pm
“Promoting Economic Growth” – Harris County Commissioner Precinct 2 Jack Morman

6:32 – 6:37pm
“Right the Wrongs” – Harris County Sheriff (R) Candidate
Carl Pittman

6:39 – 6:54pm
“Texan Tax Burdens” – Former Tax Assessor & Collector
Paul Bettencourt

6:56 – 7:01pm
“Justice in the American System” – 309th Harris County District Court Judge Sheri Dean

7:03 – 7:18pm
“The Great Conservative Awakening” – U.S. Senate (R) Candidate & Former Solicitor General Ted Cruz

7:20 – 7:30pm
“Stay Engaged, America needs You” – CLTP Board Member
Roberto Gonzalez

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Nullify Now!

Time
Saturday, April 16 · 10:00am - 5:00pm

Location
AT&T Executive Education and Conference Center
1900 University Avenue
Austin, TX




More Info
The only way to GUARANTEE seats is to get them online here:
http://www.nullifynow.com/austin/

Thomas E. Woods, Kevin Gutzman, Stewart Rhodes and Debra Medina join us in Austin to talk about Nullification as a response to a federal government that refuses to follow the rules of the Constitution.

...Woods is the New York Times bestselling author of nine books, including Meltdown and The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.

A senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, he holds a bachelor’s degree in history from Harvard and his master’s, M.Phil., and Ph.D. from Columbia University.

Through historical writings, case studies, and speeches by the Founding Fathers, our speakers will give you a logical, moral, and constitutionally sound case for nullification, revealing:

--How we can roll back Obamacare, cap and trade, and other unconstitutional expansions of federal power through nullification
--Why the Founding Fathers believed that nullification was the “moderate middle ground"
--Why the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution gives the states the power to nullify unconstitutional laws
--Why states – not the Supreme Court – should arbitrate disputes between the states and the federal government over the constitutionality of the federal government’s actions.

More speakers will be added soon!

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

The Path to Prosperity: America's two futures, visualized

This 3-minute video is a visualization of the House Republicans' budget, "The Path to Prosperity," presented by Rep. Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee.

For more information on our plan to avert the US's nearing debt crisis and chart a path of growth and prosperity, visit http://budget.house.gov

Budget Proposal: The Path to Prosperity

WALL STREET JOURNAL OPINION
APRIL 5, 2011

[Ed. note: Attached to the bottom of this post, please find the budget’s Key Facts, Contrasts with the Obama Budget and the full budget plan document.]

The GOP Path to Prosperity

Our budget cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the president's budget over the next 10 years and puts the nation on track to pay off our national debt.

By PAUL D. RYAN

Congress is currently embroiled in a funding fight over how much to spend on less than one-fifth of the federal budget for the next six months. Whether we cut $33 billion or $61 billion—that is, whether we shave 2% or 4% off of this year's deficit—is important. It's a sign that the election did in fact change the debate in Washington from how much we should spend to how much spending we should cut.

But this morning the new House Republican majority will introduce a budget that moves the debate from billions in spending cuts to trillions. America is facing a defining moment. The threat posed by our monumental debt will damage our country in profound ways, unless we act.

No one person or party is responsible for the looming crisis. Yet the facts are clear: Since President Obama took office, our problems have gotten worse. Major spending increases have failed to deliver promised jobs. The safety net for the poor is coming apart at the seams. Government health and retirement programs are growing at unsustainable rates. The new health-care law is a fiscal train wreck. And a complex, inefficient tax code is holding back American families and businesses.

The president's recent budget proposal would accelerate America's descent into a debt crisis. It doubles debt held by the public by the end of his first term and triples it by 2021. It imposes $1.5 trillion in new taxes, with spending that never falls below 23% of the economy. His budget permanently enlarges the size of government. It offers no reforms to save government health and retirement programs, and no leadership.

Our budget, which we call The Path to Prosperity, is very different. For starters, it cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the president's budget over the next 10 years, reduces the debt as a percentage of the economy, and puts the nation on a path to actually pay off our national debt. Our proposal brings federal spending to below 20% of gross domestic product (GDP), consistent with the postwar average, and reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion.

A study just released by the Heritage Center for Data Analysis projects that The Path to Prosperity will help create nearly one million new private-sector jobs next year, bring the unemployment rate down to 4% by 2015, and result in 2.5 million additional private-sector jobs in the last year of the decade. It spurs economic growth, with $1.5 trillion in additional real GDP over the decade. According to Heritage's analysis, it would result in $1.1 trillion in higher wages and an average of $1,000 in additional family income each year.

Here are its major components:

• Reducing spending: This budget proposes to bring spending on domestic government agencies to below 2008 levels, and it freezes this category of spending for five years. The savings proposals are numerous, and include reforming agricultural subsidies, shrinking the federal work force through a sensible attrition policy, and accepting Defense Secretary Robert Gates's plan to target inefficiencies at the Pentagon.

• Welfare reform: This budget will build upon the historic welfare reforms of the late 1990s by converting the federal share of Medicaid spending into a block grant that lets states create a range of options and gives Medicaid patients access to better care. It proposes similar reforms to the food-stamp program, ending the flawed incentive structure that rewards states for adding to the rolls. Finally, this budget recognizes that the best welfare program is one that ends with a job—it consolidates dozens of duplicative job-training programs into more accessible, accountable career scholarships that will better serve people looking for work.

As we strengthen and improve welfare programs for those who need them, we eliminate welfare for those who don't. Our budget targets corporate welfare, starting by ending the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that is costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. It gets rid of the permanent Wall Street bailout authority that Congress created last year. And it rolls back expensive handouts for uncompetitive sources of energy, calling instead for a free and open marketplace for energy development, innovation and exploration.

• Health and retirement security: This budget's reforms will protect health and retirement security. This starts with saving Medicare. The open-ended, blank-check nature of the Medicare subsidy threatens the solvency of this critical program and creates inexcusable levels of waste. This budget takes action where others have ducked. But because government should not force people to reorganize their lives, its reforms will not affect those in or near retirement in any way.

Starting in 2022, new Medicare beneficiaries will be enrolled in the same kind of health-care program that members of Congress enjoy. Future Medicare recipients will be able to choose a plan that works best for them from a list of guaranteed coverage options. This is not a voucher program but rather a premium-support model. A Medicare premium-support payment would be paid, by Medicare, to the plan chosen by the beneficiary, subsidizing its cost.

In addition, Medicare will provide increased assistance for lower- income beneficiaries and those with greater health risks. Reform that empowers individuals—with more help for the poor and the sick—will guarantee that Medicare can fulfill the promise of health security for America's seniors.

We must also reform Social Security to prevent severe cuts to future benefits. This budget forces policy makers to work together to enact common-sense reforms. The goal of this proposal is to save Social Security for current retirees and strengthen it for future generations by building upon ideas offered by the president's bipartisan fiscal commission.

• Budget enforcement: This budget recognizes that it is not enough to change how much government spends. We must also change how government spends. It proposes budget-process reforms—including real, enforceable caps on spending—to make sure government spends and taxes only as much as it needs to fulfill its constitutionally prescribed roles.

• Tax reform: This budget would focus on growth by reforming the nation's outdated tax code, consolidating brackets, lowering tax rates, and assuming top individual and corporate rates of 25%. It maintains a revenue-neutral approach by clearing out a burdensome tangle of deductions and loopholes that distort economic activity and leave some corporations paying no income taxes at all.

This is America's moment to advance a plan for prosperity. Our budget offers the nation a model of government that is guided by the timeless principles of the American idea: free-market democracy, open competition, a robust private sector bound by rules of honesty and fairness, a secure safety net, and equal opportunity for all under a limited constitutional government of popular consent.

We can reform government so that people don't have to reorient their lives for less. We can grow our economy, promote opportunity, and encourage upward mobility. This budget is the new House majority's answer to history's call. It is now up to all of us to keep America exceptional.

File Attachments
108.72 KB
76.37 KB
3.61 MB


Mr. Ryan, a Republican, represents Wisconsin's first congressional district and serves as chairman of the House Budget Committee.

President Barack Obama's First Ad For 2012

President Barack Obama is proud of his record of accomplishment. Watch his first ad of the 2012 campaign brought to you by the National Republican Senatorial Committee.


Sunday, April 3, 2011

And the winners of the first Obamacare payout lottery are … not the taxpayers

By Jimmie Bise, HotAir.com

If you had any doubt that Obamacare was a huge scam, let Jamie Dupree blast it away like an oyster cracker before a sandstorm.
Facing questions from both parties in the Congress, the Obama Administration has now revealed how it has spent over $1.7 billion on part of the Obama health law, known as the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program.
This plan is intended to help companies pay the cost of health care for their early retirees, but lawmakers say it is wrongly benefiting companies like AT&T and General Electric, who have billions in profits on their bottom lines.
The list that follows is like a Who’s Who of big campaign donors, unions, and public employee groups. Six of the top ten recipients are pension systems for public employees. The United Auto Workers, already $3.4 richer from the auto bailout, topped the list with an award of almost $207 million. General Electric, which paid no taxes at all in 2010 and whose CEO is a darling of the White House, received $36.6 million, good for 11th place on the list.

AT&T, which placed second on the list, spent slightly under $15.4 million on lobbying efforts in 2010 and will rake in over $140 million from just this portion of Obamacare. Verizon, third on the list, will make $91.9 million on its $16.75 million 2010 lobbying investment.

Melissa Clouthier has the right of it. This has to stop. Let us set aside the obvious fact that we simply can’t afford Obamacare and focus on the message the ERRP sends. Companies now have a crystal-clear example that if they pony up a few million dollars to Washington politicians, they can expect to see their money returned to them multiplied many times. Most of us who have watched Washington politics know this has been true for a while but I can’t recall a time when our government was this blatant about paying back its corporate and union supporters. If ever there was a time for the taxpayers to push back hard against the rent-seeking and paybacks, it’s now. If not, well, we deserve everything we get.

Jimmie runs The Sundries Shack and has his own very entertaining podcast called “The Delivery”. He is also an amateur musician, an aspiring composer, an unrepentant geek and an avid fan of Twitter. This article is cross-posted there.