Michele's Bridge to Nowhere

POSTED BY JHW22

Republicans like to say Obama is three years into his Presidency, so using their math, Michele Bachmann is one year into the new Congress -- the Create Jobs Congress. And thus far, she has sponsored seven bills in one year. Yep, seven. And none are titled "Job Creating Bill". From the way she talks, you'd think she has worked tirelessly (like the Founding Fathers on slavery) to create jobs. Nope. Seven bills. None of them job creators. Well, unless you think cutting taxes is a job creator and if you do, well, you don't need to be reading this. Or unless you think building a bridge is a job creator. (In fact, it is a job creator which is why I support federal infrastructure funding. More on that later.)

To be fair to her work ethic, she has co-sponsored 92 bills this year. But that's not really leadership, is it? I mean when you sponsor 7 and co-sponsor 92, ya look like a follower. In fact, she has only sponsored 38 bills ever. Heck, Obama sponsored 121 in only two years -- he sponsored at least one bill for every four bills he co-sponsored when he was in the Senate. In two years.

Now, about that one bill of hers, her one of her many, many (seven) bills that is a job creator. Its goal is

To facilitate a proposed project in the Lower St. Croix Wild and Scenic River, and for other purposes.

Sounds a little like earmarking to me. Hey, she did the proper thing by filing a bill and submitting it to committees. Heck, she even attached a Constitutional Authority Statement. But, still, when someone uses 1/7th of her bill-sponsoring time on a local district project, it's an earmark, because an earmark is an earmark is an earmark. Well, except when it's not. And this one is not.

This bill is not an earmark because there is no money attached to it. The bridge is estimated to cost between $334 and $373 million dollars. (Remember that other bridge that was going to cost the feds about that much?) But all THIS bill does it get permission to build it because it violates some environmental concerns. She's just asking for the green light from the federal government to be able to later ask for funding for it. So, because they can't build it, there's no need to ask for money and that means she can stick to her pledge to

not seek any earmarks this year [emphasis mine]

It seems rather easy to not seek earmarks when you're not really seeking much in general. I mean seven sponsored bills is an easy way to avoid asking for earmarks. Especially when the one you REALLY want earmarks for, isn't approved for funding yet.

Or IS it? I guess it depends on what your def... oops, sorry. Anyway, DID she avoid earmark requests for this bridge? Well, yes and no. She didn't ask for earmarks this year or even over the last two years. What she did do is send out letters requesting grant consideration for federal funding in 2009 in the ... wait for it ... stimulus!! Yes, the OBAMA stimulus. You know, the one she despises and said hasn't created jobs. She sent letters on behalf of her bridge to ask for funding from the very stimulus she spoke out against before, during and after the votes.

Is anyone really surprised? I mean the gal has a lot of "choots pa", after all.

Now, I was actually for the Bridge to Nowhere before I was still for it. It made sense to me considering the need. The problem was that it became a political football and people lost sight of the need. And, instead, they built a road to nowhere with the money. A bridge would have been the better use.

And I support more federal funding for bridges, light rail, broadband, alternate energy source conduits. I am a Democrat (although I was recently told I am not one because I don't agree with the Angry Left and I was told this by a woman threatening to vote third party so yep, I AM a Democrat). I love when the federal government employs people to make things people will use. I don't care where those things are as long as people work to make them and they make lives easier where they are.

So when a "Constitutional Conservative" who believes

that many of our problems result from the federal government's insatiable — and unconstitutional — grab for power and money

actually makes a money and power grab for a bridge in the middle of nowhere while condemning the very funding source she begs to be a part of, I think to myself, "How's that conservativey, hypocrisy thing workin for ya'?"

Oh, wrong Conservative hypocrite. It's hard to keep those two straight.

Special Education

POSTED BY JHW22

Remember when Sarah Palin ran for VP and said she would be an advocate for families of children with special needs? Anyone know what she's done about that? I don't. Seriously. I haven't heard or seen anything from her on this -- not in any big way. You'd think with that bus tour and all the media coverage, and each visit she makes to *trump* another Republican's special announcements and all that media coverage, she'd make a point of saying SOMETHING, right? Has she and we just haven't heard it? I think she talks about special needs when she does radio interviews, but not more so than fishing or the lamestream media or Obama. In fact, she probably talks more about people being mean to her kids than about what we can do to help kids with special needs.

I'd really like her to talk more, I think. I guess I don't know that I would. I have no idea what she'd say. Maybe I am glad she is quiet.

But here's the deal: a lot of cities and states are having serious budget problems and are cutting education and specifically special education. And yet, I don't think she's said anything about this. What's more interesting is that federal stimulus funds were sent to states to help keep programs and teachers on the job for kids with special needs. And that stimulus money was designed to run out. Yet, Republican Governors and legislators have welcomed the money (while bemoaning it) and haven't done anything to find ways to replace it. Some states (the above link to the Brownback article for example) are even willing to lose federal funding to schools and special education because of their so-called principles.

Then, in October of 2010, President Obama signed Rosa's Law, changing references in federal law from mental retardation to intellectual disability, and references to a mentally retarded individual to an individual with an intellectual disability, I don't know that Palin made any Facebook posts.

I can't find a Facebook post or Tweet of her congratulating Obama for signing a law that prevents the government from using a term she found a fire-able offense when used by one of his employees. She made a show of that. Yet, I can't find anything on Rosa's Law.

So where is Sarah Palin on this issue that is so important to her brand? I don't know what she's saying about special education funding. I just don't see anything.

Maybe I am not looking hard enough. But for someone who loves to take the microphone by the horns, she sure hasn't used HER bully pulpit to forward anything on special needs. Was she only going to be a fierce advocate if elected?

She has the stage. What's she waiting for?

Perry's Tax Plan Hurts Schools

POSTED BY JHW22

I just watched Karen Finney, on MSNBC, correctly remind viewers that Rick Perry's job growth in Texas, over the last two years, was in part due to the federal stimulus. That needs to be stated over and over.

What also needs to be stated over and over, is that Republicans in the state have been calling out Perry's state tax plan as detrimental to the state, primarily to education.

In 2006, the then State Comptroller, a Republican who later ran against Perry as an Independent, stated EMPHATICALLY and repeatedly that Perry's plan would destroy school budgets. She wrote, in a public letter to Perry

Texans deserve relief from high property taxes, but they do not need it at the expense of future tax hikes and more cuts in public education. Educators are justifiably skeptical of this program because they know that when the state controls the purse strings, rather than locally elected school boards, the result will be devastating to our schools.

The property tax relief contained in the bill, if it can be financed past 2008, will be quickly eroded by rising property values, and increases in local tax rates forced on local school districts struggling to keep up with rising costs. In as little as five years, the state could be right back in court.

Finally, your plan represents the largest tax bill in Texas history, includes an unconstitutional income tax, represents a 200 percent tax increase on Texas businesses at a time when the state has taken an $8.2 billion surplus out of the pockets of hardworking Texans, and does not pay for itself as required by the spirit of our Texas Constitution's "pay-as-you-go, no-deficit-spending" provision. That is unconscionable.

Governor, we should be working to improve state services for Texans and to reduce the burden of government on businesses and individuals. This plan creates a rolling mess that will take 20 years for future leaders of the state to untangle. Texans will recognize this plan for what it is -- a short-term, smoke-and-mirrors patch at best.

Sadly, the only part she was wrong about was "Texans will recognize this plan for what it is -- a short-term, smoke-and-mirrors patch at best."

My husband works for a local school district that just voted down a property tax increase that would have amounted to a bag of chips a week per household. Now buses are on the chopping block, as well as MORE teachers, sports, music, summer school, etc.

The ISD is ranked one of the highest in the state on ROI -- meaning they are efficiently run. Sure they have waste they can cut. But that waste is a blip on the $$$ scale. YET, the people most vocal against the tax increases' ONLY argument was that the ISD wastes money. Since all evidence from the current (Republican) state comptroller and other measurements shows otherwise, and even though the dollars they point to as waste were so minor that we'd still have a budget disaster, all I can say is that messaging, not common sense or comprehension of basic math, won out.

Perry says he has brought jobs to TX (without crediting the many of which were created by the stimulus to the feds). But when you bring families to TX then eliminate the way to fund educating the kids in those families, you can't blame the local ISDs. You especially can't blame the ISDs with high rankings of budget efficiency.

The entire state is facing school budget crises. Why people think each and every ISD created the problem is absurd.

And THIS guy may run for President. If he does, Texans better not fail the American people. We better tell everyone what he has done.

We need to make sure the independents hear the correct messaging: Perry destroyed the budget in the state of Texas. He has led the state since Bush left and has had a Republican state congress. All of the state's problems are his to own and he can't run away from them while running on lies. And finally, if you close your eyes and listen to him talk, you can hear George W. Bush -- and I don't mean the accent.

The only gift his run against Obama would mean would be that Obama COULD actually run against Bush policies again.

So I am also asking a favor: don't bash Texas or Texans. Help the blues in this red/purple state fight. Don't denigrate the state because we need friends outside the state standing with us. We'll have a huge battle on our hands down here -- mocking us will only give us additional fights to counter. Attack Perry and HIS policies. But treat the state with respect and friendship and lift us so that we may have the strength to fight another Texas governor ruining the country!

Sorry Scott Walker, Get Off The Government Teat

We all have to tighten our belt. We can't just keep doling out money we don't have. Unions are evil. Teachers and firefighters are to blame for all the deficits.

So to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who turned down $810 million in federal money to build a high speed rail system from Madison to Milwaukee, but now is asking for $150 million to add trains to the existing Millwaukee-Chicago line, I say "fuck you."

Fuck you, you don't deserve a dime of federal money after demonizing the government's reckless spending and wasting of the taxpayers' money. Fuck you, you don't get a redistribution of the wealth from other states. No welfare for you, Scott Walker. Fuck off.

Maybe you could have gotten, oh I don't know, $33 million if you asked nicely.  $33 million is a nice number, kind of rolls off the tongue. And you know where you could have gotten the rest of the money? From the $117 million in corporate tax cuts you signed into law just a couple of weeks into office. Tell your corporate pals you'll have to rescind that tax cut, you jackass. Or maybe take a call from David Koch and ask him to float you. $117 million is pocket change to the Koch brothers.

Maybe you can raid the firefighters' and police officers' pensions since you failed to do it the first time thinking it would suit you politically. Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, work it out and stop being so goddamned hypocritical.