WAYS HB658 WEAKEN ALABAMA’S IMMIGRATION LAW

April 9th, 2012

 

ANALYSIS OF CHANGES THAT WEAKEN ALABAMA’S IMMIGRATION LAW
By Elois Zeanah, President
Alabama Federation of Republican Women
April 10, 2012

 

Changes weaken our current law and practically nullify its intent to reduce illegal immigration through attrition. 
This makes a mockery of the law!

Changes that Weaken our Current Immigration Law in HB658

 

1.  Contractors no longer have to require an affidavit from subcontractors that their workers are legal
(Section 31-13-9, page 22)

 

 Concern:  The primary problem with this change is that the indirect hiring of illegal aliens is through subcontractors.  The current law corrected the problem of contractors claiming deniability by holding contractors accountable for ensuring that subcontractors use E-Verify by signing an affidavit.  The requirement that subcontractors sign an affidavit attested by a notary, however, was burdensome.  This doesn’t have to be burdensome for the contractor.

 

 Solution:  The solution could be as simple as (1) the contractor including an affidavit on the contract that subcontractors sign; this removes the time/expense of a notary; and (2) the state posting on a state website the names of all businesses which enroll in E-Verify.  This would remove angst from the contractor and should be done in any event to aid enforcement of the law and to encourage compliance by contractors including subcontractors.

 

2.  “The law would not apply to companies doing less than 50% of their business with the state.”  (Rep. Kerry Rich)http://www.sandmountainreporter.com/news/state_news/article_5922ca4e-827e-11e1-86c5-001a4bcf887a.html)

 

3.   Citizens can no longer sue state officials who have the responsibility for, but refuse to enforce the immigration law.  Citizens must now petition a local District Attorney or the Attorney General, who are given free rein to dismiss petitions. 
(Section 31-13-5, page 10)

 

Concern:  The purpose of this provision in the current immigration law is to prevent Alabama from becoming a sanctuary state.  The revision removes this safety valve.  The revision to give DA/AG discretion to file a lawsuit based on a complaint can ensure that there will be in most cases no enforcement.  To wit:

 

 The overload of DA’s and Courts is so horrendous that even most murders don’t go to trial.  It’s unrealistic to think that DA’s would take scarce resources and use hundreds of man-hours to investigate complaints against officials who ignore non-compliance.

 

 A humorous case in point is the Attorney General, who is the top law enforcement officer in the state, asked that the responsibility for his office to enforce Alabama’s immigration law be removed since he’s too busy already.

 

 To put the purpose of the current immigration law in context:  The reason for authorizing citizens to sue is to avoid experiences of municipalities, churches, and officials in other states which refuse to comply with or enforce immigration laws.  It’s imperative for citizens to have the ability to take civil action, if needed, to prevent Alabama from becoming a sanctuary state because officials won’t perform their legal duties.

 

Solution:  Restore wording in current law.

 

4.   Employers who fire workers to hire illegals now get virtual immunity since the bar of proof has been raised prohibitively high.  (Section 31-13-17, pages 58-59)

 

 Concerns:  Revisions make it impossible for wronged citizen-workers to sue employers who fire and replace them with illegal-workers or discriminate against them in other ways in favor of illegal aliens. 

While the current law is a clear, concise, single paragraph, stating that a citizen-employee can sue an employer for hiring/retaining an illegal alien and discriminating against him/her, revisions ADD more than a page, detailing what the citizen-employee must do to prevail; and REMOVES language that the losing party must pay court costs and reasonable attorney fees for the prevailing party.

 

 Even if the citizen-employee wins in court, employers are not penalized for hiring illegal aliens and there’s no language that employers must terminate illegal workers.  Nor do convicted employers have to pay a fine, face jail time, be put on probation, or lose licenses.  Courts are prohibited from charging convicted employers of any civil or criminal crimes or be asked to pay sanctions.  Recovery by employees is limited to compensatory relief (not spelled out).  They do not get their jobs back and do not get attorney/court costs paid, though they won.

 

 While provisions prohibit courts from placing civil or criminal penalties against convicted employers, a NEW provision makes it mandatory that a person who files a complaint against an employer shall be guilty of a Class C misdemeanor if it is considered false or frivolous.

 

Solution:  Restore language in the current law.

 

 5.  Employers can avoid any penalty upon conviction of knowingly hiring illegal aliens if a court decides the project is in the “public interest”  (Section 31-13-15, page 46)

 

 Concern:  Current law subjects employers who willfully break the law to revocation of their business license throughout the state for a 2nd  violation for a specific location and revoked statewide after a third violation.  This is lax.  But under HB658, (1) employers’ licenses can be revoked only after a third violation if they occur within a five-year-period – but the business license can be re-instated.  (2) All penalties can be avoided if a court decides hiring illegal aliens is okay because the project itself is in the “public interest”.  

 

6.  Public schools can no longer collect data on children of illegal aliens to help the state budget for their fiscal impact.  (Section 31-13-27, page 66)

 

Concern:  The current law directs schools to compile information to help identify fiscal impacts to the state of providing a free education to children of illegal aliens.  We know that ESL classes costs the state over $200,000 every year.  Shouldn’t the state/schools be aware of the full costs – especially when the state budget is in a crunch and the state has to cut some functions by at least 20%?  How can the state otherwise budget for these escalating costs at a time when teachers are being let go, there’s no money to buy textbooks or classroom supplies, and the state board of education has forced schools to implement national Common Core standards, which will cost taxpayers an additional hundreds of millions of dollars.  The information requested for children of illegal parents is nothing different than is currently required of all citizen parents.  Laws should be equally applied to all.  Repeal of this section is apparently an effort to be “politically correct”.  

 

 Solution:  Restore the language in the current law.

 

 7.  Landlords can now knowingly rent to illegal aliens.  (Section 31-13-13, page 41)

 

 Concern:  Changes repeal the section in the current law that makes it a crime for a landlord to knowingly rent to illegal aliens.  Current law prohibits concealing, harboring, shielding, encouraging illegal aliens to come to/remain in Alabama.  It classifies the willful renting to illegal aliens, while knowing they were in the state unlawfully, as harboring.  Current law tracks federal law.  Section 31-13-13, page 40 is of similar concern.  This repeals the section that makes it a crime to encourage or induce an illegal alien to move to Alabama if that person knows or recklessly disregards the fact that coming to or residing in Alabama is against federal law.

 

 Solution:  Restore the language in the current law.

 

 8.  An additional concern is that added authority for the Department of Homeland Security is internally inconsistent.  The added authority for Homeland Security to request proof of enrollment in E-Verify when a complaint is filed against an employer and to be able to inspect records of employers and check employees against E-Verify is laudable.  However, this requires unnecessary time/resources and is internally inconsistent. 

 

 Section 13-13-15(b), page 46, mandates that ALL employers enroll in E-Verify.  However, this revision does not penalize the employer for failure/refusal to enroll in E-Verify.  This rewards unlawful employers, who have an economic advantage over employers who obey the law.

 

 For this revision to be meaningful, the bill must penalize employers found to be in non-compliance with this immigration law.  If there is no pain for violation immigration law, there is no deterrent factor for dishonest employers.  This makes a mockery of the law.

 

 Solution:  Make the failure to enroll in E-Verify a misdemeanor, as Arizona does.  This would make enforcement easier, faster, less expense, and more sure in many instances.

 

11. Police can no longer ask for documentation during a lawful stop, detention, or arrest if officers reasonably suspects the individual is illegally in the country UNLESS there is an arrest or traffic citation.
(Section 31-13-12, page 37)

 

 Concern:  Revisions significantly limit the scope of the current law’s immigration status check provision.  Current law requires a law enforcement officer during a lawful stop, detention, or arrest to conduct an immigration status check of individuals if the officer reasonably suspects the individual to be in the U.S. illegally.  Changes, however, limit the requirement to conduct immigration status checks to only situations where an individual is arrested or issued a traffic ticket.

 

 Solution:  Restore current language in HB56.


SUMMARY and RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STRENGTHENING HB658

 

By Elois Zeanah, President, Alabama Federation of Republican Women
April 10, 2012

 

 

 

SUMMARY

 

 Changes to our current immigration law are premature.   The Legislature should wait until after the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the Arizona law, after which Alabama’s was modeled.  The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Arizona’s SB 1070 on April 25.  The Court is then expected to rule on SB 1070 in June.

 

Lawmakers are pushed forward with changes despite the fact that 75% of Alabama voters support the law.  (See FAIR poll, March 19, 2012)

 

 

 

Changes that weaken Alabama’s current law include:

 

  1.  Contractors no longer have to require an affidavit from subcontractors that their workers are legal.
  2. The law would not apply to companies doing less than 50% of their business with the state.
  3. Citizens can no longer sue state officials who are responsible for but refuse to enforce the law.
  4. Employers who fire workers to hire illegals now get virtual immunity since the bar of proof has been raised prohibitively high.
  5. Employers can avoid any penalty upon conviction of knowingly hiring illegal aliens if a court decides the project is in the public interest.
  6. Courts cannot fine, jail, put on probation or suspend licenses of employers convicted of hiring illegals, yet citizens shall be found guilty of a Class C misdemeanor if the complaint is considered false or frivolous.
  7. Courts can no longer require convicted employers to pay costs of former employees who filed and won.
  8. Public schools can no longer collect data on children of illegal aliens to help budget for their fiscal impact.
  9. Landlords can now knowingly rent to illegal aliens.
  10. It is no longer a crime to encourage or induce illegal aliens to move to/remain in Alabama.
  11. Police can no longer ask for documentation during a lawful stop, detention, or arrest unless an individual is arrested or issued a traffic ticket.

 

WAYS TO FIX THE BILL:

 

  1. Increase penalties on unlawful employers who commit tax fraud by hiring illegal aliens as a deterrent

 

  • HB 658 gives employers an economic incentive to break the law.  This should be corrected:
  • Incorporate Section 30-29-110 of Alabama tax codes, which make it a felony for employers to commit tax fraud.
    • Tax evasion under the law occurs when employers fail to (a) pay payroll taxes for employees hired “under the table”; (b) collect state taxes from employees, and (c) keep records and supply information regarding employees for tax purposes.
    • Penalties under the above tax code for tax fraud conviction are not more than $100,000 or $500,000 for a corporation, or imprisonment of not more than three years, or both.

 

  1. Make the refusal of employers to enroll in E-Verify a misdemeanor, as Arizona does.

 

  • The bill currently mandates that ALL employers SHALL enroll in E-Verify.  However, there is no penalty for not doing so.
  • No penalty and lax enforcement with the possibility of a “get out of jail free card”, even if convicted, makes a mockery of the law.

 

  1. Restore the requirement that contractors be held liable for hiring ONLY legal workers on their jobs.  This can be accomplished by adding an affidavit to contracts with subcontractors.
  2. Require appropriate state website to list names of businesses which enroll in E-Verify.  This will enable state enforcement officers and contractors to be a click away from enforcing Alabama’s immigration law, add certainty to enforcement by saving time and money in investigative and other enforcement costs, and save taxpayers and state budgets hundreds of millions of dollars every year in costs to subsidize unlawful employers who commit tax fraud.

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Immigration | No Comments »

Is Obama Leading America Toward a Venezuelan-Style Democracy?

December 4th, 2011
 

By Elois Zeanah

 “We can’t wait” is a phrase we hear often from President Obama  when Congress won’t fall in line with his agenda. Obama uses the  excuse “we can’t wait” to end-run Congress, Courts and the Constitution through regulations, executive orders and other arbitrary actions. 

What about the Constitution’s separation of powers and checks and balances, did you ask?  When has that stopped this president, who appointed czars, 45 total to date according to Judicial Watch, which are unconstitutional at the outset?   

President Obama makes it clear from his statements and actions that he believes our American system of government, created and protected by our Constitution, is obsolete and needs to be redesigned.  He has surrounded himself with czars who are socialists, Marxists, Communists, and admirers of Hugo Chavez, to help him get around what he sees as barriers within the Constitution to an imperial presidency.  Is Obama leading America toward a Venezuelan-style democracy?

Similarities Between What Obama is Doing and What Hugo Chavez Does

  • Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez “constantly attacks the moneyed classes charging them with creating that nation’s problems.” 
    • Obama argues “that the moneyed classes of Wall Street have created the financial crisis through greed and fraud”[i] and plays the class warfare card.
  • The Venezuelan-style economic model is based on statist-driven crony capitalism.[ii]
    • Obama’s administration makes “relentless attempts to inculcate the practices” of this model.[iii]
    • Obama is using regulations to crush free enterprise through regulations as political favors to unions and environmental groups and to expand the powers of the presidency. (Examples are enormous and some are covered in upcoming articles regarding the abuses of the Environmental Protection Agency, National Labor Relations Boards, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Justice, etc.)
  • The political and economic model developed by Venezuelan President Chavez “concentrated power in the hands of the executive, curtailed the independence of the judiciary, [and] show[ed] limited tolerance for domestic critics….”[iv] 
    • President Obama is using czars to create a shadow government within the executive branch completely outside the framework of the Constitution.
    • President Obama is attempting a government takeover of the healthcare, energy and education sectors to create central-government planning.
    • President Obama closed thousands of private automobile dealerships without payment of any sort and demanded that they turn over their assets and customer lists to competitors via General Motors, which was characterized as “gangster government”.[v] 
  • President Obama wants courts to break free from Constitutional constraints to interpret laws and, instead, to make laws by venturing into issues of redistribution of wealth; and political, economic, and social justice.   
  • President Obama repeatedly shows limited tolerance for domestic critics and uses intimidation and harassment tactics to silence private businesses, Legislators, conservative cable TV and radio talk show hosts, and ordinary citizens.

By his behavior, President Obama seems to think he can imitate President Hugo Chavez’s charisma and make revolutionary changes to the Constitution by ignoring it, by silencing critics, by federal takeovers of private sectors of the economy, by increasingly taking on dictatorial powers and stifling the judiciary and the press in the process[vi], and by redistribution of wealth and expanding the base of Americans who depend on government handouts.  After all, Chavez received 58% of the vote in a national referendum, mostly from making poor people dependent on government. 

Can Obama expand the base of Americans who depend on government handouts and convince enough people to give up more freedoms in return to ensure his re-election?  President Obama continues to excuse his violations of the Constitution by his slogan, “We can’t wait.”  Some say, “Yes, we can!”

[i] “Dick Dove on ‘Venezuelan Style Democracy’”

[ii] Mike Curtiss, The Wall Street Journal letters, “No Risk Discipline, No Return Potential, No Shame”, November 21, 2011

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] CSR No. 20, November 2006, Council on Foreign Affairs, “Living with Hugo,” by Richard Lapper

[v] Michael Barone, a senior writer with U.S. News & World Report and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics, called this “gangster government.” 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

It is Immoral that OBAMA is “Passing the Buck” to Young People to Pay for Illegal Immigration

July 17th, 2011

By Elois Zeanah

President Obama’s plans to legalize illegal immigration reminds me of the TV game show “Pass the Buck” which premiered in 1978:  It relied on luck, instant decisions under pressure, and players risked losing everything.  “Pass the Buck” lasted only 13 weeks and dissolved into the long-running game show, “The Price is Right”. 

Let’s hope Obama’s shortsighted vision to pass the buck to young people with illegal immigration will also fizzle and get the boot by voters, so that we can return to “The Price is Right”.  Otherwise, the same young voters who put Obama in office will ironically pay for his folly, forfeiting family income that should go to improve their quality of life to burdensome taxes to pay for the past generation’s free ride.   

Economic Impact of Passing the Buck to Our Kids and Grandkids is a Moral Issue

It is immoral to pass the buck to our children and grandchildren to pay our debt and steal their quality of life even while they are in diapers and before they grow up to earn their first pay check.  It is our duty to protect our children and grandchildren in every way – including their economic future and freedoms.

How narcissistic and reckless to force our children and grandchildren to forfeit their future family income, that should go to improve their quality of life, to burdensome taxes to pay for our generation’s free ride! 

Even as the federal government is debating NOW how to avoid an immediate debt default, we’re talking not about reducing the principal of our debt that will pass to the next generation, but about defaulting on the interest payments.  Interest payments on the U.S. debt is $29 billion a month.  There is no plan and no way in sight to start paying down the $14 trillion debt (which does not include trillions more in unfunded liabilities).

Consider the Tragedy This Generation is Forcing on Young People

Let’s face the tragedy that this generation is forcing upon our children and grandchildren by considering this scenario.  A 30-year-old daughter’s parents are retiring.  The parents have worked hard and scrimped all their lives to live their last 20 years in retirement in comfort.  After all they deserve it!  They’ve been fiscally frugal their whole lives and have sacrificed to give their children more than they had growing up.  Their children are now grown and on their own.

Now that the parents have retired, they decided their money has been reduced in value by inflation and while they can live a comfortable lifestyle in retirement, they decided they’d like to live a more luxurious lifestyle instead.  The parents have a great credit rating, so what’s stopping them?  After all, America has become an entitlement society, so why should they not have everything they want even if they can’t pay for it when so many other people do?  So they buy their dream by borrowing far beyond their means!

This Generation is Passing the Buck

In this scenario, when the 30-year-old daughter’s parents die, she expects to live a similar comfortable lifestyle as her parents, but she discovers to her dismay, her parents passed the bills for past pleasures to her.

Alarmed, she wrestles with the reality that not only will she not inherit money from her parents, or be able to have the freedom to pursue her dreams with her own money, or be able to provide for her basic needs without considerable sacrifice, or to help her children achieve more than she did or give her children the benefits equal to what she had had growing up.  Instead, she is worse off than her parents were and will have to spend almost every penny she earns to pay off her parent’s debts.  Horrified, the daughter wonders how her parents failed to see through the high-falutin’ illusion of their retirement while there was still time to change the outcome.

This is analogous to the entitlement mentality of illegal aliens and those who support them.  Illegal immigrants are not entitled to other people’s money and to put our own poor people as well as future generations at risk financially.

Today’s Young Generation will face this dilemma unless enough young people and their parents slow down the gathering storms that could overshadow the future adult lives of today’s young people.  We, the Older Generation, are the guardians of the American Dream and of our children’s well being, and it’s our responsibility to safeguard our children’s future.

How can people sleep at night and suggest that government borrow more money we don’t have?  We must pay back money hundreds of billions of dollars every year in money we don’t have to give to people who break our law; who throw the balance of our immigration law out of whack and make immigration work against us, not for us; who take money intended for the poorest among us; and who run up our indebtedness that our children and grandchildren will have to pay, while enjoying none of the benefits?

How can President Obama’s conscience allow him to continue to talk about more borrowing and more spending while passing the buck to today’s young people who will have to deal with his reckless spending?  He has in three years raised our national debt by four trillion dollars.  If he succeeds in giving amnesty (a path to citizenship) to 11 million illegal aliens, he will borrow and spend another additional trillion dollars every year forevermore — of someone else’s money:  our kids and grandkids.  This is immoral!

Posted in Debt Ceiling, Economic Crisis, Immigration, Taxes, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

SHOWDOWN ON DEBT CEILING: Is Obama “The Great Pretender” to Seniors?

July 11th, 2011

By Elois Zeanah

“The Great Pretender” is a much nicer phrase than “con man,” so I recall the catchy Rhythm-and-Blues tune of the 1950’s that would imprison my brain without escape as I write about President Obama’s attempt to manipulate Republicans to raise the debt ceiling – while he pretends to care.  I will do so, in part, with parody.  

Obama pretends he cares about how expanding entitlements grow the deficit, but what he really wants is for Republicans to lay out a plan (which he won’t do) to cut entitlements (which he knows must be done) so he can attack Republicans and gain political points. 

Oh, oh, oh, yes, I’m the great pretender
Pretending to seniors that I care
Their need is such
They’re blind to my touch
So lonely they’re easy to scare

If Obama really cared for seniors, he’d be truthful with seniors and work with Republicans to ensure that those currently on Medicare will not lose benefits while shoring up Medicare for future retirees, instead of:

  • using scare tactics like MediScare,
  • using ObamaCare to load up and bankrupt Medicare and Medicaid at a faster pace,
  • appointing a health advisor to ration their health care,
  •  putting new taxes on medical devices that seniors depend upon heavily,
  • stripping $500 million from Medicare, and
  • appointing a health czar that has repeated stated that the Hippocratic Oath should not be applied to seniors – or anyone else for that matter.

Oh, yes, I’m the great pretender
Creating a world of my own
I play the game but to my real shame
I’ve left seniors to fend so all alone

Too real is this feeling of make-believe
So real is my power to so well conceal

Oh, yes, I’m the great pretender
Just laughing and gay like a clown
I seem to be what I’m not you see
I’m wearing my ego like a crown
Pretending that I care when seniors ‘re around

Posted in Debt Ceiling, Uncategorized | No Comments »

DEBT REDUCTION: Alternative To Break Deadlock

July 10th, 2011

By Elois Zeanah

In his less than three years in office, President Obama has asked that the debt ceiling be raised three times.  Now he’s asking for the debt ceiling to be raised for the fourth time.  The last time Obama asked to raise the debt ceiling in February 2010, Congress voted to do so with the condition that the Government Accounting Office (GAO)  find ways to cut federal spending to cut the deficit.  This provision was inserted on the request of Representative Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma).

Negotiations to find ways to cut $2 trillion in spending are needlessly churning, as both political sides draw lines they won’t cross.  There’s an easier way:   Take from the table the fixes to Medicare and Social Security, since the President and Democrats prefer to put off solving these problems, and STOP the outrageous expenditures that American taxpayers are forced to fund that deal with fraud, waste, and duplicative government programs.  Several ways are listed in this short article.

President Obama promised when campaigning in 2007 that he would address similar issues, so he could not “spin the story” to keep from doing nothing in hopes of blaming Republicans for not raising the debt ceiling. 

Since a condition was placed on the last debt ceiling raise that ways be found by the Government Accounting Office (GAO) to cut spending to reduce the deficit the third time Obama requested additional borrowing, it would be appropriate to use the suggestions GAO identified in a March 2011 report to cut spending as part of a negotiated settlement to raise the debt ceiling this time. 

The GAO report is the first of several reports on ways to cut spending to reduce the deficit.  The March report “uncovers billions of dollars in wasteful spending by the U.S. government due to duplicative work done by dozens of agencies.”[i]

GAO identified between $100 billion and $200 billion in duplicative spending

It has been estimated that there are 1,000 duplicate programs which waste billions of dollars annually.[ii] The GAO report “could serve as a template for lawmakers in both parties as they move to cut federal spending and consolidate programs to reduce the deficit.”[iii]  For example:

  • 15 different agencies oversee food-safety laws
  • 20+ separate programs deal with ways to help the homeless
  • 80 programs involve economic development
  • 82 federal programs focus on improving teacher quality
  • 80 programs help disadvantaged people with transportation
  • 47 programs deal with job training and employment
  • 56 programs help people understand finances
  • 18 programs on food and nutrition assistance

The GAO report states “Reducing or eliminating duplication, overlap, or fragmentation could potentially save billions of tax dollars annually and help agencies provide more efficient and effective services.”  There are many other ways to cut spending other than entitlement programs. 

$150 billion every year is spent on fraud in Medicare and Medicaid

Fraud in government healthcare runs 15% (versus 1% in the private sector). This outrageous waste of tax dollars by government through fraud in Medicare and Medicare should be stopped now!  This would save $150 billion a year[iv] – and help shore up both healthcare programs at the same time.  President Obama promised to do this when he took office. 

Cancel unspent TARP funds (up to $396 million)[v]

Cancel unspent Stimulus funds ($266 billion)[vi]

Reduce government employment by hiring one person for every two who leaves civilian government service until workforce is reduce to pre-Obama levels ($35 billion)[vii]

Freeze government civilian pay for one year ($30 billion)[viii]

Reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ($30 billion)[ix]

These are just a few way to cut spending by billions of dollars to cut the deficit without dealing with entitlement programs and could break the deadlock.

[i] The Wall Street Journal, “Billions in Bloat Uncovered in Beltway,” by Damian Paletta, March 1, 2011

[ii] “National Suicide:  How Washington is Destroying the American Dream from A to Z” by investigative reporter Martin Gross, released in September 2009

[iii] The Wall Street Journal, “Billions in Bloat Uncovered in Beltway,” by Damian Paletta, March 1, 2011

[iv] Cal Thomas “Deficit has gone far beyond being our children’s burden,” August 26, 20009

[v] H.R. 3140 introduced by Rep. Tom Price of Georgia

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] H.R. 5348 introduced by Rep. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming

[viii] Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin

[ix] H.R. 1294 introduced by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas; H.R. 4653 introduced by Rep. Scott Garrett of New Jersey

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

HOW TO BREAK THE DEBT CEILING IMPASSE: The President & Congress Should Take the Same Medicine They Force on Seniors

July 10th, 2011

By Elois Zeanah

 I have a unique proposal to solve the debt ceiling impasse: Take off the table fixes to Medicare and Social Security, and ask President Obama to take the same medicine he forces seniors to take: ObamaCare.

Money saved could go toward the deficit and this would show the “good faith” that the President asks of others. Neither the president nor Congress is affected by the health of Medicare or Social Security; therefore they have no stake in them and are in no hurry to fix them.

Politicians Should be Held to the Same Laws They Force on Seniors

Listed below are a few suggestions dealing with healthcare costs that politicians have legislated for themselves but which are not available to seniors or other citizens.

#1 Recommendation: The President and Congress should be covered by ObamaCare the same as seniors and have no better insurance coverage that the rest of us.

#2 Recommendation: The President and Congress should pay for their own healthcare. Currently, taxpayers, who cannot afford health care themselves, pay 75% of politicians’ insurance premiums.

#3 Recommendation: End the taxpayer subsidy for extra health care perks (their own pharmacy in the Capitol, including a team of doctors, technicians and nurses), which costs taxpayers an additional $2 million a month.

#4 Recommendation: Repeal the generous tax break politicians gave themselves but not seniors which subtracts their health care premium from their income before taxes.

#5 Recommendation: Revise the Medicare Reform Act of 2004 which prohibits Medicare from negotiating for lower prices with pharmaceutical companies.

If the President and Congress are not bound by laws they pass, they have no stake in them.  It’s time they had some skin in the game!

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

How does Obama’s Economy Compare with Greece? Both Use the Keynesian Economic Model

July 9th, 2011

By Elois Zeanah
July 9, 2011

Obama believes that “spending money is the same as making money.”[i]  This is the same type behavior that got Greece in trouble.  President Obama’s profligate spending reminds me of the movie “War of the Roses,” where the self-indulgent behavior of a married couple (played by Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner) exacts a terrible price upon their children.  Michael Douglas says to Kathleen Turner:  “It’s a lot easier to spend it than it is to make it, honeybun!”     

This misguided behavior, which our children pay a horrific price for, is followed by “some so-called economists [who] are left-wing ideologues.  Most, however, are simply victims of someone described colourfully by Thomas Woods in Meltdown as ‘one of the twentieth century’s crackpots’: John Maynard Keynes.”[ii]

The Keynesian Economic Model

“Keynesians believe that economics are driven by demand.  If private sector demand is insufficient they believe that it must be supplemented by government demand to ensure full employment …. [Keynesian] satisfies a worldview that capitalism needed saving from itself by big government ….  The debt crises in Europe and in the United States makes it evident that big government is the problem and that Keynesianism is part of that problem.”[iii]

Obama’s 2009 stimulus copied the Keynesian Model

“The Obama Administration has emphasized the Keynesian theory of demand management in defense of its 2009 stimulus package and continued high government spending …. The Administration’s stimulus program was a textbook application of Keynesian economics, and the largest deliberate Keynesian experiment in history.”[iv] 

The Stimulus did not Help but Hurt the Economy

  • In January 2009, the unemployment rate was 7.8%.
  • Obama claimed his stimulus plan (big spending increases and tax rebates) would cap unemployment at 8% and decrease it to about 7% by late 2010.
  • Instead, unemployment climbed to 10.1% within one year.
  • “In six of the last eight recoveries, all the jobs lost below peak employment were regained within two years of recession’s end.”[v]
  • “In this recovery we are still seven million jobs below peak employment in 2008, and about two million fewer than if the $830 billion 2009 stimulus had worked as advertised and held unemployment below 8%.”[vi]

“If Keynesian policies worked, the government’s fiscal and monetary policies should have generated a roaring recovery.  (Of course, if Keynesian policy prescriptions truly worked, countries like Greece would be economic dynamos because of their spendthrift ways.)”[vii]

“The Keynesian model was popular in the 1950s and 1960s, but was discredited by the stagflation of the 1970s when inflation and unemployment both worsened, a combination that the Keynesian model predicts cannot occur.  A generation later, though, many people have forgotten past lessons, and Keynesian theory is again popular.”[viii]

The 2011 U.S. Debt will be 100% of GDP

“The most recent projection from the Congressional Budget Office put the total [U.S. debt] at over $15 trillion by the end of the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, and said that was expected to total 100 percent of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) for the year.”[ix]  This insanity must end, and the solution is NOT to continue to spend, raise taxes, and raise the debt ceiling.

While the War of the Roses movie is a slapstick tragedy concerning the decline and fall of a marriage, the belief by Obama that spending money is the same as making money is a real-time tragedy that must end to protect our economy and our children.

[i] ECONOMICS: Time to Topple Keynesian Economics, Quadrant Online, http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2010/9/time-to-topple-keyneisan-economics, by Peter Smith

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid.

[v] Wall Street Journal Editorial:  “The Jobs Double-Dip,” July 9010, 2011

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation, “Past Recessions Offer Perspective on the Federal Government’s Deficit and Debt Problems”, July 6, 2011, Advisory No. 276

[viii] ECONOMICS: Time to Topple Keynesian Economics, Quadrant Online, by Peter Smith.

[ix] Ibid.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

DEBT CEILING DEBATE: A Case for Cutting Government Spending

July 9th, 2011

By Elois Zeanah
July 9, 2011

AN OPEN LETTER TO CONGRESSIONAL FISCAL HAWKS

Congressional Fiscal Hawks, Don’t give in!   It’s insane that President Obama grew the deficit by $4 trillion in less than three years and now insists that the deficit can only be cut by $4 trillion in 12 years – long after he’s left office if he’s re-elected in 2012!  It’s insane that Obama would dare try to stare down fiscal hawks and demand that they raise taxes while asking them for a favor to raise the debt ceiling!

Don’t sell out!  After the $830 billion 2009 Stimulus Bill and a $4 trillion debt increase under the Obama Administration under three years, more voters are understanding that greater government spending does NOT grow the economy. 

Government Should Cut Spending Back to where it was when Obama took Office

The  IRET (Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation)[i] notes that the current level of federal spending is primarily responsible for ratcheted federal deficits not realized since World War II, and   states that “The huge deficits of recent years, and the consequent mushrooming of debt, are not long sustainable.  The debt crisis that has engulfed Greece illustrates the danger when a government incurs outsized deficits and debt without a credible plan for reducing them.”[ii] 

Congressional Fiscal Hawks, it’s up to you to stop the spending binge of this President who put us in this situation.  It’s up to you to stop this cycle of borrow-and-spend and save America from becoming another Greece.  Do not cave in to President Obama’s threat to not raise the debt ceiling unless Fiscal Conservatives give him election cover and raise taxes. 

Experience has shown repeatedly that raising the debt ceiling fuels more spending and creates more debt.  Instead of caving in to bullying, turn the tables and insist that if President Obama wants the debt ceiling raised, he can do it by agreeing to spending cuts, starting now!

The Private Sector is more Responsive and more Efficient than Government

“Experience in this and other countries shows conclusively that the private sector is more efficient and responsive than the government.”[iii]  Reasons include:

  • Politicians are swayed by special interests and influential political groups.
  • Lobbyists secure expensive government subsidies and handouts and shift costs to taxpayers.
  • Governments fail to sunset inefficient or outdated programs due to their taxing power whereas private-sector businesses must weed out inefficiencies and outmoded operations to protect their investments and stay in business.
  • Governments use laws and regulations to force consumers to use certain products while private-sector business must make products that people will voluntarily buy. 

Why Should Government Spending Be Reduced and Taxes not be Raised?

  • Government control does not grow the economy, it sucks the oxygen out of private enterprise.  The private sector grows the economy and sustains growth through efficiencies, innovation and job creation. 
  • Government should not pick winners or losers, as it always does, since political considerations guide government decisions.  The private sector, on the other hand, must respond to desires of the public since its motivation is profits and it must compete in the marketplace or fail.  
  • Over-bloated government hurts the economy and should be trimmed back to help the economy.

Hold Obama Accountable for the U.S. Fiscal Mess he Created by using Discredited Economic Theories

The Obama Administration’s economic policies have failed because it used discredited Keynesian theories to rationalize its coveted high government spending.  (For elaboration, see the next article.) 

Congressional Fiscal Hawks, Don’t back down!  Hold the Obama Administration accountable for using the Keynesian theory that didn’t work in the 1950’s, 1960’s and 1970’s; for growing spending and debt to historic levels not seen since World War II; and for not providing a budget or the leadership to control spending. 

If necessary, call Obama’s bluff.  Do what’s best for the next generation, not the next election! 

[i] IRET:  “Past Recessions Offer Perspective on the Federal Government’s Deficit and Debt Problems,” July 6, 2011

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Ibid.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

SHOULD RAISING TAXES BE TIED TO RAISING THE DEBT CEILING?

July 9th, 2011

By Elois Zeanah
July 9, 2011

The bill for the binge spending spree of Washington politicians is due.  The credit card is maxed.  Taxpayers want relief.  They’re tired of the hangover from government spending and of the IRS taking more and more of their money to pay for politicians’ addiction, while they must sacrifice and do with less.  But does any of this matter?   Borrowing has bumped against the debt ceiling.  Emergency!  Emergency!  If government isn’t given even more borrowing-and-spending authority, bills won’t get paid.

Who’s fault is it that the federal government spends on the average $118 billion a month more than it gets in revenues?[i]  It’s not the fault of taxpayers.  But does this matter?  Politicians who borrow and spend and fail to budget responsibly never hold themselves accountable; and the public to date hasn’t held politicians accountable.  But the debate to raise the debt ceiling may be different this time.  Taxpayers are tired of being rolled and are paying attention.

Borrowing More and Higher Taxes Hurt Young People

Young people are beginning to realize that it’s their future earnings that politicians are spending and their future quality of life politicians are stealing!  For what purpose?  To buy votes for the next election using bribes of entitlement programs. 

Should taxes be raised as part of the package to raise the debt ceiling?  Emphatically not!  It’s time for politicians to sober up and curb their addiction to spending.  It’s time for politicians to do what’s best for the next generation, not what’s best for their next election!  More government spending on entitlement programs is the crux of the problem, not the cure!

President Obama Says Taxes Must be Raised

The Obama Administration insists that tax increases be part of any negotiated agreement to raise the debt ceiling.  What’s wrong with this picture?  The President needs Republicans to raise the debt ceiling; yet he’s demanding that Republicans break their pledge to not raise taxes to do so.  In fact, the President pushed for a clean-cut vote to raise the debt ceiling without spending cuts and without a plan to pay for it.  Thankfully, voters placed Tea Partiers in the House of Representatives in November 2010 and this didn’t pass muster.  Even if old-timer Republicans would have gone along, new Republican Representatives would not.  They seem to be backed by voters. 

Cure the Hangover and Sober Up

Let’s hope the Republican leadership doesn’t let itself get rolled by a President who needs them, yet has the gall to make demands while asking for a favor.   It’s time for Republicans to plant their feet in principle and fairness to the next generation and tell Obama:  “No more taxes!  The emergency is to cut spend

[i] CNNMoney, May 18, 2011

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Illegal Immigration is an Economic and Moral Issue, Not a Racist Issue

May 10th, 2011

By Elois Zeanah

Why would President Obama push amnesty when debt is on a disastrous path?  Amnesty would cost taxpayers an additional $1 trillion dollars every year forevermore, according to the Center for Immigration Studies.  Currently, illegal immigration costs taxpayers $113 billion yearly.  We’re broke! Taxpayers cannot afford more taxes.  Yet protests to this preposterous timing will in all likelihood be called “racist”.

Opposition to illegal immigration is an economic and moral issue, not a racist issue.  Illegal immigration contributes mightily to the financial crises in education, entitlement programs, healthcare, and deficits.  It is immoral to further harm our financial future, and to continue to steal from our children money they haven’t yet earned.  Amnesty would do this.

Fixing the illegal immigration problem can be done through attrition in three steps: (1)  Secure the border.  (2) Remove the jobs magnet by requiring employers to use a free, fast and accurate Internet program (E-Verify) that was designed to crack down on unscrupulous employers.   (3) Remove the welfare magnet by passing U.S. House Bill 140 to end automatic birthright citizenship for children born to non-citizens.

It is immoral that U.S. birthright citizenship can be “sold”, “stolen”, or “traded”.  Foreigners can buy U.S. citizenship for their children for the price of a ticket to the U.S. or get it free by stealing over the border. Politicians could easily fix this problem.   But unfortunately politicians often trade our most cherished birthright, citizenship, for votes, campaign contributions and power.

Posted in 14th Amendment, Amnesty, Birthright Citizenship, Economic Crisis, Immigration, Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

« Older Entries