Current Events - February 6, 2013

CHRIS ROCK: 'THE PRESIDENT IS OUR BOSS'... OUR 'DAD'

Comedian Chris Rock showed up on Capitol Hill today to support President Barack Obama’s gun control proposals. Here is what he said during the morning press conference:

ROCK: I am just here to support the President of the United States. President of the United States is our boss, but he is also... you know, the President and the First Lady are kinda like the Mom and the Dad of the country. And when your Dad says something you listen, and when you don't it will usually bite you on the ass later on. So, I’m here to support the President.

Apparently the comedian has flip-flopped on his previous gun control position, i.e. "bullet control" ...

“You don’t need no gun control, you know what you need? We need some bullet control. Men, we need to control the bullets, that’s right. I think all bullets should cost five thousand dollars… five thousand dollars per bullet… You know why? Cause if a bullet cost five thousand dollars there would be no more innocent bystanders. 

 

Yeah! Every time somebody get shut we’d say, ‘Damn, he must have done something ... Shit, he’s got fifty thousand dollars worth of bullets in his ass.’

 

And people would think before they killed somebody if a bullet cost five thousand dollars. ‘Man I would blow your f****ing head off…if I could afford it.’ ‘I’m gonna get me another job, I’m going to start saving some money, and you’re a dead man. You’d better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway.’

 

So even if you get shot by a stray bullet, you wouldn't have to go to no doctor to get it taken out. Whoever shot you would take their bullet back, like "I believe you got my property.”

 

http://nation.foxnews.com/chris-rock/2013/02/06/chris-rock-president-our-bossour-dad

Panetta to propose military pay cut after Obama raised federal officials pay

Outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta reportedly believes the military should receive a pay cut in order to respond to the budget cuts facing the Pentagon — a position that might strengthen the Republican push to reverse President Obama’s executive order raising the salary of Vice President Joe Biden and other federal officials.

“Panetta will recommend to Congress that military salaries be limited to a one percent increase in 2014,” CNN reports, explaining that Panetta is “effectively decreasing troop salaries next year . . . The decision comes as the secretary is stepping up the rhetoric about dire cuts at the Pentagon if sequestration goes into effect.”

The debate about sequestration did not stop Obama from ending a pay freeze for some government officials, effectively authorizing a pay raise that costs $11 billion.

“The President’s pay hike even increases the salary for federal employees who receive poor performance reviews from their own supervisors,” House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said when a group of lawmakers proposed legislation to reverse the pay increase. “As President Obama continues to say one thing and do another on deficit spending, it is appropriate for Congress to challenge his unilateral decision to spend $11 billion on non-merit based pay raises for federal workers.”

http://washingtonexaminer.com/panetta-to-propose-military-pay-cut-after-obama-raised-federal-officials-pay/article/2520741

Rand Paul Introduces National Right to Work Act

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul introduced the National-Right-to-Work act this week. The legislation strips current labor law of forced unionisim language which can prevent some Americans who seek employement from obtaining a job.

"Every American worker deserves the right to freedom of association - and I am concerned that the 26 states that allow forced union membership and dues infringes on these workers' rights," Sen. Paul said  on his website. "Right to work laws ensure that all Americans are given the choice to refrain from joining or paying dues to a union as a condition for employment. Nearly 80 percent of all Americans support the principles and so I have introduced a national Right to Work Act that will require all states to give their workers the freedom to choose."

Paul describes six current provisions in the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the Railway Labor Act (RLA) as "freedom crushing" and "infringing," pointing out there are 8 million workers who are currently forced by law to pay union dues.

Paul is sure to see major push back on this, especially when it comes to Harry Reid in the Senate. Considering we just saw President Obama's appointments for the NLRB struck down by a court, he'll be in no mood to deal with this either.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/02/06/rand-paul-introduces-national-right-to-work-act-n1506420

Here Are the States Saying ‘No Thanks’ to Drone Flyovers

What do Montana, California, Oregon, Texas, Nebraska, Missouri, North Dakota, Florida, Virginia, Maine, and Oklahoma have in common? They are all currently looking to restrict the use of drones over their skies amid concerns the unmanned aerial vehicles could be exploited to spy on Americans.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says state legislators are proposing various restrictions on local authorities’ use of the technology.

Concerns mounted after the Federal Aviation Administration began establishing safety standards for civilian drones, which are becoming increasingly affordable and small in size.

Some police agencies have said the drones could be used for surveillance of suspects, search and rescue operations, and gathering details on damage caused by natural disasters.

Virginia lawmakers, for example, on Tuesday approved a two-year moratorium on the use of drones by police and government agencies.

Supporters of the legislation claim the use of drones could infringe on Virginians’ privacy rights. The legislation had the backing of the ACLU, the Tea Party Federation, and agriculture groups, while law enforcement organizations opposed the moratorium.

“Our founders had no conception of things that would fly over them at night and peer into their backyards and send signals back to a home base,” said Sen. A. Donald McEachin, D-Henrico, a sponsor of the Senate bill.

In a move to placate the law enforcement groups opposed to the two-year moratorium, Virginia legislators included a provision that would allow the use of drones only in the case of emergencies or missing children.

In Montana, a libertarian-minded state that doesn’t even let police use remote cameras to issue traffic tickets, Democrats and Republicans are banding together to back multiple proposals restricting drone use. They say drones, most often associated with overseas wars, aren’t welcome in Big Sky Country.

“I do not think our citizens would want cameras to fly overhead and collect data on our lives,” Republican state Sen. Matthew Rosendale told a legislative panel on Tuesday.

Rosendale is sponsoring a measure that would only let law enforcement use drones with a search warrant, and would make it illegal for private citizens to spy on neighbors with drones.

The full Montana Senate endorsed a somewhat broader measure Tuesday that bans information collected by drones from being used in court. It also would bar local and state government ownership of drones equipped with weapons, such as stunning devices.

The ACLU said the states won’t be able to stop federal agencies or border agents from using drones. But the Montana ban would not allow local police to use criminal information collected by federal drones that may be handed over in cooperative investigations.

The drones could be wrongly used to hover over someone’s property and gather information, opponents said.

“The use of drones across the country has become a great threat to our personal privacy,” said ACLU of Montana policy director Niki Zupanic. “The door is wide open for intrusions into our personal private space.”

Other state legislatures looking at the issue include California, Oregon, Texas, Nebraska, Missouri, North Dakota, Florida, Virginia, Maine, and Oklahoma.

A Missouri House committee looked at a bill Tuesday that would outlaw the use of unmanned aircraft to conduct surveillance on individuals or property, providing an exclusion for police working with a search warrant. It drew support from agricultural groups and civil liberties advocates.

“It’s important for us to prevent Missouri from sliding into a police-type state,” said Republican Rep. Casey Guernsey of Bethany.

A North Dakota lawmaker introduced a similar bill in January following the 2011 arrest of a Lakota farmer during a 16-hour standoff with police. A drone was used to help a SWAT team apprehend Rodney Brossart.

Its use was upheld by state courts, but the sponsor of the North Dakota bill, Rep. Rick Becker of Bismarck, said safeguards should be put into place to make sure the practice isn’t abused.

Last year, Seattle police received approval from the Federal Aviation Administration to train people to operate drones for use in investigations, search-and-rescue operations and natural disasters. Residents and the ACLU called on city officials to tightly regulate the information that can be collected by drones, which are not in use yet.

In Alameda County, Calif., the sheriff’s office faced backlash late last year after announcing plans to use drones to help find fugitives and assist with search and rescue operations.

 http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/06/here-are-the-states-saying-no-thanks-to-drone-flyovers/

Taking America from Welfare State to Opportunity Society

"I must go to college!" insists eight-year-old Pierre William.

Such planning may seem unusual in a second grader. But Pierre is lucky. He's attending a private school in the District of Columbia using funds from the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. That's opened his eyes to the possibilities that only a college education can provide.

His mother Patricia William says the program has taught her how to be a better parent and to be involved in her children's education. She insists she'll remain involved. "I try to stay focused and not get discouraged," William says. That matters for her children, and the other 1,600 benefiting from the scholarships.

This is just one American Dream - Pierre's dream. But every American should have the opportunity to pursue his own dream. This week, we are highlighting America's Opportunity for All, The Heritage Foundation's plan to help people secure these dreams.

Yet our modern, cradle-to-grave welfare state is structured in such a way that it hinders rather than boosts upward mobility. Despite a massive array of programs and colossal budgets, poverty rates remain high, our public education system is failing us, and the family - whose importance for the future well-being of children cannot be overstated - is falling apart among poor and low-income Americans.

President Obama made clear yesterday that he is more interested in additional tax increases than serious entitlement reforms. At the same time, the Congressional Budget Office was projecting that health care entitlement spending will be bigger than defense or even Social Security spending in just two years.

For some, the entitlement mentality of the welfare state breeds a culture of dependency. Conservatives propose a different approach, one based on empowering all Americans. We intend to encourage upward mobility for poor and low-income Americans. We intend to strengthen an anxious middle class. We intend to reduce concerns about health care and retirement security. And we intend to protect those throughout society who have earned success for themselves and their families.

For those who cannot care for themselves or who get knocked down from time to time, we believe in a society that provides a basic, temporary safety net formed with the active involvement and leadership of their fellow citizens, supplemented with public assistance at the appropriate level of government.

But in the end, we must restructure the welfare state to secure basic commitments, introduce private choice and market incentives for success, and focus on upward mobility.

America's Opportunity is our plan to:

• End Obamacare and, instead, provide real health care solutions. Obamacare represents a huge step in the wrong direction. Instead, policymakers should restructure the tax treatment of health insurance to encourage competition and drive down costs.
• Preserve Social Security as real insurance. President Obama spoke yesterday of a plan to balance the budget through "a balanced mix of spending cuts and more tax reform." But the real key to reducing future deficits is to reform Social Security so it becomes a true insurance program, guaranteeing that no senior citizen need fall into poverty, but not providing automatic benefits to wealthier retirees.
• Make welfare work for the poor. The federal government spends nearly a trillion dollars each year on welfare. Yet the system isn't working. True welfare reform should include strong work requirements, should promote marriage, and should use loans - not grants - to help needy Americans.
• Improve education by expanding options. Washington should issue fewer mandates and encourage more experimentation by states and local school districts. Also, policymakers should allow federal funding to follow a student to the school of the family's choice.
• Strengthen immigration through common-sense reform. By attempting to pass "comprehensive" reform, Congress is setting itself up to fail. Instead, lawmakers should reform our legal immigration system and make it easier to work legally and temporarily in the U.S. They should also encourage high-skill immigration. And to be fair, the Administration should commit to enforcing existing immigration laws.
• Revitalize marriage, family and civil society. These institutions are the building blocks of a healthy society. Social science proves that the intact married-parent family - husband, wife, and children living together - is the best setting for the optimal development of the child and provides the best insurance for the future welfare of the nation.

America's Opportunity for All relies on the premise that everyone must be free to vigorously pursue his or her own American Dream. Together, we can break the cycle of dependency, encourage upward mobility, and promote economic freedom for all.

http://blog.heritage.org/2013/02/06/morning-bell-taking-america-from-welfare-state-to-opportunity-society/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email;utm_campaign=&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

A Way Out of the Wilderness for the GOP

Republicans hold a weak hand in Washington but a stronger grip in states where voters have entrusted them with power. Performances there can boost not just the Republican image but bring the party back to power in Washington. More importantly, they can show conservative principles work. The "Red State Model" can, in the Wall Street Journal's words, "Drive Republican Revival."

Walter Russell Meade, one of our most brilliant thinkers, has written quite perceptively about the collapse of what he calls "the blue model." These are states that have been firmly in the hands of the Democratic Party and their allies (unions-especially public employee unions; special interest groups -- environmentalists among them). Together they have created a tax, spend and borrow model of governance that is leading to fiscal chaos. Policies have been adopted that have created a hostile business climate that has cramped growth and blighted the future of the middle class.

 Prospects for these states are so dim there has been not just an exodus of their "best and brightest" (blue states are heavily dependent on taxing high-income people who have options to migrate to redder pastures) out of them, but a collapse in fertility rates, as well. When the future is bleak and the cost of living in the present is too high, people don't have children.

Liberals may caterwaul about a sustainable environment but seemingly couldn't care less about sustainable families or a sustainable future or a sustainable state.

These are states that are collapsing under the weight of liberal policies.  While the fiscal condition of the Democrat-controlled federal government and blue state governments is horrendous, many Republican-controlled states are swimming in surpluses (there is a threat blue states will use their power in Washington to extract, courtesy of red-state workers, a massive bailout).

The archetype of this model would of course be California where "Progressive Failure is on Full Display" writes Californian Steven Greenhut -- but other states (Illinois, New York) are following down this disastrous path.

And therein lies an opportunity for the Republican Party.

While Barack Obama won re-election and the Senate remains in the hands of the Democrats, voters in 30 states put in power Republican governors, and 25 of those states have legislatures controlled by Republicans. The 2012 election sharpened the partisan divide in America between red states and blue states
That could be electoral gold on the national level if -- a big if -- the Republican Party can capitalize on the opportunity before it. They should embrace federalism not just for constitutional reasons but for practical and political reasons, as well.

The success of the policies enacted by these states can be contrasted to the failure of policies followed by blue states.

There was a reason Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis called states "laboratories of democracy". States can test long-debated policy ideas.

Ari Fleischer recently noted the potential of these states:

"Our governors are America's reformers in chief. There is a movement in America being led by our 30 Republican governors. That's a source of inspiration and an example."

The focus is shifting from Washington -- bogged down by grandstanding and rhetorical chaff, scandals and pettiness -- to states where real reform is being undertaken by Republicans.
Jonah Goldberg appreciates the potential for these efforts to revivify the GOP on a national level. He writes about the "Premature Reports of GOP Death"

In states as diverse as Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, Nebraska, Michigan, New Jersey, Texas and a half-dozen others, Republicans have been implementing impressive - even miraculous - reforms.
In pro-Obama Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker beat back a historic attack from organized labor. And Michigan - Michigan - recently became a right-to-work state, which I'm pretty sure is mentioned in the AFL-CIO's bylaws as a sign of the end times.

There are far more examples of reform afoot. State tax reformers are multiplying almost as fast as Obama's job-killing regulations. Oklahoma and Kansas have lowered their income-tax rates with an eye towards eliminating them. Mike Pence of Indiana, Susana Martinez of New Mexico, Pat McCrory of North Carolina -- all Republicans -- have focused on reducing income tax taxes. Nebraska's GOP Governor Dave Heineman wants to eliminate the state income tax and replace it with a sales tax. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal wants to eliminate his state's income and corporate income tax and replace them with a higher state sales tax.

Why the change?

Governors Jindal, McCrory and Heineman cite the growing evidence that states with low or no income taxes have done better economically in recent decades compared to states with income-tax rates of 10% or more.
A new analysis by economist Art Laffer for the American Legislative Exchange Council finds that, from 2002 to 2012, 62% of the three million net new jobs in America were created in the nine states without an income tax, though these states account for only about 20% of the national population. The no-income tax states have had more stable revenue growth, while states like New York, New Jersey and California that depend on the top 1% of earners for nearly half of their income-tax revenue suffer wide and destabilizing swings in their tax collections.

Rick Perry of Texas is exploring the option of sending tax money back to the people.
The fringe benefit from the GOP view is these changes will, as a Wall Street Journal editorial notes, "further sharpen the contrast in economic policies between GOP reform Governors and the union-dominated high-tax models of California, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts and now Minnesota, where last week Governor Mark Dayton proposed a huge tax hike. Let the policy competition begin".

This is a battle Republicans should welcome.

Reform won't and should not end with taxes; this will just play into the image of the GOP as merely being tax-slashers who serve the interests of the rich.

In recent history, Republicans have been the party of ideas from Jack Kemp on taxes and John Engler on welfare reform, to Tommy Thompson on crime control. Their successors are emerging now.

The Republicans need to have an agenda that advances the interests of the middle class. They need a Middle-Class Agenda -- not just because it is the right thing to do but offers them the best chance of winning the White House.

Each initiative Republicans take should raise the middle-class standard of living; enhance their security and brighten the prospects of middle-class people. They should, among other things, cut the costs of energy, health care, child-caring and education (while improving the quality of teaching).

Advances are being made in these areas under Republican governors.

Texas, North Dakota, Louisiana are all leading energy-producing states not just because they are geologically-blessed but have adopted policies that encourage the tapping of their carbon bounty. Pennsylvania has led the way in encouraging the  fracking revolution that has enriched its citizens, lowering the costs of energy, providing high-paying jobs, and boosting industries that benefit from the low costs of energy. Meanwhile, in stark contrast, the blue state on its border, New York, is throttling the same development within its borders. California environmentalists have caused the cost of energy to skyrocket.
Talk about contrast.

Republicans are pushing for more charter schools and vouchers to encourage more competition among schools and a better education for children. They face stiff opposition from teachers' unions allied to the Democrats but are forging ahead.

State-level education reform is crucial to children's' futures. State lawmakers can look to the example set by Louisiana, a pioneer in education reform for the 21st century. The reform package passed by the state legislature and signed into law by Gov. Bobby Jindal last year creates an aggressive school voucher program, expands charter school opportunities and ties teacher tenure to effectiveness in the classroom. Under this new law, Louisiana parents have more control over how their tax dollars are spent, and can choose whichever type of school best suits their child's individual needs: public, charter, private, parochial or virtual. Texas and Tennessee are trying to do the same.

"Choice" -- a concept embraced by liberals -- should be available to parents seeking the best education for their children.

At the college level, Florida's Republican Governor Rick Scott is seeking a way to reduce tuition for select majors (science among them). Rick Perry of Texas is even more ambitious: he is pushing for a $10,000 degree at a time when high student debt loads imperil the futures of many college students and their families and people begin to question the value of college education given the higher education bubble that has already beginning to burst.

Health care reform has not stopped with the Supreme Court decision on ObamaCare, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, for example, has turned over delivery of Medicaid services to private health insurers- a step he says will hold down costs.

Republican governors are trying to avoid the worst aspects of ObamaCare by refusing to open state health-care exchanges. This will be a boon for them and their citizens. Rick Manning notes in The Hill the real-world impact that this refusal to implement Obama's agenda may have:

The practical effect is that businesses in non-state exchange states will operate under a different set of federal healthcare rules than their counterparts in states like California, Massachusetts and New York. The current competitive advantages that many of these states currently enjoy due to low tax, less regulatory environments over high-tax, bad-business-environment hard-blue states will grow almost exponentially (italics mine).

Employers who can will shed the Obama mandates simply by picking up stakes and moving to states where they cannot be enforced.

Tort reform in Texas has led to an influx of doctors while the threat of abusive malpractice suits has dramatically reduced the number of doctors on other states where OB-GYNs, for example, have become an endangered species.

Republicans are also following the lead of Scott Walker in Wisconsin in trying to end collective bargaining with public employees (even Franklin Roosevelt thought this was a bad idea). This breaks the grip that public unions have over the public purse. Collective bargaining has been the tool that unions have used to extract unaffordable salary and benefit packages for their members and has led to the bankruptcy of various cities and massive debts in blue states such as California and Illinois (credit rating equal to Botswana's). Pension reform for public workers is also part of the game plan for Republicans.

Republicans greatly benefit their citizens when they take on public unions (as well as private unions).
Michigan's Governor shocked the nation when he and his GOP-controlled legislature passed "right to work" legislation that barred unions form requiring workers to pay dues or representation fees even if they are covered by union contracts. When various states have passed this type of legislation, members often opt out of paying dues and weakening the power of unions -and boosting the growth and job-producing prospects of those states ("right-to-work" states  have lower unemployment and higher income levels

The poster child for collapsing blue states is California; for red states, it is Texas, that can become a model state for dynamic job and economic growth.

Wendell Cox writes about "The Texas Growth Machine" in City Journal:

A pro-business climate has unquestionably been a substantial advantage. In its annual ranking of business environments, Chief Executive has named Texas the most growth-friendly state for eight years in a row (California has been last for the same eight years). The reasons include low taxes and sensible regulations; a high quality workforce (Texas ranked second only to Utah in that category in 2012).
Texas has a low cost of living-far lower than California's. Adjusted for cost of living, Texas's per-capita income is higher than California's and nearly as high as New York's. Factor in state and local taxes, and Texas trumps NY.
More than three quarters of the cost of living difference between Texas and California can be explained by housing costs. Texas lacks the draconian land-use restrictions that drive Californian housing prices into the stratosphere.

Viva la difference!

Red states, many in the South, are growing stronger and wealthier because they are adopting pro-growth policies, breaking the power of unions, creating a business-friendly climate, and passing sensible regulations. Indeed they have become magnets for people fleeing blue states in the north. 

Widening the competitive advantages healthy red states have over dying blue states is another way of allowing all Americans to compare and contrast the impact of conservative versus liberal policies.

How can this be communicated to the rest of America? That will be a challenge given the huge number of "low information" voters but certainly in the next few years Republicans will have good stories to tell regarding the success of their policies. "Low information" voters may gloss over abstract theories and claims but might be receptive to "show and tell" lessons and "comparing and contrasting" challenges.

Republicans should be able to make the case that conservative policies writ large across America can improve the lives of all Americans.

Will they succeed?

Game on! Don't blow it, GOP.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/02/a_way_out_of_the_wilderness_for_the_gop.html#ixzz2K9Y68M7q