Category Archives: spending out of control

A suggestion to cut some wasteful spending out of the government Part 4 (includes editorial cartoon)

April 30, 2013 – 6:00 am

What Are the Dangers of Too Much Debt?

Published on Mar 20, 2012

Interest payments on U.S. government debt are three times spending in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars already, and that is with the lowest interest rate we have seen since the 1960s. A rise in interest rates would increase interest payments dramatically. What can the U.S. government do today to prevent a crisis from happening when interest rates go up?

___________________

We got to cut wasteful spending out of the government and here is another fine suggestion from the Heritage Foundation.

Todd Thurman

March 12, 2013 at 5:40 pm

Newscom

The massive spending bill, or continuing resolution, released by the Senate this week continues spending on programs which are inappropriate or wasteful and fails to adopt good policies in many areas. Here’s a rundown of some of the worst offenders in the Senate bill:

Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Unlike the budget passed by the House, the Senate bill seeks to restore government spending to fund the failed CPSC product safety database. CPSC decision making with respect to the database has previously been called “arbitrary and capricious” by the courts.

Since it was implemented in 2011, manufacturers have shown that the CPSC database is seriously flawed. The database allows the public to submit unproven claims of harm with the CPSC and gives manufacturers only 10 days to challenge these claims; however, the CPSC itself has final authority to publish reports of such claims, even if they are disproved by the manufacturer. The accuracy of the CPSC reports is thus seriously questionable, and is a one-stop shop for tort lawyers seeking new clients or seeking “evidence” for their current lawsuits.

Furthermore, last October, in Company Doe v. Inez Tenenbaum, a federal court in Maryland overturned a decision of the CPSC to publish a report as “arbitrary and capricious,” because the CPSC report was “misleading and fail[ed] to relate[] to the [manufacturer’s] product in any way.” Indeed, the CPSC database is a concrete example of government waste: It is a shame that the Senate bill seeks to restore government spending to publishing misleading claims that damage business growth and likely lead to additional frivolous lawsuits.

—Andrew Kloster, Legal Fellow

The third-most viewed post in the history of this blog, with more than 22,000 views, is this set of cartoons showing how the welfare state begins and how it ends.

A similar theme can be found in this great new cartoon from Chuck Asay.

And just in case you think Asay is being unfair, keep in mind that folks like Obama and Pelosi actually have claimed that more unemployment benefits is “stimulus.” Yes, you read correctly. Subsidizing unemployment is good for growth to these strange ideologues.

Asay’s cartoon is so good that it may dethrone my previous top choice. Though sometimes I am most impressed by this one showing why parasites shouldn’t kill their host animal.

I’d be curious to know which one all of you think is most effective.

And since Asay’s work is almost always worth sharing, you can find more of my top picks here, here, here, and here.

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

Obama acts like the Sequester cuts would bring the world to an end!!!

April 29, 2013 – 3:42 pm

When Governments Cut Spending

Uploaded on Sep 28, 2011

Do governments ever cut spending? According to Dr. Stephen Davies, there are historical examples of government spending cuts in Canada, New Zealand, Sweden, and America. In these cases, despite popular belief, the government spending cuts did not cause economic stagnation. In fact, the spending cuts often accelerated economic growth by freeing up resources for the private sector.

_________________________

 

Obama acts like the Sequester cuts would bring the world to an end!!!

You don’t enjoy many victories when you fight for liberty, so I’m not averse to spiking the football on those rare occasions when we win.

That’s why I shared this very funny cartoon last week to celebrate Obama’s belly flop on gun control.

Now we have another cartoon, this one by Henry Payne, mocking the Administration’s shameful effort to force a tax increase by deliberately making air travel less convenient.

Sequester Tax FAA

No wonder the President is behaving in such a petulant fashion. The sequester is an embarrassing defeat for Obama and other proponents of bigger government.

He thought he could bully Republicans into a class-warfare tax hike. Now he’s resorting to pathetic gimmicks.

And he lost on that issue now that Congress has made explicit that the FAA has authority to reallocate funds.

Let’s not just spike the football. Let’s do a dance in the end zone.

Related posts:

Sequester did not hurt job growth!!!!!

If you blame the Sequester for blaming job growth then you don’t have a good grasp on economics. The Overlooked Jobs Tragedy April 9, 2013 by Dan Mitchell When the monthly job numbers are released, most people focus on the unemployment rate. On many occasions, I’ve cited that number, usually to point out that the unemployment […]

Sequester not so bad after all (includes cartoons)

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. Sequester was not so bad after all. Since the Sequester Has Been in Place for More than One […]

Another funny sequester cartoon from Dan Mitchell’s blog

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. As Humorously Explained by Henry Payne, the World Amazingly Didn’t End When Uncle Sam Got Put on a […]

Sequester Cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog Part 4

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. These sequester cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog have been great but today he has about 4 cartoons that are […]

Sequester Cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog Part 3

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. These sequester cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog have been great but today he has about 1/2 cartoons that […]

Sequester Cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog Part 2

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. What a bunch of wimps we have on Capitol Hill. They can’t even cut 2% out of this […]

Sequester Cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog Part 1

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. Here is a couple of cartoons below I thought you would enjoy. Debunking Sequester Hysteria from the Big […]

We got to cut the budget and not just pretend to cut the budget

We got to cut the budget and not just pretend to cut the budget. Reid Suggests Exploiting Budget Gimmicks for Sequestration Romina Boccia April 25, 2013 at 3:30 pm     Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) is proposing not one but two old budget gimmicks to spend $85 billion more in 2013 than allowed […]

White House’s political motivated chicanery with the FAA

Obama is up to his old tricks again and here comes the White House’s political motivated chicanery with the FAA Privatization Is the Best Response to the FAA’s Deliberate Attempt to Inconvenience Air Passengers April 24, 2013 by Dan Mitchell In an interview with Neil Cavuto earlier this month, I mocked proponents of big government for […]

A closer look at the Boston Marathon terrorists

Sad case indeed. Immigration, Terrorism, and Welfare Tourism April 24, 2013 by Dan Mitchell So we’ve now learned that the Boston Marathon terrorists were welfare bums. Why am I not surprised? “Thanks for the handouts, suckers!” Heck, it was only a couple of days ago that I announced the Moocher Hall of Fame and included terrorists from theUnited Kingdom and Australia (and […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, President Obama | Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 306)

April 29, 2013 – 1:43 am

Rep. Paul Ryan’s Budget Problem – CBN.com

(Mailed before Oct 15, 2012.)

President Obama c/o The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

I know that you feel that the justification for your compassion to the poor comes from your religious beliefs. Did you know that Congressman Ryan can say the same thing about his views.

Ryan Messmore

April 16, 2012 at 1:00 pm

How should one’s faith shape his or her engagement in the policy arena?

Political Correspondent David Brody recently asked that question of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R–WI) concerning the Republican budget plan. In a taped interview for the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), Ryan, a Roman Catholic, identified care for the poor as a fundamental tenet in the social teachings of his Church.

For Ryan, that teaching means: “Don’t keep people poor, don’t make people dependent on government so that they stay stuck at their station in life. Help people get out of poverty.”

Ryan believes his federal budget plan helps accomplish that goal. In a letter last year to then-Archbishop (now Cardinal) Timothy Dolan of New York, Ryan stated that his proposed budget better targets assistance to those in need, repairs the social safety net, and fulfills the mission of health and retirement security for all Americans. Furthermore, if the U.S. government continues to drive up the deficit through reckless spending, Ryan wrote that “the weakest will be hit three times over: by rising costs, by drastic cuts to programs they rely on, and by the collapse of individual support for charities that help the hungry, the homeless, the sick, refugees and others in need.”

In the CBN interview that aired last week, Ryan highlighted an additional principle of Catholic social teaching that informs his engagement in public policy: the principle of subsidiarity.

Subsidiarity holds that decisions are best made at the most local level available. As Ryan noted, when applied to political authority, this means federalism. Subsidiarity also holds that larger, more powerful institutions should refrain from undermining the freedom and integrity of smaller, less powerful ones. This is the aspect of the principle that Ryan picked up on most pointedly:

[Subsidiarity means] not having big government crowd out civic society, but…having     enough space in our communities so that we can interact with each other, and take care of    people who are down and out in our communities.

This principle arises out of a larger vision of social flourishing, one in which the common good is advanced “through our civic organizations, through our churches, through our charities, through all of our different groups where we interact with people as a community.”

Ryan has been attacked by those who hold a different view of government’s relationship to social well-being. His critics, including President Obama, seem to prefer that Washington, D.C., play a more direct and comprehensive role in pursuing the common good, even at the expense of civil society organizations that are often better equipped to serve people in need.

Some have tried to make the budget debate a conflict between those who do or do not care about the poor. But at its heart, this debate is about two contrasting visions of government’s proper role—in relation to prosperity, the common good, and to other institutions in society.

Ryan has reminded Americans in general—and people of faith in particular—of a principle that deserves more attention in budget discussions. The morality of a budget cannot be evaluated solely in terms of government welfare spending; it must also consider effects to the long-term well-being of the poor, the financial viability of the nation, and the freedom of other social institutions.

These criteria inform The Heritage Foundation’s own proposal for addressing the debt crises, called Saving the American Dream.

A federal budget that continues to promote the same unsatisfactory programs and accumulate unsustainable debt—while crowding out smaller institutions of society—is neither moral nor helpful to the poor.

Subsidiary and federalism are important principles that can help drive America’s budget debate in a better direction.

_______________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in President Obama, Taxes | Comments (0)

Why are despicable people sometimes subsidized by taxpayers?

April 28, 2013 – 3:10 pm

 

Why are despicable people sometimes subsidized by taxpayers?

The bad news is that there are despicable and evil people seeking to kill innocents.

The worse news is that some of these pathetic excuses for protoplasm are subsidized by taxpayers.

It’s happened in France, Australia, and the United Kingdom.

And we now know that the Tsarnaev family was on he dole as well.

Which makes this cartoon funny, but at the same time not funny at all.

Welfare Terrorism

I used to think it was outrageous that the welfare state funded bad behavior (as illustrated by this humorous poster), as well as general laziness and moral depravity.

But there should be a special wing of the Moocher Hall of Fame for taxpayer-subsidized terrorists.

Related posts:

What does the welfare state do to people?

I have posted stories on welfare before and here is another one. Another Horrifying and Depressing Look at the Human Cost of the Welfare State March 22, 2013 by Dan Mitchell When we think of Julia, the mythical moocher created by the Obama campaign, our first instinct is probably to grab our wallets and purses. After […]

Founders Fathers were against welfare state

Why are we spending more and more on welfare every year?  What would the Founding Fathers have to say about this if they were still here today? We will look at that in a little bit. We need to cut Food Stamp program and not extend it. However, it seems that people tell the taxpayers back […]

The Welfare trap can be destroyed by Milton Friedman’s negative income tax

The best way to destroy the welfare trap is to put in Milton Friedman’s negative income tax. A Picture of How Redistribution Programs Trap the Less Fortunate in Lives of Dependency I wrote last year about the way in which welfare programs lead to very high implicit marginal tax rates on low-income people. More specifically, they […]

Open letter to Congressman Womack: Total Welfare Spending Is Rising Despite Attempts at Reform

  December 19, 2012 The Honorable Steve Womack United States House of Representatives 1508 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515-0403 Dear Congressman Womack, This is the second time I have written to you about this. It is obvious to me that if President Obama gets his hands on more money then he will continue […]

Welfare Spending Shattering All-Time Highs

  We got to act fast and get off this path of socialism. Morning Bell: Welfare Spending Shattering All-Time Highs Robert Rector and Amy Payne October 18, 2012 at 9:03 am It’s been a pretty big year for welfare—and a new report shows welfare is bigger than ever. The Obama Administration turned a giant spotlight […]

We need more brave souls that will vote against Washington welfare programs

We need to cut Food Stamp program and not extend it. However, it seems that people tell the taxpayers back home they are going to Washington and cut government spending but once they get up there they just fall in line with  everyone else that keeps spending our money. I am glad that at least […]

Welfare programs are not the answer for the poor

Government Must Cut Spending Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Dec 2, 2010 The government can cut roughly $343 billion from the federal budget and they can do so immediately. __________ Liberals argue that the poor need more welfare programs, but I have always argued that these programs enslave the poor to the government. Food Stamps Growth […]

Private charities are best solution and not government welfare

Milton Friedman – The Negative Income Tax Published on May 11, 2012 by LibertyPen In this 1968 interview, Milton Friedman explained the negative income tax, a proposal that at minimum would save taxpayers the 72 percent of our current welfare budget spent on administration. http://www.LibertyPen.com Source: Firing Line with William F Buckley Jr. ________________ Milton […]

The book “After the Welfare State”

Dan Mitchell Commenting on Obama’s Failure to Propose a Fiscal Plan Published on Aug 16, 2012 by danmitchellcato No description available. ___________ After the Welfare State Posted by David Boaz Cato senior fellow Tom G. Palmer, who is lecturing about freedom in Slovenia and Tbilisi this week, asked me to post this announcement of his […]

President Obama responds to Heritage Foundation critics on welfare reform waivers

Is President Obama gutting the welfare reform that Bill Clinton signed into law? Morning Bell: Obama Denies Gutting Welfare Reform Amy Payne August 8, 2012 at 9:15 am The Obama Administration came out swinging against its critics on welfare reform yesterday, with Press Secretary Jay Carney saying the charge that the Administration gutted the successful […]

 

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell | Comments (0)

We got to stop encouraging people to stay on welfare

April 28, 2013 – 3:06 pm

 

We got to stop encouraging people to stay on welfare.

I’m a big fan of Chuck Asay’s political cartoons. My favorite is his nothing-left-to-steal masterpiece.

And his tractor cartoon and his regime-uncertainty cartoon are brilliant indictments of Obamanomics.

Here’s another classic. It shows the impact of the welfare state on incentives for work, self reliance, and independence.

Asay Welfare CartoonIn six cartoon frames, he cleverly explains the economics of labor supply in a welfare state. Heck, there are many economists who could learn something from Asay’s work.

With gems like this, no wonder he came in second place in my political cartoonist contest.

This unsigned Wizard-of-Id parody has the same basic message about labor supply and handouts, and here’s a chart with some staggering real-world evidence of how the welfare state discourages people from productive behavior.

Related posts:

What does the welfare state do to people?

I have posted stories on welfare before and here is another one. Another Horrifying and Depressing Look at the Human Cost of the Welfare State March 22, 2013 by Dan Mitchell When we think of Julia, the mythical moocher created by the Obama campaign, our first instinct is probably to grab our wallets and purses. After […]

Founders Fathers were against welfare state

Why are we spending more and more on welfare every year?  What would the Founding Fathers have to say about this if they were still here today? We will look at that in a little bit. We need to cut Food Stamp program and not extend it. However, it seems that people tell the taxpayers back […]

The Welfare trap can be destroyed by Milton Friedman’s negative income tax

The best way to destroy the welfare trap is to put in Milton Friedman’s negative income tax. A Picture of How Redistribution Programs Trap the Less Fortunate in Lives of Dependency I wrote last year about the way in which welfare programs lead to very high implicit marginal tax rates on low-income people. More specifically, they […]

Open letter to Congressman Womack: Total Welfare Spending Is Rising Despite Attempts at Reform

  December 19, 2012 The Honorable Steve Womack United States House of Representatives 1508 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515-0403 Dear Congressman Womack, This is the second time I have written to you about this. It is obvious to me that if President Obama gets his hands on more money then he will continue […]

Welfare Spending Shattering All-Time Highs

  We got to act fast and get off this path of socialism. Morning Bell: Welfare Spending Shattering All-Time Highs Robert Rector and Amy Payne October 18, 2012 at 9:03 am It’s been a pretty big year for welfare—and a new report shows welfare is bigger than ever. The Obama Administration turned a giant spotlight […]

We need more brave souls that will vote against Washington welfare programs

We need to cut Food Stamp program and not extend it. However, it seems that people tell the taxpayers back home they are going to Washington and cut government spending but once they get up there they just fall in line with  everyone else that keeps spending our money. I am glad that at least […]

Welfare programs are not the answer for the poor

Government Must Cut Spending Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Dec 2, 2010 The government can cut roughly $343 billion from the federal budget and they can do so immediately. __________ Liberals argue that the poor need more welfare programs, but I have always argued that these programs enslave the poor to the government. Food Stamps Growth […]

Private charities are best solution and not government welfare

Milton Friedman – The Negative Income Tax Published on May 11, 2012 by LibertyPen In this 1968 interview, Milton Friedman explained the negative income tax, a proposal that at minimum would save taxpayers the 72 percent of our current welfare budget spent on administration. http://www.LibertyPen.com Source: Firing Line with William F Buckley Jr. ________________ Milton […]

The book “After the Welfare State”

Dan Mitchell Commenting on Obama’s Failure to Propose a Fiscal Plan Published on Aug 16, 2012 by danmitchellcato No description available. ___________ After the Welfare State Posted by David Boaz Cato senior fellow Tom G. Palmer, who is lecturing about freedom in Slovenia and Tbilisi this week, asked me to post this announcement of his […]

President Obama responds to Heritage Foundation critics on welfare reform waivers

Is President Obama gutting the welfare reform that Bill Clinton signed into law? Morning Bell: Obama Denies Gutting Welfare Reform Amy Payne August 8, 2012 at 9:15 am The Obama Administration came out swinging against its critics on welfare reform yesterday, with Press Secretary Jay Carney saying the charge that the Administration gutted the successful […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell | Comments (0)

A suggestion to cut some wasteful spending out of the government Part 3 (includes editorial cartoon)

April 26, 2013 – 5:49 am

What Can We Cut to Balance the Budget

Published on Oct 16, 2012

Will Rogers has a great quote that I love. He noted, “Lord, the money we do spend on Government and it’s not one bit better than the government we got for one-third the money twenty years ago”(Paula McSpadden Love, The Will Rogers Book, (1972) p. 20.)

If the U.S. government cut all government services except Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and payments on the debt, federal spending would still outpace revenues. Prof. Antony Davies argues that there are not specific cuts that will enable government to balance the budget. He says, “Nothing less than a redesign will solve this problem.” That redesign should begin by determining what the proper role of government is.

__________________

We got to cut wasteful spending out of the government and here is another fine suggestion from the Heritage Foundation.

Todd Thurman

March 12, 2013 at 5:40 pm

Newscom

The massive spending bill, or continuing resolution, released by the Senate this week continues spending on programs which are inappropriate or wasteful and fails to adopt good policies in many areas. Here’s a rundown of some of the worst offenders in the Senate bill:

Energy. The Senate CR continues to fund a failed energy policy that empowers Washington bureaucrats instead of American families and businesses. Though it does cut some programs minimally, it does the equivalent of removing a used napkin from a full trash can. There’s much more waste that needs to be removed. For example, section 1203 reduces Department of Energy (DOE) funding by $44 million when more than $5.3 billion could be cut. The $44 million is equivalent to 0.8 percent of what should be cut.

Perhaps most egregious is the meager $11 million cut from the $1.8 billion request for Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. In total, the DOE budget funds applied-research programs on conventional fuels, renewable energy sources, and nuclear energy that the private sector should be undertaking. American families and business are far better equipped than government to determine what types of energy technologies work for them. Eliminating these programs alone would save $3 billion in taxpayer money and help to return energy choice back to Americans.

Though the bill cuts $10 million from nuclear energy spending, based on the 2013 request, it would still fund over $150 million for nuclear waste disposal and management programs. None of this funding would go toward Yucca Mountain, the waste repository mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as amended. Given the complete lack of any nuclear waste disposal or management policy by the Administration and its insistence on terminating the Yucca project, there is little justification for this spending. Instead, Congress should provide $40 million for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to finish its review of the DOE’s Yucca Mountain permit application.

—Jack Spencer, Senior Research Fellow, Nuclear Energy, and Nick Loris, Herbert and Joyce Morgan Fellow

Last year, I made fun of the Washington Post for biased reporting when they used the world “slash” to describe a budget proposal that would have trimmed $6 billion out of a giant $3,800 billion budget.

I wrote that this was the budgetary equivalent of “going on a diet by leaving a couple of french fries in the bottom of the bag after bingeing on three Big Mac meals at McDonald’s.” A couple of other bloggers then had some fun by doing the exact calculations of what this would mean.

Now we have a cartoon version of Washington budgeting, authored by Gary Varvel.

Keep in mind, though, that this cartoon actually is inaccurate because it implicitly accepts the dishonest Washington definition of a budget cut (having spending grow, but not as fast as previously planned).

Every budget plan, even the very admirable proposals put forth by Sen. Rand Paul and the House Republican Study Committee, merely restrains the growth of federal spending.

So the cartoon should show Uncle Same with some clippers, simply seeking to keep the weed from growing even faster.

And if we replaced Uncle Sam with Barack Obama, instead of scissors or clippers, he’d be holding fertilizer.

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

We got to cut the budget and not just pretend to cut the budget

April 26, 2013 – 5:48 am

We got to cut the budget and not just pretend to cut the budget.

April 25, 2013 at 3:30 pm

 

 

Harry ReidSenate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) is proposing not one but two old budget gimmicks to spend $85 billion more in 2013 than allowed under sequestration. Contrary to Senator Reid’s claim that “it wouldn’t add a penny to the deficit,” this spending would in fact add every single penny in foregone cuts to the deficit.

1.      Phantom War Savings

Reid’s proposal (S. 788) suggests placing caps on war-related spending for Iraq and Afghanistan, referred to as Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), a category otherwise exempted from the Budget Control Act caps. The savings from the caps are phony because they appear to be based on the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) baseline, which assumes that OCO spending will rise, even though it’s winding down.

Under this inflated baseline, Reid could claim nearly $110 billion over three years in phony savings from his OCO spending caps. Under the CBO alternative baseline, however—which includes the reality that the number of troops deployed will fall by 2015—Reid’s proposal could actually increase spending by $28 billion. And that is before cancelling sequestration, which increases spending by $85 billion in 2013 for a total spending increase of $113 billion over three years.

The practical reality is that there is no accepted baseline for OCO spending. Even the President’s budget resorts to mere placeholders for OCO “because final decisions about the pace of the drawdown in Afghanistan have not yet been made.”

2.      Spend Now, Save Later

Even if Reid’s savings were real, his proposal would increase spending immediately by $85 billion while cutting it by that amount over the course of three years. If it takes Reid three years to offset five months of sequestration, how long would it take to replace all of sequestration with other cuts? Too darn long for them to possibly ever materialize.

Real Savings Are Only $95 Billion in Overlap Waste Away

Senator Reid should stop playing budget games and instead find real savings that would avoid unnecessarily painful sequestration impacts. He could start by following the Government Accountability Office’s suggestions to save $95 billion from 31 new areas of overlap. Heck, he’d have $10 billion left over to reduce the deficit! Now that would be a proposal that taxpayers could embrace.

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (“Thirsty Thursday”, Open letter to Senator Pryor)

April 25, 2013 – 6:50 am

Dear Senator Pryor,

Why not pass the Balanced  Budget amendment? As you know that federal deficit is at all time high (1.6 trillion deficit with revenues of 2.2 trillion and spending at 3.8 trillion).

On my blog www.HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth.com I took you at your word and sent you over 100 emails with specific spending cut ideas. However, I did not see any of them in the recent debt deal that Congress adopted. Now I am trying another approach. Every week from now on I will send you an email explaining different reasons why we need the Balanced Budget Amendment. It will appear on my blog on “Thirsty Thursday” because the government is always thirsty for more money to spend.

We need to pass the Balanced Budget Amendment soon. I am glad that at least some people see the importance of that.

WASHINGTON, DC —

Roanoke Congressman Bob Goodlatte hopes things will be different this time, for his balanced budget amendment bill.

The new Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee introduced the bills on Thursday, with the start of the 113th Congress.  Rep. Goodlatte (R-6th) had introduced the bills in the prior three Congresses, but they have not been adopted.

“When I introduced these bills two years ago, the national debt had topped an unprecedented $14 trillion,” wrote Rep. Goodlatte in a news release.  “Today, the national debt has soared well past a staggering $16 trillion.  This rapid increase in debt and four consecutive trillion dollar plus budget deficits are clear signs that Washington has a serious spending problem.”

Goodlatte’s bill would:

  • Require Congress to not spend more money than the country takes in
  • Require the President to submit a balanced budget to Congress
  • Require a 3/5th majority vote to increase the federal debt limit

The bill provides exceptions in times of national emergencies.

Goodlatte noted that 49 of the 50 U.S. states, including Virginia, have a balanced budget requirement.

5th District Congressman Robert Hurt (R-Chatham) signed on as a co-sponsor of Rep. Goodlatte’s bill.

“For far too long, members of both parties have chosen the politically expedient course over what is in the best interest of our nation – casting aside meaningful proposals for deficit reduction and carrying our nation further along on a careless spending binge.  As a result, we have witnessed the devastating consequences for the people of Virginia’s 5th District and those all across our country as unemployment levels have remained unacceptably high and the debt continues to grow. At a time when we are borrowing 45 cents on the dollar and rapidly adding to a more than $16 trillion debt, there is no greater duty to those we represent than to get serious about fixing this spending-driven debt crisis,” Rep. Hurt wrote in a news release.

___________

The Balanced Budget Amendment is the only thing I can think of that would force Washington to cut spending. We have only a handful of balanced budgets in the last 60 years, so obviously what we are doing is not working. We are passing along this debt to the next generation.

Thank you for this opportunity to share my ideas with you.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

By Everette Hatcher III | Comments (0)

White House’s political motivated chicanery with the FAA

April 24, 2013 – 6:10 pm

Obama is up to his old tricks again and here comes the White House’s political motivated chicanery with the FAA

In an interview with Neil Cavuto earlier this month, I mocked proponents of big government for their hysterical predictions of bad things happening under sequestration. And cartoonists had a field day making the same point (see here and here).

The White House obviously wasn’t happy about the sequester, in part because they like bigger government and also because sequestration was a big defeat for the President.

Well, now the Obama Administration sees a chance for revenge and redemption. The President’s appointees, by choosing to furlough air traffic controllers, are seeking to turn air travel into something akin to a visit to the Post Office or DMV. It’s clear that the White House hopes to recreate momentum for a tax hike as an alternative to sequestration.

But they’re not exactly being subtle.

The Wall Street Journal exposes the White House’s political motivated chicanery, starting with the very important point that the FAA’s budget – even after sequestration – is as large as it was in 2010. Yet the White House is manipulating the sequester to cause the maximum amount of inconvenience for taxpayers.

The sequester cuts about $637 million from the FAA, which is less than 4% of its $15.9 billion 2012 budget, and it limits the agency to what it spent in 2010. The White House decided to translate this 4% cut that it has the legal discretion to avoid into a 10% cut for air traffic controllers. Though controllers will be furloughed for one of every 10 working days, four of every 10 flights won’t arrive on time.

The Obama Administration is pretending that it’s merely following the law, but the WSJ editorial debunks that notion.

This is a political pose to make the sequester more disruptive. Legally speaking, the sequester applies at a more general level known as “accounts.” The air traffic account includes 15,000 controllers out of 31,000 employees. The White House could keep the controllers on duty simply by allocating more furlough days to these other non-essential workers. Instead, the FAA is even imposing the controller furlough on every airport equally, not prioritizing among the largest and busiest airports. …ever since Al Gore launched a training initiative to increase the productivity of air traffic controllers in 1998, productivity has continued to fall. A larger workforce is now in charge of a smaller workload as the number of flights has dropped by 23%.

I didn’t realize that controllers were doing less work over time, but I’m not surprised to learn that superfluous bureaucrats at the FAA are being protected.

But the WSJ doesn’t go far enough. My Cato colleague Chris Edwards has a column in the Daily Caller that outlines the inefficiency of the FAA.

The federal budget sequester is interfering with the air traffic control (ATC) system and snarling up air traffic. As usual, politicians are pointing fingers of blame at everybody but themselves. But politicians are the ones who have strapped the ATC system to the chaotic federal budget. And they’re the ones who have insisted on running ATC as a bureaucracy, rather than freeing it to become the high-tech private business that it should be. …Last year Bloomberg reported: “More than one-third of the 30 contracts critical to building a new U.S. air-traffic system are over budget and half are delayed, a government audit concluded.

Chris then takes the logical next step and says the system should be privatized. Which is exactly what happened in his home country of Canada.

To run smoothly and efficiently, our ATC system should be given independence from the government. We should privatize the system, as Canada has done very successfully. …Canada provides an excellent model for U.S. reforms. Canada’s ATC system is run by the nonprofit corporation Nav Canada, which is separate from the government. Like any private business, it raises revenues from its customers to cover its operational costs and capital investments. The company’s financial statements for 2012 show revenues and expenses of $1.2 billion, with $125 million allocated to capital expenditures. Unlike the U.S. system, Nav Canada is self-supporting and not subsidized.

I’ve already written on this topic, citing some good analysis from Canada’s Financial Post, and the evidence is overwhelming that the private system in Canada works much better than the inefficient bureaucracy we have in the United States.

Let’s close with a Michael Ramirez cartoon. The “politics” and “waste” markings are very appropriate.

FAA Sequester

Lost in this controversy, by the way, is any recognition that sequestration barely makes a dent in the federal budget. There are some small first-year cuts in a few programs, but the wasteful behemoth known as the federal government is barely nicked.

To be more specific, the net effect of the sequester is that the burden of government spending grows by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years rather than $2.5 trillion.

So don’t pay any attention to the hyperbole and hysteria from the special interest groups in Washington. The sequester is a tiny – and desirable – step in the direction of fiscal responsibility.

Related posts:

Dan Mitchell explains what happened in Cyprus

Dan Mitchell explains what happened in Cyprus.   What Really Happened in Cyprus? April 14, 2013 by Dan Mitchell Did Cyprus become an economic basket case because it is a tax haven, as some leftists have implied? Did it get in trouble because the government overspent, which I have suggested? The answers to those questions are […]

Dan Mitchell on Obamacare (includes cartoons on Obamacare)

Some very good points by Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute on Obamacare: Why We Should Be Optimistic about Repealing Obamacare and Fixing the Healthcare System April 10, 2013 by Dan Mitchell I’m going to make an assertion that seems utterly absurd. The enactment of Obamacare may have been good news. Before sending a team of medical […]

Dan Mitchell’s blog has great cartoon that demonstrates what President Obama has been doing the last 4 years!!!

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control.     I’ve Obtained a Secret Pre-Release Copy of Obama’s Budget April 9, 2013 by Dan Mitchell The President is supposed to release […]

Dan Mitchell’s tribute to Margaret Thatcher

Very well said by Dan Mitchell. A Tribute to Margaret Thatcher April 8, 2013 by Dan Mitchell The woman who saved the United Kingdom has died. A Great Woman I got to meet Margaret Thatcher a couple of times and felt lucky each time that I was in the presence of someone who put her nation’s […]

Dan Mitchell, Ron Paul, and Milton Friedman on Immigration Debate (includes editorial cartoon)

I like Milton Friedman’s comments on this issue of immigration   and Ron Paul and Dan Mitchell do well on the issue too. Question of the Week: What’s Your Take on the Immigration Debate? April 7, 2013 by Dan Mitchell A reader from overseas wonders about my views on immigration, particularly amnesty. I confess that this is one of […]

Dan Mitchell on Texas v. California (includes editorial cartoon)

We should lower federal taxes because jobs are going to states like Texas that have low taxes. What Can We Learn by Comparing the Employment Situation in Texas vs. California? April 3, 2013 by Dan Mitchell One of the great things about federalism, above and beyond the fact that it both constrains the power of governments […]

Cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog on Obamacare

Third-Party Payer is the Biggest Economic Problem With America’s Health Care System Published on Jul 10, 2012 This mini-documentary from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation explains that “third-party payer” is the main problem with America’s health care system. This is why undoing Obamacare, while desirable, is just a small first step if we […]

Obamacare cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. The funniest cartoon is the one with “Nurse Sebelius” stuffing the huge capsule down the kid’s throat!!! Obamacare […]

Editorial cartoon from Dan Mitchell’s blog on California’s sorry state of affairs

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the sequester, economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  minimum wage laws, tax increases, social security, high taxes in California, Obamacare,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. President Obama’s favorite state must be California because […]

Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute:HUD has to go!!!! (includes political cartoon)

You want a suggestion on how to cut the government then start at HUD. I would prefer to eliminate all of it. Here are Dan Mitchell’s thoughts below: Sequestration’s Impact on HUD: Just 358 More Days and Mission Accomplished March 12, 2013 by Dan Mitchell As part of my “Question of the Week” series, I had […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell | Comments (2)

A closer look at the Boston Marathon terrorists

April 24, 2013 – 8:52 am

Sad case indeed.


Immigration, Terrorism, and Welfare Tourism

April 24, 2013 by Dan Mitchell

So we’ve now learned that the Boston Marathon terrorists were welfare bums. Why am I not surprised?

“Thanks for the handouts, suckers!”

Heck, it was only a couple of days ago that I announced the Moocher Hall of Fame and included terrorists from theUnited Kingdom and Australia (and I could have included a taxpayer-subsidized terrorist from France as well).

I’m tempted to joke about al Qaeda including welfare applications in their training manuals, but I’m worried that might give them new ideas.

Anyhow, here are some of the predictable details from a story in the Boston Herald.

Marathon bombings mastermind Tamerlan Tsarnaev was living on taxpayer-funded state welfare benefits even as he was delving deep into the world of radical anti-American Islamism, the Herald has learned. State officials confirmed last night that Tsarnaev, slain in a raging gun battle with police last Friday, was receiving benefits along with his wife, Katherine Russell Tsarnaev, and their 3-year-old daughter. The state’s Executive Office of Health and Human Services said those benefits ended in 2012… In addition, both of Tsarnaev’s parents received benefits, and accused brother bombers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan were recipients through their parents when they were younger, according to the state.

All this raises a broader point about why the United States has a policy of letting people in the country who are not self supporting?

This is the point I made in my Fox Business News debate about immigration. Like most other libertarians, I’m very sympathetic to immigration, but I want people with initiative and ambition, not welfare tourists.

Speaking of welfare tourism, even Europeans realize it’s a problem when people come for handouts rather than opportunity. Here’s a blurb from a Daily Telegraph report.

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, has convinced her counterparts in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands to campaign for tighter restrictions to migrants’ access to welfare handouts and other state-funded services. In a joint letter, the countries have warned that migrants from EU members states are putting “considerable strain” on schools, healthcare and the welfare state…David Cameron has said he wants to restrict migrants’ access to housing benefit, legal aid and the NHS. The letter sent by the four countries warns that the EU free movement directive must not be “unconditional” and that major towns and cities “are under a considerable strain by certain immigrants from other member states”.

Of course, it’s hard to have much sympathy for the politicians in the UK, Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands. After all, they certainly have the power to reduce their overly generous welfare systems.

But instead of taking that sensible step, they want to restrict immigration.

Which brings us back to Milton Friedman’s warning about the incompatibility of opens borders and the welfare state.

But the real reason to pare back the welfare state is that dependency is bad for poor people, regardless of whether they’re native born or immigrants. Even some honest liberals have acknowledged this problem.

If we want to help the less fortunate, economic growth is the best approach. That means free markets and small government.

And the combination of more growth and less welfare will ease concerns about immigration, so it’s a win-win-win situation. What’s not to love?

P.S. Better economic policy is desirable for many reasons, but I’m not under any illusion it will stop terrorism. As I wrote recently, there’s no way to create a risk-free society, particularly when there are people motivated by anti-modernity.

Related posts:

Dan Mitchell explains what happened in Cyprus

April 14, 2013 – 1:46 pm

Dan Mitchell explains what happened in Cyprus.   What Really Happened in Cyprus? April 14, 2013 by Dan Mitchell Did Cyprus become an economic basket case because it is a tax haven, as some leftists have implied? Did it get in trouble because the government overspent, which I have suggested? The answers to those questions are […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell | Edit | Comments (0)

Dan Mitchell on Obamacare (includes cartoons on Obamacare)

April 10, 2013 – 9:37 am

Some very good points by Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute on Obamacare: Why We Should Be Optimistic about Repealing Obamacare and Fixing the Healthcare System April 10, 2013 by Dan Mitchell I’m going to make an assertion that seems utterly absurd. The enactment of Obamacare may have been good news. Before sending a team of medical […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, Healthcare, President Obama | Edit | Comments (0)

Dan Mitchell’s blog has great cartoon that demonstrates what President Obama has been doing the last 4 years!!!

April 9, 2013 – 3:52 pm

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control.     I’ve Obtained a Secret Pre-Release Copy of Obama’s Budget April 9, 2013 by Dan Mitchell The President is supposed to release […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, President Obama | Edit | Comments (2)

Dan Mitchell’s tribute to Margaret Thatcher

April 8, 2013 – 1:53 pm

Very well said by Dan Mitchell. A Tribute to Margaret Thatcher April 8, 2013 by Dan Mitchell The woman who saved the United Kingdom has died. A Great Woman I got to meet Margaret Thatcher a couple of times and felt lucky each time that I was in the presence of someone who put her nation’s […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0)

Dan Mitchell, Ron Paul, and Milton Friedman on Immigration Debate (includes editorial cartoon)

April 8, 2013 – 8:42 am

I like Milton Friedman’s comments on this issue of immigration   and Ron Paul and Dan Mitchell do well on the issue too. Question of the Week: What’s Your Take on the Immigration Debate? April 7, 2013 by Dan Mitchell A reader from overseas wonders about my views on immigration, particularly amnesty. I confess that this is one of […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, Milton Friedman | Edit | Comments (0)

Dan Mitchell on Texas v. California (includes editorial cartoon)

April 3, 2013 – 4:35 pm

We should lower federal taxes because jobs are going to states like Texas that have low taxes. What Can We Learn by Comparing the Employment Situation in Texas vs. California? April 3, 2013 by Dan Mitchell One of the great things about federalism, above and beyond the fact that it both constrains the power of governments […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, spending out of control, Taxes | Edit | Comments (0)

Cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog on Obamacare

March 30, 2013 – 9:14 am

Third-Party Payer is the Biggest Economic Problem With America’s Health Care System Published on Jul 10, 2012 This mini-documentary from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation explains that “third-party payer” is the main problem with America’s health care system. This is why undoing Obamacare, while desirable, is just a small first step if we […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, Healthcare | Edit | Comments (0)

Obamacare cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog

March 27, 2013 – 1:14 pm

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. The funniest cartoon is the one with “Nurse Sebelius” stuffing the huge capsule down the kid’s throat!!! Obamacare […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, Healthcare | Edit | Comments (0)

Editorial cartoon from Dan Mitchell’s blog on California’s sorry state of affairs

March 26, 2013 – 12:38 pm

I have put up lots of cartoons from Dan Mitchell’s blog before and they have got lots of hits before. Many of them have dealt with the sequester, economy, eternal unemployment benefits, socialism,  minimum wage laws, tax increases, social security, high taxes in California, Obamacare,  Greece,  welfare state or on gun control. President Obama’s favorite state must be California because […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell | Edit | Comments (0)

Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute:HUD has to go!!!! (includes political cartoon)

March 19, 2013 – 6:00 am

You want a suggestion on how to cut the government then start at HUD. I would prefer to eliminate all of it. Here are Dan Mitchell’s thoughts below: Sequestration’s Impact on HUD: Just 358 More Days and Mission Accomplished March 12, 2013 by Dan Mitchell As part of my “Question of the Week” series, I had […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell, spending out of control | Edit | Comments (0

By Everette Hatcher III | Also posted in Cato Institute, Economist Dan Mitchell | Comments (0)