Supreme Court Aftermath....

 It all starts in 2014 , but how will it work ? . Here me out first before you shout hallelujah !  

Disappointed with conservative justices are you? How about that the Supreme Court of the United States is filled with Liberals. Obviously the Supreme Court handed Obama a victory.   The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Obama care, the controversial federal health care reform program, in a blockbuster decision yesterday. As Crazy as it seems , I was just livid . I know that Obama care is not exactly 'socialized medicine' . I'd preferred a Canada Model of health care  than the swindle the Supreme Court  handed the American public. Here is the buzz . If you are uninsured , and if if you are illegal . You can go to the federal Government and get a card and receive benefits .If they are truly low income I might not have a problem BUT the majority of those on the public dole are families that are "generational" recipients. No father present yet the poor children keep on coming, at the expense of the hard-working middle class! Let's not forget the ILLEGALS that are also getting FREE care at the expense of American Citizens. I suspect that you might fit into one of these categories. Maybe I am going over the hill , but something is just not right with the individual mandate  . My problem the way the Obama care is going to work is by Paul robbing Mary to Pay for Peter . The Public sector Unions should be outright angry as what is going to turn over in the next few years over Obama care , public sector workers are going to see their own employer medical benefits out of pocket increase  . Not only will they be taxed , their employer benefits medical otherwise will be taxable income. I advise Public Sector Unionized Employees to drop their healthcare benefits in 2014 and go to the government and apply for the uninsured , and get cheaper medical with the feds.  We are now officially slaves to the Federal Government. You will never earn money for yourself as your wages are taxed. You will never own your own property since they can take it if you don't pay taxes. And you could now essentially be jailed if you do not pay the "Penalty" "tax" or whatever for not having Insurance. And the Government, and their Insurance Corporation friends win again.

SOME OBAMA-CARE FACTS:

The fine for not purchasing health insurance under PPACA is $95 per person in 2014 (or 1% of taxable income, whichever is greater), $325 in 2015 (or 2%), and $695 in 2016 (or 2.5%). Thereafter, the mandate is indexed to inflation.How is healthcare costs already consuming almost 20% of the GDP and rising faster than the inflationary rate not already bankrupting America?

In Wisconsin, Gruber reported that people purchasing insurance for themselves on the individual market would see, on average, premium increases of 30 percent by 2016, relative to what would have happened in the absence of Obamacare. In Minnesota, the law would increase premiums by 29 percent over the same period. Colorado was the least worst off, with premiums under the law rising by only 19 percent.

NOTES AND COMMENTS:

Let's see coverage for preexisting. How much will the premiums cost? Insure 50 million uninsured. Would all of them have died without this? Name one person "on the system" that will now pay for insurance. How will they find everyone not buying insurance, they can't even find uninsured drivers until they get in a accident. If a company can pay a 2K fine instead of 6k in insurance why would they? When they decied to pay the fine and drop insurance what middle class worker will be able to pay for his familys insurance? Just does not make sense but the rich including pelosi, reed , kerry, edwards and most politicans republican and democrat will not have to worry. Just plain stupid. No tort reform no competion across state lines just feel good politican vote buying.

U.S. Courts & Obamacare.

The law will cost the government about $938 billion over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which has also estimated that it will reduce the federal deficit by $138 billion over a decade.

The Nation needs some form of 'healthcare reform' .  The Supreme Court might cut the 2,700 page law in half. As the country awaits the U.S. Supreme Court decision on health care, more American voters continue to oppose the law than favor it.  In addition, voters are divided over what Congress should do if the high court rules parts or all of the 2010 law as unconstitutional.  FOX news Poll suggests. As released ,  43 percent want lawmakers to scrap the whole law because it can’t work without the individual mandate and 42 percent want Congress to keep what’s left of the law and see what works. The Supreme Court is expected to announce its decision on the law Thursday. Even if the individual mandate is ruled unconstitutional, millions of the uninsured would still gain health-care coverage if the ruling leaves the rest of the law intact.That's for two big reasons. One, the law contains a major expansion of Medicaid for low-income households – those with incomes up to 1.3 times the official poverty level. The second factor is the law's system of tax subsidies, designed to help more Americans afford health coverage.Consider a working-age family of four, with an income of $60,000 and no earner covered by an employer-based health plan. According to a "health reform subsidy calculator" created by the Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks US health-care policies, this family would reap a tax subsidy of $9,308 if they buy insurance in 2014. That would cover most of a total premium cost of $14,245, perhaps putting health insurance within the family's financial reach.But without the "stick" of an individual mandate, this "carrot" wouldn't prompt all households to fully insure themselves. To take the family in the example just given, they would still face a sizable premium (nearly $5,000), plus the prospect of additional out-of-pocket expenses, capped for this family at $6,250.Senate Republicans have devised a strategy to counter attacks they lack a health care plan and spin whatever the Supreme Court decides on President Barack Obama’s health care law as a victory for their party.In a series of talking points obtained by POLITICO, Republicans lay out four possible rulings and detail how their party should respond in each of those cases. Sensitive to Democratic criticisms that they lack a plan to call their own, they will make the case that they won’t enact a 2,700 page law and will instead replace it “step-by-step” piecemeal reforms.Republicans will then try to highlight a series of health care ideas that have long been popular with their party as their preferred alternative, including by allowing small businesses “to pool resources to purchase health insurance” for employees, opening the door for health insurance to be purchased across state lines, targeting malpractice lawsuits against doctors, expanding health savings accounts and giving state governments unspecified “incentives” to lower costs.

NOTES & COMMENTS:

ACA requires our elected members of Congress to access the same insurance options as their constituents. This assures that we all end up with a reasonable menu of choices in the exchanges because members of Congress will not deny themselves. Apparently, many members of Congress prefer to retain their privileged "cadillac plan" at the exclusion and expense of constituent taxpayers.

THIS FROM FORBES,

"As things currently stand, Members of Congress and their staff, until 2014, will continue to participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). This program, considered among the best in the nation, allows federal employees- including Members of Congress and their staff- to choose from a wide range of health plans and select the one that best suits their needs. Note that the current plan is neither ‘government’ insurance, ‘free’ insurance nor any other sort of sweet deal that the public has been led to believe is the case. The federal employee’s program involves private insurance policies with premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etc.

Here’s the surprise – come 2014, when the lion’s share of the ACA provisions come on line, Members of Congress and their staff will be required to buy their health insurance on an exchange. In fact, their choices will be even more limited than our own. While it is expected that some 24 million people will elect to purchase their health care policy on a state run exchange, we are not required by law to do so. Members of Congress and their staff, however, must buy their insurance in this way."

Section 1312 of the Affordable Care Act

http://www.forbes.com/sites...

If SCROTUS kills ACA, Obama should provide universal individual health insurance access to the FEHB health plan menu that members of Congress and SCROTUS have for themselves (at taxpayer expense), and make it a full, 100% tax deduction on individual tax returns.

Here is the hypocrisy of every GOTP politician, including McConnell and Boehner and Romney - they signed the Gridlock Grover pledge to not raise taxes, and yet they all complain that "half of Americans don't pay taxes", so they promise to "broaden the base" by RAISING TAXES ON LOW AND MIDDLE INCOME WORKING AMERICANS.

Meanwhile, every working American with income under $110,000 pays FICA and Medicare tax on every dollar of income, and their employer pays a match (the full employment penalty tax). All "earned income" (aka work) above $110,000 is exempt from FICA - an incentive to hire fewer workers at higher income. ALL "unearned income" above $0 is exempt from FICA and Medicare tax - an incentive to shift income from salary (that pays up to 35% income tax + payroll tax) to stock, dividends, "carried interest" (that pays 15% income tax + 0 payroll tax).

SEE:  http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2012/06/27/us-health-care-reform-efforts-through-history-2 

Faster , you should be Furious.

American guns are helping Mexican drug cartels kill Mexicans , this is the worst part of the Failing War on Drugs that America has exported to Mexico.

Faster , you should be Furious. American Tax dollars , gun smuggling  and Mexican Cartels .  To the right, the story has been an election-year blessing, a roiling melange of: (1) gun righteousness; (2) antipathy toward Holder, and; (3) fear and loathing of Mexico and Mexicans. Fast and Furious was begun in 2009, under the Obama administration.  This program allowed the firearms to go across the border without any surveillance whatsoever.  Law enforcement did not re-establish any tracking of these weapons until they were found at murder scenes.  The Bush era program only lost track of a handful of firearms when it was shut down, but Fast and Furious provided 1700 high powered firearms to Mexican drug cartels.  You could say that the program was WORSE THAN BUSH. (You could say that about a lot of things with this administration.)   Here is how it all began : 

Two years ago, Mexican President Calderon told a Joint Session of Congress that the drug cartels in his country were exploiting weak American gun laws to amass their arsenals; indeed, he said the escalation of Mexican drug violence "coincides with the lifting of the assault weapons ban in 2004." President Calderon told the Congress of his understanding that the purpose of the Second Amendment "is to guarantee good American citizens the ability to defend themselves and their Nation." "But believe me," he added, "many of these guns are not going to honest American hands."Since his address, it has become even clearer that Mexican crime guns are originating in American gun shops. Last month, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives released its most recent data showing that, in the last five years, more than 68,000 crime guns were recovered in Mexico and traced back to the United States. The guns that "walked" across the border under the "Fast and Furious" operation constitute less than 3% of those guns. Where is Speaker Boehner's concern about the other 97%?

On this weekend’s broadcast of the syndicated public affairs program “Inside Washington,” Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer took on his co-panelists, NPR’s Nina Totenberg and fellow Washington Post columnist  Colby King.

Both Totenberg and King, who happen to be liberal detractors of House oversight Chairman Darrell Issa’s investigation into Attorney General Eric Holder and his Justice Department’s handling of the Fast and Furious scandal, suggested that the whole situation was nothing more than an effort by an ambitious Issa to go fishing for dirt on the Obama administration. On Friday’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” on HBO, panelists debated the relevance of the Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal and the competence of Attorney General Eric Holder.Maher assumed much of his audience was unaware of the details about the scandal, so he gave them a refresher before unloading his own opinion.“[House oversight committee Chairman] Darrell Issa says this is a giant scandal,” Maher said. “I’ve heard on Fox News this week it’s worse than Watergate because 200 Mexicans have died. First of all, let me just say Republicans don’t care about dead Mexicans, A. And B — I think those 200 dead Mexicans would be dead even if we hadn’t sold them guns. They would have gotten the guns somewhere else. So is it really a scandal?”

NOTES & COMMENTS: 

On his radio show yesterday, Schultz finally caught up with the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal that's been brewing for 18 months since the murder of border agent Brian Terry.The flood of tens of thousands of weapons underscores complaints from Mexico that the U.S. is responsible for arming the drug cartels plaguing its southern neighbor. Six years of violence between warring cartels have killed more than 47,000 people in Mexico. 

China's Rocket , America's problem.

It might not be a giant step for mankind, but Saturday's launch of a piloted space capsule known as Shenzhou-9 marks China's breakthrough into the exclusive club once made up only of the United States and Russia. Sure enough it makes America look vary bad in terms of keeping up with scientific achievements. While America's space shuttle program ended . Leaving the Nation without a replacement program on launching payloads into orbit . America has begun a slow decade of sending humans into space via Russia . Again Here President Obama has plowed into the thinking that private companies eventually  will  handle most development  ... o rockets and capsules. The  President requested $830 million for Commercial Crew programs, which is America's single most important near-term civil space project.  But cutting the Technology budget while increasing the Earth Science budget – a function that doesn't even belong in a space exploration agency – and continuing to shovel resources into the SLS money pit is a travesty. Before long we are going to see China do bigger things while America takes a back seat . Mind you space exploration is expensive , but it creates jobs in the the technical field . The loss of  Constellation program  In his April 15, 2010 space policy speech at Kennedy Space Center announcing the administration's plans for NASA, none of the 3 plans outlined in the Committees final report were completely selected.^[14] The President rejected immediate plans to return to the Moon on the premise that the current plan had become nonviable. NASA had a vision for space exploration and it was tossed in the dumpster by the current administration. You can only envision what budgets allow. That’s what NASA is faced with. That plus no documented vision from the administration, which we’ll never get from this president. All talk and no money to back it up. And commercial is a farce … won’t work with no market (other than ISS resupply) and without federal funding.NASA has said its long-term goal is Mars, and President Obama has said he would like the space program to send humans to an asteroid in the interim. But there are no budgets or timelines for either of these missions.

NOTES& COMMENTS:

• "When President Obama recently released his budget for NASA, he proposed a slight increase in total funding...the accompanying decision to cancel the Constellation program, its Ares 1 and Ares V rockets, and the Orion spacecraft, is devastating."
• "It appears that we will have wasted our current ten plus billion dollar investment in Constellation and, equally importantly, we will have lost the many years required to recreate the equivalent of what we will have discarded."
• "For The United States, the leading space faring nation for nearly half a century, to be without carriage to low Earth orbit and with no human exploration capability to go beyond Earth orbit for an indeterminate time into the future, destines our nation to become one of second or even third rate stature. While the President's plan envisages humans traveling away from Earth and perhaps toward Mars at some time in the future, the lack of developed rockets and spacecraft will assure that ability will not be available for many years."

• "Under the Obama plan, NASA will spend $100 billion on human spaceflight over the next 10 years in order to accomplish nothing"
• "Obama called for sending a crew to a near Earth asteroid by 2025. ... Had Obama not canceled the Ares 5, we could have used it to perform an asteroid mission by 2016. But the President, while calling for such a flight, actually is terminating the programs that would make it possible."
• "With current in-space propulsion technology, we can do a round-trip mission to a near-Earth asteroid or a one-way transit to Mars in six months ... Holdren claims that he wants to develop a new electrically powered space thruster to speed up such trips. But without gigantic space nuclear power reactors to provide them with juice, such thrusters are useless, and the administration has no intention of developing such reactors."^[19]
• "Without the skill and experience that actual spacecraft operation provides, the USA is far too likely to be on a long downhill slide to mediocrity."

Amnesty for “Kids” . Some thoughts!

These illegal alien “kids” are already getting college scholarships, etc., and living freely here without fear of any consequences. So, this is really, again, just a formality. The only difference is that these aliens will now have legal status to work. Will they be required to register for the draft? Don’t count on it. Only American citizens will have to do that. 

Your standing in a long line , and you have been faithful to the latter on getting into a Movie theater . All of a sudden a couple shows card , the couple is led out of the long line right into the theater and seated . You and other have to stand in line waiting .  This allegory  illustrates what is wrong with amnesty that Pres. Obama just "granted" to children of illegals   . I don't think it's fair to the average Collage student who had to pay their way towards higher education . Obama said that these illegal aliens are Americans in their hearts and minds and in every way except on paper.  I know that there are sincere "children" of illegals who want to get an education here in America  , but with all the Federal freebie's given to these Children ahead of the Citizen , and his children . Sure Obama is a risk taker . In his own mind he seems to have taken issues like Gay marriage and now amnesty for illegals as "civil rights issues" . Pres. Obama has now created for most "reverse racism" which most African Americans are being pushed out of the job market and displaced by Hispanics . . Fast food places and restaurants used to be great starting points for young Blacks seeking their first jobs while in high school. Also, companies like McDonald’s actually sought out the most talented crew people for management tracks. A Black teen could find himself an assistant store manager or even manager in five years. If one of these recruits stuck it out, general management and franchise opportunities were available as well. That situation has changed. Now, a typical McDonald’s restaurant, if there is any significant Hispanic population at all, has an almost entirely Hispanic staff with a bilingual manager. Pres. Obama missed another point when he announced this kind of amnesty. He has short changed all Blacks  in the nation , who deserve to have their children go to collage with the same "rights" as the illegals . This insidious coalition hurts the poor by lowering the cost of labor by flooding the market with unskilled and semi-skilled labor. Poor Whites, Blacks, and other minorities who are not Hispanic are left out in the cold by such policies. Illegal alien parents are subject to deportation at any time. Amnesty to the hundreds of thousands of 30 year old “children” of illegal aliens is wrong because it is morally wrong to separate families. Deporting the parents of “children” that have been given amnesty will be impossible.

NOTES & COMMENTS: 

UNEMPLOYED AMERICANS under the Obama . The economic disaster: 14 million Americans are unemployed and over 50% of young Blacks have no job and many more have given up looking in the last 2 years. This summer 7 in 10 teenagers will not find the jobs they need to get back to school with book and tuition money. Obama’s amnesty hands out residency permits and work permits to illegal aliens putting more Americans out of work and at risk of losing their homes and life savings.

Let’s be clear, every indication is that the overwhelming majority of illegal aliens will register and vote Democrat regardless what POTUS or Political Party gives them the Amnesty and eventually the vote. Obama’s Amnesty has no constitutional or legislative justification and it is in fact a new law by FIAT, like any common dictator would execute. This is happening while Congress is asleep.

Second, Article II, Sec. III of the Constitution calls for the president to faithfully enforce the laws. Securing our borders is the president’s responsibility under Article IV, Section 4.  The penalty for violations of immigration laws is DEPORTATION, anything less is amnesty. Failure by the POTUS to enforce the existing laws is contrary to Constitutional obligation and intention. What other law violations and the criminals that commit them is Obama going to give a pass to?

Obama said :  "people younger than 30 who came to the United States before the age of 16, pose no criminal or security threat, and were successful students or served in the military can get a two-year deferral from deportation...

It also will allow those meeting the requirements to apply for work permits, Napolitano said, adding that participants must be in the United States now and be able to prove they have been living in the country continuously for at least five years."

On the backs of the Poor......

The governor calls the Democratic proposal presented in the Senate and Assembly fiscally irresponsible. He seeks more cuts in welfare spending.

Legislative Democrats are poised to send Gov. Jerry Brown a budget that avoids deep new cuts in safety-net programs while reducing state worker pay and taking funds from courts and counties. To help bridge a $15.7 billion deficit, the Democratic governor has asked his own party's lawmakers to overhaul welfare-to-work, slash in-home care and require low-income students to earn higher grades .But Democrats plan to reject more than $1 billion of those cuts, saying the state has already balanced enough prior budgets on the backs of poor Californians. They lack a deal with Brown, but lawmakers face a Friday constitutional deadline to send him a budget or lose their pay.Legislative leaders released a proposal Wednesday that instead would nearly halve the size of Brown's $1 billion reserve, recalculate education funding formulas to save $330 million and take $250 million in funds that counties expected to receive. This sounds a bit of an odd ball way to push paper on the budget just to avoid any cuts in the education budget . Which is the 'sacred cow' of the Democrats . Anyhow it proves that Gov. Jerry Brown is mo worse than the any governor save a ** Republican Governor like Scott Walker . He can't keep any promises to the budget , sure enough he is going after all options soon as the deficit grows.Why does Jerry Brown never say anything about the billion in taxes we've spent on illegal foreign nationals?  Why isn't he suggesting cuts to all the freebies they get?  Why are we paying for free schooling, free school breakfasts and lunches, free admission the the AfterSchool Program from 2:30 to 6:00 pm every school day including more free food and free field trips, in state tuition rates given to illegal aliens who violated federal Laws by stealing into CA, and complete free health care ( MediCal) which any illegal alien who walks into a hospital will be signed up for so long as he claims no income?  Why is Moonbeam Brown not suggesting cuts in these free giveaways?  And yet he has the audacity to ask the citizens and legal residents who get nothing from all these giveaways to criminals, to vote themselves higher taxes in November? In all, Brown and legislative Democrats appear to be $300 million apart in cuts: Brown wants $8.3 billion in cuts, Democrats want $8 billion. The core difference is over $1.3 billion in cuts Brown has proposed to CalWORKs, the state's welfare-to-work program, and child care. A big chunk of Brown's savings -- $880 million -- comes by limiting parents to two years of welfare grants and child care instead of four if they can't find work or don't enter job training programs. \ Democrats say Brown's approach of requiring parents to look for work is costly and fruitless with so few jobs available in a down economy.

NOTES & COMMENTS:

** The Republicans of California long ago gave up. They turned to politics of power and protecting themselves rather than putting California ahead of their party. That's the precise reason Democrats are fully in power here. It's the voters' decision. If Republicans want back in the game, they've got to more than empty, debunked ideas and get creatively involved.




Please go here for further information.

Crap on TV these days............

 People are often worried about the "decline of morals" on the TV . I worry mostly about quality programing on educational television .

Back in the 80s, everyone knew that Cable TV meant we'd have 500 channels of programming and everyone presumed the way forward was boutique programming channels like the Food Network and the Golf Network and SF and History and Science and whatever. Reality TV has invaded and corroded what most Cable Network are. I am writing here to blow some steam , not on as much politics as my blog is about,  but more about television . Politics and the Media are an odd mix for the social fellows . Here is my gripe . Please follow me here. Example The History Channel . History is my favorite  subject . What does Chucking a pumpkin have to do with History ? The History Channel shows things that have nothing to do with history these days . Like shows named Pawn Stars . I like watching history documentaries. I don't understand what ice truckers and swamp men, etc. has to do with history. Theravada so many interesting time periods and spectacular things that have happened in the past. Everyone could benefit from learning from the past. I hope this channel doesn't abandon all it principles just for profits! The worst offenders on my list of what the F is this doing on this Channel . Look at the National Geographic Channel  lately they are showing marathons of Wicked Tuna & Shark Men. Show me the geographical  importance of these shows?  I thought Nat Geo would show programs about exploration and not exploitation.  I don’t watch a lot of TV, since it’s something I just now began to really notice. But it makes me wonder if the “reality-based”/pseudo-documentary TV trend has gone too far. At least during the talk show TV trend days, you couldn’t modify them into any other kind of genre to show on other TV stations.Initially the Discovery Channel was about science. In the beginning they filled in some time slots with programs about UFOs, the Loch Ness Monster and lots of old science and speculative TV specials from previous decades; however, now things have changed a lot. Junkyard Wars and even MythBusters can at least be considered slightly scientific, but shows like Cash Cab, Dirty Jobs, American Chopper, Monster Garage and a few other are more mainstream. They eventually made another channel called Discovery Science which eventually became the Science Channel. However this trend is , it mostly immolating like with the rest of Hollywood these days with "remakes of remakes" and "prequels" .   Quality programming is virtually non-existant, it seems people enjoy getting dumbed down by Jersy Shore instead of actually learning something.

Leaks to the Media.

 Obama Administration may have leaked Classified info to prevent a war , but it also may have given Iran the edge .

In following news stories about leaks of classified information over the years, it is evident that the worst offenders are politicians.Two reports today about Iran's nuclear program and the possibility of an Israeli military strike have analysts in Israel accusing the Obama administration leaking information to pressure Israel not to bomb Iran and for Iran to reach a compromise in upcoming nuclear talks.The second report from Bloomberg, based on a leaked congressional report, said that Iran's nuclear facilities are so dispersed that it is "unclear what the ultimate effect of a strike would be…" A strike could delay Iran as little as six months, a former official told the researchers. I ponder who "leaked" this information ** . The story line here is that the Classified info was about a possible Israeli attack on Iran from Azerbaijan. The New York Times, which broke this particular story, said it had interviewed “three dozen of [Obama’s] current and former advisers,” which suggests the sort of mass law-breaking not seen since Richard Nixon took out after commies, liberals, conservationists, antiwar protesters, Jews and, of course, leakers. The two U.S. attorneys assigned to finding the leakers may have to use the facilities at Guantanamo, which, as luck would have it, are somehow still open. Of course, the chances of a successful prosecution are slim, leak cases being hard to prove. Journalists, unlike the mob, still adhere to the Mafia code of silence, omertà. We are, at heart, traditionalists.Indeed, the Iranian regime could not hope for better intelligence sources than what Obama’s defense officials leak to the media on a regular basis. First there was the revelation in June 2010 that Israel might use Saudi Arabia's airspace in order to fly a more direct route to Iran. The unanticipated Saudi-Israeli cooperation was leaked to, and then reported by, the London Times, citing anonymous “U.S. defense sources.”Media observers began to notice the pattern--”Did the U.S. just torpedo Israeli deal for a base in Azerbaijan?” the Christian Science Monitor asked--and to wonder why Israel’s “best friend” was doing so much to help the enemy.

NOTES & COMMENTS:

 ** Michael Reagan today on Fox News said he suspects the leaker is big mouth then- Senator Joey Biden. During the Reagan adm, Michael relayed that Joey Biden would sit in on nat'l security conferences and if Pres. Reagan wanted some covert operation that Joey B, did not like he threatened he would leak the covert operation to the media.

A Collective Issue......

 Pension "reform" is not the the only problem California faces in November.

Collective Bargaining rights are perhaps the most important issue to any Union . I believe that they are essential.  Recent attempts at "reform" pension plans only demonstrate that big government with it's amount of debt can't no longer pay for "extravagant" plans that only bankrupt the state's coffers. I believe that Unions are entitled to seek "reasonable" benefit packages for it's members .  The Recent moves by Republican Gov. Scott Walker to go up against "union bosses" is a two way candle burning on Gov. Scott Walker's desk . Gov. Scott Walker still has to deal with the Public Employee sector, that won't go away even if bargaining  rights are gone.   While I was against his recall only because the "people" elected him fair and square, and chose to keep in office only demonstrates the fact that  Public Employee Union members in Wisconsin may also be blamed for his election to that office . I compare what was going on in California in the recent decade with it's Total Recall . Union Members threw out Gov. Gray Davis , and blamed him for the "mess" , they did it going against their own union political agenda and voting ahead for the Terminator Arnold Schwarzenegger . The Union Political Machine can be kinda schmoozed  when dues paying members don't go with the union agenda . The California "Paycheck Protection" Initiative (2012)   is probably the most anticipated and feared law if it's voted in by the union members themselves , not the general public at large would cause a another California meltdown . The Pressure would fall on Gov. Jerry Brown to veto.If approved, the initiative will:

• Prohibit the government from deducting union dues from government employee paychecks that will be used for political purposes.
• Ban contributions to candidate-controlled committees by corporations and labor unions.
• Ban contractors who receive government contracts from donating to the officeholder who awarded the contract.^[2]

 Thad Kousser, a political-science professor at UC San Diego, says that the Paycheck Protection Initiative could have a strong impact on the public sector (government employee) unions in the state: "Defeating this has got to be the top goal of labor. If they don't, they could become almost extinct in California politics."^[7]

 WATCH OUT FOR BROWN.

I believe if you work hard and are a Union Member you are entitled to the wages and benefits your union has fought and negotiated for   . However Gov. Jerry Brown has sneaked into the November Ballot . California Pension Reform (CPR) is the name of an ambitious political group that’s promoting an initiative, the “California Government Employee Pension Reform Act Initiative of 2012,” to go on the November 2012 state ballot. If the Pay Check Initiative is fighting enough, the Pension reform act of 2012 will spell out many more problems .  Sundheim credited Gov. Jerry Brown for raising public awareness of the state’s pension liabilities, but he said the governor’s own proposal would relieve just five percent of the state’s pension debt. By contrast, a CPR initiative would trigger broad systemic changes that could solve the problem of public employee pensions in California and point the way to other states that can no longer afford union-dictated pension benefit systems.

NOTES & COMMENTS:

Police and Fire fighters in San Jose were mostly betrayed by their Union  Members . I feel sorry for them , but their salaries and benefit packages are "huge" . They are like CBO packages . If  California "Paycheck Protection" Initiative (2012) passes what will happen to the non-Union members who opt out? Likely they will lose all benefits of unionized members . Lower wages and a non-unionized benefit plan , but who is in the right frame of mind to no pay union dues and protection . In this day in age I would rather pay my union dues . Considering the predatory actions of employers anyway. 

 There is a provision that says you either have to belong to a union or not.  Its called the Dills Act.  State employees were not given a choice.  However, the Dills Act gives them a choice as to whether or not they have to pay the extra dollar.  The union decides whether or not you get to vote without paying the $1.00.  It appears you're saying the $1.00 is no big deal to an employee, however despite the fact it does not provide any extra money towards bargaining and representation, it appears to be a big deal to a multi-million dollar organization otherwise they wouldn't be denying the right to vote just to collect it.

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/the_state_worker/2011/10/paycheck-protection-initiative-a-step-closer-to-statewide-vote.html#storylink=cpy

No More Recalls.

 Angry voters create chaos in Government when they recall their elected officials . Example here would be the State of California .

Voters get angry with their elected officials for a number of reasons and if those reasons are serious enough they ...Recall. There are lessons in regards to Recalling a elected official . California ** had it's day with Gray Davis replacing him with Arnold Schwarzenegger . If the voters are not happy with their elected President of the United States are they too entitled to "recall" him out of office as well ?  . I believe the same applies . Gray Davis did not deserve getting recalled .  (1) Perhaps in all of American History of memory was a governor recalled , we've had Presidents impeached for crimes legal enough for constitutional actions . I don't want to see Gov. Scott Walker out of office . Walker ran on a platform of financial and public sector union employee reform. He was elected, did what he promised, and now the attempt to recall him comes to a head. On the surface, the election is about whether Badger State residents will recall their lightning rod of a governor, Republican Scott Walker, largely for having stripped Wisconsin public workers of their collective bargaining rights.But on a national level, the recall effort has become a proxy fight over whether Republicans can push through spending cuts and confront organized labor - and live to tell about it. And the outcome will have major implications not just for the GOP but for the labor movement, the Obama campaign and the outside groups poised to play a major role in the November elections.Recalls are now the norm in politics .

MONEY POURS IN THE RECALL ELECTION.

Along the way, Walker has become a star among Republicans and the most successful fundraiser in Wisconsin politics, collecting at least $31 million from around the country since taking office. That obliterated his fundraising record of $11 million from 2010.
About $63 million has been spent on the race so far, including $16 million from conservative groups such as the Republican Governors Association, Americans for Prosperity and the National Rifle Association.
Democratic groups — including those funded by unions, the Democratic Governors Association and the Democratic National Committee — have poured in about $14 million, based on a tally from the government watchdog group the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.
"Approximately $8 million, a little more than $8 million and that's the cost for each recall election at the local level," said Reid Magney, spokesman for the state's Government Accountability Board in Madison.
That's $8 million for the primary recall election and another $8 million for the general recall election. In all $16 million for both statewide elections in which local municipalities pay their share.

NOTES & COMMENTS:

** Well just as Brown an the Democrats consider a smaller increase in spending a "tax cut", so too can someone call a slight slowing of California's downward spiral an "improvement." I think the recall should be reserved only for corruption or malfeasance.  Walker has probably saved Wisconsin public employees and services from a worse fate---bankruptcy, a fate that we in California may soon experience.  Next year, I think there will be talk of recalling Brown.  Whether or not his tax initiative is successful, he won't get the money.  The people of this state of tapped out.  But, I won't vote to recall Brown because I want the liar to suffer and I think those who voted for him need to suffer along with him.  I especially want those who voted for the super sonic choo choo to suffer. (1) Walker is only the third governor in U.S. history to face a recall vote. The other two lost, most recently California Gov. Gray Davis in 2003. Wisconsin's recall election is a rematch of the 2010 governor's race in which Walker defeated Barrett by 5 percentage points.

No more cigarette Taxes!

Austin-Post Headline read : 

Lawmakers seek cigarette tax hike to aid schools, cut smoking

I don't smoke , and won't light up to pay for more taxes that seem always to be used in a fraudulent manner . In the last two decades in California and across  the nation taxes are being levied to pay for Education and Cancer research . Money in the past has been raised to pay for Education funding using Tobacco Tax. It seems disgusting to me that a vile and addictive habit of  the sick and miserable pays for your child's education .All that said, Proposition 29 is not an easy call — at least at first blush.The initiative on the June 5 state ballot would tax tobacco to fund research on cancer and other tobacco-related ailments, such as emphysema and heart disease.The state cigarette tax would be raised $1 per pack, from 87 cents to $1.87. The feds tack on an additional $1 tax. The current average retail price for a pack in California is $5-plus, the legislative analyst reports. One needs only look at New York City, where they placed such prohibitive taxes on smokes that a pack costs up to $14.50 thanks to the new tax they imposed. Of that $14.50, $6.46 is tax! Of course, little did the greedy Democrat politicians realize that there's always a bull market somewhere. You see, as the tax increased to an onerous level, smokers, the most reviled human beings known to man, began using other avenues of acquisition.The Indian smoke shops in upstate New York have enjoyed a windfall profit from their business. And of course organized crime saw a need, and met it, by going back into trafficking cigarettes. Those are real business people. The loser in all of this was the New York City health department, whose funding came largely by taxation on tobacco. Net tax revenues dropped, precipitously, thanks to the onerous new tax scheme.When you put the average American up against the government, the Average Joe will outsmart the government every single time.

NOTES & COMMENTS:


1.  I don't smoke and never have.
2.  I don't own any tobacco securities.
3.  I know that smoking causes cancer, emphysema and a whole host of issues, directly related to health.
If people haven't figured this out yet, there is something called stupidity and ignorance.  You can't change that.
The only thing that will result in a new tax, is an infusion of a narcotic, known as money, to the State and there will be an increase in the bootlegging of cigarettes and other tobacco products, from other parts of the nation, where the tax rate is lower.  Do the math.  I can ship a case of smokes, which has 50 cartons of cigarettes, each carton containing 10 packs each, for about $50 and make $450 on a case, not including the money I'd save in taxes.
So let's say I pick-up a load in Missouri, where the tax is 17 cents a pack and in California, it's 87 cents a pack.  Add another $300, not including sales tax.  Add another dollar for this new tax and your looking at a net loss to the state of at least $800 a case.
Then there is the avoidance of sales and income taxes.
No more taxes.  If a special interest group wants money for research, let them get off their collective azzes and ask for donations, not tax revenue.  Canada found out all about it, the hard way.

 20% (approximately $156 million annually) would go to tobacco prevention and cessation to the state’s existing tobacco control program. These funds would be divided between the California Department of Public Health (80%) and the California Department of Education (20%) for their existing programs to prevent and reduce the use of tobacco.