Barney Frank, during a Fox Business interview focused on the Fannie and Freddie mess said, “They should be abolished.”  Hmmm.  That can’t be Barney, can it?  Perhaps he misspoke?  Oh wait, he also said, “There were people in this society for economic and, frankly, social reasons, that can’t and shouldn’t be homeowners.  I think we should particularly stop this assumption that you put everybody into homeownership.”  Those words came out of Barney Frank’s mouth--the number one inflator of the housing bubble and lead cheerleader for the virtually unlimited expansion of Fannie’s and Freddie’s mission?  Really?  Still not convinced?  Hold on, there’s one more quote.  “Public policy has been too much to try to push people into homeownership.”

You really cannot make this stuff up.

Mind boggling, isn’t it. The chief architect of the Democrat policy to push people into homeownership just said that there was a misguided policy to push people into homeownership.  Yep, the person and party who forced lending institutions to lower their credit standards (Community Reinvestment Act) and who refused to dramatically reform the wildly out of control Fannie and Freddie, despite continual protestations from the Republicans, now says, rather of matter-of-factly, with no hint of culpability/responsibility, that Fannie and Freddie should be abolished.  Wow!  That’s pretty darn shameless, even for Barney and his Democrat colleagues.

Could it be any clearer that the Democrats should be kept as far away as possible from economy’s steering wheel ?  Let’s elect people who have the understanding and discipline necessary to clean up the mess and put us back on the path to prosperity for all.

 

This Independence Day weekend certainly does not bring a respite from campaigning—I am in the midst of a busy four-day stretch of appearances in more than a dozen communities from one end of the district to the other.

I hope that you will find time for moment of reflection this weekend.  Two hundred thirty-four years ago, the signers of the Declaration of Independence set in motion the world’s longest and most successful experiment in self-government.  Their courage as they pledged their “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor” in Philadelphia shaped the American idea in a fundamental way.

The heated political debates of the moment—and they are heated for the simple reason that the stakes are indeed high—would not be possible without the conviction that animated the Declaration of Independence that individuals and communities can and have a right to shape their own destiny.

In the America that was forged by those ideas, we all tend to that kind of freedom for granted.  I hope that you enjoy what Americans once called without irony “the glorious Fourth” with family and friends and remember just how precious the freedoms we celebrate today are.

Jason Altmire and the Democrats were just born to spend.  Whether it be on big ticket programs or small, they just can’t seem to help themselves.  Altmire just voted NO on a proposal that would cut the first-class sleeper subsidy on Amtrak.  For those who may be unaware, federal taxpayer dollars grant a significant subsidy to those who opt for “sleeper class” travel, as opposed to coach class.  These passengers are provided with a sleeping room (many of which include private facilities), turn-down service, complimentary entertainment, and pre-paid food.  Not surprisingly, Amtrak loses more than twice as much per passenger ($396)for this first class service as compared to coach service.  This additional subsidy would add another $1.2 billion over ten years to the ballooning debt.

How can we possibly expect Altmire and his Democrat colleagues to dramatically cut spending when they can’t even bring themselves to make the simple cuts? 

Missouri voters just overwhelmingly rejected, albeit symbolically, the healthcare provision that requires everyone to carry insurance.  People all over the country are recognizing the healthcare care law, and many other acts by the Obama administration and Democrats, for the massive intrusion on liberty that they represent.  It is important to remember that as expensive and sovereignty-threatening as these big government initiatives are when initially enacted, they get much, much worse over time.

For example, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion.  It was estimated that by 1990, allowing for inflation, the cost would rise to $12 billion.  The actual cost in 1990:  a staggering $107 billion--nearly a 900% underestimation!  Today, Medicare’s costs and unfunded liabilities run in the trillions. 

Big government programs only get bigger, eventually choking our economic vitality and threatening our prosperity.  A liberal Jason Altmire has shown absolutely no proclivity for stopping this massive government incursion.  He certainly has not stood up to fight his party leaders to halt the big government policies.  We need an aggressive champion for limited government who will work to enact pro-growth policies.

A little-noticed news story today drove home in just a hundred words or so what is wrong with the current leadership in Congress. The leaders of the Democratic majority in Congress have decided that they will not pass a budget this year—the first time that there will not be a budget resolution since the current rules were put in place in 1974.

Why? Fear of the political consequences for members of Congress who would then have one more vote to explain to an electorate that is ever more skeptical about runaway federal spending.

This is, of course, the same Congressional majority that passed a $767 billion “stimulus” bill, set in motion a federal takeover of one-sixth of the American economy, passed a second stimulus bill late last year only to see it rejected by the Senate, and is now discussing a $50 billion bailout of state and local governments.

A family that fails to set and follow a budget is likely to regret it.

A business that does not set a budget is all but doomed to fail.

A great country without a budget is a nation without priorities, lurching from one crisis to another while spending money wildly and running up a trillion-dollar tab for future generations to pay.

That, sadly, is the fiscal state of the American Republic today. My opponent has helped bring us to this point through his votes and his failure to lead. I am running because we deserve better.

Aren’t you tired of President Obama’s and the Democrat congress’ excuses about the economy? Is it leadership to continually point the finger and lament the situation they inherited? Whatever happened to optimism and action? When Ronald Reagan took office in 1980 he wasn’t obsessed with the disastrous economy he was handed by Jimmy Carter. Instead, he got to work on implementing a straightforward and simple set of pro-growth initiatives. The economy responded in dramatic fashion and with relative alacrity. It’s important to remember that Reagan delivered those results despite previous administration’s policies that greeted his presidency with inflation in the 12 to 13% range and interest rates upwards of 21%. As significant as the current downturn has been, who would trade it for the hand Reagan was dealt?

The good news is that we don’t have to endure a dark decade like Japan did and many now predict for the United States. Instead, we simply need to elect people who understand that government is not the solution. We can return to prosperity with a common sense approach that unlocks the power of our market economy. Allow people to keep more of their hard-earned money so they can save and invest it. Incent business formation and expansion. Stop smothering initiative with an overly burdensome, unnecessary, and unclear regulatory and tax framework.

Let’s follow the proven Kennedy and Reagan model for jumpstarting a moribund economy, not the failed model of Western Europe’s thirty plus year flirtation with cradle to grave social democracy. We’ve already seen the failure of big government at the state level. It is no coincidence that the states that have historically received the most earmarks and/or been the most business unfriendly are the ones in a perpetual state of decline? Clearly, a reliable pro-growth business climate would be a superior alternative to perpetual stagnation and decline. The country needs industries and jobs that will be there after the government money runs out. Such jobs can only be created and supported by the private sector. An environment where government jobs are being created at a faster rate than private sector jobs, and where those government jobs pay nearly double the average private sector wage, is not sustainable. We ultimately pay for this explosion of government workers and wages. That’s less money in our pockets, and therefore, a lower standard of living.

We will become prosperous again by voting for people who support economic policies that have historically made America great.

Big government is on the march again. On Thursday, the Senate passed a $4.5 billion childhood nutrition bill. Is there nothing that is out of the purview of President Obama and this congress? Why is this an issue for the Federal government? This is a classic matter better left to the states. Unfortunately, it is just one more example, in a seemingly endless list, of a congress without discipline. Yet another body blow to Federalism.

Is this a congress we can trust to substantially cut spending, reform entitlements, and dramatically reduce the deficit and debt? Of course not. We need strong conservatives who will stand up and fight against these feel-good spending programs that do nothing more than erode our liberty and mortgage our future prosperity.

HARRISBURG — Despite losing his re-election bid in November 2006, former House Democratic Whip Mike Veon continued to approve staff bonuses for campaign work before leaving office, the former top House Democratic staffer testified today.
Michael Manzo, ex-chief of staff for former House Minority Leader Bill DeWeese, said Veon approved the bonuses from 2004-06 and is convinced DeWeese knew about the program, though he testified he never had "explicitly" discussed it with DeWeese.

"I could always be much more direct with Mike," Manzo said. That stemmed, in part, from the fact DeWeese "was not a hands-on guy," Manzo testified.

Veon, 53, who represented his Beaver County district for 20 years, is accused of overseeing a secret $1.4 million bonus system paid for by taxpayers to motivate staffers to work on campaigns.

Three of Veon's former aides also are charged in the case being prosecuted by Attorney General Tom Corbett's office — Annamarie Peretta-Rosepink, 47, a former district office manager in Beaver Falls; Brett Cott, 37, a former policy aide in Harrisburg; and Stephen Keefer, 39, the ex-director of House Democrats' information technology department.

All are charged with multiple felonies of theft, conspiracy and conflict of interest.

Manzo, the prosecution's star witness, said he and former administrator Scott Brubaker recommended bonus amounts and got Veon's approval. Brubaker then informed DeWeese, Manzo said.

DeWeese, charged with crimes in a separate case, denies knowledge of bonuses for campaign work.

After Republican Jim Marshall defeated Veon in the general election, Veon approved bonuses for campaign work before leaving office Nov. 30, Manzo said.

"Mike set the amounts for his staff. It was my suggestion for everybody else," said Manzo, who struck a plea agreement and is cooperating with prosecutors.

Prosecutors reduced charges against Manzo and his wife Rachel, who also was charged and entered a guilty plea.

Commonwealth witnesses with plea agreements who will testify against the defendants are "liars" who are in a "cover your butt mode," said attorney Bryan Walk, who is representing Cott.

Prosecutors began presenting e-mails as evidence intended to show Veon approved the bonuses.

The defense is focused on showing DeWeese as the higher-ranking leader behind the bonuses.

The attorney for Peretta-Rosepink admitted that campaign activity occurred in Veon's Beaver Falls office but said his client had no authority to approve bonuses.

"I understand there was campaigning in the Beaver County office — I can't deny that," said Michael Palermo, a Carlisle attorney. "I assure you she didn't have the authority to award anybody a bonus."

Palermo said Peretta-Rosepink worked 60 to 80 hours a week. "Nobody is going to say the taxpayers of Pennsylvania didn't get 120 percent from Annamarie Peretta-Rosepink," Palermo said.

Walk said there are no e-mails showing Cott authorized bonuses.

"Politics, legislating and campaigning are like a big ball of yarn," Walk said.

Cott spearheaded an effort that knocked Green Party candidate Carl Romanelli off the ballot in the 2006 U.S. Senate race, an effort Democrats believed would help Sen. Robert Casey. Prosecutors say it was paid for with tax money.

"Brett did exactly what he was asked to do," Walk said.

"Tom Corbett has a stake in this case," Walk said, starting to refer to Corbett's bid for the Republican nomination for governor, before Judge Richard Lewis interrupted him.

"Let's move on," Lewis said.

"I don't need to tell you why they need a conviction," Walk said. "You know why."

Veon's lawyers have said the bonus investigation is politically motivated by Corbett's effort to increase his standing with voters. Corbett said the case is based on a state grand jury's recommendation.

Veon was one of 12 Democrats charged in July 2008. Seven pleaded guilty this month.

A jury last month acquitted former Rep. Sean Ramaley of Baden, accused of holding a "ghost job" in Veon's office.

In November, 10 Republicans, including former House Speaker John Perzel of Philadelphia, were charged with diverting $10 million in tax money for sophisticated computer systems to give the GOP an edge in elections. Perzel said he is innocent.

Read Full Article Here:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/regional/s_665223.html

If you’re not convinced that elections matter, consider the rhetoric coming out of Democrat circles. Their apoplexy over the utter failure of Obamanomics and its upwards of $2 trillion in failed stimulus spending is leading them to suggest some rather “interesting” next steps.

In their ultra-liberal minds, the problem is not that they’ve spent unprecedented amounts of money (times 10); it’s that they have not spent enough. Can you imagine a congress after the 2010 midterm elections that would inflict more of the same fiscal insanity on the economy and American people? Liberal thought leaders, like Paul Krugman and Robert Reich, argue that the stimulus should have been at least double the size that was actually passed. Amazing. Believe it or not, Reich is arguing for a Depression-era-like Works Progress Administration (WPA) program. If you recall, the WPA was a big government program instituted to hire millions of the unemployed.

Apparently, some things never change with the Democrats. They didn’t trust the free market during the Depression, and thus prolonged it substantially—and they don’t trust it now. So, we all have to pay the price because they are blinded by a discredited government-first orthodoxy.

Elections do matter. Let’s put an end to the big government craziness and install representatives who understand fiscal restraint, pro-growth initiatives, and the free market.

Just in: the U.S. government ran a budget deficit of $165 billion in the month of July. By comparison, the deficit for all of fiscal 2007 was $160 billion. Let that sink in for a moment. President Obama and the Democrats are racking up more debt in a month than the Bush administration did in an entire year. Even in the two years after 9/11, when the economy took a major hit, the deficit never exceeded $400 billion. In fact, it was only about $150 billion in 2002.

Can there be any doubt as to the economically destructive policies of the Obama administration and the Democrat congress?  We need to change these policies that are destroying our kids' futures, and soon.