The Texas 18th District Blog

The Gerrymandered shape of our district.  Texas 18th wikipedia

I don’t know what or who is in the donut hole but you can bet they are there for a political reason.  I saw a picture of a district in another state a couple of years ago where a congressional district was in two distinct pieces not even touching.  I think it was Georgia. Gerrymandering goes back over 150 years and probably longer.  Setting districts gets to be a problem because republicans want to be represented by a Republican, democrats want to be represented by a Democrat.  As you get away from populated areas territory has to be apportioned to provide fair representation to its scattered residents yet still within reach so there can be townhall meetings and local issues communicated.  Because it is a complex problem it will always be subject to manipulation.  Reapportioning is done sometimes in a manner to “sqeeze out” a representative from the party not in the majority in a state.  That’s what the big issue was after the last census in 2000.

Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program funded by general tax revenues (not Social Security taxes):

As I mentioned in a post a while back I was amazed when I went to the Social Security Office to register for my retirement benefits.  Easily of the approximately 100 or so people in there only about 6 were old (like me).  They had a separate line for SSI.  I had no idea what it was until I went home and told my wife.  They had a separate window for old timers.  When they asked how many in the room were there for retirement benefits about 6 of us raised our hands.  In the other line (SSI) people appeared to range in age from early twenties to about 50 years old.

If someone is disabled for whatever reason they should be helped.  If they recover from an injury or illness they should be removed from SSI and sent to the unemployment office for help finding a job. Twice in my life I was laid off and went to the unemployment office for job leads.  I also went to websites, job fairs and “head Hunters”. Work and self-sufficiency provides dignity.  I believe when someone lives off of another’s labors they feel some degree of guilt.  They suspect that others resent supporting them.  Then they resent the others resenting them. It leads to loss of self-respect and attitudinal issues for the recipient. If they want to find the proof of my statement let them go live off a family member for a while.  I’ll bet the family member gets tired of supporting them real quick and let’s them know it.

If someone is old and social security is inadequate then SSI may be necessary.  The amount you receive for social security depends on how much you or your spouse contributed while working.

SSI Eligibility

In order to be eligible to receive SSI benefits, an individual must prove the following:^[7]

• That he/she is age 65 or older, blind, or disabled
• That he/she legally resides in one of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Northern Mariana Islands or is the child of military parent(s) assigned to permanent duty outside of the US, or is a student (certain restrictions apply) temporarily abroad.
• That he/she has income and resources within certain limits (see subsections)
• The individual must also apply for the benefits.

Furthermore, an individual may find himself or herself ineligible if he/she is a resident of a public institution from the first day of a month through the last day of the same month,^[8] fails to apply for all other benefits for which he/she may be eligible (including Social Security benefits), has an unsatisfied warrant or violates parole conditions, fails to give SSA permission to contact any financial institution for financial records, or is outside the US for 30 consecutive days (with some exclusions).^[9] Numerous restrictions have been placed on who is eligible for the benefit, which is considered a welfare benefit. However, unlike social security benefits (Title II), earned work credits are not a requirement for SSI.^[10]

Citizens For A Freer America

The socialism paradigm penalizes success and rewards mediocrity and failure. It brings to mind an old Russian saying. “The government pretends to pay us, and we pretend to work.” An apropos epithet for USSR’S Gross Domestic Product. Well folks, there isn’t a one of us that haven’t heard someone say “I don’t want to work overtime on Saturday because all the extra money will go to taxes.” We’re penalizing productivity for the alleged benefit of all. All being those that can’t or won’t provide adequate income, retirement or medical care for themselves, and those who don’t need it, but having had it extorted from them, insist on receiving their rebate as a social entitlement program.

Making The Rounds On The Internet (Satire I think)

Note To Employees

As of November 5, 2008, when President Obama officially becomes president-elect, our company will instill a few new policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:

1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales and bonuses into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you. This will serve to give those of you who are under-achieving a ‘fair shake’.

2. All low level workers will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally amongst you. This will help those who are ‘too busy for overtime’ to reap the rewards from those who have more spare time and can work extra hours.

3. All top management will now be referred to as ‘the government.’ We will not participate in this ‘pooling’ experience because the law doesn’t apply to us.

4. The ‘government’ will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging its workers to continue to work hard ‘for the good of all’.

5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it’s ‘good to spread the wealth around’. Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more ‘patriotic’.

6. The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks. Don’t feel bad, though, because President Obama will give you free healthcare, free handouts, free oil for heating your home, free food stamps, and he’ll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can’t pay your mortgage. If you appeal directly to our Democrat Congress, you might even get a free flat screen TV and a coupon for free haircuts (shouldn’t all Americans be entitled to nice looking hair?)!!!

If for any reason you are not happy with the new policies, you may want to rethink your vote on November 4th.

 My question is where do they get money when the last dollar has been “redistributed” and spent?  When government taxes and spends, it spends through contractors to build anything and everything and also pocket huge sums (which are shared with the politicians).   Government employees don’t mine anything, grow anything, manufacture anything, repair anything, sing, dance or otherwise entertain us.  The government doesn’t create wealth it only takes it from us. 

Dr Phil and talk radio have been trying to soothe people who are getting stressed out over the election. So the Hanover Pennsylvania Evening Sun posted an article with a little levity.

Charisse: Real writing or, like, whatever  (Sheila Jackson Lee is mentioned about halfway down)

And now back to the somber election issues.

I was just listening to the economic news on Fox News.  They think the Federal Reserve may lower interest rates again.  I also heard that CEOs and other executives in large corporations receiving bailout money are going to get huge bonuses.  They are asking Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to prevent using bailout money for executive bonuses.

My sense is that the next couple of years are going to require a lot of tough decisions and even tougher actions.  Can we expect a junior politician notorious for voting “present” to make tough decisions and pursue tough action.

News Only - No Inference

California has begun early voting already as well as mail-in balloting. The number of people who have gone in to vote in person has been extensive. The results so far prove what we had always suspected. The polls are being proven as totally unreliable. Although the results of early balloting have not been disclosed,of course, how many Republicans and how many Democrats have voted has been revealed.

Fearing default, Argentina moves to nationalize private pension funds

article here  Maybe this is where our congress got the idea from to confiscate our 401Ks..

Another old file (an email sent to me) I came across. 

This was sent to me on Sunday, February 20, 2005 10:17 PM by a Democrat

“IT DOESN’T MATTER IF YOU ARE REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT!

2008 Election Issue!!

GET A BILL STARTED TO PLACE ALL POLITICIANS ON SOC. SEC. This must be an issue in “2008” Please! Keep it going.———————————-SOCIAL SECURITY:

Saving Social Security

Episode Four: Broken Trust  (video)

REASON TV HAS MORE ON SAVING SOCIAL SECURITY:

Congress borrows it and spends it and issue 2% bonds to the Social Security Administration.  As the population ages, boomers retire and the Social Security Administration needs that money, congress doesn’t have enough.  So they want your 401K money to buy them a few years until the next fix. 

 so I went to the Wall St Journal and here it is.  Click on blue heading for entire item and “Workforce Management” for more.

Are 401(k)s safe from congressional Democrats? 

If you have a 401(k) or equivalent retirement plan, you’ve probably been watching nervously the past few weeks as your nest egg has shrunken owing to the current turmoil in the markets.

Well, it could be worse. But don’t take heart, for what we mean is it could get worse. The market turmoil has some politicians on Capitol Hill eyeing the end of the 401(k) as we know it. Workforce Management reports on a hearing of the House Education and Labor Committee earlier this month:

A plan by Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic-policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, contains elements that are being considered. . . .

Under Ghilarducci’s plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3 percent a year, adjusted for inflation.

The current system of providing tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated.

“I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s,” Ghilarducci said in an interview. “401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won’t have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break.”

Ghilarducci outlined her plan last year in a paper for the left-liberal Economic Policy Institute, in which she acknowledges that her plan would amount to a tax increase on workers making more than $75,000–considerably less than the $250,000 Barack Obama has said would be his tax-hike cutoff. In addition, workers would be able to pass on only half of their account balances to their heirs; presumably the government would seize the remaining half. (Under current law, 401(k) balances are fully heritable, although they are subject to the income tax.)

Sounds pretty unappealing, doesn’t it? But in her congressional testimony, Ghilarducci offered a sweetener:

Short-term I propose . . . that the Congress allow workers to swap out their 401(k) assets, perhaps at August levels, for a guaranteed retirement account–just a one-time swap. . . .

How would this work? You go back to your districts and meet up with a 55-year-old who had had $50,000 in his account last month and now has $40,000 in the account. He can swap out that $50,000, valued in August, for that guarantee of what would become, if he retires at 62, a $500 a month addition to Social Security.

A 55-year-old who lost 20% of his 401(k) because of the recent stock market decline was investing more aggressively than he should have, given his age. Ghilarducci proposes to reward this imprudence in exchange for dramatically limiting everyone’s ability to take risks (and enjoy the corresponding rewards) and for greatly increasing government control of Americans’ retirement funds.

If you want to vote against it you have until November 4.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. ”

• Edmund Burke Renowned British Statesman and Political Philosopher.

Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago, 4 weeks ago?  Actually you are the same, you just didn’t know it because your congress kept it hidden from you.  Every evening on the “News” we hear of more people having reported concerns to the House Banking Committee about the problems in the mortgage industry  from out of control Federal Agencies,  and Congress overriding attempts to make the regulators do their jobs.

The balloon had been becoming inflated for years.  The final puff occurred 4 weeks or so ago but the hot air was building all along.  Who runs congress, Nancy Pelosi (D-California), Harry Reid (D-Nevada).  Who chairs the House Banking Committee, Barney Frank (D- Massachusetts).  Who represents us in Congress, Sheila Jackson Lee, (D-Texas). 

Its time to vote them out.  We can’t vote against Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank but we can replace Sheila Jackson Lee.

We know they knew because John McCain, George Bush and a host of other Members of Congress told them.

The ownership role government plans to take in banks will be preferred stock, non-voting.  Theoretically preferred shareholders cannot vote for company policies but simply get dividends before common shareholders if there are profits available. Congress makes the banks do whatever Congress wants now anyhow so I don’t see much difference.  Currently banks are audited by the Federal Reserve Bank, the State Banking Departments, the US Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service.   Who dares to say they are not regulated?  The audit reports were just ignored by Congress in exchange for campaign donations.  Who leads Congress, Nancy Pelosi (D-California) and Harry Reid (D- Nevada), who is Chairman of the House Banking Committee, Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts).  What is the current approval rating of Congress by American voters, 13%.

NEW WORD FOR TODAY - OBFUSCATION 

“ Re, fair and insurance”

Fair Tax: as currently used it refers to a national sales tax.  It wouldn’t work because congress would make exceptions and exemptions for donors defeating the benefit of the fair tax.  The current Internal Revenue Code allows Congress to grant favors to campaign donors.  Congress likes that ability especially at re-election time. 

They are not about to give it up.  Advocates of  “Fair Tax” say Congress would lose the ability to manipulate the tax code for their own benefit.  Don’t bet on it.  Rather than replace the Tax Code, replace Congress.  Replace your representative in Congress, Sheila Jackson Lee.

Fair Trade:  imported goods that are taxed by Congress (tariffs) to make them cost more so you are forced to buy the more expensive domestically produced goods.  Why this is undesirable.  International trade functions on the principle of comparative advantage.  If minerals are abundant in another country, or certain crops grown abundantly in another country because of weather, soil, temperature, etc. they can produce and sell them cheaper.  In exchange they buy from us things like technology and manufactured goods that we produce cheaper.  Everybody benefits.  You say but the news media claims we don’t manufacture any longer.  To put it mildy, balderdash.  We still have a large manufacturing sector.  Its just that since other areas of our economy have grown percentage-wise it is a smaller part of the whole.  Some examples:  Institute for Supply Management Index and Manufacturing Index Contracts.  The opposite of Fair Trade (managed by Congress) is Free Trade where we benefit from comparative advantage.

I’m always entertained when they use the prefixes “re” as in Community Reinvestment Act and Re-distribution of wealth, as well as insurance as in National Health Insurance when no one pays premiums.  Under state insurance laws “Free” insurance is illegal. What the politicians actually are referring to is “free” healthcare.  They say insurance to infer the covered persons will pay a premium.  Not true.  The tax payers will pay taxes from which the healthcare will be financed.  I have a hard time believing we have a healthcare crisis because it comes up in every election and has for decades.  We have that hospital tax that is part of social security, we have medicaid, SCHIPS, local clinics, and pharmacy companys will provide medications for free to those who cannot pay (Montel Williams advertises for the pharmacies).  Doctors have samples given to them by salemen that they give for free to patients.  It is very rare if ever that we hear of someone not getting medical treatment in this country (usually someone too ill to go to a hospital on their own or living in a remote rural area).  It is common in Europe and other countries where they have National Healthcare. Renowned author and political commentator P.J. O’Rourke once wrote: “If you think health care is expensive now, wait and see how expensive it’ll be when it’s free.”

Benjamin Franklin introduced the concept of insurance in America to spread the risk of houses burning down in colonial times.  Actually farmers had an unofficial form of insurance as well.  When a farmer’s barn burned down, neighboring farmers would all pitch in and build him a new one.  The principle of insurance is violated when someone comes along who never helped his neighbors but demands that they build a barn for him.  Only the government can force that to happen.  Insurance existed in England in colonial times to reduce the risks of sending ships full of goods to foreign lands to sell them and buy and bring back goods from those lands, comparative advantage.

Did we invest in those communities before and it was ineffective so we have to do it again?

Was there ever a “distribution” of wealth?  If so, I missed out and I want my portion.  No one ever gave me anything.  I paid from my own pocket for every thing I bought: education for me and my children, my house, my car, my healthcare, etc.  Nothing was distributed to me.  I performed labor or services for a paycheck.  Where does distibution and re-distribution come from? Its foreign to me.

Congress this weekend has a 13% approval rating.  Why re-elect them.  Wayne Rodgers of Wayne Rodgers Investments (and MASH) says we should go to DC and shoot them.  He says the way to shoot them is vote them out.

If you like your present situation re-elect them.

We don’t need lawyers in Congress, we need proven financial practicioners like John Faulk.

Its Time to Trade-In Sheila Jackson-Lee for a New Model 

There’s an old saying in Washington,  “you have to go along to get along”.  The political process is a negotiation.  When a congress member wants something for his district you have to vote to support it and in return get that member’s vote for something you want for your constituents.  In other words its a team (don’t laugh).  That’s why we hear so much about bi-partisanship.  Is Sheila Jackson-Lee a team player?

She Backed Clinton, Her District, Obama

“It had to be embarrassing last spring when Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee of Houston got booed at a Harris County senatorial district convention. It was presumably for her support of Hillary Clinton instead of Barack Obama…”

“Her Harris County senatorial district went heavily for Obama. That’s why she got the treatment there.”

 Texans on Capitol Hill Terrorizing Congress

 ”According to the Washington Magazine poll of Capitol Hill aides, Houston Congresswomen Sheila Jackson lee is the meanest lawmaker to work for in the U.S. House. She was also named the second biggest fashion victim in the house.”

“Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson took second for being the meanest to work for in the senate. We repeat those are the opinions of congressional aides on Capitol Hill.”

Kay Bailey Hutchison announced she is not seeking re-election.  It may take more than that to remove Sheila Jackson-Lee.

 Voting Is About Character

Mychal Massie states: “As a child, I was not raised with the understanding that it was the government’s job to provide for me. I was raised with the dictate that education and faith were the two essentials necessary to succeed. I was inculcated with an understanding that the only way I would be able to face myself in the mirror was if I worked hard and looked only to myself and to my God. There was no financial parachute from the family and certainly none from the government.”

“It is precisely the opposite of what I was raised to believe that drives so many persons (of color specifically) to buy into the Barack Obama mania. They believe that his being black will somehow be of extraordinary benefit to them.”

Politicians firstly look out for themselves, they look out for their constituents when it will benefit their re-election efforts.

“I recently bumped into a childhood friend (who is Hispanic) at a Puerto Rican storefront restaurant in the “hood.” He was quick to rail against Republicans for “destroying the economy and not providing jobs.” I pointed out that his nephew owned a restaurant in the bedroom community I call home, and that it was opened during the Bush administration. I pointed out that my friend was employed by one of the nation’s top universities, and because of that, his children could attend same tuition free. Still, he fixated on how bad he perceived things personally.”

“I pointed out that we were standing in the middle of a restaurant whose owner had no formal education before moving here from Puerto Rico – yet he had come here and opened an immensely successful restaurant in the middle of one of the worse neighborhoods in the area. Still, my friend refused to acknowledge such reason. His viewpoint was that Obama was black and, as such, that would somehow translate into a plus against the mean ol’ Republicans.”

You can help us send John Faulk to Congress in November, today.

Among the goals of democrat politicians this year is implementing National Health Care. What will this do for the average American? It will do for us what it does for the British. I have family who live in Europe and are British citizens. I hear their complaints and so I have located some information to share with you what we may be in for.

British, Canadian health care systems, supposedly the model we should follow

The British combine their vacations with medical treatments so they can get service outside of Britain. Many go to Africa and India.

A New Medical System Is Needed for the British Nation

“British patients have been the foundation of the growth of the medical tourist industry. They combine vacations with surgery in countries like India, rather than endure long waits for “free” surgery in Britain. Many of these Third World facilities are excellent and operate profitably. In fact, some Americans and their employers now take advantage of this industry in order to save money. Free markets can work if permitted to do so.”

Cut Laundry Expenses in Half

At a financially strapped hospital in England, when a patient leaves the hospital (living or otherwise) rather than change the sheets they turn them over to save laundry costs.

There’s No Place Like Home

This is an article by David Asman now on Fox News Channel. He published this in the Wall St Journal after his wife had an experience in England. Note that he says the medical personnel did the best with what they had, they just didn’t have the diagnostic equipment that they knew they needed.

“We had arrived in London the night before for a two-week vacation. We spent the day sightseeing and were planning to go to the theater. I decided to take a nap, but my wife wanted to get in a workout in the hotel’s gym before theater. Little did either of us know that a tiny blood clot had developed in her leg on the flight to London and was quietly working its way up to her heart. Her workout on the Stairmaster pumped the clot right through a too-porous wall in the heart on a direct path to the right side of her brain.

Hurrying down to the gym, I suspected that whatever the “small” problem was, we might still have time to make the play. Instead, our lives were about to change fundamentally, and we were both about to experience firsthand the inner workings of British health care”

Remember the GovTrack.US rating

Jackson-Lee is a far-left Democrat according to GovTrack’s own analysis of bill sponsorship. (Where do these labels come from?)

 2008 Social Security Trustees Report Continues to Show the Urgent Need for Reform

The debate about whether Social Security faces a problem and needs to be fixed is over. The 2008 Trustees Report shows that the program faces massive annual deficits starting in just nine years. Now is the time to focus on solutions.

Several plans to establish personal retirement accounts have been shown to fix Social Security. Instead of just criticizing these plans, opponents of personal accounts need to propose comprehensive programs that permanently fix Social Security. Opposing a potential solution is not the same thing as coming up with a plan.

President Bush proposed a solution and welcomed additional proposals from congress several years ago.  Congress did nothing.  The problem didn’t go away.  Our population continues to age.  His proposal included not changing anything except on an individual voluntary basis.  If  you wanted you could put what is taken out of your paycheck into an account where it could earn perhaps 6, 7 or 8%.  Whereas the US government is now compounding your social security money at 2%.  Which is better?

Finance: Social Security Reform

Democratic lawmakers were quick to criticize Bush’s policy for “cutting” Social Security benefits for millions of workers.

Why is “cutting” in quotes?.  When congress wants to increase an expenditure and the President or opposition party wants to increase it by a lesser amount, congress calls the lesser amount a cut.  For example, if the proposed budget for the next year includes a 10% increase for congressional pay and the opposition instead says the increase should be only 5%, the opposition is accused of “cutting congressional pay by 5%.  We see this phenomenon every year at budget time.  Federal expenditures have never been cut for anything, they only grow.  Actually the telephone tax levied on American taxpayers to finance the Spanish American War was only recently stopped.  The war was over more than 100 years ago.  

The social security “cutting” referred to was changing the increases from wage based to inflation or cost of living based.  There would still be increases in what is being received by retirees.  I have included sources in the blue links far more informed than me .  Please read them because the problem will be coming up again in the next congress.

Social Security deceit