|
Thursday, February 11, 2010 |
"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate - look to his character...."
- Noah Webster, Letters to a Young Gentleman Commencing His Education, 1789
- Private Sector Shrinks; Government Grows
- Letter to President Obama from Sens. Coburn and Burr, Reps. Ryan and Nunes
- Charter Schools Work
- Obama Administration Ignores Entitlement Crisis
- U.S. Supreme Court Ruling on Political Spending
|
Join us on Facebook |
Follow us on Twitter |
|
|
|
PRIVATE SECTOR SHRINKS; GOVERNMENT GROWS
All the job losses of late have come from the private sector, according to an analysis by economist Robert Higgs. From 2007 to 2009, private sector employment fell by six million, from 115.4 million to 109.5 million, which is about where it was in the late 1990s. But over that same period, government payrolls increased by 300,000 to 22.5 million, an increase of roughly 1.7 million above the 2000 level. In 2009 alone, total employment fell from 135.1 million persons to 130.9 million, while government employment remained essentially constant.
Higgs says, “While taxpayers (and unemployed former taxpayers) no doubt were hoping that Washington would focus on economic growth, much of the Obama administration's ‘stimulus’ spending was directed toward ensuring that state and local government workers don't lose their jobs, while the normal appropriations process has been increasing spending for practically every department and agency of government.”
He says this “bears an eerie resemblance to the employment situation during the Great Depression, when private nonfarm hours worked fell steeply from 1929 to 1932 and did not return to 1929 levels until 1941, while millions were added to government payrolls during the New Deal. Keynesians like to suppose that whenever the government undertakes new spending to augment the ranks of its employees a multiplier effect will result, causing private economic activity and employment to follow the same upward course. The jobs data tells a different story.”
Source: Robert Higgs, The Disappearing Private-Sector Jobs, Investors.com, January 20, 2010. Read the editorial
LETTER TO PRSIDENT OBAMA FROM SENS. COBURN AND BURR, REPS. RYAN AND NUNES
Dear President Obama,
We share your belief that health reform is not only needed, but is long overdue. During Wednesday’s State of the Union address you told the nation, “If anyone from either party has a better approach [than the current proposals] that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know.”
We are hopeful that we can begin anew in the spirit of true bipartisanship and again submit our reform proposal to you. On May 20, 2009, we introduced comprehensive health reform legislation, The Patients’ Choice Act. We believe this legislation would put patients and physicians back in control of health care decisions. We hope you will seriously consider this legislation, because it accomplishes each of the goals you have outlined, but does so without dramatically expanding the size and scope of the federal government or raising taxes. These legitimate concerns are a primary reason reform efforts have stalled, and we would appreciate consideration of a different approach to our shared goals.
• Bringing Down Premiums. The Patients’ Choice Act equalizes the treatment of wages and health coverage under the tax code, which economists across the political spectrum confirm will effectively increase workers’ wages so all Americans can obtain affordable health coverage.
• Bringing Down the Deficit. In a letter to Rep. Paul Ryan on September 21, 2009, the Congressional Budget Office analyzed policies in The Patients’ Choice Act and found they would reduce the deficit.
• Covering the Uninsured. The Patients’ Choice Act gives all individuals a tax credit to buy health insurance regardless of their income, health, or employment status.
• Strengthening Medicare For Seniors. The Patients’ Choice Act would eliminate billions and billions of taxpayer dollars being lost to Medicare fraud every year, by using the same smart technologies banks and financial institutions use to prevent identity theft and credit card fraud. Our plan also takes a step forward on payment reform with programs which increase care coordination between physicians and other health providers to lower costs and increase quality.
• Stopping Insurance Company Abuses. The Patients’ Choice Act creates state market places for health insurance – we call them State Exchanges –so every American can choose a plan that best meets their own medical needs. Insurance companies in State Exchanges must cover all Americans, regardless of age, pre-existing conditions, or health history.
We believe that the Patients’ Choice Act meets the goals you articulated in Wednesday night’s State of the Union address. These are important goals the American people share.
On Wednesday, you asked Congress to not walk away from health reform. You asked us to “find a way to come together and finish the job for the American people.” We agree with you that the American people deserve health care reform, and we encourage you to give our proposals consideration. Sincerely,
Tom Coburn, M.D., U.S. Senator
Richard Burr, U.S. Senator
Paul Ryan, Member of Congress
Devin Nunes, Member of Congress
Click here to read the entire letter.
CHARTER SCHOOLS WORK
By Forest Thigpen
To hear this commentary click here.
This year, it appears the legislature will finally address the need for charter schools in Mississippi. But I want to warn you: there is a lot of misinformation floating around.
Charter schools are public schools that are created to meet students’ educational needs in unique ways. Charter public schools are given freedom from some rules and regulations that traditional public schools have to follow, and in return for that freedom, they are held to a higher level of accountability.
Some have said there is no evidence that charter schools perform better than traditional public schools. That’s just not true. Studies by Harvard professors and others have found plenty of places where charter schools have outperformed the traditional schools near them.
What is true is that not all charter schools are successful. Of course, neither are all traditional public schools. The difference? When a traditional school fails, it gets more money from the state. When a charter school fails, it closes. Now, that is accountability.
To learn more about charter schools and how you can help us bring them to Mississippi, go to ParentPower.net. That’s ParentPower.net.
2010 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS |
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IGNORES ENTITLEMENT CRISIS
In his State of the Union Address, President Obama made several commitments to fiscal responsibility in the years to come. What do they really mean though?
President Obama’s proposed three-year discretionary spending freeze, which excludes defense, homeland security, and veterans’ and international affairs, is not as promising as it might first appear. The savings won’t be large considering the programs included in the proposed spending freeze only comprise one-eighth of the overall budget ($420 billion). Therefore, a freeze might save a possible $20 billion (0.5 percent of the federal budget). Furthermore, these programs can still feast on their 19 percent hike over the past two years, plus their additional $311 billion in mostly-unspent stimulus funds.
Though the President deserves credit for picking some of the low-hanging fruit on spending control, if he is serious about righting the fiscal ship, he needs to take tougher actions like canceling TARP, ending the stimulus program, and turning his attention to the tsunami of entitlement programs that threaten to swamp our economy in the years to come. At a time when the deficit is $1.4 trillion and we face a sea of even more red ink, such a freeze is tantamount to bailing out the Titanic with a dixiecup.
Source: Kathryn Nix, Obama’s State of the Union Address Dampens Hope for a Real Budget Action, The Heritage Foundation, January 29, 2010. Read More
U.S. SUPREME COURT RULING ON POLITICAL SPENDING
Democrats are exploring ways to counter a Supreme Court ruling that eliminates limits on corporate political spending.
Possible legislation includes requiring corporations to obtain shareholder approval before funding political advertisements and blocking companies from deducting election spending as a business expense on their taxes. Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), said Democrats are also weighing an effort to bar companies that received federal bailouts and big government contractors from electioneering, similar to rules affecting federal employees.
Most Republicans hailed the court's decision as a victory for free speech. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) said it would help individuals acting "collectively through a corporation." Brian Walsh, a spokesman for the Senate Republican campaign arm, said Democrats are putting their partisan interests ahead of the "constitutional right to free speech and fair elections."
Source: Jess Bravin and Brody Mullins, Democrats Seek to Counter Court Ruling on Political Spending, The Wall Street Journal, January 25, 2010. Read the full article
Mississippi Center for Public Policy's mission is to advance the ideals of limited government, free markets, and strong traditional families by influencing public policy, informing the media, and equipping the public with information and perspective to help them understand and defend their liberty.
Mississippi Center for Public Policy's vision is for Mississippi to be a place where entrepreneurs are free to pursue their dreams, parents are free to direct the education and upbringing of their children, government functions according to the principles that enhance freedom, and all Mississippians are free from dependence on government for their daily needs.
You are receiving this message as a subscriber to Policy Snapshots.
Reply to this message with UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line to be removed. |
