Dear Speaker Boehner,
The TV news has well covered Pres. Obama's statement that he will use his pen and phone, for what he considers accomplishments, when he cannot obtain Congressional support.
The Washington Times now elaborates on that, with Republicans on Capitol Hill countering the President's executive actions by putting forward pieces of actual legislation that, in their view, both sides of the aisle should support.
It doesn't seem to me that any of the Republican pieces of legislation counteract any of the Presidents pen and phone actions, but let's look at the detail.
The President has asked the CEOs of many major companies to show some employment preference for the long-term unemployed and to not consider credit histories for their employment. I'm not surprised that the CEOs have generally agreed, because it is a Presidential request. However, it doesn't make sense, because the long-term unemployed have generally been unemployed because they are incapable of employment. It also makes no sense to ignore credit ratings. People who don't know how to handle their money are generally incompetent. It is likely that while the CEOs have tentatively agreed to Pres. Obama's request, they will probably drag their feet in actual application.
The President used executive power to raise the minimum wage for all federal contractors from $7.25 to $10.10. Purely a political move. The number of employees of federal contractors making minimum wage are likely insignificant. If not, all it does is increase the cost of government to the public.
The President established new government-backed, interest-bearing retirement accounts for all American workers and took other steps. Rather silly! The operation involves buying government bonds, which the average citizen already knew he could do. One reason he doesn't do it is because he has no incentive to save, in view of Obama's stated goal to equalize assets among the American people. In addition, the interest rate on government bonds is so low as not to justify the risk of government default. There is no mention of what the "other steps" were.
Let's now see what the so-called "counter actions" of Congress have been.
The President talked about supporting federally funded research to unleash more great discoveries. Rep. Gregg Harper, Mississippi Republican said, "We agree. More must be done to prioritize the resources we have to the research we need. We can’t fix it all, but surely creating a lifetime of hope and opportunity for our most, vulnerable kids is more important than subsidizing week-long political pep rallies.” He was pointing at a House passed bill to eliminate public funding for political party conventions and use those dollars to fund pediatric research at the National Institutes of Health. Pure baloney! I've been trained in science research, worked seven years in Research and Development, and many more years judging what research has actually done. There's no question that research is necessary and must be of two types; basic and applied. But even the "basic" must have a logical basis. Should we spend money to determine how frequently a butterfly flaps its wings. There is always a possible application, but it's too far out. Up to now we have spent billions and billions of taxpayer dollars on research projects at universities. Can someone name some practical result of this expenditure? Even if research has uncovered some new basic opportunities, as it has done in several aspects of private industry, it takes many years to develop to the point of affecting employment. But, we have an unemployment problem now. Research will do us no good on the immediate problems. That is not to say we should give up research, but it should be left to private industry, who has a monetary incentive and knows how to make proper judgments on how it should be oriented and whether certain projects should even be discontinued.
Rep. Martha Roby of Alabama highlighted a measure that would allow workers in the private sector to use their overtime toward paid time off. What? How does this socialist from Alabama believe that she has the right to tell corporations how they should handle overtime and paid time off? A ridiculous suggestion, which tends to further inhibit economic development by imposing further restriction on corporate and private company operations!
Rep. Susan Brooks of Indiana called on the President to support legislation consolidating federal training programs and strengthening federal partnerships with community colleges. Not a bad suggestion on the surface, but look a little deeper. We should not have federal training programs and don't need federal partnerships with community colleges. Training programs are already available through private education and private industry and can be monetarily supported by individuals and their families. I didn't receive a federal training program, and I believe most people, who know me would agree that I'm reasonably well trained to do my job as a chemist. How did I get the training? I worked for it and my family helped support it, with later help from my employers. With respect to federal partnerships with community colleges, we already have too much partnership in federal grants for ridiculous research projects. The federal government should get out of the business of meddling. Americans should handle their own training, in cooperation with colleges, universities, and industries with specific training programs.
Rep. Fred Upton, Michigan Republican and Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said, "We believe that this can be a year of bipartisan action, a moment when speeches give way to solutions. The American people never let us down, and we cannot let them down either.” Naïve or the usual "two chickens in every pot" speech!. As long as we have a Senate dominated by Communists parading under a Democratic name, there's no hope for the country. Until they are out and the Communistic President in some way immobilized, there is no hope for a redevelopment of our country.
No comments:
Post a Comment