Pages

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Who Do New Tea Party Members of Congress Think Will Run For President in '12?

Hear what the new tea party lawmakers think of a Sarah Palin presidential run.
 
 

Diane Sawyer's Full Interview With New Tea Party Members of Congress: Part 4

Watch Diane Sawyer's Full Interview With New Tea Party Members of Congress: Part 3

Watch Diane Sawyer's Full Interview With New Tea Party Members of Congress: Part 2

Diane Sawyer Interviews Members of Congress Part 1

Senate Starts New Session with Debate on Filibuster Rules


 WASHINGTON, DC 
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
he new session of the U.S. Senate has begun with the traditional swearing-in of reelected and newly elected members. After the ceremonies completed,  Democrats made a  motion to change a long-standing debate rule.
Following the opening prayer, Vice President Biden administered the oath of office for 31 senators, which includes 16 new senators. Though they maintained the majority, Democrats lost six seats in the November mid-term elections resulting in the make-up of the current Congress at 51 Democrats, 47 Republicans and two Independents.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) plans to raise an objection that the previous Senate’s rules be passed over to the new session and submit his filibuster-change resolution. Sen. Udall has cited a Constitutional rule under Article I, Section 5 that allows Congress to determine the rules for its proceedings on the first day of a new session. The senator argues that, while only the U.S. House takes advantage of this provision every two years, it is open to the U.S. Senate as well.
His proposal seeks to implement three requirements: senators that wish to object to a motion to proceed on a bill must remain on the floor to maintain the filibuster; if a motion to proceed passes then a cloture vote must be taken immediately to prevent delays by opposing senators; and finally, the elimination of “secret holds” on bills and nominations.
Though several other senators have voiced their support, including Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Republicans have panned the changes. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) called the attempt “a brazen power grab” by Democrats in a speech yesterday at the Heritage Foundation.
In anticipation of the difficulties ahead, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is likely to recess the Senate at the end of today instead of adjourning members and freeze the official calendar for the next 20 days. This move will technically keep the first legislative day open and allow Democrats more time to negotiate with Republicans, thus removing the short deadline for a vote on the filibuster package.

Deficit solution? Soak the rich, whatever that is

January 4, 2011

ENID — “Who is rich? He that rejoices in his portion.” — Benjamin Franklin



The new year is only in its fifth day, but it already has been remarkable.

Before the new year is even a week old, we have a solution to the nation’s burgeoning budget deficit.

At least we have a solution, according to those taking part in a 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair poll released earlier this week.

The majority of Americans responding say the solution to balancing the federal budget is to tax the rich. Sixty-one percent of respondents, in fact, say raising taxes on the rich is the way to go.

Sounds great. But who determines who qualifies as rich?

Despite the optimism a new year brings, Americans as a whole aren’t feeling too positive these days.

A Bloomberg poll released last month showed 51 percent of respondents said they were worse off now than two years ago.

These people certainly wouldn’t describe themselves as rich. Neither would those who are considered elderly (the discussion of what constitutes elderly is a topic for another day).

A study by a professor at Washington University in St. Louis showed 32.7 percent of elderly whites and 64.6 percent of blacks will face poverty at some point in their so-called “golden years.”

So who is rich, anyway? According to the Obama administration, couples annually earning more than $250,000 and individuals earning $200,000 or more are wealthy. That is approximately 2.5 percent of the population.

But wealthy, it seems, is in the eye of the beholder. A recent Los Angeles Times article quoted Ricky Metz, a hairdresser in New York City, who along with her attorney husband earns $310,000 per year.

“I know, I know I shouldn’t whine, but in New York unless you’re a millionaire you don’t feel rich. We feel middle-class,” she said.

The concept of wealth could depend in part on geography. A salary of more than $300,000 certainly would go farther in Enid than it would in Manhattan, where it might cost $500 a month or more just to park your car.

There is no hard-and-fast scale by which wealth can be measured, a University of Michigan economic professor told the LA Times.

“The higher your income,” said Joel Slemrod, “the more money you think you need to be rich.”

In much of the world the vast majority of Americans, even those in lower income brackets, would be considered fabulously wealthy.

In Afghanistan, CNN detailed the struggles of Marjan, who spends hours picking through garbage heaps in Kabul for bits of trash her family can burn as fuel for cooking, as well as a measure of warmth against the harsh winter winds.

Marjan is 5 years old. Last winter Marjan’s baby brother died from the cold. Her mother set fire to the garbage Marjan gathered and placed the baby near it for warmth. The fire went out and the baby froze to death.

Marjan never has been to school, but dreams of being a teacher. Her supper consists of weak tea and a couple of scraps of bread. She loves to play with dolls, but instead spends her days trying to help keep her family alive.

Are you rich? If you have food, a roof over your head and warm clothes, I would wager young Marjan would consider you, to quote lyrics from the song “On the Sunny Side of the Street,” as rich as Rockefeller.

The president wanted to end the Bush-era tax cut for the wealthy, but he backed off that stance in a compromise with Republicans. Even some of the president’s Democratic colleagues can’t agree on what constitutes being rich. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., would like to see those earning $1 million or more hit with higher taxes.

In the aforementioned Bloomberg poll in which a majority of Americans said they were worse off than before, 51 percent said the government needs to address the budget deficit, but also should “minimize sacrifices for the American people.” In the same poll, only 40 percent of those responding said they would favor “bold and fast change” to reduce the deficit.

I don’t like paying taxes anymore than the next guy, but this doesn’t seem to make much sense. It would seem that in order to begin making a dent in the $1.3 billion federal budget deficit, all Americans must assume some level of sacrifice. Like it or not we are all in this together.

Now, admittedly, I have to have my bride figure the amount of the tip when we go out to eat, so I am certainly not one to be espousing my views on economics, but one thing is obvious even to me — if you are spending more money than you are taking in, you are not heading in the right direction.

According to 2008 Census figures, the median U.S. household income was $52,000.

That would put that median U.S. family in the top .97 percent of the richest people in the world, according to the website globalrichlist.com.

When Christmas bills roll in and tax season approaches, many of us will bemoan our own economic status.

When you are so tempted, give a thought to little Marjan and the billions of her brothers and sisters the world over for whom the simplest thing we Americans take for granted would constitute the height of luxury and extreme wealth.



Mullin is senior writer of the News & Eagle. E-mail him at jmullin@enidnews.com

Febraury 2011 Issue The February 2011 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair Poll

Our country is trillions of dollars in
debt, and the number increases every day.
Which denomination comes after a trillion?
  TOTAL LESS THAN COLLEGE COLLEGE GRADUATES 18–29 30-44 45-64 64+
Quadrillion 40% 34% 56% 46% 46% 37% 26%
Gazillion 12 14 7 16 13 13 5
Bazillion 7 8 3 6 6 9 7
Quintillion 4 3 9 7 4 4 2
Decillion 1 1 2 3 1 1 1
Don’t know 36 40 23 23 30 37 59
© Image Source/Corbis.
To answer the questions yourself, visit the 60 Minutes homepage at CBSNews.com.



NOTE: This poll was conducted by telephone November 29–December 2, 2010, at the CBS News interviewing facility among a random sample of 1,137 adults nationwide. Some low-percentage answer choices have been omitted.

Febraury 2011 Issue The February 2011 60 Minutes/Vanity Fair Poll

To balance the federal budget, which of the
following would be the first step you would take?
  TOTAL >$50K $50K–$100K >$100K
Increase taxes on
the wealthy
61% 67% 58% 46%
Cut defense spending 20 20 22 20
Cut Medicare 4 2 5 10
Cut Social Security 3 1 5 6

To answer the questions yourself, visit the 60 Minutes homepage at CBSNews.com.


NOTE: This poll was conducted by telephone November 29–December 2, 2010, at the CBS News interviewing facility among a random sample of 1,137 adults nationwide. Some low-percentage answer choices have been omitted.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to Step Down

Good riddance: White House press secretary and Obama confidante Robert Gibbs has announced he is stepping down from his position. He plans to stay within Obama's inner-circle as the 2012 election approaches.
The New York Times reports that Gibbs is expected to leave early next month, with his successor likely to be named within the next two weeks.
The departure of Mr. Gibbs is part of a series of moves inside the West Wing as the president prepares for a new phase of his administration. The internal shuffling also could bring a new White House chief of staff, a decision the president is expected to make by week’s end, with an announcement as early as next week....
The leading potential replacements for press secretary include Jay Carney, a spokesman for Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., along with Bill Burton and Josh Earnest, who work as deputies to Mr. Gibbs. Other candidates also could be considered, an administration official said.
Gibbs said he has "no intention of establishing a political consulting or lobbying business" and noted that he plans to work out of the downtown D.C. office used over the past two years by 2008 Obama campaign manager David Plouffe. Plouffe, in turn, will move to the White House, where he will serve as a senior adviser to the president.
President Obama released a statement on Gibbs' resignation this morning:
For the last six years, Robert has been a close friend, one of my closest advisers and an effective advocate from the podium for what this administration has been doing to move America forward.  I think it’s natural for him to want to step back, reflect and retool.  That brings up some challenges and opportunities for the White House – but it doesn’t change the important role that Robert will continue to play on our team.
John Nichols at The Nation echos the left's sense of relief over the departure of a press secretary who "was never a particularly good communicator" and who struggled to get Obama's messages across "on even the most basic levels." "Whoever replaces Gibbs will be an improvement," Nichols notes. And it's hard to disagree with that.
By Lauren Kelley | Sourced from AlterNet

Posted at January 5, 2011, 10:03 am

Pelosi hands the reigns to Boehner


Boehner promises 'more responsive' house


House Members Elect Boehner Speaker of the House

Rep. John Boehner & Rep. Nancy Pelosi
Rep. John Boehner & Rep. Nancy Pelosi
WASHINGTON, DC 
Wednesday, January 5, 2011


One of the first actions of the 112th U.S. House of Representatives was the election of newly elected Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH). He received 241 votes, Rep. Nancy Pelosi  (D-CA) got  173, and 19 voted present or for other members. 
During his speech to his colleagues on the floor he expressed his belief that both parties can find a way of working together, “we can disagree without being disagreeable to each other.” Also saying, “We may have different – sometimes, very different – ideas for how to go about achieving the common good, but it is our shared goal.  It is why we serve.” 
 
Next, Boehner presided over the ceremony to swear-in the new congress, which included 96 new members, 87 Republicans and 9 Democrats.
House Republicans have already released their legislative schedule for the first week, with one of their first actions being to repeal the Democrats’ new health care law with a vote scheduled for next week on the resolution. The effort is likely to be blocked in the Senate, and President Obama has also stated he would veto any repeal efforts that come to his desk. However, House Republicans say they will then try to repeal the legislation piece by piece.
Another key goal of the incoming majority is to reduce the federal budget deficit, as GOP leaders have outlined a plan to cut five percent from the House operating budget that will result in saving taxpayers an estimated $35 million. A new proposal by the GOP aims to replace the existing policy of “pay as you go” with a “cut as you go” rule.  Under the new rules, increases in mandatory spending would be paid for with spending cuts of an equal or greater amount elsewhere and not tax hikes.
 
These and other proposals on parliamentary procedure are part of the draft package for the 112th Congressional legislative rules. The House GOP Caucus approved its package during a meeting yesterday. Today, the entire House will vote on the rules submitted by both parties.
The House Democratic Caucus said yesterday that their agenda would focus on job creation, strengthening the middle class, and deficit reduction.

Harvard Grad Facing Deportation Granted Deferral

Mark J. Farrales '01, a UCSD grad student, had been facing deportation but has been granted a deferral on immigration proceedings against him and has been released from detention.
After spending one and a half months in detention while facing imminent deportation, Mark J. Farrales ’01 has been granted a one-year deferral, a delay to the immigration proceedings against him that has resulted in his release from federal detention.
On November 17, Farrales, a UC San Diego graduate student, put plans to complete his dissertation on hold when he opened the door to Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents on the step of his Los Angeles home. He was arrested and detained at Mira Loma Detention Center in Lancaster, California.
At age 10, Farrales was brought to the United States by his parents only a few days after two alleged hit men shot his father, Jaime Farrales, twice in the head near his home in the Philippines. Farrales’ father survived and fled with his family to Los Angeles where they sought political asylum.
However, with Jaime’s unexpected death in June of 2006, the battle to achieve legal status also died.
Meanwhile, Farrales assimilated in the United States and thrived academically, graduating magna cum laude from the College with a concentration in Government. His dissertation at UCSD seeks to address government efforts to combat corruption.
But while he advanced academically, he was unable to achieve legal residency, and in mid-November ICE agents arrested him and placed him in detention. His case rose to prominence as friends, family, and political leaders rallied on his behalf. Earlier this month, the Los Angeles Times reported on his case.
“I’m not 100 percent sure of the series of discussions on the part of ICE that led to my deferral, but I know Congressman Sherman’s office was involved and contacted the ICE on my behalf,” Farrales said. “My inmate number was called over the PA system. I showed up to the room, where some paperwork was ready. Officials said ‘You’re leaving today.’”
Farrales said his lawyer Leon Hazany, a Los Angeles immigration attorney, filed a motion with the Board of Immigration Appeals to reopen his own asylum case—separate from his father’s—to land a court hearing. Farrales said previous attorneys gave him poor advice; he was told that he did not need to file for a student visa, as his case was coupled with his father’s.
Rep. Brad Sherman, the local Democratic congressman, contacted ICE officials and expressed concern regarding the handling of the case of Farrales, who is his constituent.
“My office was informed that Mr. Farrales received a deferral of his deportation and was released from detention in time to spend the holidays with his family,” said Sherman in an e-mailed statement. “I am pleased by this outcome and my staff will continue to monitor Mr. Farrales's situation."

Farrales’s federal representatives—the two Democratic California Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer in addition to Congressman Sherman—reviewed his case to consider introducing a private immigration bill, said Nicolas E. Jofre ’13, co-director of Harvard College Act on a DREAM. But Jofre added that only two such measures have been approved since 2005.

ICE said in a statement to the Los Angeles Times before Farrales's release that courts have “consistently held that Mr. Farrales does not have legal basis to remain in the United States.”

Farrales said that his deferral could not have happened without the help of his professors, his lawyer, and friends like Jeffrey R. Chaput ’01, whom he met on campus move-in day in 1997 as a first-year student at the College.
The two were roommates at Harvard for the first four years, residing in Grays West and then Leverett House, and Chaput helped rally support for Farrales’s cause.
While Farrales was detained, Chaput visited him at the detention center, where he slept on a bunk bed in barracks with approximately 70 other detainees. Farrales held an impromptu English class daily for detainees from Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador and Somalia.
Chaput describes Farrales as his “brother” and “the nicest person the world has to offer,” and said that he mobilized friends from Leverett and Delta Upsilon—now known as the Oak Club—to organize a letter campaign among Harvard alumni, faculty, and staff to plead Farrales's case before the government. A Facebook page entitled “Save Mark Farrales” was also created to raise awareness and encourage support.
“Sitting on the other side of a glass and chicken wire partition, I spoke to Mark, and learned that he taught English to other detainees,” Chaput said. “He translates between the guards and the detainees. It’s amazing to me how positive he is about this, and it’s hard to capture how extraordinary of a person he is.”
Farrales is not the first Harvard College affiliate to face potential deportation—and be granted a deferral. Eric Balderas ’13 was propelled into the national spotlight last summer when he was detained in San Antonio, Texas after trying to board a plane with a consulate card and his Harvard identification.
Balderas said he could identify with Farrales’s situation. He avoided deportation to Mexico after being granted deferred action to stay in the United States temporarily.
“The Department of Homeland Security gave me deferred action to be able to finish my studies. I don’t understand why they wouldn’t do that with [Farrales] either,” Balderas said. “I may be able to renew deferred action when it expires after I graduate, but I’m not entirely sure I will have that option. It isn’t guaranteed.”
But Balderas identified some differences between himself and Farrales, noting that “Mr. Farrales is at a different point in his academic career, and he is older than me. I think a big part of why I was able to stay is that I am younger and in school at Harvard.”
“It’s worrisome that there are students at Harvard now that will transition from the situation Eric is in, at the University with resources available, to being in Mark’s shoes,” said Jofre. “It is such an injustice to know people will face that.”
For now, Farrales faces a waiting period—and a measure of uncertainty.
“The next step legally is waiting. I have no control over whether I will get another deferral or not,” Farrales said. “If the BIA decides to reopen the case, then I may have the opportunity to have my own day in court, for the first time in my life.”
—Staff writer Nadia L. Farjood can be reached at nadiafarjood@college.harvard.edu.

Homeless man with radio voice has offer

ESPN.com news services
CLEVELAND -- The Cleveland Cavaliers have offered a job to a homeless Ohio man with a golden radio voice.
Ted Williams, whose deep baritone and plight have made him an online video sensation, was contacted Wednesday by the Cavs.
Team spokesman Tad Carper said details are still being worked out on a possible position for Williams. Carper said any job could include working in Quicken Loans Arena, the NBA team's downtown arena. It is not yet known if Williams has accepted the team's offer.
[+] EnlargeTed Williams
AP Photo/Columbus Dispatch/Doral Chenoweth IIITed Williams, a homeless ex-radio announcer, has been offered a job by the Cavaliers after becoming an Internet sensation.
The Columbus Dispatch reports that video of Williams posted this week on its website has commanded millions of views.
In the clip, Williams stands near a Columbus highway ramp demonstrating his smooth, deep speaking voice. He holds a sign that asks motorists for help and says, "I'm an ex-radio announcer who has fallen on hard times."
Williams, who told the Dispatch he sometimes lives in a camp behind a gas station, says he had trouble with drugs and alcohol but is two years sober.
"I'm trying hard to get it back," he told the newspaper.
A Dispatch videographer by chance decided to film Williams, who sometimes panhandles off Interstate 71.
"We run into these guys at the exit ramps and we pretty much ignore them," the videographer, Doral Chenoweth III, said on the Dispatch website. "This guy was using his talent."
On the Dispatch's video clip, Williams said he was 14 and on a field trip when he became fascinated by the world of radio after talking with an announcer.
"He said to me: 'Radio is defined [as] theater of mind,' " Williams said on the video. "I can't be an actor; I can't be an on-air [television] personality. The voice became something of a development."
The newspaper since has fielded numerous inquiries from various media entities, radio stations and talent agencies.
"My boss said to me: 'If you don't get him hired, you're fired,' " Kevin McLoughlin, director of post-production films for the NFL, told the Dispatch Tuesday night. "I can't make any guarantees, but I'd love to get him some work."
Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

OPEN LETTER TO THE TEA PARTY MEMBERS OF THE 1121TH CONGRESS

January 05,2011
 
Dear Tea Party Members & Supporters in the 112th Congress
Later on today as many as 90 men and women backed by you will be among the 435 members of the 112th Congress that are sworn in..  There has been a lot of speculation as to what the Tea Party will do and how your influence and potential power will be respected. Almost everyone agrees the shift in power with Nancy Pelosi stepping down and John Boehner stepping in as Speaker of the House, is due to the enthusiasm you all touched off in people.
As an acknowledgement to that influence for the first time, the Constitution will be read. As I understand it will take more than an hour and a half  and the point of reading it is so that everyone in the chambers, the country and for that matter the entire world, is reminded exactly what sort of principles we as a country should ideally be embracing.
I have a couple of questions about this reading and your next actions as members of Congress. The first involves the 4th amendment around the issue of search and seizures and our collective protections from them..The amendment reads as follows:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and Warrants shall not be issued, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Now as you all are aware over the past few years surveillance on the American people is an at an all time high. Some of this has been a result of so-called ‘War on Drugs‘ and in more recent days the ‘War on Terror‘. We went from a nation that prided itself on having a right to privacy to one where police can stop you at any time under the loosely interpreted ‘suspicion of illegal activity‘.
For example, in places like New York City under their infamous Stop and Frisk policy anywhere from 300 thousand to more than half a million people stopped each year in New York with the police looking for guns. Very few are found, but there are high numbers of lower level summons issued.We recently come to find that New York police are under pressure to meet a quota. 20 summons is the equivalent to one arrest.
In cities like Oakland, LA and Chicago we see the government has created far-reaching gang injunctions. If it’s done thing to stop criminal activity. I think we can all agree to that, but what many of these cities are doing is establishing gang data bases.
Many of the people entered into the database are young men and women who live in high crime neighborhoods but have no gang affiliations. How they wind up being placed in the database is the police will stop many under that pesky little ‘reasonable suspicion‘ clause and then look for literally anything to associate them with a gang.
It could be they have a red, blue, purple etc backpack or jersey from a school that happens to have the same color or initials favored by a gang. They could’ve had their hats worn backwards or they were observed saying ‘hello’ to a family member or friend who is a suspected gang member. The police observe this sort of activity and the next thing you know the person they’re profiling winds up in the gang database. Once this happens, that person is subjected to all sorts of unwarranted surveillance, stop and frisk measures and even civil lawsuits.
This is all happening more often than not, without due process or the person’s knowledge they were even added to the database. Years later if that person is pulled over for a minor traffic violation, the officer punches in their name and voila, suddenly they’re viewed as a gang member.
Recently a new law was enacted in states like California which allows the police to confiscate and search our cell phones or computers to seek additional evidence in the form of text messages and emails to qualify their suspicions.
Does this sound fair? Does this sound reasonable?
Now what I described is going on in many urban areas, but I’m sure these search and seizure tactics, are manifesting themselves in other areas, probably in the form of warrantless wiretapping and are being applied to ‘suspected’ groups of varied backgrounds.
I know earlier this year while at the Netroots convention in Las Vegas I attended a panel discussion that focused on increased government surveillance. I was shocked to hear about recent reports that had come out identifying the top three targets for profiling and monitoring were Muslims with Middle Eastern Backgrounds, students at historically Black colleges and Ron Paul supporters are considered Constitutionalists. This was discussed at length at the netroots convention and I know its been discussed in other circles.
As the constitution is being read today, will you in the Tea Party be looking to put an end to all this government surveillance of innocent people? Will you be fighting to put an end to to intrusive policies like stop and frisk, warrantless wiretaps, no knock warrants and all this government monitoring on social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter?
As members of the Tea Party we understand that you are all about making sure we have Due Process. This is outlined in the 5th Amendment which reads as follows:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
As you are probably aware the past few years we’ve seen government violate this amendment on all sorts of grounds. In recent days we’ve seen the Department of Homeland Security shut down websites without due process. Popular websites like Onsmash.com and RapGodfathers.com were shut down on the suspicion of copyright infringement.
The owners say they are innocent but that didn’t seem to matter to DHS. What was most disturbing there was no warrant, no letter inquiring about so-called infringement or  whether or not the site owners had permission to post particular material. In fact with RapGodfathers they didn’t post material, but instead pointed links to sites where music was hosted.
There was no discussion or place to appeal the shut downs. There was no letter issued asking sites to remove material. Similar fate was met with 80 other sites also shut down by DHS. These sites were shut down completely along with years worth of robust discussions and exchanges on message boards and  a wealth of information in the form of articles and reviews submitted by visitors to the sites. Where was the due process for those who posted up writings and material to a site. What laws did they break?
These sites were suspected of copyright infringement and for those who respect the law that may seem like an open and shut case, but as those who love the constitution we all know that due process is paramount and a precedent should not be set by allowing increased government encroachment.  Today its the rap sites, but tomorrow it could any of our own sites if we don’t do proper attributions to quotes from newspaper article or if a visitor to our message boards post up a copyrighted picture.
It wasn’t to long ago Tea Party backed candidate Sharon Angle found herself the subject of lawsuit for posting up an article from a local newspaper about herself. Although it was a private entity that sued her and not the government, there was suspicion that the government was behind it. In addition, no letters were written requesting she remove material,she was dragged into court.
Angle is high profile but thousands of others have been hit with similar fate.
Will this sort of activity be vigoriously opposed by the 90 Tea Party backed members in congress?
Lastly I read this morning that Congressman Darrell Issa, who is set to lead the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has written to over 150 corporations asking what sort of regulations they need lifted. Is this something the Tea Party supports?
Maybe I’m cynical but last year we saw 29 miners get killed in West Virginia with the company Massey being cited as one that routinely scoffed the few regulations already in place. In fact they are cited as having the worse record in US mining history.
In San Bruno California, 6 people were killed and entire neighborhood destroyed because of faulty gas pipe that was supposed to be repaired by PG&E. At first we thought it was an unfortunate accident, but came to find out PG&E had increased rates in 2007 to justify the 5 million dollars which they had on hand needed repair faulty pipes including the one that exploded which was deemed by them to be one of the most at risk.
PG&E never did the work instead they spent 46 million dollars on Prop 16 this past summer to prevent other gas companies from coming into the area and being contracted by local municipalities. The people of California rejected PG&E’s proposition.
We won’t even speak about the negligence that led to the explosion and repair efforts around the BP Gulf Oil Spill.
All in all we hope you in the Tea Party who railed against the government clamping down on our freedoms will step up and make sure the government backs off some of these egregious intrusions. At the same time we hope that you are wary of powerful forces and corporations that have access to lawmakers like yourself and have used their money, resources and influence to literally put elected officials in their back pocket. An unchecked corporation can be just as oppressive as an unchecked government and from what I gathered y’all should be opposed that as well or are you? We look forward to seeing how you will reform Washington or if Washington will reform you.
peace out for now
Davey D

US private sector adds nearly 300,000 jobs according to ADP


A jobs sign above the US Chamber of US private sector adds nearly 300,000 jobs according to ADPCommerce in Washington, DC. The US private sector added 297,000 jobs in December, nearly three times the number expected by most analysts, private payrolls firm ADP data showed Wednesday.  
The stronger than expected increase marked the 11th straight month of gains in payrolls, offering hope that the jobs sector, still struggling in the post-recession recovery, is gaining traction.
"This month's ADP National Employment Report suggests non-farm private employment grew very strongly in December, at a pace well above what is usually associated with a declining unemployment rate," ADP said in a statement.
The ADP report came ahead of Friday's official monthly jobs data, a key gauge of the economy's health.
Persistently high unemployment hovering near 10 percent has been a major challenge to full recovery more than a year after the end of the worst recession in decades.
Analysts expected the Labor Department to report Friday the unemployment rate slipped to 9.7 percent in December, from 9.8 percent in November, and the economy added non-farm 135,000 jobs, up from 39,000.


Copyright AFP 2008, AFP stories and photos shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium