Blog @ MoreWhat.com

So who cares if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid opposes the ground zero mosque and Senator Dick Durbin supports it? Answer: only liberals who view this party split as one more reason to expect a severe beating at the polls in November. What? Reid takes his position based on election year politics and Durbin concludes he should support the mosque for the same election year considerations?

More to the point is that Dick Durbin uses the lame argument that this is about religious freedom and the idea that America is a cultural melting pot. He says NYC Mayor Bloomberg supports it and that’s good enough for him.

Once again it is not about religious freedom. No one is suggesting that Muslims are not allowed to practice their religion. Unless you agree they believe all infidels must convert or die and somehow that is not at odds with the founding of our nation. Much about Islam is at odds with the founding of our nation.

If Mayor Bloomberg is so supportive of the ground zero mosque and as Durbin suggests this is about religious freedom ask them this. What about the St Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church that was destroyed on September 11, 2001 when a group of Muslims committed acts of terrorism or war at the World Trade Center?

It is approaching a decade later and their church is still not rebuilt. You can follow this link if you are unfamiliar with the story. Where was Bloomberg’s support for St Nicholas’ Church during his years in office. You know, the years he extended by corrupt politics. While you’re at it ask the Port Authority why the St Nicholas Church is still not replaced.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This video is not new. But it is worth viewing/studying for more than one reason. Can you guess what they are?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Nothing like political rhetoric to muddy the waters before a weekend stealth vote on so-called healthcare reform. Both major parties are guilty of playing politics. Within this rhetorical battle a few reminders should be stated. Currently the Democratic party is in the majority. They control the White House and Congress. With that political advantage comes power and responsibility. We already know the GOP misused that advantage their last time at bat. The Dems are doing the same now.

(RTTNews) - In advance of a crucial vote Saturday, leading Senate Democrats criticized their Republican opponents for seeking to stop health reform efforts without advancing an alternative.

“Senate Republicans want to talk about the number of pages in this bill; we want to talk about the number of people who will get affordable care,” Durbin said. “Our bill is two thousand pages long and it helps hundreds of millions of people.”

He added, “The Republican bill is zero pages long and helps no one. The choice is clear. It’s time to pass this health reform bill.”

Let’s be clear. The GOP may not have introduced a bill in Congress as an ‘alternative’ to the several submitted by the Democrats. Just as John Boehner touts CBO scoring of a GOP alternative proposal Dick Durbin and other Dems suggest the GOP has no proposal. Here’s a link to the CBO scoring of a GOP proposal the Dems say does not exist.

Most bills introduced in Congress never see the light of day. If they make it to committee that is where they die most of the time. That’s the upside. Those that survive the introduction may not pass. Those that do pass become law. Of those that become law the debate continues as to their benefit for the public. The Democratic party is responsible for the current healthcare reform proposals in Congress. The GOP is currently in the minority status and as such has few tools available to advance alternative proposals.

But what they have suggested makes sense. We should do this thing, healthcare reform, in smaller more manageable steps. That is contrary to the Democratic plan to pass legislation that is huge, restrictive, manipulative, debt raising, deficit increasing, budget busting and an overall hijacking of personal freedom. Say all you want about that not being true but nearly every report from the CBO to the MSM documents the dangerous effects of what they propose.

Once again it is time to contact your elected reps and demand a sensible approach to reform and that is not included in the current proposals being advanced by the liberal majority. The manipulation of the legislative process and the speed with which the Dems seek passage should be warning enough. Let’s back up and start over before any more damage is produced.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

A committee in the House of Representatives has passed a healthcare bill. A question you might want to ask of your elected reps is why it features federal aid to families and individuals who earn FOUR TIMES the poverty level? We already have Medicaid, SCHIPS and other programs for aid to low income persons for the purposes of healthcare. In addition to this penalizing employers for not offering health plans or targeting the rich for tax revenue to pay for it does not demonstrate a contribution by everyone to solve the problem. If anything it reduces choice as has been said and forces those selected by Congress to pay for it. All the while there is no guarantee or even expectation that it will provide even a partial solution.

The Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee voted 13-10 along party lines to pass a $600-billion measure that would expand coverage to nearly all Americans by requiring individuals get insurance and employers to contribute to the cost. The bill would provide federal aid to families and individuals making less than four times the poverty level, or about $88,000 for a family of four.

In the reference below some may find optimism that the plan that has yet to pass in the full House will not have an easy time in the Senate.

July 13 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. Senate is unlikely to back a proposal that House leaders plan to introduce tomorrow to raise taxes on high-income Americans to pay for a health-care overhaul, Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois said.

Durbin, the Senate’s No. 2-ranking Democrat who serves as his party’s vote-counter, said in an interview on the MSNBC television program “Morning Joe” that the Senate would take a “more conservative approach” to raising needed tax revenue.

And more reports like the one below support the notion that the House and Senate versions of healthcare will be far apart. With any luck at all these pitiful attempts raising the ante on government mandates and spending on healthcare which have plagued this country for decades will begin to see an end of life scenario.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. House bill’s proposed tax on wealthy Americans to help pay for broader healthcare insurance is unlikely to be in the Senate’s version of legislation to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system, a senior Democrat told Reuters on Wednesday.

“I don’t think that is going to be part of the Senate Finance Committee’s proposal,” Kent Conrad, a member of the Senate Finance Committee, said in a brief interview before a meeting of committee Democrats. Conrad is chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.

The Senate Finance Committee has been meeting privately to prepare healthcare reform legislation. On Tuesday, the House unveiled its plan, which would create a public insurance option to compete with private companies, penalize employers that do not offer health insurance and tax the wealthiest Americans to help pay for the changes.

As polls indicate more people in the US are moving to conservative views and those supporting or opposing healthcare reform are at an even split the tide may already be turning on President Obama and Congress. It is no wonder, in terms of healthcare, that giving a family of four who earns $88,000 per year aid from taxpayer funds is not going to solve the problem. And voters are beginning to understand that the White House and Congress are not being realistic. They are just pushing their agenda, like it or not.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This is easily the fourth or fifth time a post on this blog has urged citizens to continue pressing Congress and the White House to abandon S. 1348 and simply enforce current immigration law. More information has surfaced on why the Senate amnesty bill is bad legislation.

A Kennedy aide said lawmakers are negotiating to pair Republicans amendments with Democratic ones should the bill resurface. The amendment strategy also includes an overall “manager’s amendment” with language proposed by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., on H-1B visas and employer-based green cards as well as changes to two amendments adopted by the Senate on guestworkers and confidentiality rights for illegal immigrants.

As if it was not bad enough Senators like Dick Durbin claim to be opposed to illegal immigration and immediately submit amendments on visa matters but now Maria Cantwell is pushing the same thing and worse. For those who claim an intention of bringing illegals out of the shadows, hard coding ‘confidentiality’ seems an odd way to do it. This is just another example of all the political deals associated with this legislation. The worst is it offers amnesty and just as bad it will increase visas, quotas and every other way to accommodate the rest of the world and ignore the needs of US citizens.

How can any bill be worthwhile with 350 amendments waiting that are published on the Congressional information website Thomas (click here) The reasonable conclusion to draw is the bill will essentially be rewritten on the fly. So, they cannot pass a flawed bill, they will weigh it down with amendments and to buy votes they’ll pass some of them. No one will take the time to read what they really have and the bill will be dumped on the American public.

This amendment situation is such a mess it is nearly impossible to tell the good guys from the bad or who is trying to do what with the amendments. One can only assume they are meant to sway votes one way or the other or simply cause so much frustration the bill dies. The bottom line is everyone still needs to urge their reps to kill S. 1348. There is no chance it will do anything but deliver amnesty for illegals and do nothing to solve the problem.

One of the most disturbing items aside from the list of amendments being at 350 and counting is a sentence that accompanies many of them. Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. Nothing like being kept in the dark while you’re being kept in the dark.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Senator Dick Durbin must have difficulty expressing himself. He’s against amnesty but for a path to citizenship. He is for protecting American jobs but never saw a visa he didn’t like. With just the two following items from his own website Senator Dick Durbin is for everything and nothing all at the same time. And they wonder why the public is steaming mad about illegal immigration. Not to mention every other major issue in this country.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from Senator Dick Durbin’s website:

Immigration

Senator Durbin is a strong supporter of fair and tough immigration laws. He believes that immigration reform is an urgent priority for our nation because our immigration system is broken. It harms our national security and our economy and treats hard-working immigrants, especially immigrant children, unfairly.

Durbin opposes amnesty for undocumented immigrants. He believes people who work hard, contribute to our economy and, and respect the law should have the opportunity to earn legal status. He has worked to ensure U.S. laws are tough on terrorism without unfairly targeting our immigrant population.

Durbin has sponsored the Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors Act, or DREAM Act, a narrowly-tailored, bipartisan bill that would provide immigration relief to a select group of students who grew up in the United States, have good moral character, and are pursuing a college education or have enlisted in the military. The DREAM Act would also return to states the authority to determine whether to grant in-state tuition to state residents regardless of immigration status.

the following information is from his website as well:

Statement of U.S. Senator Durbin on Immigration Reform Proposal

Thursday, May 17, 2007

[Washington, DC] - U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) today issued the following statement after the announcement of an agreement on immigration reform.

“Our nation needs immigration reform and if we want to address the problem effectively, we must take a comprehensive approach. We must strengthen border security, improve enforcement in the workplace, and deal with the approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants who are in the United States today.

“The agreement reached today is a start, but more needs to be done. I will work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to improve this bill. Hopefully those efforts will result in legislation that we can all support - one that includes stronger border security, tougher sanctions on employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants, protections for American workers, and provisions allowing families to reunite and those who work hard and play by the rules to earn their way to legal status.”

This post features another Senator Dick Durbin press release that contradicts his claims to be against amnesty and in favor of tough immigration law. It would be better if he first was in favor of tough immigration enforcement. If you read this one carefully and the previous post on this subject, it is quite clear that Durbin is like so many others in Congress as well as the White Hosue. Claim you are for one position and issue press releases that contradict that notion. Expecting the public to bite may require medical attention rather than politics as usual because the public does not care. Take notice Senator Durbin. The public once again cares because you and your colleagues are incapable of doing your jobs without adult supervision.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Durbin Passes American Workers First Amendment 71-22 On Y-Visa

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Currently, the Y-visa program’s requirement to recruit an American worker first would be waived if the Labor Secretary determines that there is a “labor shortage.” However, the bill doesn’t define what constitutes a “shortage.” Durbin’s “Recruit Americans First” amendment closes this loophole by eliminating the waiver, therefore requiring employers to recruit American workers first at all times.

“The Administration has asked Congress to include a Y visa program to fill ‘low-skill’ jobs that Americans don’t want,” said Durbin. “This vote in the Senate requires American companies to give American workers the chance to apply. The only way to know what jobs Americans do or don’t want is to require Americans be recruited first, and that’s just what we’ve done.”

Senator Durbin is also working to ensure that American workers are given priority when it comes to the H-1B visa program. Durbin, along with Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), introduced the H-1B and L-1 Visa Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act which overhauls the H-1B and L-1 visa programs. The bill also cracks down on unscrupulous employers who deprive qualified Americans of high-skill jobs. The major components of the Durbin-Grassley H-1B act were included in the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, currently being debated on the floor.

What side is Senator Dick Durbin on? That might best be described as a rhetorical question. He is another one of those who claims to be opposed to amnesty but wants a ‘path to citizenship’ for illegals who are currently in the US. The best ‘path to citizenship’ for illegals starts with deportation. Dick Durbin is apparently real proud of himself for an amendment to the amnesty bill that adds visa language to a bill most in Congress said would die if any amendments were passed. Probably not for the same reason, but it would be good if all legislation was decided on without amendments. If you can’t write decent bills and they will need amendments to pass, they are bad bills from the beginning. Politicians will tell you they are necessary. That is only if you believe in pork and backroom political deals that always accompany bad legislation. So tell me readers. What is your opinion of Senator Dick Durbin?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Durbin: H1-B Visa Reforms Needed to Protect American Workers

Friday, June 1, 2007

[WASHINGTON, DC]- U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) today announced that provisions of “The H-1B and L-1 Visa Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act of 2007” he introduced earlier this year with U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) have been added to the Kennedy-Kyl immigration reform compromise bill. Durbin’s legislation would overhaul the H-1B and L-1 visa programs to give priority to American workers and crack down on unscrupulous employers who deprive qualified Americans of high-skill jobs.

The H-1B visa program allows American companies and universities to employ temporary foreign workers who have the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor’s degree in a job category that is considered by the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services to be a “specialty occupation”. The L-1 visa program allows companies to transfer certain employees from their foreign facilities to their U.S. facilities for up to seven years.

“Our immigration policy should seek to complement our U.S. workforce, not replace it,” Durbin said. “Some employers have abused the H-1B and L-1 temporary work visa programs, using them to bypass qualified American job applicants. I want to set up safeguards for American workers, and provide much-needed oversight and enforcement of employers who fail to abide by the law.”

Provisions of the Durbin-Grassley bill included in the Kennedy-Kyl immigration reform compromise bill would change existing law in the following ways:

Currently, the H-1B visa program is criticized for failing to protect American workers.

* Under current law, only employers that employ H-1B visa holders as a large percentage of their U.S. workforce are required to pledge that they have attempted to find American workers before bringing in foreign workers. The Durbin-Grassley bill would require all employers seeking to hire an H-1B visa holder to pledge that they have made a good-faith effort to hire American workers first and that the H-1B visa holder will not displace an American worker.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would require that H-1B employers may not advertise a job as available only for H-1B visa holders or recruit only H-1B visa holders for a job.

Currently, so-called “job shops” hire large numbers of foreign workers on H-1B visas for short time periods to train and then outsource these workers offshore.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would prohibit companies from hiring H-1B employees if they employ more than 50 people and more than 50% of their employees are H-1B visa holders.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would double penalties for employers who violate H-1B program requirements

Currently, the Department of Labor lacks sufficient oversight and investigative authority over the H-1B program.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would give DOL the ability to conduct random audits of any company that uses the H-1B program, and would require DOL to conduct annual audits of companies with more than 100 employees that have 15% or more of those workers on H-1B visas.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would give DOL authority to review employers’ H-1B applications for “clear indicators of fraud or misrepresentation of material fact.” Currently, DOL is only authorized to review applications for “completeness and obvious inaccuracies.”

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would give DOL 14 days to review H-1B applications, instead of the seven days currently permitted.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would give DOL more authority to conduct employer investigations and streamline the investigative process by, among other things, permitting DOL to initiate its own investigations and eliminating the requirement that the DOL Secretary personally authorize an investigation.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to share with DOL any information in H-1B visa applications indicating that an H-1B employer is not complying with program requirements.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would strengthen existing whistleblower protections for the H-1B program and establish whistleblower protections for the L-1 program.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would give DOL authority to conduct investigations for 24 months instead of the 12 currently permitted.

Currently, the H-1B and L-1 visa programs are criticized for making it possible for companies to hire foreign workers at lower wages and with fewer rights than Americans, in turn creating incentives for companies to avoid hiring Americans.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would require the government to provide H-1B visa holders with information about their rights.

Under current law, experts argue that employers can use the L-1 program to evade restrictions on the H-1B program because the L-1 program does not have an annual cap and does not include protections for American workers. As a result, efforts to reform the H-1B program are unlikely to be successful if the L-1 program is not reformed at the same time.

* The Durbin-Grassley bill would establish a process for DOL to investigate, audit and penalize L-1 employers.

The extreme peaceniks and others expressing less venomous opposition to the Iraq war often begin their arguments with reference to inherent characteristics of war as their central theme. Aside from the obvious death and destruction that accompanies armed conflict, they stress the loss of troops and civilians as their largest concern. But they will never accept the fact that this same expression of opposition has prolonged the war in Iraq by strengthening the determination of the enemy. In other words, opposition prolonging the war shares responsibility for the death toll that the anti-war crowd views with such disdain. How’s that for irony?

Each day that politicians seek political cover on the war in Iraq from these same anti-war critics also causes more loss of life. A prudent and practical human being regardless of ideology would sacrifice their own selfish interest in favor of the valiant contributions by those actually at risk of death. To express the realities of politics is simply more rhetoric and of little consolation to those who shoulder the real burden. If you are not now nor have ever been in Iraq, shut the hell up and get this thing done so those who are can satisfy the demands of both sides of the issue by achieving victory in Iraq and coming home that much sooner.

To a much less dramatic issue but with equal potential for serious injury to the United States is illegal immigration. The reason for addressing it at the same time as the Iraq war is the focus afforded these two issues will distract from attending to other matters until resolved. The sympathy argument for illegals is another ploy that compels politicians to seek political cover rather than face the reality that this is simply an economic or financial issue.

The open borders crowd claims that illegals are merely seeking a better life is really describing a better income. The business community’s scare tactics about economic disaster without illegals is really describing lower costs and higher profits by exploiting artificial wage competition. Trying to solve the world’s problems by eliminating border and immigration control only exacerbates the symtoms.

Not securing the borders or controlling immigration is a national security risk we cannot afford. Allowing amnesty for lawbreakers only encourages its continuation. Not enforcing existing laws is a violation of the oath of office of all or most elected and appointed officials in the executive branch. Both sides of the issue, again, can be satisfied by effective control and management of the flow of people in and out of this country. Conceding to the demands of selfish special interest is not an option. Common sense demands this issue be solved now. The guiding force should be the rule of law not the whim of personal preference.

As a personal note, if you truly believe open borders are a good thing, I suggest this. Leave all your locks unlocked 24/7 from now on. Then let us know how long it takes before you experience something really bad. It is nice to think the best of people but that does not suggest ignoring the worst. They invented security because both exist.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Congressional Democrats Negotiate With Bush Aides on Iraq

Congressional Democrats and President Bush’s aides meet again Thursday to negotiate on funding for the Iraq war.

Senators Work With White House to Craft Immigration Deal

Bipartisan group of senators and White House officials work to craft an immigration agreement.

It may sound outragious to the casual observer or typical apathetic or bleeding heart version of American, but the laws against treason should have a section that addresses politicians who sell this country by accepting money from every special interest and who do their bidding regardless of the negative impact on this nation.

A report from Politico has it right and wrong. The report describes the power and influence, meaning political contributions, etc., of the ‘goliath’ supporting amnesty in immmigration legislation. Senate bill 1348 is the culmination of Harry Reid’s push via Kyl, Kennedy and others to circumvent existing legislation that has been rendered useless through the Bush Administration and others before them refusing to enforce immigration and border control.

Amnesty lobby is immigration Goliath

Nearly every major corporation, trade association, union and civil rights group has a dog in this fight — but most of them seek slightly different things. Companies and trade associations mainly seek reforms in the green card and visa process, while most unions want changes in the guest worker program; civil rights groups press for a path to citizenship above all. The challenge, lobbyists say, remains for these groups to band together to thwart anti-immigration groups like the Federation for American Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA and others trying to fan the flames of grass-roots angst against illegal — and legal — immigration.

The Politico report describes the ‘goliath’ push for easing unenforced immigration laws against what it called the grassroots angst against illegal and legal immigration. That part is wrong. It is not angst. And it is not against legal immigration.

There are seven immigration ‘reform’ bills on the active legislation list at the Senate. This is just a dog and pony show to mask the elimination of immigration and border control as ‘’immigration reform’. The middle class will pay for the crushing burden of opening the immigration flood gates while the politicians and corporate interests line their pockets with the profit from illegal immigration in the form of cheap labor and campaign contributions.

The result will include an increased risk in attack by terrorists that is being sanctioned by political and corporate wrongdoing that explains the ealier suggestion of expanding the laws against treason in this country to include this type of criminal behavior.

But the vast majority of Americans have not the vision to see what is being done to them and have developed such an iron clad shield of apathy they simply nod in agreement and continue to bend over and let it happen again. To which the powerful interests are unable to ignore the opportunity to abuse it again. The few individuals and ‘grassroots’ groups that continue to oppose such travesties are mostly ignored and the cycle repeats itself.

While some of us lobby our representatives and get involved in local, state or national efforts to thwart the open borders crowd and other threats to this nation, the rest of you sit idly by with a front row seat watching the ease with which special interest steals the country from under you.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

If the previous post does not show you that Senator Harry Reid is a contradction then understand he said they would not cut and run in Iraq or raise taxes. Right at the moment the tax thing is secondary. He said they would not cut and run. Senator Reid would you kindly explain the report below if you are not planning on cut and run?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

US Senate Democrats Draft Plan to Revise Military’s Iraq Mission
By VOA News
23 February 2007

Democratic Party leaders in the U.S. Senate are working on legislation that would effectively revoke the 2002 resolution authorizing military action against Iraq.

Senate Democratic aides say the proposal, which is not expected to be adopted, would limit the U.S. military’s mission to training Iraqi troops and police forces, securing the country’s borders and combating terrorist forces. Regular combat forces would be withdrawn by next year.

The proposal, drafted by Senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Joseph Biden, who chairs the Foreign Relations panel is set to be presented to other Democratic senators next week.

If accepted, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would likely attach the proposal to an anti-terrorism bill. If passed by the Senate, which is not likely, the revised authorization would also have to be passed by the House and would be subject to a veto by President Bush.

Democrats and the independents aligned with them hold a slim 51 to 49 majority in the Senate, but hold a more comfortable majority in the House of Representatives.

The 2002 resolution gave President Bush authorization to take military action against Iraq, because of its alleged arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. In a speech last week, Biden said the original resolution is now irrelevant because the WMD program did not exist, and former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is “no longer there.”

The bill is the latest effort by Senate Democrats to challenge President Bush on his Iraq policy. A vote on a non-binding resolution criticizing Mr. Bush’s plan to deploy an additional 21,000 troops to Iraq failed in the Senate, but was passed in the House last week.

Meanwhile, Democrats in the House of Representatives are considering a proposal by lawmaker Jack Murtha that would link funding of the U.S. military mission in Iraq to strict conditions on troop readiness and training standards.

Some information for this report was provided by AP and Reuters.

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Right Nation, Leaning Straight Up, Maggie’s Notebook, and basil’s blog, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

We need to give minimum wage earners a raise. We need to give employers a tax break to cover the added expense. So let’s give the taxpayer MoreWhat they’re accustomed to; paying for political appeasements.

MoreWhat.com staff

House Takes Step Toward Minimum Wage Deal

The House overwhelmingly approved business tax breaks worth $1.8 billion over 10 years, a key step toward forging a congressional compromise on increasing the federal minimum wage.

Does anyone remember the intelligence community scurrying around like trapped rodents when they became the target of choice for the blame gamers after 9/11? Yup, the spooks were getting spanked for not sharing information with the FBI and others in the executive branch. Faulty information, or worse, accusations of just making stuff up smacked them again on Iraq and WMD. Members of Congress are still blaming everyone else for their vote for war. And those who voted no are feeling superior. The “yea” voters defend themselves as being fooled by the intel provided and feel that is a valid defense. If that is the case, then the “nay” voters are wrong. Claiming after the fact that you voted on flawed data means those who voted no were unwilling to use military force to thwart a clear and present danger. Congress can’t have it both ways. And no one is calling them on it.

The Dems are feeling superior. They have a new direction for America. Their 100 hour agenda will prove their worth. And yet even the less complicated issues perplex them. Last week’s example is brought to you by Senator Dick Durbin and a co-sponsor. In their wisdom and due to prodding by a “public interest” group, a solution for all the tainted food incidents in this country is to increase bureaucracy. Food safety responsibilities are already split between the USDA and the FDA. Rather than fix what is wrong with the current arrangement, Durbin is suggesting the solution is to split it more or simply create another agency. There are already 12 involved in food safety. Ya, the 12 will go away after the new one comes online. Even if he was right, why not fix what is wrong with existing tools rather than abandon one and create another?

C. Harris
MoreWhat.com

Legislation Would Create New Food Safety Agency

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) have introduced legislation to put all food safety responsibilities under a single new Food Safety Administrator.

Some other tainted food headlines to increase your appetite:

Cooked chicken breasts join tainted-food recalls
Carolina Culinary Foods, a West Columbia, S.C., firm, is voluntarily recalling approximately 52,650 pounds of fully cooked chicken breast strips manufactured for Oscar Mayer (Listeria monocytogenes)

Tainted Cantaloupe, Baby Food Recalled
Dole Fresh Fruit Co. recalled several thousand cartons of imported cantaloupes after the fruit tested positive for salmonella, the bacteria involved in the nationwide peanut butter recall earlier this week.

Food Recalls, More To Come
“I don’t think we are seeing more food borne pathogens occur, I think we are finding them more quickly and using better methodology,” says SFC President Curtis Coleman.

Fresh crops tainted by suspicion
Last year’s E. coli outbreaks — one traced to bagged spinach and two to lettuce — have left a nation in a salad spinner of confusion.Americans have come to expect the food they eat won’t make them sick.But unlike most edible items in the grocery store that have been cooked, baked, broiled, fried, or pasteurized to destroy harmful bacteria, fresh produce has no such “kill point,” no moment on the assembly line when pathogens meet their doom.

• Salmonella Outbreaks: A Recent History
There was a time there when Salmonella was associated largely with chickens and eggs, but as the last few years have shown the potentially deadly pathogen can show up in all kinds of foods.