Blog @ MoreWhat.com

[Trent] Lott is the captain of the K Street team. He told a reporter last month his thoughts on the Tea Partiers: “We don’t need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples. As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them.”

The story source for the quote above points to a problem that has long been a problem in American politics. We talk about it. We complain about it. But we do nothing to change it. And some ‘voters’ beyond those representing the corrupt power of most special interest cast their votes on ‘wallet’ issues at the heart of this problem.

It is hoped that the Washington Examiner will not be upset by this blog’s use of more than the usual ‘fair use’ of their content. But the following two paragraphs are critical points from the piece that needs to addressed. And of course you are encouraged to the follow the link above for the whole story and make the Examiner your regular read if it is not already.

The current GOP fault line is not exactly conservatives vs. moderates or new guard vs. old guard. For 2010, the rivalry is the Tea Party wing against the K Street wing. To tell which kind of Republican a candidate is, see how the Democrats attack him: If he’s branded a shill for Wall Street, he’s from the K Street wing. If he’s labeled an extremist outside the mainstream, he’s a Tea Partier.

More tellingly, study their campaign contributions. K Street Republicans’ coffers are filled by the political action committees of defense contractors, drug companies, lobbying firms, and Wall Street banks. A Tea Party Republican is funded by the Club for Growth or the Senate Conservatives Fund, which is run by the Republican leadership’s least-favorite colleague, Jim DeMint.

Two things needing emphasis. There is a growing opinion that Senator Jim DeMint is one of the few real conservatives in the US Senate. He needs the support of everyone who believes in the founding of our nation and preserving this republic.

Lobbyists, the money and power brokers have made the two party system what it is…. corrupt. If it wasn’t obvious to you by now, this is the single most important reason to support the Tea Party phenomenon and the current outrage expressed by a majority of Americans. Elections this year can begin the renewal of principles that founded our nation. Citizens can take back our country from the corruptocrats in Washington and elsewhere.

Throw the bums out. Repeat as necessary.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

This video presentation is dated from the end of June 2010. Although DeMint is speaking about a particular piece of legislation he also expresses the continuing need for our US government to abandon an agenda that does not work and runs counter to our founding in addition to the immediate need for economic recovery.

That is why this video is presented. It emphasizes the desire by most Americans to adhere to those principles that have served us well for so long. The notable and well-known examples are to stop spending, stop increasing deficits and the national debt and above all get government out of the way of Americans who are the engine that drives our economic prosperity.

Thank you Senator Jim Demint (R-SC)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Like DeMint you can pass by the Steele problem as it is merely a distraction. There are many reasons why ousting Democrats this November is important. Not the least of which is the Obama Administration’s decision to sue over Arizona defending its borders since the Obamanation will not. The other items mentioned in the title are equally important.

But the overall consideration is to return this beloved nation back to its founding principles and only conservatives seem interested in that goal. And be clear. Candidates like Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina are not conservatives. Fiorina destroyed HP. Fiorina is an establishment Republican who is in lock step with RINO McCain. Whitman is in the news for two things recently. Her support from other billionaires and shamnesty. Like Bloomberg and Murdoch as well as other limousine liberals they claim conservative values while eroding the rule of law and support liberal fantasies that are dangerous.

Find real conservatives to support and get them in office. Our nation needs them. Let’s move the country in the right direction after years of neglect.

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

One of the political debates in the news concerns President Obama’s nominee for leading the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The simple pro and con on the issue has conservatives criticizing the Obama Administration for dragging its feet on filling the vacancy and liberals countering with the complaint that Republican Senator Jim DeMint is holding up the confirmation of Erroll Southers, Obama’s current candidate for the job.

Senator DeMint’s January 1, 2009 press release answers critics of his position. It is short, sweet and to the point. Maybe critics of Senator DeMint should consider the fact that holding up the confirmation of a flawed nominee is better than confirming same. Given recent security failures the importance of this nomination is emphasized. Rubber stamping President Obama’s first choice in the name of expediency is irresponsible at best. President Obama can easily replace this nominee with someone worthy of filling the vacancy. Here’s DeMint’s press release.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

DeMint Statement on TSA Nominee

January 1, 2010 - WASHINGTON, D.C - Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) made the following statement about President Obama’s nominee to lead the Transportation Security Administration (TSA):

“Erroll Southers has not been forthcoming about whether he’ll give union bosses control of our airport security, which is one of the most important decisions he’ll make as head of the TSA. Mr. Southers’ unwillingness to form a position on collective bargaining seriously calls into question his judgment, because it weakens security and has already been rejected by the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service, the Coast Guard, and by every previous TSA administrator.”

“And now we learn that he misled Congress in sworn testimony about accessing confidential records. The TSA is one of the most critical security agencies in the War on Terror, and the Senate must carefully vet this nominee. If Mr. Southers is unwilling to put security ahead of politics and if he can’t tell the truth, then he’s not qualified and should not be confirmed.”

###

crossposted at:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts

The United States Senate is scheduled to deal with HR1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, at 2 pm Monday February 2, 2009. By a count from the senate website there are 56 Democrats, 1 independent, 1 independent Democrat and 41 Republicans currently seated. For matters only requiring a simple majority vote to pass party line votes give victories to the Democratic majority. For voting requiring 3/5 or 2/3 majorities a party line vote alone won’t get it done.

Without covering all the possibilities and/or procedures like filibusters and cloture it is fair to say some of that will have to come into play to stop the passage of HR1. The view from this blog finds stated opposition of the bill by the GOP as the only event in which Republicans have tried to stand their ground since the November 2008 elections or longer. Rubber stamping confirmations of White House nominations is the other notable activity of the GOP so far this year.

Based on the report below and Senator Kyl’s record during the shamnesty votes of 2007 little confidence is found in his statements or assessment. For the same reasons Senator DeMint instills more confidence than the former. These are truly defining moments for the GOP and perhaps the DNC as well. By the end of the first 100 days of the Obama Administration, a typical early measure of US Presidents, one party or the other will have the upper hand. The Democratic party majority in Congress and a Democrat in the White House do not make it a foregone conclusion.

One note on the comment of Barney Frank in the story below indicating he never saw ‘ a tax cut fix a bridge.’ As little attention as liberals ever direct to tax cuts it would be easy to say that is the reason for his statement. But it shows his failure or refusal to understand the numbers. Governments do not create wealth. Free people and free markets do. Allowing the private sector to use more of the wealth created to expand economies and jobs through tax cuts also increases revenue to the government. That Mr Frank is how a tax cut fixes a bridge without extra burden on taxpayers. He also failed to tell you that massive spending by the government during these economic hard times will require tax increases afterwards.

It is better to equip the private sector to drive the economy rather than fund short sighted jobs bills with taxpayer money for the reasons stated. But we will see who wins the arguments and how many others the GOP is able to convince to vote against HR1 in its current form.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Opposition Republican Party senators are warning they likely will vote against U.S. President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus plan unless it is revised to create more jobs.

The party’s second-ranking Senate member, Jon Kyl of Arizona, told U.S. television Fox News Sunday the legislation needs to be reconstructed. Kyl and other Republicans say the estimated $820-billion bill wastes money on programs that will not stimulate the economy. They are calling for more tax cuts and infrastructure building.

Another influential Republican senator, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, called the legislation a “spending plan,” not a “stimulus plan.” He said on ABC’s This Week it is “temporary” and “wasteful.”

The other chamber of Congress, the House of Representatives, already has approved the plan. The Senate is to begin debating the legislation this week.

President Obama says the stimulus plan is necessary to save or create three million jobs.

Democratic Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois expressed support for Mr. Obama’s plan in a television interview on Fox News. He said lawmakers need to pull together and avoid delaying the rescue plan further, because the United States is facing one of the most serious economic crises in its history.

Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, also defended the bill he voted for last week. Frank said the package includes necessary spending on infrastructure, like bridges. He said sarcastically that he never saw a “tax cut fix a bridge.”

The U.S. economy - the world’s biggest - is in a recession. The country lost 2.6 million jobs last year and already has seen tens of thousands more layoffs this year.

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

The view from this blog is that the House was unable to pass the massive bailout bill because those fearing election defeats voted for the bill. When it failed, Congress in their 12% approval rating mentality decided to hand it over to the Senate as re-election is viewed as not a problem for them. With that in mind this blog finds it reassuring that in the NO vote area below, Senators Sessions, Shelby and DeMint are listed. If memory serves, their voting records on illegal immigration and other issues were respectable as well.

But to be fair, since many members of Congress know who is going to do what before it happens, you could vote ‘no’ with the knowledge that so many others will vote ‘yes’ that your vote only serves to make you look good. But the leaning here is that Sessions, Shelby and DeMint are voting conscience and reason in this case. That is just a guess. Which unfortunately is the best one can do so often in observing politics.

Below is a copy of the roll call vote for HR1424 in the Senate. It is provided here simply as a reminder for those of you keeping score on your reps and what to do wth them. McCain and Obama of course voted for the bill. This blog views both Senators votes as purely political. This again requires a reminder that the choices for President at this point are not ideal but McCain, as viewed from this blog, is the better choice of the two. The reasons why will not be repeated in this post as it would just clutter things up and the reason for this post is obvious. Keep tabs on voting related to the BAILOUT and target members of Congress as necessary.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Measure Number:

H.R. 1424 (A bill to provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes. )

Measure Title:

A bill to provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes.

Vote Summary Grouped by Vote Position

YEAs —74

NAYs —25

Not Voting - 1

This is the companion post for ‘ Senator DeMint: Fighting Pork in National Security. ‘ This was linked from inside Senator DeMint’s press release but may have made the previous post a bit too large. This information will help you evaluate what Congress is really interested in with Homeland Security. It would appear to be PORK. There is no excuse for abusing widespread support for protecting this country by adding pork to related legislation. Again you are urged to help Senator DeMint and a few others like him to correct these problems. Contact your representatives and voice your opposition to pork or earmarks. Read on. Follow the links for additional information.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

For Immediate Release
June 26, 2007
Contact: Steve Ellis
202-546-8500 x126

TCS ANALYSIS OF FY08 SENATE HOMELAND SECURITY
APPROPRIATIONS BILL

Complete database of Department of Homeland Security earmarks (click)

Washington, D.C. - The Senate FY08 Homeland Security Appropriations bill contains $37.6 billion in funding, $2.3 billion more than the President’s request, and $2.8 billion more than 2007 appropriation.

Some of the bill’s highlights:

Earmarks

Unlike its House counterparts, the Senate discloses the requesting member of most earmarks in the legislation. But its disclosure is far from perfect.While the earmarks are listed in the report, you have to look real close because the type is small and they are scattered far and wide throughout the report. In 137 pages of the report, there are 24 earmarks, including two doozies not disclosed as earmarks.

All told, twenty Senators receive Department of Homeland Security earmarks. As usual, members on the Committee were the big winners, as only five members not on the Committee receive earmarks (Sens. Cantwell (D-WA), Corker (R-TN), Cornyn (R-TX), Kennedy (D-MA) and Kerry (D-MA)), and only two of these don’t have fellow home state Senators pulling weight for them on Committee.

Sens. Domenici (R-NM) and Shelby (R-AL) both receive three earmarks apiece and Sens. Cochran (R-MS), Hutchison (R-TX) and Murray (D-WA) each get a pair.

But wait, there’s more. TCS found two undisclosed earmarks – one for the U.S. Coast Guard Operations System Center in Kearneysville, WV and one that, in part, relocates Immigration and Customs Enforcement data centers to Stennis Space Center in Mississippi. So, one undisclosed earmark goes to the home state of the Chairman of Appropriations Robert Byrd (D-WV) and the other goes to the home state of the Ranking Member of the Committee Thad Cochran (R-MS).

The total cost of all the earmarks is more than $396.6 million. We’re not sure how much more, because one earmark, for Sen. Inouye (D-HI) just stipulates that Customs should hire temporary and part-time pest inspectors in Hawaii.

DHS Acquisitions

The Committee points out that: “The Department’s track record on major development programs is spotty at best” and that the multi-billion dollar Secure Border Initiative program is “extremely high risk,” but then turns around and approves another billion dollars for the program, bringing the two year total appropriations for SBI to $2.2 billion.

Aviation Security

Aviation security at the Transportation Security Administration gets an $86.4 million bump to more than $5 billion, predominantly for explosives detection systems and explosives trace detection. However, maintenance of that technology takes a $7 million hit.

Coast Guard

The Committee points out that the Coast Guard Yard at Curtis Bay, MD (Baltimore) is “a critical component of the Coast Guard’s core logistics capability” but they are not quite sure how, because they further direct that “sufficient industrial work should be assigned to the Yard to maintain this capability.”

After a year of failures and shortcomings, the Coast Guard’s Deepwater acquisition program is cut $18 million from the President’s request, to $770.1 million. The Committee also directs the Coast Guard to get going with acquiring Vertical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (VUAV) for the program, a technology that has been experiencing problems of late.

The Truman-Hobbs Act (1940) bridge program remains in good health after six earmarks were added to the tune of $16 million to alter bridges that interfere with navigation. The bridges are in Illinois (Sen. Durbin (D)), Alabama (Sen. Shelby (R)), Iowa (Sen. Harkin (D)), Massachusetts (Sens. Kennedy and Kerry (both D)), Wisconsin (Sen. Kohl (D)), and Texas (Sen. Hutchison (R)).

National Protection and Programs Directorate

Continuing the saga of problems for this troubled part of DHS, the committee notes that, “The budget submission is incomprehensible, information is unattainable, budgeted numbers are suspect, authorities used to execute certain activities are unclear…” Ouch. That cost the Directorate a cut of $127 million, $100 million of which came from the much maligned US-VISIT program to biometrically track the entry (but not exit) of visitors to the United States.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

FEMA receives a dramatic bump of more than $2.8 billion over the FY08 request and nearly $1 billion over FY07 enacted levels to a total of $6.9 billion. Virtually every area receives an increase with State grants receiving the lion’s share of the increase.

Conclusion

In previous years, there had been a moratorium on earmarks in the Homeland Security Appropriations bill – which was never perfect – but the moratorium seems to be relevant only if you are not on the appropriations committee. And in the beginning of a disturbing trend similar to the Department of Defense appropriations bill, many of the earmarks are popping up in the Research and Development, Training, and Services title of the bill. The appetite for R&D earmarks is nearly limitless, so we are likely watching the beginning of the slippery slope to more earmarks that direct more of our tax dollars for political gain instead of for protecting our country.

###

It appears earmarks have plagued national security issues from the beginning as state’s that were awarded federal funding were unable to pass on the windfalls whether needed or not. Again, a spending bill proposed for national security may be abusing the tendency to avoid arguments on anything to do with protecting the country after 9/11. Well, with the exception of the troops and winning a war. All other spending measures get a pass without much scrutiny or political opposition.

With the help of Senators like Jim DeMint the earmarked or porked push in Homeland Security appropriations for fiscal 2008 may be avoided. Another opportunity to contact your representatives is right here. Don’t rely on a veto from the President to avoid these problems. Express your opinion. Let those in Washington echo the sentiments of Senator DeMint that you favor much about efforts on national security but this bill needs fixing.

A companion post will be published later and a surprising position on the subject from another Senator.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

DeMint Calls on Senate to Restrain Spending

July 27th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina), Chairman of the Senate Steering Committee, made the following statement Friday after he voted against the Fiscal Year 2008 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations bill, which the President has threatened to veto due to excessive spending.

“There are many good things in this bill that I strongly support – like the critical funding for border security – but it’s over budget and represents the addiction to spending that has overcome Washington,” said Senator DeMint. “Congress must set priorities just like every American family and business must do. This bill exceeds the President’s budget by over $5 billion and includes numerous earmarks and wasteful spending. If this trend continues, Congress will go deeper and deeper into the red ink with each spending bill that it considers.”

According to the Statement of Administration Position, the President will veto the legislation because “it includes an irresponsible and excessive level of spending and includes other objectionable provisions.” In fact, the bill exceeds the President’s request by $5.3 billion. Among other things, it takes $100 million from border security and earmarks it for security at the national political party conventions, a function that is normally paid for by the hosting city.

Also, even though the Department of Homeland Security currently has over $4 billion in unused funds from previous years for state and local grant programs, this bill appropriates over $3 billion more to that program.

According to an analysis by the non-profit, independent research group Taxpayers for Common Sense, the Senate DHS Appropriations bill was reported out of committee with 24 earmarks that spend over $396 million:

“All told, twenty Senators receive Department of Homeland Security earmarks. As usual, members on the Committee were the big winners, as only five members not on the Committee receive earmarks, and only two of these don’t have fellow home state Senators pulling weight for them on Committee… TCS found two undisclosed earmarks – one for the U.S. Coast Guard Operations System Center in Kearneysville, WV and one that, in part, relocates Immigration and Customs Enforcement data centers to Stennis Space Center in Mississippi… The total cost of all the earmarks is more than $396.6 million. We’re not sure how much more, because one earmark, for Sen. Inouye (D-HI) just stipulates that Customs should hire temporary and part-time pest inspectors in Hawaii.”

DeMint concluded, “I hope my colleagues will start showing some self control when it comes to spending, and help us change course soon. I urge the House-Senate conference to trim the waste and prioritize funds to urgent security needs at our borders and ports.”

###

Related information:

H.R.2638
Title: Making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] (introduced 6/8/2007) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.RES.473, S.1644
Latest Major Action: 7/26/2007 Resolving differences — Senate actions. Status: Senate insists on its amendment, asks for a conference, appoints conferees Byrd; Inouye; Leahy; Mikulski; Kohl; Murray; Landrieu; Lautenberg; Nelson NE; Cochran; Gregg; Stevens; Specter; Domenici; Shelby; Craig; Alexander.
House Reports: 110-181
MAJOR ACTIONS:

6/8/2007 Introduced in House
6/8/2007 The House Committee on Appropriations reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-181, by Mr. Price (NC).
6/15/2007 Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 268 - 150 (Roll no. 491).
7/26/2007 Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay. 89 - 4. Record Vote Number: 282.
7/26/2007 Resolving differences — Senate actions: Senate insists on its amendment, asks for a conference, appoints conferees Byrd; Inouye; Leahy; Mikulski; Kohl; Murray; Landrieu; Lautenberg; Nelson NE; Cochran; Gregg; Stevens; Specter; Domenici; Shelby; Craig; Alexander.

H.RES.473
Title: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2638) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] (introduced 6/11/2007) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.R.2638
Latest Major Action: 6/12/2007 Passed/agreed to in House. Status: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.
House Reports: 110-184
MAJOR ACTIONS:

6/11/2007 Introduced in House
6/11/2007 The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-184, by Ms. Slaughter.
6/12/2007 Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.

S.1644
Title: An original bill making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Byrd, Robert C. [WV] (introduced 6/18/2007) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.R.2638
Latest Major Action: 6/18/2007 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 204.
Senate Reports: 110-84
MAJOR ACTIONS:

6/18/2007 Introduced in Senate
6/18/2007 Committee on Appropriations. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Byrd. With written report No. 110-84.
6/18/2007 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 204.