E-mail to Rep. Neugebauer:
I have read your October 19 Roundup.
Nice job in introducing H.R. 534, the Responsible Government Empowerment Act (RGEA). However, I say again you need support for these bills or they are a waste of time. 10% of your time should be spent in preparing the bills and 90% of your time should be spent in gaining support to accept them. Keep talking to fiscally conservative Democrats, particularly the Blue Dogs.
On healthcare, I agree reform needs to happen, just like reform needs to happen in government. However, that doesn't mean we throw out the whole original process and start from scratch. Instead, we fix the things in the system that are wrong. The Baucus bill cuts too deeply into the original system. It must be defeated.
We support the removal of Kevin Jennings. Promotion of various sexual lifestyles should not be part of any educational curriculum. Our society is strongly based on traditional families of mother, father, and children. We should leave it at that. There is also no room for criticism of homosexual couples or childless couples. If there is a majority objection from these groups to the use of mommy, daddy, and children in early grade reading, we should consider that. If we need to determine whether there is a majority, the question can be put to the voting public as a "proposition".
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
E-mail to Congress:
EIN News says, "U.S. House Begins Assembly of Financial Reform Plan. The House Financial Services Committee is to begin work on Wednesday on a top priority for the U.S. Congress -- legislation to mend regulatory holes exposed by last fall's financial crisis. The committee will focus this week on bringing the $450 trillion market in over-the-counter derivatives under federal regulation and creation of an agency to protect consumers from risky financial products. (reuters.com)".
Good move, after you have killed the healthcare and climate control bills!
May I respectfully remind you that any effective legislation is a combination of rules involving penalties for non-adherents AND PROPER SUBSEQUENT ENFORCEMENT ACTION. It is the latter in which we have been sorely deficient in our legislative actions. You are undoubtedly more familiar than I am in how this can be done. My only suggestion is to pressure the Justice Department and other Law Enforcement Agencies.
EIN News says, "U.S. House Begins Assembly of Financial Reform Plan. The House Financial Services Committee is to begin work on Wednesday on a top priority for the U.S. Congress -- legislation to mend regulatory holes exposed by last fall's financial crisis. The committee will focus this week on bringing the $450 trillion market in over-the-counter derivatives under federal regulation and creation of an agency to protect consumers from risky financial products. (reuters.com)".
Good move, after you have killed the healthcare and climate control bills!
May I respectfully remind you that any effective legislation is a combination of rules involving penalties for non-adherents AND PROPER SUBSEQUENT ENFORCEMENT ACTION. It is the latter in which we have been sorely deficient in our legislative actions. You are undoubtedly more familiar than I am in how this can be done. My only suggestion is to pressure the Justice Department and other Law Enforcement Agencies.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Randy's October 12 Roundup
Open letter to Rep. Neugebauer:
I have read your October 12 Roundup and have taken your Spending Survey.
You are moving in the right direction to control federal spending but don't have sufficient allies. You need to cross party lines and coordinate with people who have similar opinions on government spending. Start with the Blue Dog Democrats.
With respect to military activities in Afghanistan, I don't believe in fighting half wars at half strength. My first preference is to bail out of Afghanistan. We have no business trying to "save" people who don't want to be saved. When the Russians were in Afghanistan, they least had a major point, which was to pull it into the Soviet bloc. They learned that was a difficult fight and pulled out, even though they had an incentive to win. We learned in Vietnam that if there is not sufficient US public support to "save the world for democracy", the minimal troops we send there with their hands tied behind their backs, are scheduled for slaughter.
The idea of controlling terrorists on their home ground, so that they not perform their terrorist activities here, has some merit. However, no one seems to believe that the Taliban is planning terrorist activities in the US. If Al Qaeda has terrorist training camps in the area, they can likely be identified by aerial reconnaissance, and we can bomb the bejeebers out of them, without setting foot on the ground.
With respect to Pakistani atomic weapons falling into the hands of terrorists, we will have little control over that no matter what we do. Afghan and Pakistani neighbors, such as Russia and Iran have the capability and incentive to control that development. Let's leave it to them, while we concentrate on maintaining and refining our own atomic weapon capability. Similarly, the nations of the EU have a stake. Let us give them an opportunity for an independent show of force.
Let us recognize that the US is rapidly sinking as a world leader for two reasons; loss of financial power and misguided attempts to do good in the world. When the UK gave up its so-called "colonialism", the African countries, which it left, reverted to shambles and the UK itself fell into semi-oblivion.
I have read your October 12 Roundup and have taken your Spending Survey.
You are moving in the right direction to control federal spending but don't have sufficient allies. You need to cross party lines and coordinate with people who have similar opinions on government spending. Start with the Blue Dog Democrats.
With respect to military activities in Afghanistan, I don't believe in fighting half wars at half strength. My first preference is to bail out of Afghanistan. We have no business trying to "save" people who don't want to be saved. When the Russians were in Afghanistan, they least had a major point, which was to pull it into the Soviet bloc. They learned that was a difficult fight and pulled out, even though they had an incentive to win. We learned in Vietnam that if there is not sufficient US public support to "save the world for democracy", the minimal troops we send there with their hands tied behind their backs, are scheduled for slaughter.
The idea of controlling terrorists on their home ground, so that they not perform their terrorist activities here, has some merit. However, no one seems to believe that the Taliban is planning terrorist activities in the US. If Al Qaeda has terrorist training camps in the area, they can likely be identified by aerial reconnaissance, and we can bomb the bejeebers out of them, without setting foot on the ground.
With respect to Pakistani atomic weapons falling into the hands of terrorists, we will have little control over that no matter what we do. Afghan and Pakistani neighbors, such as Russia and Iran have the capability and incentive to control that development. Let's leave it to them, while we concentrate on maintaining and refining our own atomic weapon capability. Similarly, the nations of the EU have a stake. Let us give them an opportunity for an independent show of force.
Let us recognize that the US is rapidly sinking as a world leader for two reasons; loss of financial power and misguided attempts to do good in the world. When the UK gave up its so-called "colonialism", the African countries, which it left, reverted to shambles and the UK itself fell into semi-oblivion.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Open letter to Sen. Cornyn:
"Sen. Cornyn,
I have read your "Sen. Cornyn Backs Two Measures To Increase SCAAP Funding".
For those initiated with the acronym SCAPP, it stands for State Criminal Alien Assistance Program.
The question then arises as to whom the assistance is for. Is it for improvement of criminals welfare or is it increase in federal funds to offset criminal interment costs?
In either case, two amendments to increase federal funding are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!
If the Obama administration has mandated handling of criminals such as to require an increase in cost, it is Congress' responsibility to offset the mandate, not to make additional money available to the states.
An analogy might be that the Obama Administration mandates all states to build birdhouses for sparrows. Should Congress now say, "Fine. We will supply the money to the states", or should Congress say, "this is a ridiculous idea, to which we are opposed."
As another significant aspect, is this something you should be fooling around with when your country is going down the tube on healthcare and climate control?"
"Sen. Cornyn,
I have read your "Sen. Cornyn Backs Two Measures To Increase SCAAP Funding".
For those initiated with the acronym SCAPP, it stands for State Criminal Alien Assistance Program.
The question then arises as to whom the assistance is for. Is it for improvement of criminals welfare or is it increase in federal funds to offset criminal interment costs?
In either case, two amendments to increase federal funding are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!
If the Obama administration has mandated handling of criminals such as to require an increase in cost, it is Congress' responsibility to offset the mandate, not to make additional money available to the states.
An analogy might be that the Obama Administration mandates all states to build birdhouses for sparrows. Should Congress now say, "Fine. We will supply the money to the states", or should Congress say, "this is a ridiculous idea, to which we are opposed."
As another significant aspect, is this something you should be fooling around with when your country is going down the tube on healthcare and climate control?"
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Government Laxness in Contracting
E-mail to Congress:
EIN News says "U.S. Military Contractor Oversight 'Too Lax'. A major trouble spot is the business systems and procedures that companies use to bill the government. The numbers are eye-popping. Defense auditors have found at least $6 billion in questionable charges generated by sloppy accounting or, worse, contractors trying to bilk the military. (cbsnews.com)".
This is a continuing major criticism of government. Congress spends considerable time debating and establishing new legislation and then turns the operation over to an Administrative Agency. If the legislation is a mandate, many times Congress neglects to specify penalties, including jail time, for non-adherence. Similarly, the Administrative Agencies are negligent in applying the law. This seems incomprehensible, considering the fact that there are a preponderance of lawyers in government, who have been trained in contract law.
Congress must accept a responsibility to see that the laws they have passed are put into effect. For example, if the Department of Defense is not properly handling its military contracts, Congress should not ignore the situation. Rather, they should chastise the DOE and threaten additional legislation to remove incompetent DOE employees, as may be determined by a Congressional Committee.
Considering contractors, some may be encouraged to dishonesty by lack of government attention. For those cases where such dishonesty is illegal, the contracting company should be chastised and added to a "questionable integrity" list. Those individuals within the contracting company who have been responsible for the illegality, should be prosecuted toward imprisonment. Fines should be avoided for individuals, since they would usually be absorbed by the employer, who would in turn consider such payments as a "cost of doing business" and add it to subsequent pricing.
EIN News says "U.S. Military Contractor Oversight 'Too Lax'. A major trouble spot is the business systems and procedures that companies use to bill the government. The numbers are eye-popping. Defense auditors have found at least $6 billion in questionable charges generated by sloppy accounting or, worse, contractors trying to bilk the military. (cbsnews.com)".
This is a continuing major criticism of government. Congress spends considerable time debating and establishing new legislation and then turns the operation over to an Administrative Agency. If the legislation is a mandate, many times Congress neglects to specify penalties, including jail time, for non-adherence. Similarly, the Administrative Agencies are negligent in applying the law. This seems incomprehensible, considering the fact that there are a preponderance of lawyers in government, who have been trained in contract law.
Congress must accept a responsibility to see that the laws they have passed are put into effect. For example, if the Department of Defense is not properly handling its military contracts, Congress should not ignore the situation. Rather, they should chastise the DOE and threaten additional legislation to remove incompetent DOE employees, as may be determined by a Congressional Committee.
Considering contractors, some may be encouraged to dishonesty by lack of government attention. For those cases where such dishonesty is illegal, the contracting company should be chastised and added to a "questionable integrity" list. Those individuals within the contracting company who have been responsible for the illegality, should be prosecuted toward imprisonment. Fines should be avoided for individuals, since they would usually be absorbed by the employer, who would in turn consider such payments as a "cost of doing business" and add it to subsequent pricing.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
British Cash for Clunkers
EIN News says, "New Car Sales Rise by More Than 11%. Sales of new cars in Britain increased by more than 11% last month, providing fresh evidence of the motor industry's recovery from recession, new figures have revealed. There were 367,929 new car registrations in September, 11.4% more than the same month a year ago, as motorists continued to take advantage of the scrappage scheme, under which they receive a GBP 2,000 discount on vehicles more than 10 years old when they buy a new model. (uk.msn.com)".
This is the British equivalent of "cash for clunkers" program we have had in the US. It is a sales promotion technique, with intention to speed up sales of product. As this technique is applied, it is also the hope of the marketer that there will be some slight overall increase in sales, since a few of the immediate buyers may also return again at a future date. However, realistic marketers know that any increase in total sales will be small. Examples of cases where this will not work are as follows. A retailer offers master bedroom furniture for a year at 0% interest. How likely is it that the same buyer will return next year to purchase another master bedroom set? In a second example, Market Street just had a sale on canned baby clams. I bought three cans, which should last me about three months. In that same three-month period, how likely is it that I will purchase another can of baby clams?
Government should not be messing around with sales promotion programs. They will not help the overall economy, and any activity in this area is the responsibility of existing retailers, including automobile dealers.
This is the British equivalent of "cash for clunkers" program we have had in the US. It is a sales promotion technique, with intention to speed up sales of product. As this technique is applied, it is also the hope of the marketer that there will be some slight overall increase in sales, since a few of the immediate buyers may also return again at a future date. However, realistic marketers know that any increase in total sales will be small. Examples of cases where this will not work are as follows. A retailer offers master bedroom furniture for a year at 0% interest. How likely is it that the same buyer will return next year to purchase another master bedroom set? In a second example, Market Street just had a sale on canned baby clams. I bought three cans, which should last me about three months. In that same three-month period, how likely is it that I will purchase another can of baby clams?
Government should not be messing around with sales promotion programs. They will not help the overall economy, and any activity in this area is the responsibility of existing retailers, including automobile dealers.
Boeing Bailout
E-mail to Congress:
EIN News says, "Boeing, Airbus at Risk of Cuts After Defying Slowdown. The world's two biggest planemakers may have to cut production of their narrow-body models by as much as 30% by 2011, according to a Bloomberg survey of 15 aerospace analysts and consultants. (bloomberg.com)".
The Obama Administration may consider this an opportunity to save jobs at Boeing by a bailout. If they do, there will be surplus production of narrow-body models or production workers will be resting while they draw their pay. Either scenario is undesirable.
The Obama Administration has previously suckered Congress into supporting its bailouts, which will lead to eventual complete government control of industry and commerce. Please don't fall for it again. Boeing is responding to market forces, which it should. Reduction in employees may be required for continued sound fiscal company operations. The unemployed can receive government subsistence payments, while government is also arranging for tax reduction and elimination of restrictions which would lead to an "ease of doing business". Subsequent investment in new projects or expansion of old projects by private industry will then reemploy the recently unemployed.
I also suggest that you ignore any activity the EU may take in regard to Airbus. They will likely take a socialistic approach of some sort, which will indirectly weaken the EU and in combination with many other similar socialistic actions will doom the EU to destruction.
EIN News says, "Boeing, Airbus at Risk of Cuts After Defying Slowdown. The world's two biggest planemakers may have to cut production of their narrow-body models by as much as 30% by 2011, according to a Bloomberg survey of 15 aerospace analysts and consultants. (bloomberg.com)".
The Obama Administration may consider this an opportunity to save jobs at Boeing by a bailout. If they do, there will be surplus production of narrow-body models or production workers will be resting while they draw their pay. Either scenario is undesirable.
The Obama Administration has previously suckered Congress into supporting its bailouts, which will lead to eventual complete government control of industry and commerce. Please don't fall for it again. Boeing is responding to market forces, which it should. Reduction in employees may be required for continued sound fiscal company operations. The unemployed can receive government subsistence payments, while government is also arranging for tax reduction and elimination of restrictions which would lead to an "ease of doing business". Subsequent investment in new projects or expansion of old projects by private industry will then reemploy the recently unemployed.
I also suggest that you ignore any activity the EU may take in regard to Airbus. They will likely take a socialistic approach of some sort, which will indirectly weaken the EU and in combination with many other similar socialistic actions will doom the EU to destruction.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Chinese Homegrown Media
E-mail to Congress:
EIN News says, "Beijing Hopes to Create Its Own Media Empires. China plans to spend billions of dollars in the next few years to develop media and entertainment companies that it hopes can compete with global giants like the News Corporation and Time Warner, and will in the process loosen some of its tight control of these industries. (nytimes.com)".
This is good competitive news! The Chinese government will be frittering away billions of dollars to develop its media empire. Now if we can just get them to fritter away more billions of dollars on global warming, universal healthcare, and stimulus packages, we may have a chance to compete.
I particularly like the statement that they will loosen tight control of media and entertainment companies. That is contrary to standard Communist policy. When government is in power, it is ridiculous to believe that government leaders will easily give up that power, and they will certainly do nothing which would even weaken it. An analogy is that Michael Jackson would not take a job as a janitor.
While the Chinese announcement is a small piece of good news, we still have a major problem in this country. Get rid of climate control, government health care, and further stimulus packages. Follow this with removing other restrictions on industry and commerce, especially taxes, and you will see employment soar.
EIN News says, "Beijing Hopes to Create Its Own Media Empires. China plans to spend billions of dollars in the next few years to develop media and entertainment companies that it hopes can compete with global giants like the News Corporation and Time Warner, and will in the process loosen some of its tight control of these industries. (nytimes.com)".
This is good competitive news! The Chinese government will be frittering away billions of dollars to develop its media empire. Now if we can just get them to fritter away more billions of dollars on global warming, universal healthcare, and stimulus packages, we may have a chance to compete.
I particularly like the statement that they will loosen tight control of media and entertainment companies. That is contrary to standard Communist policy. When government is in power, it is ridiculous to believe that government leaders will easily give up that power, and they will certainly do nothing which would even weaken it. An analogy is that Michael Jackson would not take a job as a janitor.
While the Chinese announcement is a small piece of good news, we still have a major problem in this country. Get rid of climate control, government health care, and further stimulus packages. Follow this with removing other restrictions on industry and commerce, especially taxes, and you will see employment soar.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
