I thought it might be good to recap the activities of this past week.
On Monday, Democrats accepted defeat on the Prevailing Wage. They say they will be back.
On Tuesday, the Unions attacked Principal Financial Group for belonging to a pro-business, non-partisan group called the Iowa Association of Business and Industry.
Also on Tuesday, CCI, Citizens for Community Improvement attacked Rep. Dolores Mertz and accused her of being factory farmer. CCI is just a lap dog for the Unions.
On Wednesday, House Leadership (Union Thugs) took away a number of Veteran bills that Rep. McKinley Baily was to manage on the floor. Baily is an Iraq War Veteran and one of the Democrats who votes against the Union Bosses.
I thought the following video was in order.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Obama/Vilsack lash out against farmers, they would rather spend money on fat kids.
Our esteemed former Governor and current Secretary of Ag had this to say:
"If you had a dollar - one dollar - where would you put it?" Vilsack asked. "Would you give it to a child for more nutritious eating? Would you give it in a direct payment to a high-income (farm) operation?"
Tom, if I only had one dollar, I’d let the farmer keep it so he can keep producing the food that feeds the world, and the food that has become America’s greatest foreign policy asset.
Once again, liberals like Vilsack and Obama look at gross income and conclude whether or not a person is wealthy or not. They need to look at the net, ya know after they pay all the bills…
Once again, Sen. Grassley is the only adult in the room. "I'm a farmer, and I know that gross income or sales revenue does not reflect your ability to pay," he said. "Just because I sell a lot of corn doesn't mean that my input costs to grow that corn weren't even higher."
Liberals…
"If you had a dollar - one dollar - where would you put it?" Vilsack asked. "Would you give it to a child for more nutritious eating? Would you give it in a direct payment to a high-income (farm) operation?"
Tom, if I only had one dollar, I’d let the farmer keep it so he can keep producing the food that feeds the world, and the food that has become America’s greatest foreign policy asset.
Once again, liberals like Vilsack and Obama look at gross income and conclude whether or not a person is wealthy or not. They need to look at the net, ya know after they pay all the bills…
Once again, Sen. Grassley is the only adult in the room. "I'm a farmer, and I know that gross income or sales revenue does not reflect your ability to pay," he said. "Just because I sell a lot of corn doesn't mean that my input costs to grow that corn weren't even higher."
Liberals…
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Bruce Braley and Leonard Boswell – Iowa Job Killers
Through Wednesday’s passage of H.R. 1105 – The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 - the U.S. House voted to kill a program that allows private sector collection agencies to help the Internal Revenue Service recoup old outstanding tax debts. I’m told that Federal Treasury Union Employees never liked the program because its success could have made the case for more effective collections by the private sector. And the last thing we want to do is create private sector jobs and reduce the size and scope of government…
They had reason to fear the program’s success. As of October 2007 the IRS' Private Debt Collection Program, which launched as a test program only a year earlier, successfully closed 9,000 old cases, collecting more than $30 million in outstanding debt. Knowing how much the Obama Administration – and Democrat’s like Congressman Charlie Rangel hates tax cheats (uh-hmm…) they should be very supportive of this program that collects tax dollars that are legally owed to the government and that are otherwise not likely to be collected by the IRS.
There is a unique Iowa angle to this story, which is why I’m writing about it this morning. As of October 2007, the program was responsible for the employment of 60 Iowans by the Waterloo, Iowa-based CBE Group Inc. – a company that at that time employed over 900 Iowans in Waterloo and West Des Moines. The owner of the company said that he expected the number of Iowans employed by them as a result of full implementation of the Debt Collection Program to grow to more than 200 Iowans. The CBE Group is one of those private sector companies that will be affected by the elimination of this program.
So with the economy is disarray, and with the federal government bailing out companies to prevent job cuts, I was surprised to see that Congressmen Bruce Braley (who represents Waterloo) and Leonard Boswell (who represents most of West Des Moines) voted to most kill these Iowa jobs? Why couldn’t they have convinced their leadership to remove this provision from H.R. 1105 based on the principals of saving jobs in their districts and that tax cheaters should pay up.
This just blows my mind. These are accounts that the IRS has all but written off because they don’t have the time and believe these owed taxes are un-collectible. Yet private companies have proven that they can successfully collect these dollars. Apparently the Democrats are fans of the new program where you name someone to Obama's cabinet to get the tax cheat to finally pay up!
I wonder is Senator Harkin will join Congressman Braley and Congressman Boswell in voting to kill Iowa jobs when this same measure is up before the U.S. Senate next week?
They had reason to fear the program’s success. As of October 2007 the IRS' Private Debt Collection Program, which launched as a test program only a year earlier, successfully closed 9,000 old cases, collecting more than $30 million in outstanding debt. Knowing how much the Obama Administration – and Democrat’s like Congressman Charlie Rangel hates tax cheats (uh-hmm…) they should be very supportive of this program that collects tax dollars that are legally owed to the government and that are otherwise not likely to be collected by the IRS.
There is a unique Iowa angle to this story, which is why I’m writing about it this morning. As of October 2007, the program was responsible for the employment of 60 Iowans by the Waterloo, Iowa-based CBE Group Inc. – a company that at that time employed over 900 Iowans in Waterloo and West Des Moines. The owner of the company said that he expected the number of Iowans employed by them as a result of full implementation of the Debt Collection Program to grow to more than 200 Iowans. The CBE Group is one of those private sector companies that will be affected by the elimination of this program.
So with the economy is disarray, and with the federal government bailing out companies to prevent job cuts, I was surprised to see that Congressmen Bruce Braley (who represents Waterloo) and Leonard Boswell (who represents most of West Des Moines) voted to most kill these Iowa jobs? Why couldn’t they have convinced their leadership to remove this provision from H.R. 1105 based on the principals of saving jobs in their districts and that tax cheaters should pay up.
This just blows my mind. These are accounts that the IRS has all but written off because they don’t have the time and believe these owed taxes are un-collectible. Yet private companies have proven that they can successfully collect these dollars. Apparently the Democrats are fans of the new program where you name someone to Obama's cabinet to get the tax cheat to finally pay up!
I wonder is Senator Harkin will join Congressman Braley and Congressman Boswell in voting to kill Iowa jobs when this same measure is up before the U.S. Senate next week?
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Jindal is more than a flash in the pan.
So there is a lot of chatter today about Bobby Jindal’s poor performance in delivering the response to Obama’s speech to a joint session of Congress. In the comment section a fellow krustacean asked if Jindal’s presidential aspirations ended last night. The answer is absolutely not.
If we were to follow such logic, then Jindal would have been the undisputed 2012 nominee on Sunday when he turned in a stunning performance on Meet the Press. I know we always say it’s too early for these types of setbacks to matter, but that is the case with Jindal.
While his national introduction last night wasn’t very good, meaning he’s not the shiny new penny anymore, he has plenty of time to recover. Now, I know this isn’t widely known, but President Obama was defeated in congressional primary by a two to one margin in 2000. Was that the end of the road for him?
I like Jindal a lot. If he ran, he would probably be my guy. The problem he faces is the same one that George Pataki and Mitt Romney had. No, he’s not bad on the social issues, but he is up for re-election in 2011. So I think that if Jindal wants to run for President in 2012 he can’t run for re-election as governor 2011. Trust me, it would be almost impossible.
Now unlike Pataki and Romney, I think that if he does run for President in 2012 as a one term Governor, watch out. He’s going to be a fundraising machine, and the smartest guy in the race.
So did last night help him? Nope. Did it hurt him? Just a little blow to his ego, he will probably come out a better candidate because of it.
It’s only Wednesday, and it’s been another bad week for the unions.
First, in what many in the press called a “stunning defeat”, the first of four Big Union bills, Prevailing Wage, went down in flames. Despite the Big Lug twisting arms over the weekend, Big Union members sitting in the gallery and glowering down on Representatives during the debate, and the Speaker’s self-professed Big Irish Temper causing the vote to remain open for three days, the votes just weren’t there.
The loss on prevailing wage puts in serious doubt the other three Big Union Bills. While Speaker Murphy talked a tough line yesterday, and was supported by the Big Lug, one might have to say that the engine in the old Soviet Moskvitch is sputtering a little.
And yesterday, they were dealt another blow, this time in the United States Supreme Court. In a 6-3 opinion, the Court upheld an Idaho state law banning local governments from using payroll deductions to fund union political activities. Five unions and the AFL-CIO argued the law infringed on their First Amendment rights, but the Court disagreed. Reversing the Ninth Circuit, the Court held that the prohibition merely allows the state to avoid subsidizing political activities and does not restrict them (or the First Amendment) in any way.
It is a decision that could strike at Big Labor's ability to raise funds for their political activities. Commonly known as “paycheck protection” laws, in some of the state where they have been enacted there has been a drop in union PAC contributions by up to 50%.
As I wrote about last week, the Big Union agenda is pretty simple: it’s about being subsidized, about taking money from 89.4% of us to benefit the 10.6% of union members in the State. Once you shine a light on their activities, they lose public support. Once you allow people to think and act freely, i.e., paycheck protection laws, their money dries up.
Really, the Unions ought to be a little ashamed of themselves. They just can’t convince workers that union membership adds value anymore. They just resort to scare tactics, coercion and bullying.
Electoral College Bill
Alright you guys win, I’ll mention it briefly. This has to be the stupidest thing that I have seen since Speaker Murphy spent 90 hours keeping the voting machine open, when he could have had a one yes vote change to a no, accept a motion to reconsider. Wait…
Anyway, why on earth a small state like Iowa would support a bill giving our 7 electoral votes to the winner of the popular votes is beyond me. If that would have been in effect last fall that means no big Obama rally for Becky Greenwald to get her ugly on at…
Let me get this straight. Last week the people of Iowa were clear in their opposition to the Prevailing wage legislation. They emailed and called their legislators, who then voted against it. Yet, the Democrat leaders in the House don’t want to listen to the people and those they sent to represent them. So they keep the voting machine open all weekend in hopes that they can force someone to switch their vote. Interesting.
The founders of our nation did a great job; I’m going to side with them on this one.
The loss on prevailing wage puts in serious doubt the other three Big Union Bills. While Speaker Murphy talked a tough line yesterday, and was supported by the Big Lug, one might have to say that the engine in the old Soviet Moskvitch is sputtering a little.
And yesterday, they were dealt another blow, this time in the United States Supreme Court. In a 6-3 opinion, the Court upheld an Idaho state law banning local governments from using payroll deductions to fund union political activities. Five unions and the AFL-CIO argued the law infringed on their First Amendment rights, but the Court disagreed. Reversing the Ninth Circuit, the Court held that the prohibition merely allows the state to avoid subsidizing political activities and does not restrict them (or the First Amendment) in any way.
It is a decision that could strike at Big Labor's ability to raise funds for their political activities. Commonly known as “paycheck protection” laws, in some of the state where they have been enacted there has been a drop in union PAC contributions by up to 50%.
As I wrote about last week, the Big Union agenda is pretty simple: it’s about being subsidized, about taking money from 89.4% of us to benefit the 10.6% of union members in the State. Once you shine a light on their activities, they lose public support. Once you allow people to think and act freely, i.e., paycheck protection laws, their money dries up.
Really, the Unions ought to be a little ashamed of themselves. They just can’t convince workers that union membership adds value anymore. They just resort to scare tactics, coercion and bullying.
Electoral College Bill
Alright you guys win, I’ll mention it briefly. This has to be the stupidest thing that I have seen since Speaker Murphy spent 90 hours keeping the voting machine open, when he could have had a one yes vote change to a no, accept a motion to reconsider. Wait…
Anyway, why on earth a small state like Iowa would support a bill giving our 7 electoral votes to the winner of the popular votes is beyond me. If that would have been in effect last fall that means no big Obama rally for Becky Greenwald to get her ugly on at…
Let me get this straight. Last week the people of Iowa were clear in their opposition to the Prevailing wage legislation. They emailed and called their legislators, who then voted against it. Yet, the Democrat leaders in the House don’t want to listen to the people and those they sent to represent them. So they keep the voting machine open all weekend in hopes that they can force someone to switch their vote. Interesting.
The founders of our nation did a great job; I’m going to side with them on this one.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
A pattern? I doubt it.
Liberal group attacks Rep. Mertz.
Unions attack Principal for being an ABI member and want Treasury to deny them TARP funds because they're member of a group that objects to the union agenda.
Seems like if they don't like what you say, they'd rather you just not say anything. It's Iowa's Fairness Doctrine.
It ain't fair, but well, it's their Doctrine.
So much for the wide open debate on the issues, change, openess, tolerance, and all that other crap Obama and his goons spread during the campaign.
Unions attack Principal for being an ABI member and want Treasury to deny them TARP funds because they're member of a group that objects to the union agenda.
Seems like if they don't like what you say, they'd rather you just not say anything. It's Iowa's Fairness Doctrine.
It ain't fair, but well, it's their Doctrine.
So much for the wide open debate on the issues, change, openess, tolerance, and all that other crap Obama and his goons spread during the campaign.
The Unions assault on Iowa businesses enters a new phase
I thought this was about jobs, good paying jobs, like the ones people who work at Principal Financial Group have…
Guess again, it’s about the Union Bosses, and they are pissed off.
More to follow.
Guess again, it’s about the Union Bosses, and they are pissed off.
Change to Win Iowa to confront the Principal Financial Group for their questionable involvement with Iowa Association of Business and Industry
(Des Moines) - With the Treasury Department poised to approve the second round of TARP funds, Change to Win has registered its opposition to granting assistance to the Principal Financial Group, which has applied for up to $2 billion under TARP. In a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Change to Win chair Anna Burger said, Unless and until Treasury can assure hardworking taxpayers that our money is not being used against us, firms like Principal that engage in extensive, gratuitous lobbying are undeserving of TARP assistance.
Change to Win Iowa will be confronting executive officers of the Principal Financial Group at their downtown Des Moines building at 11:00 this morning with a letter from Iowa officers of the United Food and Commercial Workers, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and the Service Employees International Union. Change to Win Iowas dispute with the Principal Financial Group derives from their involvement with the Iowa Association of Business and Industry (ABI). The ABI has been running an extremely negative and wholly false radio advertisement campaign against a number of pieces of legislation that would benefit Iowa workers.
Merle Peterson, the vice president of government affairs for the Principal Financial Group sits on the ABI board of directors. In 2008, Principal paid ABI $15,000 in membership fees. The ask from Change to Win Iowa is to stop the false radio advertising and drop their membership with ABI. They should not be using their $2 billion of tax payers money to fight bills that benefit Iowa workers and have zero impact on their company.
The text of Change to Win Iowas letter to Principal is pasted below:
February 23, 2009
Dear Mr. Vice-President
The Iowa members of Change to Win are asking for your help. Principal Financial is an important part of our Iowa economy and has a reputation for being a very good employer. In fact, Principals reputation for standing up for the civil rights of their employees is honorable. In many instances we have sat on the same side of the fight for human rights.
But Principals complicit role in anti-worker messaging is intolerable. As active members of the Iowa Association of Business and Industry, and through the board membership of Merle Petersen, you contribute significant resources to, and facilitate discrimination against members of organized labor.
In these dire financial times, vehemently opposing statutory changes that would empower workers and improve wages for ordinary Iowansnurses, food workers, laborers, police officersis unconscionable. Additionally, Principal Financial is the steward of the retirement resources of many Change to Win members. The same workers who ABI has opposed in their search for a secure middle class existence have been willing to support Principal Financial with their tax dollars.
Principal has the opportunity to influence ABI and help workers. We ask you today to terminate your ABI membership and/or stop the following hostile and false radio ad:
"Once upon a time, a band of union bosses roamed the Iowa countryside threatening hardworking people while claiming to do good deeds. (Sound of ripping paper.) Union bosses in Iowa are writing a very scary fairy tale. They want to make you pay union dues even if you're not a union member. The unions want to fix the cost on every public construction project, and strip our local school boards of their authority. And the unions want to control health care for Iowa workers. Their greed will cost you hundreds of dollars out of your paycheck. It will force local governments deeper in debt and raise our property taxes. It will drive up our health care costs. Please call your legislator today at (515) 281-3221 and tell them this is no fairy tale. Tell them in this story, hardworking Iowans will not live happily ever after."
We also ask you to speak out in our support. We suspect that you know as well as we do that the enactment of Fair Share will have no impact on economic development in Iowa. Please tell the truth and help your clients and benefactors win Fair Share in Iowa.
Thank you,
Jerry Messer, UFCW Sarah Swisher, SEIU Pat Navin, IBT
Quad Cities Iowa City Winterset
More to follow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
