|
Posted by
on
October 07, 2011
Probe Sought Into Disability Delays By: Damian Paletta The subcommittee's request came in response to a Sept. 30 Wall Street Journal article saying that managers had instructed administrative law judges and others not to close any cases between Sept. 26 and Sept. 30. The agency wouldn't count cases closed that week toward the goals because of a quirk in the federal calendar. Hitting the goals is important for managers as they can determine bonuses and promotions. The delay meant that thousands of Americans who had applied for disability assistance would have to wait at least an additional week for their benefits. "If this intentional work slowdown story is true, this behavior is an abuse of the taxpayer dollars that support the program, a neglect of the Americans that depend on these critical benefits, and raises serious questions about those charged with leading this important program," the Republicans wrote in a letter to Social Security Administration inspector general Patrick O'Carroll. A Social Security Administration spokesman said the agency was likely to change its policy and no longer have isolated weeks that didn't factor into the fiscal calendar. It also planned to cooperate fully with the investigation, the spokesman said. The Social Security Disability Insurance system has more than 10 million beneficiaries. Applications are up sharply in recent years because of high unemployment and an aging population. More than 3 million people are projected to apply this year and nearly 750,000 have applied and await a decision. The letter was signed by 22 Republicans, including House Ways and Means Committee chairman Dave Camp (R., Mich.) and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R., Wis.). They asked Mr. O'Carroll to investigate management oversight in seven states mentioned in the article and to check for a pattern of managers instructing "employees to manipulate work loads for personal gains." Last week, a Social Security Administration spokesman said that "based on available data, it does appear some judges are holding cases...which is counter to our policy. We regret this occurrence." But several judges said they were ordered to hold cases by managers, and other Social Security Administration employees said they were given similar directives by superiors.
Posted by
on
September 22, 2011
The Spend Now, Tax Later Jobs Bill According to the Sept. 19 White House fact sheet, "The President calls on [the super committee] to undertake comprehensive tax reform, and lays out five principles for it to follow: 1) lower tax rates; 2) cut wasteful loopholes and tax breaks; 3) reduce the deficit by $1.5 trillion; 4) boost job creation and growth; and 5) comport with the "Buffett Rule" that people making more than $1 million a year should not pay a smaller share of their income in taxes than middle-class families pay." But the administration's tax plan violates these principles. It raises rather than lowers tax rates, shrinks tax deductions to pay for more spending, makes no believable contribution to economic growth, has nothing specific to say about the Buffett Rule, and allocates a third of the proposed $1.5 trillion tax increase over the next decade to such miscellany as the temporary payroll tax break, more subsidies for state and local government jobs, and prolonged unemployment benefits. Nearly all of Mr. Obama's new tax increases are identical to those in his failed budgets of 2011 and 2012. But the repackaging of stale ideas is partly concealed by intermingling the phasing-out of deductions and exemptions with allowing the Bush tax rates to expire, thus increasing the top two tax rates to 36% and 39.6% from 33% and 35%. This intermingling gives the false impression that $866 billion in projected additional revenue comes from raising the top tax rates alone.
The Treasury Department's more candid explanation of these same proposals in the 2011 budget estimated that raising the top two tax rates would bring in only an extra $36.4 billion a year from 2011 to 2020, which adds up to little more than $400 billion from 2012 to 2021. The administration's 2011 proposal to raise the tax rate on capital gains and dividends to 20% from 15% on upper incomes was estimated to raise an even punier $10.5 billion a year. But the 3.8% surtax in ObamaCare already raised those tax rates to 18.8% to finance health-insurance subsidies, leaving no meaningful revenue from that source. In other words, most of that large, $866 billion 10-year tax hike comes from phasing out personal exemptions and deductions. These are not "tax breaks that small businesses and middle-class families don't get," as the president claimed on Monday in his Rose Garden remarks. The phase-outs apply to the same exemptions and deductions enjoyed by those earning less than $250,000, including deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions, and state income taxes. Mr. Obama's second biggest tax increase, supposedly worth $410 billion over 10 years according to the fact sheet, comes from further reducing "the value of itemized deductions and other tax preferences to 28% for those with high income." The phasing out itemized deductions for upper-income taxpayers would shrink those deductions by as much as 80%, so this additional cap would limit any remaining deductions to 28 cents on the dollar. The combination would be severe. Ask any charity. As for corporate taxes, Mr. Obama said in the Rose Garden that "We can lower the corporate rate if we get rid of all these special deals." But his plan does not include a lower corporate rate. Instead it earmarks the revenue from eliminating any loopholes and "special deals" to pay for the $447 billion jobs bill. This brings us to the president's puzzling remarks about "the Buffett Plan," which has no clear connection to anything in his own plan. Mr. Obama has said that anyone who thinks "somebody who's making $50 million a year in the financial markets [i.e., Warren Buffett] should be paying 15 percent on their taxes, when a teacher making $50,000 a year is paying more than that" should "have to defend that unfairness. . . . They ought to have to answer for it." Warren Buffett's large capital gains (mostly unrealized) and token $100,000 salary are by no means typical. IRS statistics show those earning more than $1 million paid 28.9% in federal income taxes in 2009, compared with 24.6% for those earning from $200,000 to $500,000 and 11.6% for those earning from $50,000 to $75,000.
However, if Mr. Obama is seriously suggesting that marginal tax rates should be the same for the working teacher's salary as for the retired teacher's capital gain, then he may be flirting with a rerun of George McGovern's 1972 presidential campaign theme that, "Money made by money should be taxed at the same rate as money made by men." Unlike Mr. McGovern, though, Mr. Obama has not yet proposed a capital gains or dividend tax higher than 20%. If the rhetorical Buffett Rule has any meaning at all, it appears to be nothing more than a presidential hint to the congressional super committee that he would like them to propose (as he has not) that incomes above $1 million face a 28% tax on capital gains and dividends. The trouble is that such a Buffett Rule would quite certainly reduce rather than enlarge federal revenue. That's because we know from experience that a 28% tax on selling stock or property greatly reduces the amount offered for sale. Wealthy people then sit on more unrealized capital gains rather than subjecting themselves to a stiff tax penalty on selling those assets. The 28% tax on long-term capital gains brought in only $36.9 billion a year from 1987 to 1997, according to the Treasury Department, while the 15% tax brought in $96.8 billion a year from 2004 to 2007. Putting aside the seemingly empty threat of a Buffett Plan tax on capital gains, the president's new-old plan to raise income taxes on families and small businesses earning more than $250,000—to pay for temporary tax gimmicks and extra spending—is just stale wine in a new bottle. Any plan that would impose permanently higher tax rates on income to pay for temporarily lower tax rates on payrolls is no stimulus or jobs plan under any sort of economics. Neither is a tax-financed extension of unemployment benefits. It's a tax-and-spend plan, and a bad one. Mr. Reynolds, a senior fellow with the Cato Institute, is the author of "Income and Wealth" (Greenwood, Press 2006).
Posted by
on
September 14, 2011
How Do Taxes Generate Jobs? When an angry Barack Obama repeatedly demanded at a joint session of Congress last week that lawmakers "pass this jobs bill," he knew their answer would be no. But at the time, no one outside the White House knew the game the president was playing. In one of the most deceitful ploys ever attempted against the American people, President Obama kept it to himself that he was planning a full-frontal assault on tax deductions to "pay for" nearly $450 billion in new stimulus. Individuals earning more than $200,000 annually and married couples taking in more than $250,000 would see restrictions on itemized deductions for mortgage interest, charitable giving, and state and local taxes. Coming out of the blue as a high-unemployment economy threatens a double-dip recession, these tax increases define the term "nonstarter." Obama also wants to tax "carried interest" at the rate of ordinary income instead of at the lower capital gains rate — a class warfare attack on the profits of venture capitalists, private equity specialists and other investors that raises just $18 billion, a fraction of the cost of the bill. The president obviously attributes no value to such investors in the private jobs sector. Club for Growth executive director David Keating tells IBD of "some remarkable conference calls in recent months with CEOs" he's listened in on. "They see job creators being viewed as just targets, sources of government revenues," Keating relates. "And so, their money is frozen on the sidelines." Obama also smacks the oil and gas industry with $40 billion in new taxes over a decade through drilling deduction restrictions. As a Wood Mackenzie study commissioned last year by the oil industry warned, $5 billion in annual tax increases would reduce domestic oil production by 400,000 barrels a day, destroy 170,000 American jobs by 2014 and lose $128 billion in government revenues over about 15 years. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., rejected the Obama tax increases, but expressed hope that Congress could "peel off the things that we can actually agree on," like payroll tax cuts. Democratic talking points say "no way": House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi roared that the Obama bill should not be voted on in pieces; White House political adviser David Axelrod told ABC News the legislation is "not an a la carte menu" open to negotiation. What's more, the president's speech itself was delivered as a gruff ultimatum, with its harsh, repeated insistence that Congress "pass this bill," arguing that it was already a compromise. Big tax increases clearly will not pass with the economy in the doldrums. But this collection of job-killing new taxes and yet-more stimulus spending is designed not to pass, but to hoodwink 2012 voters into thinking obstructionist Republicans — not a big-government president and his party — are to blame for the economy. http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/584704/201109131830/How-Do-Taxes-Generate-Jobs-.htm
Posted by
on
August 22, 2011
How Not to Grow an Economy But this is not how our current government behaves. Day after day brings headlines of another legislative, regulatory or enforcement action that gives CEOs and investors reason to hunker down, retain as much cash as possible and ride out whatever storms are ahead. This is not the way to nurture an already fragile recovery, much less help the economy to endure shocks from Europe, natural disasters or a big bank failure. Consider the headlines only from last week, a slow week by Washington standards, with Congress out of session and President Obama campaigning for three days before going on vacation. Even in the dog days of August, your government was hard at work undermining economic confidence. • Monday: "Warren Buffett right about taxes, says Obama." The week began with a one-two tax punch from Warren Buffett and President Obama. The Omaha stock-picker wrote an op-ed begging Congress to raise taxes on millions of Americans who make less than he does, and the President used the first stop of his bus tour, in Cannon Falls, Minnesota, to agree. The week began with a one-two tax punch from Warren Buffett and President Obama. The Omaha stock-picker wrote an op-ed begging Congress to raise taxes on millions of Americans who make less than he does, and the President used the first stop of his bus tour, in Cannon Falls, Minnesota, to agree."I put a deal before the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, that would have solved this problem," Mr. Obama said, "and he walked away because his belief was we can't ask anything of millionaires and billionaires and big corporations in order to close our deficit." So America's main job creators are still on notice that a tax increase is in their future in 2013, if not sooner. • Tuesday: "Federal mortgage role to be preserved: Obama is working to develop new housing policy." A Washington Post story reported that Mr. Obama has directed a White House team to develop a housing plan that would keep the feds deeply involved in mortgage markets, with subsidies and loan guarantees, perhaps even preserving Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. A Washington Post story reported that Mr. Obama has directed a White House team to develop a housing plan that would keep the feds deeply involved in mortgage markets, with subsidies and loan guarantees, perhaps even preserving Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.This contradicts the Treasury's February white paper recommending a much smaller government role in housing without Fan and Fred. A Treasury official responded that the white paper is still guiding policy, but private investors who might want to get into housing finance know the Post story came from someone in authority and have another reason to stay on the sidelines. • Thursday: "Justice Inquiry Is Said to Focus on S.&P. Ratings." Barely two weeks after Standard & Poor's downgraded U.S. debt over White House protests, we learn that the feds are going after the firm for its ratings on mortgage securities before the financial crisis. The feds say the probe was underway before the downgrade, but the credit rater's mortgage mistakes have been known for years. And why not Moody's or Fitch? Barely two weeks after Standard & Poor's downgraded U.S. debt over White House protests, we learn that the feds are going after the firm for its ratings on mortgage securities before the financial crisis. The feds say the probe was underway before the downgrade, but the credit rater's mortgage mistakes have been known for years. And why not Moody's or Fitch?The message: If you disagree with this Administration, you'd better lawyer-up. • Thursday: "Exxon, U.S. Government Duel Over Huge Oil Find." Exxon has made the biggest oil discoveries ever in the Gulf of Mexico at some one billion barrels, but the feds have taken the extraordinary action of denying the oil company what had long been routine oil lease extensions. So Exxon and a Norwegian firm are suing the feds to be able to drill on the leases, spending money on lawyers for permission to create jobs and increase domestic oil production. Exxon has made the biggest oil discoveries ever in the Gulf of Mexico at some one billion barrels, but the feds have taken the extraordinary action of denying the oil company what had long been routine oil lease extensions. So Exxon and a Norwegian firm are suing the feds to be able to drill on the leases, spending money on lawyers for permission to create jobs and increase domestic oil production.• Thursday: "Fed Eyes European Banks: Regulators Scrutinize Ability of Institutions' U.S. Units to Fund Themselves." The Wall Street Journal quotes Federal Reserve Bank of New York officials as saying they're worried about the condition of European banks and are on the job making sure that any problems don't damage American banks. It's nice to know U.S. regulators are earning their pay, but the spectacle of regulators publicly broadcasting troubles at European banks does nothing to calm already jittery interbank markets. The Wall Street Journal quotes Federal Reserve Bank of New York officials as saying they're worried about the condition of European banks and are on the job making sure that any problems don't damage American banks. It's nice to know U.S. regulators are earning their pay, but the spectacle of regulators publicly broadcasting troubles at European banks does nothing to calm already jittery interbank markets.• Thursday: "Obama to push stimulus plan." The President signals more government fiscal action, to be unveiled after Labor Day. Ideas on the table: New spending on roads and a tax credit for companies that hire workers. The President signals more government fiscal action, to be unveiled after Labor Day. Ideas on the table: New spending on roads and a tax credit for companies that hire workers.The thinking, say aides, is to pressure Republicans to pass these proposals or look indifferent to high unemployment. So even as he proposes to reduce deficits far into the future in ways that will depend on decisions by future Congresses, the President will fight to increase spending immediately. Americans may conclude they've heard this cognitive dissonance before. None of these stories by themselves—or even a week of them—is enough to undermine a recovery. But the cascade of such stories day after day—about new regulations, new prosecutions or fines against business, new obstacles to investment, more spending and higher taxes—contributes to the larger lack of business and consumer confidence. It's impossible to quantify the impact of such policies on lost GDP or lost job creation, but everyone in the real economy understands how such signals work. The great tragedy of the Obama nonrecovery is that this Administration still doesn't realize the damage it is doing. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903327904576522382504681992.html
Posted by
on
August 19, 2011
2011 Transportation Summit Below is a list of transportation projects I wanted to bring to your attention that affect the 24th Congressional District:
Posted by
on
August 12, 2011
A New Strategy for Economic Growth
|
 |
father, riding the DART green line.
Not only will the new line offer people better accessibility across the DFW Metroplex, but it will also provide numerous opportunities for economic growth in the 24th District. On the green line alone, people will be able to access multiple medical facilities, large employers, and the State Fair of Texas. By 2012, DART expects to complete a green line transfer to the orange line which will take riders to DFW International Airport.
Here are a few facts from the Dallas Morning News about the green line:
-
"Green Line service is coming to communities that have been waiting more than 27 years, since voters formed DART through the added sales tax."
-
"DART is the longest light-rail project in North America."
-
"In its first year of operation, the [green] line is expected to more than double DART's rail ridership, with nearly 33,000 daily boardings."
- "In Carrollton and Farmers Branch, city officials have created development zones near DART stations to nurture business activity and draw more passengers."
