Printer Friendly
May
Don’t get caught flat-footed in front of the press! Below is a quick rundown of today’s “must reads.” – John T. Doolittle, House Republican Conference Secretary
The Morning Murmur – Wednesday, May 10, 2006
1. Revenue Revelation - Wall Street Journal Op-ed
Yesterday's agreement on extending the 15% tax rate on dividends and capital
gains through 2010 means you can expect lots of media and liberal rhetoric
about "the deficit" and "the rich," but the real news is how well these
lower rates have been soaking the rich to fill government coffers.
2. Agency denies tipping Mexico - San Bernardino County Sun
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is rebutting a report that the U.S.
Border Patrol provided information to the Mexican government about the
whereabouts of civilian border-watch groups.
3. Why Natural Gas Is the Solution - Human Events
There is a comprehensive solution to both our high cost of gasoline and
dependence on foreign oil. It's called natural gas. Our economy will boom,
we'll no longer be hostage to foreign oil, and our environment will be
cleaner.
4. Democrats' Message Misses Middle Class - FoxNews
Former Rep. Martin Frost discusses a study which includes findings that
Democrats "downplay the strengths of the American economy...and fail to
inspire conviction that America can continue to lead the world."
5. Nebraska governor narrowly wins Republican primary - Reuters
Nebraska Gov. Dave
Heineman narrowly won the state's Republican
gubernatorial primary contest on Tuesday, fending off a challenge by state
sports legend Tom Osborne.
For previous issues of the Morning Murmur, go to www.GOPsecretary.gov
FULL ARTICLES BELOW:
1. Revenue Revelation - Wall Street
Journal Op-ed
May 10, 2006; Page A18
House and Senate GOP conferees finally agreed yesterday on extending the 15%
tax rate on dividends and capital gains for two more years through 2010.
This means you can expect lots of media and liberal rhetoric about "the
deficit" and "the rich," but the real news is how well these lower rates
have been soaking the rich to fill government coffers.
The latest evidence is Treasury's monthly budget report for May that tax
receipts were up by $137 billion, or a remarkable 11.2%, for the first seven
months of Fiscal 2006 through April. That's more than triple the inflation
rate. And it comes on top of the $274 billion, or 14.6%, increase in federal
revenues for all of Fiscal 2005, which ended last September 30.
These columns have been documenting this trend for the last couple of years,
as well as the revenue tide flowing into state budget coffers. Overall state
revenues climbed by 8% in 2004 and nearly 9% in 2005, according to the
Census Bureau, and more and more states are piling up big surpluses. We've
reported this news because politicians like to disguise these tax windfalls
so they can spend it all with impunity and still plead poverty. Journalists
contribute to this ruse by focusing their budget coverage on deficits,
rather than on the spending and revenue trends that are the actual
components of any budget.
The current revenue rush also refutes the prevailing Washington consensus
that the federal deficit is the result of the Bush tax cuts. In fact, this
revenue tsunami is the direct result of the expansion that took off in
earnest at about the time the 2003 tax cuts passed. Lower tax rates have
since had precisely the result that supporters predicted, though don't look
for that story on page one any time soon.
This explains why tax-cut opponents have tried to change the subject from
the sluggish growth they first expected, to the "jobless recovery" that soon
became the 4.7% unemployment rate recovery, to lagging wage growth that is
also now increasing. The latest liberal themes are allegedly rising
"inequality" and allegedly exorbitant executive compensation. These are
subjects for other editorials, but their current political and media
prominence means the critics are conceding that they can't credibly call the
tax cuts an economic failure. So they have to find other election-year
talking points.
This revenue wave has also come as a shock to the estimators at the
Congressional Budget Office, whose May analysis is full of implicit
amazement, not to say chagrin, since they predicted nothing of the sort. As
recently as March, CBO was still advertising an expected increase in the
baseline for individual income tax receipts of only $76 billion and merely
$24 billion in corporate tax receipts for all of Fiscal 2006. Yet in only
seven months, individual income tax revenues have already climbed by $56
billion and corporate receipts by $40 billion. (See nearby chart.)
"Various types of personal income not automatically subject to tax
withholding may have increased faster than expected in 2005," explains CBO,
in as much of a mea culpa as the bureaucrats allow themselves. "Sources of
such income could include capital gains, noncorporate business income,
interest, and dividends. In addition, growth in incomes in 2005 may have
been concentrated more than expected among higher-income taxpayers, who face
the highest tax rates."
Translation: CBO completely missed that lower tax rates on income, capital
gains and dividends would produce greater tax revenue. Their static-revenue
calculations missed the dynamic impact that greater incentives would have on
individuals to work, invest and to declare income and stock-market profits.
To put it another way, they failed to see that the Bush tax cuts would do
more to soak the rich, and fill the Treasury, than keeping the higher rates
would have.
This also underscores the folly of letting CBO or the Joint Tax Committee or
any other bureaucracy be the final arbiters of "scoring" for legislation.
They're so wrong so often that Members would be better off passing laws that
they believe make sense. Not fixing this tax "scoring" system is another GOP
failure.
This revenue inflow also means that federal taxes as a share of the economy
are now almost back to their post-World War II average of roughly 18%. That
share will continue to increase if the economy continues to grow, as more
taxpayers get wealthier and are thrown into higher tax brackets. The only
reason the federal deficit continues to exist is because Congress continues
to spend more than 20% of GDP.
So far in Fiscal 2006, spending is still rising by 7.6% overall. Defense is
rising by only about 6%, but Medicare is speeding ahead at nearly 14%,
thanks to the new prescription drug benefit. As ever, the real budget
problem is spending, especially on entitlements. The solution there is
restraint and reform, not higher taxes. At least Republicans can finally
point to a policy victory this year, one that should push any big tax
increase well past the next election.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114722545735348501.html?mod=opinion&ojcontent=otep
2. Agency denies tipping Mexico - San
Bernardino County Sun
By Sara A. Carter, Staff Writer
U.S. Customs and Border Protection is rebutting a report from The Sun's
sister newspaper, the Ontario-based Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, that the
U.S. Border Patrol provided information to the Mexican government about the
whereabouts of civilian border-watch groups.
"Today's report by the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin . . . is inaccurate,"
read the statement issued Tuesday evening. "Border Patrol does not report
activity by civilian, non-law enforcement groups to the government of
Mexico."
Kristi Clemens, a spokeswoman for Customs and Border Protection, would not
elaborate on the agency's statement other than to say Mexican officials are
given information under the rules of the Vienna Convention on Consular
Relations of 1963, which provide foreign nationals being detained by a
government the right to consular access.
"This is the same agreement that protects United States citizens when they
travel to foreign countries," the statement said.
An August 2005 document, "Third Report on the Activities of Vigilantes"
posted on Mexico's Secretary of Foreign Relations Web site suggests U.S.
officials were giving out more details than required by the Vienna
Convention. Part of that information was the location of U.S. citizens
participating in volunteer border patrols.
The Sun and Daily Bulletin reported on the contents of that document and two
others on the Mexican Web site in a story published in Tuesday's editions.
Mexican consulates also went beyond the boundaries of the Vienna Convention,
asking U.S. Border Patrol officials to provide them with information on
"vigilantes" operating along the U.S. border, according to the August 2005
document.
Some of the information cited in the Mexican document originally was given
only to U.S. Border Patrol and other law-enforcement officials, border-watch
organizers said.
"Nobody but law enforcement and Border Patrol knew where we were at," said
Andy Ramirez, chairman of the Chino-based nonprofit group Friends of the
Border Patrol. "So how is our base address on a Mexican government document
dated last August? Nobody, not even media, had this information."
Ramirez said he revealed the location of his base camp only to local and
federal officials. The Mexican document gives the exact location of his
group's site, which was on private property near San Diego.
According to Ramirez, the group had no encounters at that site with illegal
immigrants, which would have been the only cause for that information to be
revealed under the Vienna Convention.
On Monday, Mario Martinez, a Customs and Border Patrol spokesman, said that
when illegal immigrants are apprehended in the United States, they have the
right, under the convention, to be represented by their country's consulate
and to information regarding their apprehension.
Information contained in a Border Patrol agent's field report, which is
filed when a person is caught, would reveal the location of the detainee and
therefore the area where the volunteer group is operating, Martinez said.
Martinez did not deny that information on the border volunteers was being
shared with the Mexican government. He added that the group's whereabouts
also were identified by numerous media outlets.
However, the Mexican report also contains specific information on civilian
groups operating much farther inside the United States.
For example, the document notes that 50 Minuteman volunteers work in
Chicago, focusing mainly on employers who hire illegal immigrants.
Minuteman volunteers said specific information such as the number of
volunteers and their plans could have been provided only by law-enforcement
officials at that time. The document credits the various Mexican
consul-general offices in the United States with providing the information
to the Mexican foreign secretary for the reports.
"How did they know the number of volunteers in Chicago? And why should the
Mexican government care?" asked Connie Hair, spokeswoman for the Minuteman
Civil Defense Corps in Washington.
The three reports on the Mexican Web site documented the activities of the
civilian groups based on concerns the Mexican government had about volunteer
patrols on the border in 2005, said Rafael Laveaga, spokesman for the
Mexican Embassy in Washington.
"The Border Patrol does not report activity of the Minutemen to the Mexican
consulate," Laveaga said. "But it's all a matter of perception. If a migrant
requests to have counsel, which is their right under the Vienna Convention,
then the information is provided to the counsel."
Throughout the Mexican government's reports on "vigilantes," it is noted
that Mexican consulates in the United States contacted Border Patrol
officials seeking U.S. cooperation in reporting instances of civilians
monitoring the border. Among such requests:
The Mexican consul in Presidio, Texas, asked the Marfa Sector's Border
Patrol chief to be alerted if the United States detected any volunteer
activity.
In Phoenix, consulate officials asked the Border Patrol to notify them if
civilian groups apprehended any illegal immigrants so consulate
representatives could interview them.
In San Diego, the document referred to a meeting with Border Patrol Chief
Darryl Griffen stating that "Mr. Griffen reiterated to the undersecretary
his promise to notify the General Consul right away when the vigilantes
detain or participate in the detention of any undocumented migrant."
"It appears the border reports are the tip of the iceberg," said Chris
Simcox, founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, which began patrolling
the border in April 2005.
Such requests from Mexico, and U.S. officials acquiescing to them, are not
new, say Border Patrol agents.
Scott James, a former Tucson, Ariz., agent, resigned after eight years of
service in February, citing the Department of Homeland Security's lack of
support for agents.
He said Border Patrol officials provided office space inside their
headquarters to Mexican consulate officials, allowed the consulate to
dictate the agents' activities and gave the consulate information on ongoing
investigations.
Such courtesies were not extended to consulate offices of other countries,
James said.
http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_3804187
3. Why Natural Gas Is the Solution -
Human Events
by Jack Wheeler
Posted May 10, 2006
There is a comprehensive solution to both our high cost of gasoline and
dependence on foreign oil. It's called natural gas. Here's why.
First, unlike crude oil, natural gas is de-coupled from the world market.
However much we increase oil production (say in Alaska), the Chinese or
Indians will bid against us for it. This is because crude oil can be cheaply
shipped by ocean tanker. Natural gas is different. It is prohibitively
expensive to ship liquefied natural gas by ship around the world. The only
cost-effective way to transport natural gas is by pipeline. No matter how
much natural gas we produce, it will always be cheaper for China to pipeline
it from Siberia. However much natural gas we produce, it's off the world
market. We get to consume what we produce for ourselves.
Second, the U.S. has gigantic amounts of natural gas reserves, between one
and two quadrillion cubic feet in the offshore waters of our continental
shelf. Energy companies are not permitted to extract it except off Texas,
Louisiana, and Alaska. Both the Feds and the state governments prevent its
extraction in Washington, Oregon, California, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida,
Georgia, the Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and New
England. If natural gas extraction were permitted along the entire U.S.
continental shelf, we would be energy independent within three to five
years.
Third, any modern car's or truck's internal combustion engine using either
gasoline or diesel can easily be converted to additionally using natural
gas. Such conversion to dual-fuel use requires no engine modification. You
just need a compressed natural gas tank, an injector and control valve. The
natural gas-powered engine is a mature proven technology in use for a
half-century. Nothing has to be invented. Unlike hydrogen or fuel-cell
futurism, this is here and now, ready to go.
Fourth, a compressor installed in your garage connected to your home's
natural gas line will fill up your car's compressed natural gas tank with
the same gas that heats your home and cooks your food. One such home
compressor is called Phill made by FuelMaker Corp. One compressed natural
gas tankfull gives your car a range of 200-300 miles. Dual-fuel cars running
both natural gas and gasoline/diesel, using the latter only for long
out-of-city drives, filling up their compressed natural gas tank overnight
at home, will achieve energy independence for the U.S. and eliminate our
dependence on foreign oil.
At present, natural gas prices ($6.70 per tcf -- thousand cubic feet),
compressed natural gas-powered cars (such as the already-produced Honda
Civic GX) average 5 cents a mile. Greatly increasing production through
offshore extraction will drop the price to mid-90s levels of $2 to $3 per
tcf. Driving your car would cost a penny a mile, 3 cents a mile for a
Cadillac Escalade or Hummer 2.
This can be achieved -- penny-a-mile cost of driving and energy independence
-- by a combination of two federal government actions:
Overcome state resistance to offshore gas drilling by sharing federal
royalties with state residents. The feds would get a third, state
governments a third, state residents a third. Directly paying residents of
natural gas-producing states one-third of federal royalties will render
those residents enthusiastic proponents of natural gas extraction. The check
they get in the mail, which will be hundreds if not thousands of dollars per
year per resident (including children), is passive income and not subject to
Social Security/FICA taxes.
Provide tax credits for compressed natural gas home compressors, compressed
natural gas duel-fuel car conversion, installation of commercial compressed
natural gas tanks and compressors by service stations, and the purchase of
dual-fuel vehicles. This overcomes the chicken-and-egg problem by enabling
people to purchase a home compressor and convert their car at little cost
(i.e., with money they would have sent to the IRS), plus give them natural
gas availability at service stations. The IRS will make up the money with
the drilling royalties.
All President Bush has to do is get Congress to allow oil and gas companies
to extract the vast amounts of natural gas we have off our shores, cut state
residents in on the wealth, provide tax credits for folks to run natural gas
in their cars, and before his presidency is over, Americans will be driving
a penny or two a mile, and he will have achieved a presidential legacy of
energy independence for America.
Our economy will boom, we'll no longer be hostage to foreign oil, and our
environment will be cleaner. For the natural gas solution is an
environmentalist's dream. Natural gas burns far more cleanly than gasoline,
diesel, or ethanol. Fueling our cars (and city buses and delivery vehicles)
with natural gas will greatly reduce both CO2 and photochemical smog
emissions.
Cheap gas, energy independence, and a cleaner environment: that's the
natural gas solution. And it can be done right now. No years of research and
development, no new technology. The natural gas solution can be implemented
immediately. What are we waiting for?
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=14696
4. Democrats' Message Misses Middle Class
- FoxNews
Monday, May 08, 2006
By Martin Frost
Lots of people bemoan the fact that the Democratic Party does not connect
with white middle class voters, but few of the complainers offer workable
solutions.
Third-Way, a "center progressive" think tank made up of former Democratic
Congressional and White House staffers, has now addressed this issue with
some real insight.
In a study released on May 4, Third-way notes that Democrats believe they
are talking to middle class voters but that their message is all wrong. The
study then makes some very specific suggestions on how to solve the problem.
Let's review the bidding.
First, middle class is defined as household income between $30,000 and
$75,000 a year. Obviously this figure could go higher in some parts of the
country, depending on cost of living factors.
In 2004, John Kerry lost middle class white voters by 22 points and
Congressional Democrats lost middle class white voters by 19 points. Kerry
lost all middle class voters as a group (including whites, Blacks and
Hispanics) by 6 points.
This was not an aberration but part of a trend. In 2000, Al Gore lost middle
class white voters by 15 points and Congressional Democrats lost them by 14
points. In 1996, Congressional Democrats lost middle class white voters by
12 points.
According to Third-way, "Americans are optimistic about the nation's future
and their own; (Democratic) messaging is not. Americans see our society as a
basically fair one, where hard work is rewarded; progressives emphasize
obstacles to middle-class success."
The study faults Democrats for always attacking the wealthy, noting "the
middle-class aspires to wealth and doesn't see big business or the wealthy
as enemies."
It adds that Democrats "downplay the strengths of the American economy...and
fail to inspire conviction that America can continue to lead the world."
Stated another was: "Let's be clear - no one can deny that there are serious
and legitimate concerns about our economy. The nation's federal budget
deficit is at a record high, as is America's trade deficit with the world.
Manufacturing jobs have declined, and the gap between the wealthy and the
middle-class is increasing. These are not trifling problems that should be
glossed over by progressives. But for every piece of bad news, there is also
good news about the economic health and future of America."
The study added, "It is in the American nature to believe that
America...will prevail in an economic battle against China, Japan and India
and that the American standard of living can only get better. If
progressives believe otherwise, they will be wrong on substance as well as
wrong on the politics."
The study then goes on to categorize a number of proposals that Democrats
think help the middle class but which really help primarily the poor:
raising the minimum wage, expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit, increasing
the size of Pell grants for college, making the child care tax credit
refundable and fully funding Head Start.
These ideas "are worthy progressive initiatives, but they have virtually no
impact on the middle class."
The study notes that the average family income for Pell grants was $19,460
in 2003-04; that Head Start is specifically targeted for children living in
poverty or whose families are on public assistance and that only 2.7 percent
of the entire workforce earned the minimum wage last year.
The final part of the study urges Democrats to be optimistic about America
and offer ideas that directly benefit the middle-class.
Here are some of Third-way's specific proposals:
(1) Get the nation's fiscal house in order by controlling entitlement
spending, reining in budget deficits and "holding the federal government to
the same standards of efficiency and competitiveness that are demanded of
the nation's companies and workers."
(2) Invest in infrastructure to create jobs of the future by investment in
research and pure science and wiring the nation for advanced information
technology.
(3) Help businesses keep jobs in America by containing health care costs,
lifting some of the burden of retirement security off of business and
punishing countries that use unfair trade tactics that harm American
companies.
(4) Make college the goal of all young Americans by expanding the tax
deductibility of college tuition for middle class parents.
(5) Provide all Americans with affordable health insurance in the form of
"competition-based health care reform."
There's a lot more packed into this report. Democrats who want to win back
middle class voters should read every word.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,194749,00.html
5. Nebraska governor narrowly wins
Republican primary - Reuters
Wednesday, May 10, 2006; 6:23 AM
KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) - Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman narrowly won
the state's Republican gubernatorial primary contest on Tuesday, fending off
a challenge by state sports legend Tom Osborne.
Heineman, who was named governor in 2005 when predecessor Mike Johanns was
selected as U.S. agriculture secretary, defeated challenger Tom Osborne.
Heineman, 57, will face Democratic candidate David Hahn in November.
Heineman took 49 percent of the more than 197,000 votes cast, and Osborne 45
percent. Businessman Dave Nabity received 5 percent.
Osborne, 69, won supporters across the state by leading the University of
Nebraska football team to three national championships before being elected
to Congress in 2000.
The race was considered one of the biggest clashes in a series of primaries
that will set the combatants for November's mid-term election.
Polls had shown Osborne, who had a 25-year reputation as a much-beloved
Cornhusker coach, and Heineman, former state treasurer and lieutenant
governor, running neck and neck into election day. Thousands of Democrats
changed their registration to Republican to allow them to weigh in on the
contest.
Nebraska is one of 36 states electing governors this year.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/10/AR2006051000357.html
### |
