Congress has lost its mind...

[Queen of the Ryche]

I'm cool with Merc posting articles he finds interesting. I'm cool with both parties having their own opinion of what's right. Guess I was expecting more debate over the issues at hand rather than over who's righter. No biggy.

And yes, let Congress hang from a net too. Or make them pay full fare on one of our failing airlines.

Originally Posted by Queen of the Ryche

And yes, let Congress hang from a net too. Or make them pay full fare on one of our failing airlines.

By the very nature of being in the Line of Presidential Succession, every Cabinet secretary and the top leaders of the House and Senate are afforded levels of security and protection beyond the norm.

The same applies for the Joint Chiefs and top military officials and members of Congress on official business when traveling abroad.

I have no problem with those folks having that level of security when conducting the nation's business.

[Queen of the Ryche]

Me neither, but did they have to spend $200 million on new jets? Was there something wrong with the existing ones? Or their bulletproof limos for more local trips?

Personally, if I saw a Congressman on a regular flight with his fair share of security, I would have much more respect for him. And how many whack jobs are aiming at Congressmen? And how are they going to get past security to whack them on a public flight? IMHO, I don't think it's about security, I feel it's about entitlement, which pisses me off.

[TheMercenary]

Can't get more secure than riding in the back of an Air Force C-130 (with nominal temperature control and requiring the use of ear plugs ).

IMO, this is marginally more of an issue than bitching about the cost to taxpayers of the Obama's taking a weekend trip to NYC...but not by much.

In both cases, the Secret Service has alot to say about minimum security levels for such officials.

[TheMercenary]

Many Congress people ride to and from work each day and few have any security. The need for custom jets is not warranted. Esp in this time of spend, spend, spend. They need to take a back seat to their own needs.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Many Congress people ride to and from work each day and few have any security. The need for custom jets is not warranted. Esp in this time of spend, spend, spend. They need to take a back seat to their own needs.

Members of Congress have no authorization to use these jets for commuting to and from work, but solely when acting on Congressional business, particularly when traveling abroad.

The exception is Pelosi, who is second in line to the presidency...scary, huh?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Members of Congress have no authorization to use these jets for commuting to and from work, but solely when acting on Congressional business, particularly when traveling abroad.

You mean particularly when traveling within the US. Which is the problem. They can take military airlift to go overseas. They should not be taking custom jets, flown by our military, for luxury travel overseas. You know sort of when Pelosi flew to Italy for her vacation.

The exception is Pelosi, who is second in line to the presidency...scary, huh?

All the more reason to have her fly in a jet with very poor engines.

[TheMercenary]

An IOU for your great-great grandchildren...

Geithner Asks Congress to Increase Federal Debt Limit

Washington -- U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner asked Congress to increase the $12.1 trillion debt limit on Friday, saying it is "critically important" that they act in the next two months.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124970470294516541.html

[TheMercenary]

Nice...

Deficit grew by $181 billion in July

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...009-08-09.html

[TheMercenary]

It is all about power. Not about getting things done for the people.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Political survival will be high on lawmakers' minds when the Democratic-led U.S. Congress returns to work on Tuesday amid widespread voter dissatisfaction with its performance.

While the debates over healthcare reform, global warming and banking legislation and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will dominate the airwaves, many incumbents, both Democrats and Republicans, are beginning to worry about holding on to their seats in November 2010 elections.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090906/...ngress_preview

[kerosene]

"...many incumbents, both Democrats and Republicans, are beginning to worry about holding on to their seats in November 2010 elections."

As they should.

[TheMercenary]

Taxpayers Face Heavy Losses on Auto Bailout
Congressional Oversight Panel report says most of the $23 billion initially provided to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC late last year is unlikely to be repaid.

WASHINGTON - Taxpayers face losses on a significant portion of the $81 billion in government aid provided to the auto industry, an oversight panel said in a report to be released Wednesday.

The Congressional Oversight Panel did not provide an estimate of the projected loss in its latest monthly report on the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. But it said most of the $23 billion initially provided to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC late last year is unlikely to be repaid.

"I think they drove a very hard bargain," said Elizabeth Warren, the panel's chairwoman and a law professor at Harvard University, referring to the Obama administration's Treasury Department. "But it may not be enough."

The prospect of recovering the government's assistance to GM and Chrysler is heavily dependent on shares of the two companies rising to unprecedented levels, the report said. The government owns 10 percent of Chrysler and 61 percent of GM. The two companies are currently private but are expected to issue stock, in GM's case by next year.

The shares "will have to appreciate sharply" for taxpayers to get their money back, the report said.

For example, GM's market value would have to reach $67.6 billion, the report said, a "highly optimistic" estimate and more than the $57.2 billion GM was worth at the height of its share value in April 2008. And in the case of Chrysler, about $5.4 billion of the $14.3 billion provided to the company is "highly unlikely" to ever be repaid, the panel said.

Treasury Department officials have acknowledged that most of the $23 billion provided by the Bush administration is likely to be lost. But Meg Reilly, a department spokeswoman, said there is a "reasonably high probability of the return of most or all of the government funding" that was provided to assist GM and Chrysler with their restructurings.

Administration officials have previously said they want to maximize taxpayers' return on the investment but want to dispose of the government's ownership interests as soon as practicable.

"We are not trying to be Warren Buffett here. We are not trying to squeeze every last dollar out," Steve Rattner, who led the administration's auto task force, said before his departure in July. "We do want to do well for the taxpayers but the most important thing is to get the government out of the car business."

Greg Martin, a spokesman for the new GM, said the company is "confident that we will repay our nation's support because we are a company with less debt, a stronger balance sheet, a winning product portfolio and the right size to match today's market realities."

The Congressional Oversight Panel was created as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. It is designed to provide an additional layer of oversight, beyond the Special Inspector General for the TARP and regular audits by the Government Accountability Office.

The panel's report recommends that the Treasury Department consider placing its auto company holdings into an independent trust, to avoid any "conflicts of interest."

The report also recommends the department perform a legal analysis of its decision to provide TARP funds to GM and Chrysler, their financing arms and many auto parts suppliers. Some critics say the law creating TARP didn't allow for such funding.

The panel's members include Rep. Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican, who dissented from the report. Hensarling said the auto companies should never have received funding and criticized the government for picking "winners and losers."

Other agencies have also projected large losses on the loans and investments provided to the industry. The Congressional Budget Office estimated in June that taxpayers would lose about $40 billion of the first $55 billion in aid.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elec...-auto-bailout/

for those of you who don't like fox, the story is from the AP:
http://money.aol.com/article/taxpaye...on-auto/632298

[TheMercenary]

Ladies and Gentlemen I bring you the Chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee of the U.S. Congress...

The Absent-Minded Chairman

When normal people happen to “find” their own money, it might mean a twenty left in a winter coat, or discovering change beneath the sofa cushions. But if you’re Charlie Rangel, it means doubling your net worth.

Earlier this month the Chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee of the U.S. Congress "amended" his 2007 financial disclosure form—to the tune of more than a half-million dollars in previously unreported assets and income. That number may be as high as $780,000, because Congress's ethics rules only require the Members to report their finances within broad ranges. This voyage of personal financial discovery brings Mr. Rangel's net worth for 2007 to somewhere between $1.028 million and $2.495 million, while his previous statement came in at $516,015 and $1.316 million.

When you're a powerful Congressman and working diligently to increase tax rates to pay for President Obama's health-care plan, we suppose it's easy to lose track of one of your checking accounts. That would be the one at the federal credit union with a balance somewhere between $250,001 and maybe as high as $500,000. And when you're crunched for time and pulling together bills to pass in a rush, we guess, too, that you might overlook several other investment accounts, even if some of them are sizable, such as the ones Mr. Rangel missed at JP Morgan, Merrill Lynch, Oppenheimer and BlackRock.

Oh, and those vacant properties in Glassboro, in southern Jersey? Everybody in Manhattan tries not to think much about New Jersey, so those lots and their as-much-as-$15,000 value must also have slipped down the memory hole. (The New York Post reported yesterday that Mr. Rangel failed to pay property taxes for two of the lots, according to the county clerk's office.)

The Chairman probably isn't doing a lot of dining at KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell or Long John Silver's, either, which may explain why he didn't disclose the $1,001 to $15,000 in stock he owns in Yum Brands, the conglomerate that runs those chain restaurants. Compared to his undisclosed portfolio stake in PepsiCo—$15,001 to $50,000—that's practically a rounding error.

All lawmakers amend their financial reports from time to time, though rarely are the errors this extensive. Via email, a Rangel spokesman declined to offer details about how the errors occurred, noting that "Once the Ethics Committee completes its work, then we can answer questions in more detail." He added that Mr. Rangel is now "confident that his records have been subjected to an exhaustive and complete review, and that the amendments accurately reflect his financial interests."

Among other issues, Mr. Rangel is currently under investigation regarding his use of four rent-stabilized apartments at New York City's tony Lenox Terrace and soliciting donations with his official letterhead for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York, which was itself built with a $1.9 million earmark. Yet another part of the probe is his failure to report $75,000 in income from a rental villa at the beachfront Punta Cana Yacht Club, in the Dominican Republic.

Mr. Rangel blamed that last one on the language barrier because he doesn't speak Spanish. We can only imagine what language he speaks with his accountants and tax attorneys.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB4000...92072820.html#

[classicman]

Removal from office - immediately. (After the pony show of an investigation, of course)


It's the only way they are going to learn.