The states have codified more a efficient and politically expedient means for balancing a budget. The United States Congress might want to take a hint from them.
Governor Chris Christie (and to a lesser extent Governor Jerry Brown) exercise wide discretion with the line-item veto over their states' budgets. Congress extended this power to the President in the 1990's, but the Supreme Court struck down this option for President Clinton in 1996.
Instead of a Balanced Budget Amendment, why not extend wider latitude to the President of the United States to limit spending with a Line Item Veto Amendment? With this power, the President could make the painful and unpopular cuts while safeguarding legislators from disappointed constituents. Specifically, lawmakers could slip in pork barrel projects into the budget bill, but the President--who responds to the needs of the nation--will sign the bill with significant cuts. The President can score political points with the nation by demonstrating fiscal restraint, while Congress can argue that they tries to send money to their constituents. Everyone wins because the government will be spending less, lower the deficit and easing the national debt once and for all.
The Line Item Veto: a win-win for everyone.
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Balanced Budget Amendment
Will a law requiring a balanced budget a balanced budget make?
Tea Party advocates are pressing for the United States to pass a "Balanced Budget Amendment", a move which would coerce the United States Congress to live within its means.
Yet is such a mechanism really effective at curbing spending and keeping the government out of debt? The State of California is required to balance the budget every year, yet legislators finesse the numbers with optimistic revenue projections and borrowing to make ends meet. Within weeks, the projections fail in the wake of tax shortfalls. Inevitably, debts and deficits continue to menace the Golden State. Once more time, lawmakers have to scramble again to make up for the lack caused by sudden downturns in revenue.
Governor Brown and his legislators have crowed that they have signed into law the second budget on-time in so many years. This dysfunctional self-congratulation cannot paper over the more glaring inability for the legislators to pass a budget on time. In recent years, the California legislature passed a budget 100+ days after the dead-line, a sluggish outcome which impoverished state agencies and held independent contractors hostage, while the State Controller had to resort to handing out IOUs. Imagine the fiscal fallout in the United States if Congress delayed indefinitely the passing of a balanced budget because they were trying to muster a balanced spending plan with cuts and revenue increases? Would contracts throughout the nation be content with more fiat currency while U.S. legislators were stalling on settling differences? The risks are far greater, and far too great, for the nation as a whole.
Instead of requiring a Balanced Budget Amendment, why not insist on some mechanism which will automatically deduct spending from certain entitlements when appropriations exceed the limits of the annual budget?
If Congress ties these cuts to politically neutral entitlements, like corporate welfare and industrial subsidies, then Congress would have a buffer to make the necessary cuts with spending increases.
Tea Party advocates are pressing for the United States to pass a "Balanced Budget Amendment", a move which would coerce the United States Congress to live within its means.
Yet is such a mechanism really effective at curbing spending and keeping the government out of debt? The State of California is required to balance the budget every year, yet legislators finesse the numbers with optimistic revenue projections and borrowing to make ends meet. Within weeks, the projections fail in the wake of tax shortfalls. Inevitably, debts and deficits continue to menace the Golden State. Once more time, lawmakers have to scramble again to make up for the lack caused by sudden downturns in revenue.
Governor Brown and his legislators have crowed that they have signed into law the second budget on-time in so many years. This dysfunctional self-congratulation cannot paper over the more glaring inability for the legislators to pass a budget on time. In recent years, the California legislature passed a budget 100+ days after the dead-line, a sluggish outcome which impoverished state agencies and held independent contractors hostage, while the State Controller had to resort to handing out IOUs. Imagine the fiscal fallout in the United States if Congress delayed indefinitely the passing of a balanced budget because they were trying to muster a balanced spending plan with cuts and revenue increases? Would contracts throughout the nation be content with more fiat currency while U.S. legislators were stalling on settling differences? The risks are far greater, and far too great, for the nation as a whole.
Instead of requiring a Balanced Budget Amendment, why not insist on some mechanism which will automatically deduct spending from certain entitlements when appropriations exceed the limits of the annual budget?
If Congress ties these cuts to politically neutral entitlements, like corporate welfare and industrial subsidies, then Congress would have a buffer to make the necessary cuts with spending increases.
The New Axis of Evil
Syria, Iran, China: behold the new Axis of Evil.
Syria is shaking.
Iran is trembling.
China is worried, for good reason. They hold much of the world's debt, and nations seem poised to default. The roaring engine of economic recovery in China will come to a crashing halt.
Tyrannies around the world are crumbling in the face of populist revolt, fueled by information technology that has linked protesters terrified of reprisal.
Whether the world devolves into more chaos or increasing prosperity, these three nations, symbols of failing technological autarchy, are coming to an end.
Syria is shaking.
Iran is trembling.
China is worried, for good reason. They hold much of the world's debt, and nations seem poised to default. The roaring engine of economic recovery in China will come to a crashing halt.
Tyrannies around the world are crumbling in the face of populist revolt, fueled by information technology that has linked protesters terrified of reprisal.
Whether the world devolves into more chaos or increasing prosperity, these three nations, symbols of failing technological autarchy, are coming to an end.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Christie's Success
Governor Chris Christie knows how to talk.
He knows how to make a point.
He knows how to negotiate across the aisle.
He has compromised efficiently with a Democratic Legislature in order to pass a sound budget early.
He has kept taxes low. He has offered a cap on property taxes to ease the burden on the middle class.
He articulated what exactly the public unions would need to contribute in order to lessen pension liabilities and budget gaps. When the Teachers' Union refused to deal, Christie had a ready answer in subsequent interviews regarding the $1 billion cut in funding which New Jersey education received.
He is a humble man who has clearly explained why he is not running for President:
1) He does not have the experience set needed to be the chief executive of the United States
2) He is keeping his commitment to serve out his term as governor.
Keep up the Good Work, Governor Christie.
He knows how to make a point.
He knows how to negotiate across the aisle.
He has compromised efficiently with a Democratic Legislature in order to pass a sound budget early.
He has kept taxes low. He has offered a cap on property taxes to ease the burden on the middle class.
He articulated what exactly the public unions would need to contribute in order to lessen pension liabilities and budget gaps. When the Teachers' Union refused to deal, Christie had a ready answer in subsequent interviews regarding the $1 billion cut in funding which New Jersey education received.
He is a humble man who has clearly explained why he is not running for President:
1) He does not have the experience set needed to be the chief executive of the United States
2) He is keeping his commitment to serve out his term as governor.
Keep up the Good Work, Governor Christie.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
The Pro-Abortion Lobby, or Hahn's Craven Coven
In a last-ditch effort, feminists and pro-abortion advocates have stormed the campaign headquarters of Craig Huey in feeble protest, attempting to derail the man most likely to be the next Congressman for the
CA-36th.
They malign him as shameful, sexist, and out of touch.
The only shameful display is the gross exaggeration of the social issues which have been settled by the Huey camp. Abortion for the time being is settled law in the land. Huey respects that, but favors adoption in the case of unexpected pregnancies, which is respectable, not sexist in the least.
Unlike his out-of-touch opponent, Huey is stressing the issues weighing most heavily on voters' minds: the economy and job growth.
$14 Trillion national debt, $1.6 trillion annual deficit, and a growing bureaucracy burdening business growth: these define the shallow legacy of the Democratic party, of which Janice Hahn is a proud member. She offers no new ideas, she spins the same folly, and she touts the endorsements of the same liberal elites who dumped this huge economic mess on the country.
Huey has campaigned on the needs of the South Bay. He will advocate for our needs in Washington.
On July 12th, vote for Craig Huey to represent the CA-36th.
CA-36th.
They malign him as shameful, sexist, and out of touch.
The only shameful display is the gross exaggeration of the social issues which have been settled by the Huey camp. Abortion for the time being is settled law in the land. Huey respects that, but favors adoption in the case of unexpected pregnancies, which is respectable, not sexist in the least.
Unlike his out-of-touch opponent, Huey is stressing the issues weighing most heavily on voters' minds: the economy and job growth.
$14 Trillion national debt, $1.6 trillion annual deficit, and a growing bureaucracy burdening business growth: these define the shallow legacy of the Democratic party, of which Janice Hahn is a proud member. She offers no new ideas, she spins the same folly, and she touts the endorsements of the same liberal elites who dumped this huge economic mess on the country.
Huey has campaigned on the needs of the South Bay. He will advocate for our needs in Washington.
On July 12th, vote for Craig Huey to represent the CA-36th.
Huey: More Pro-Choice than Hahn
Craig Huey is the Pro-Choice candidate:
He wants people to have more jobs to choose from.
He wants businesses to have more choice from start up to get go, from setting to selling.
He wants us, our children, and future generations to have more choice when it comes to the quality of life that we wish to enjoy in this country.
Free markets make free people. Free people have choice. Huey favors limiting government, limiting regulations, and limiting intrusions into our daily lives
Craig Huey, the Pro-Choice candidate for the South Bay.
He wants people to have more jobs to choose from.
He wants businesses to have more choice from start up to get go, from setting to selling.
He wants us, our children, and future generations to have more choice when it comes to the quality of life that we wish to enjoy in this country.
Free markets make free people. Free people have choice. Huey favors limiting government, limiting regulations, and limiting intrusions into our daily lives
Craig Huey, the Pro-Choice candidate for the South Bay.
CA-36th: A tale of two candidates--One candid, One not so candid
Craig Huey has worked in the private sector. He knows what voters in this district are going through because has had to balance a budget, make payroll, and settle debt in order to stay in business. He knows that wasteful spending from Washington hinders economic recovery, the one issue on everyone's mind.
Janice Hahn is a career politician who only rose to power on a famous name. Working with a cadre of politicians in Los Angeles, she failed to balance the city budget, settle the enormous debt which menaces the municipality into bankruptcy, nor has she managed to prevent massive furloughs and layoffs of hard-working taxpayers.
Craig Huey is reaching out to voters with a clear message: Cut taxes, cut spending, get people working again. Reduce the national debt, curb inflation, spur economic growth: this is what people in the CA-36th want from their next Congressman.
Janice Hahn has thrown up pseudo-issues like abortion and empty shrieks of "Tea Party Extremism" to distract the voters from the fact that she and her party do not have the policies nor the potential to advocate for more political and economic freedom in this country, both of which are desperately needed to transform the current anemic recovery into an economic boom.
The choice is clear for the CA-36th. On July 12th, vote for Craig Huey!
Janice Hahn is a career politician who only rose to power on a famous name. Working with a cadre of politicians in Los Angeles, she failed to balance the city budget, settle the enormous debt which menaces the municipality into bankruptcy, nor has she managed to prevent massive furloughs and layoffs of hard-working taxpayers.
Craig Huey is reaching out to voters with a clear message: Cut taxes, cut spending, get people working again. Reduce the national debt, curb inflation, spur economic growth: this is what people in the CA-36th want from their next Congressman.
Janice Hahn has thrown up pseudo-issues like abortion and empty shrieks of "Tea Party Extremism" to distract the voters from the fact that she and her party do not have the policies nor the potential to advocate for more political and economic freedom in this country, both of which are desperately needed to transform the current anemic recovery into an economic boom.
The choice is clear for the CA-36th. On July 12th, vote for Craig Huey!
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Lady Diana Spencer: Will She Ever Rest in Peace? Part II
"I would rather be the Queen of people's hearts," Lady Diana Spencer said.
In once sense, a noble sentiment. Who needs the trappings of royalty if they merely trip up one's gait? She could influence people just by being who she was, without an unfaithful husband or unsupportive in-laws.
Yet this begs the question: who was she? And what kind of influence was she hoping to have? What does it say about the adoring public who still long for her presence long after her death?
Obviously, the press could not get enough of her. Her inclination to be prominent was her own wish, which inadvertently led to her death. She is not responsible for the lecherous photophiliacs who stalked her, but she did goad them to follow her with her beauty and desire to impact millions.
Also, was this person worthy to be the queen of people's hearts? She had stepped out on Charles, too. A photogenic congeniality does not a worthy soul make.
What is the infatuation that the world has with Princess Di, now fifteen years after her death? She was a timorous Cinderella facing off against the cold, cruel monarchy. Yet despite the recriminations of the press, Queen Elizabeth and her coterie have risen above the fraud and tabloid gossip.
Everyone wants to be like Di: a beautiful victim, inducing pity and awe from the masses without having to do anything for it. Yet being a victim has its price: to be the foil and following for the fickle public who will stop at nothing to engorge their obsessive following. For Di, the pursuing public, pulled by her popularity, led to her untimely death, which incidentally transformed a wronged princess into forever royalty and media martyrdom.
In once sense, a noble sentiment. Who needs the trappings of royalty if they merely trip up one's gait? She could influence people just by being who she was, without an unfaithful husband or unsupportive in-laws.
Yet this begs the question: who was she? And what kind of influence was she hoping to have? What does it say about the adoring public who still long for her presence long after her death?
Obviously, the press could not get enough of her. Her inclination to be prominent was her own wish, which inadvertently led to her death. She is not responsible for the lecherous photophiliacs who stalked her, but she did goad them to follow her with her beauty and desire to impact millions.
Also, was this person worthy to be the queen of people's hearts? She had stepped out on Charles, too. A photogenic congeniality does not a worthy soul make.
What is the infatuation that the world has with Princess Di, now fifteen years after her death? She was a timorous Cinderella facing off against the cold, cruel monarchy. Yet despite the recriminations of the press, Queen Elizabeth and her coterie have risen above the fraud and tabloid gossip.
Everyone wants to be like Di: a beautiful victim, inducing pity and awe from the masses without having to do anything for it. Yet being a victim has its price: to be the foil and following for the fickle public who will stop at nothing to engorge their obsessive following. For Di, the pursuing public, pulled by her popularity, led to her untimely death, which incidentally transformed a wronged princess into forever royalty and media martyrdom.
Lady Diana Spencer: Will She Ever Get to Rest in Peace? Part I
Lady Diana Spencer--former spouse of Prince Charles--died in a terrible car crash, fueled by the frenzied paparazzi who hounded her mercilessly throughout her public life.
She is still haunted by the adoring public which cannot get enough of her.
In the past week, Newsweek published a cover with a photoshopped image of her next to Princess Kate, the new wife of Prince William, Diana's elder son.
In life, Princess Di seemed to live a love-hate relationship with the press. She enjoyed the attention that reporters and commoners lavished upon her. She despised the intrusions of the press into her private life. Yet, she must have realized that she would be risking much of her privacy by marrying the heir apparent to the throne of the United Kingdom.
Despite her tragic fourteen years ago, why do people still get giddy about Princess Di? She was beautiful, no doubt. She represented the Cinderella hopes of many young women, for Di, a lady of minor nobility, ascended into the upper reaches of the Royal Family, wedded in a ceremony eagerly anticipated by the viewing world when media technologies were not nearly as advanced (or invasive) as they are now.
Princess Di represented the little guy (or girl, rather), who rose to great prominence, then rejected a cold and callous Royal Family in favor of a life of greater integrity. Often, the press presented her as a victim--even though she was cheating on Charles, too--and everyone loves to see a victim stand up for herself.
In one timely interview shortly after her divorce from Prince Charles, the journalist asked Di if she would miss being Queen of England. Her answer: "I would rather be the Queen of people's hearts."
And reign she has in people's hearts, to this day, where Diana Infatuation has reached an all-time high.
She is still haunted by the adoring public which cannot get enough of her.
In the past week, Newsweek published a cover with a photoshopped image of her next to Princess Kate, the new wife of Prince William, Diana's elder son.
In life, Princess Di seemed to live a love-hate relationship with the press. She enjoyed the attention that reporters and commoners lavished upon her. She despised the intrusions of the press into her private life. Yet, she must have realized that she would be risking much of her privacy by marrying the heir apparent to the throne of the United Kingdom.
Despite her tragic fourteen years ago, why do people still get giddy about Princess Di? She was beautiful, no doubt. She represented the Cinderella hopes of many young women, for Di, a lady of minor nobility, ascended into the upper reaches of the Royal Family, wedded in a ceremony eagerly anticipated by the viewing world when media technologies were not nearly as advanced (or invasive) as they are now.
Princess Di represented the little guy (or girl, rather), who rose to great prominence, then rejected a cold and callous Royal Family in favor of a life of greater integrity. Often, the press presented her as a victim--even though she was cheating on Charles, too--and everyone loves to see a victim stand up for herself.
In one timely interview shortly after her divorce from Prince Charles, the journalist asked Di if she would miss being Queen of England. Her answer: "I would rather be the Queen of people's hearts."
And reign she has in people's hearts, to this day, where Diana Infatuation has reached an all-time high.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Greece Passes Austerity Package, Receives Another Loan, Deceives Desperate Investors
Greece does not deserve another bailout.
The nation deserves to sink into the Aegean, not just for failing to balance its books, for creating a nation of spoiled adult-children entitled to retire at 45 with a generous pension, but for defrauding their entry into the Euro Zone.
Cut them loose. Let them flounder through bankruptcy for a season, like the wily Odysseus who lied his way out of trouble, only to enrage the God of the Sea.
Greece should not have duped and demeaned the Kings of Global Finance.
Did the Greeks really think that the party of public corruption, private concupiscence, and rampant fraud would last forever? Did the Hellenes not realize that at some point, the bill for generous public offerings would come due?
Investors, Euro Zone members, and the United States are worried that a default from Greece would induce the rest of the PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain) to default on their onerous debt, which would lead to massive bank failures across Europe and shake investors throughout the world.
Yet these stopgap measures with piece-meal bailouts, are they working? Have they succeeded in creating any long-term stability in the financial markets? Investors are doubly deceived: deceived by the Greek government's smoke and mirrors to handle its debt, and deceived by themselves into heeding the desperate threat of a Mediterranean nation which has not made any serious moves to fiscal solvency in many years.
The Greek Parliament, after weathering a no-confidence vote over Papandreou's leadership, passed a severe austerity package. This legislation will severely curtail state services, raise taxes (always a bad idea in bad economic times), and privatize public utilities (right idea, but too little, too late).
The Greeks have risen up in arms in the streets. The Government is finally accepting responsibility for its financial house, and they are accepting the voters to do the same. Judging by the fires, the fights, and the disorderly conduct rising in the streets, the people do not seem one bit willing to step up and take charge of the wide debt incurred by lavish promises which the state no longer can afford.
If the Greek people are ever going to learn from the follies of socialism and embrace free market reforms, they may have to endure living in a nation which has defaulted on its debt and is no longer able to borrow money for the foreseeable future.
The nation deserves to sink into the Aegean, not just for failing to balance its books, for creating a nation of spoiled adult-children entitled to retire at 45 with a generous pension, but for defrauding their entry into the Euro Zone.
Cut them loose. Let them flounder through bankruptcy for a season, like the wily Odysseus who lied his way out of trouble, only to enrage the God of the Sea.
Greece should not have duped and demeaned the Kings of Global Finance.
Did the Greeks really think that the party of public corruption, private concupiscence, and rampant fraud would last forever? Did the Hellenes not realize that at some point, the bill for generous public offerings would come due?
Investors, Euro Zone members, and the United States are worried that a default from Greece would induce the rest of the PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain) to default on their onerous debt, which would lead to massive bank failures across Europe and shake investors throughout the world.
Yet these stopgap measures with piece-meal bailouts, are they working? Have they succeeded in creating any long-term stability in the financial markets? Investors are doubly deceived: deceived by the Greek government's smoke and mirrors to handle its debt, and deceived by themselves into heeding the desperate threat of a Mediterranean nation which has not made any serious moves to fiscal solvency in many years.
The Greek Parliament, after weathering a no-confidence vote over Papandreou's leadership, passed a severe austerity package. This legislation will severely curtail state services, raise taxes (always a bad idea in bad economic times), and privatize public utilities (right idea, but too little, too late).
The Greeks have risen up in arms in the streets. The Government is finally accepting responsibility for its financial house, and they are accepting the voters to do the same. Judging by the fires, the fights, and the disorderly conduct rising in the streets, the people do not seem one bit willing to step up and take charge of the wide debt incurred by lavish promises which the state no longer can afford.
If the Greek people are ever going to learn from the follies of socialism and embrace free market reforms, they may have to endure living in a nation which has defaulted on its debt and is no longer able to borrow money for the foreseeable future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)