Open Letter to Congressman Blake Farenthold

Congressman Farenthold,I read your column in our newspaper and I appreciate the concern and effort  but in the words of Senator Dianne Feinstein," don't talk to me like I'm a sixth grader.” The sequester is not about a family budget, and I know that it's not about a 3 percent cut.  Those cuts are to be made over a seven-month  period, and they're not across the board.

Congress and the White House knew that the cuts would be painful that's why they used it as a trigger mechanism to make both parties  come up with a better solution.

You are obviously in a situation where you now have to justify the sequester cuts because  they will affect your constituents.  If the Federal Aviation Administration had spared Victoria; there would have been another congressman complaining about his district being cut.  This didn’t  have to happen if your party accepted  revenues as part of a grand bargain to stop all these games.

Congressman Farenthold, what is it with discontinuing White House tours that binds your right-wing  colleagues?  It would be great if you showed that same anger for all the cuts, the poor and the elderly will endure.  You know the ones in the Ryan budget you recently voted for.  That kind of talk probably got you a fat check from your country club constituents, but I'm not going to lay awake at night worrying about White House tours.

I'm all for efforts like the Protecting America’s Civilian Employees Act you introduced to cut wasteful government spending, but we all know that  non- discretionary defense spending is not the problem.  Eliminating waste and duplication should be an ongoing effort despite budgets, continuing resolutions or partisan food fights.  I'll keep my cable, so I can keep up with the happenings in Washington.  That's how I know that the big-ticket items that we have to control is defense spending, Medicare, and Medicaid.  It won't take much to put Social Security back on a track of solvency for another 75 years.

Congressman Farenthold, keep looking for all those savings and let’s use that money to restore the Pell Grants the Ryan budget eliminates because that can create a bright future for our children.

Finally, Mr. Congressman, I just read a graph in the Washington Post showing that Congress is less popular than lice and colonoscopies, so you have some nerve trying to put all the blame of the sequester cuts on the president.  The president inherited a financial mess,he didn’t get any help from your party to clean it up, and now you throw the sequestered cuts on top of that and complain because the pain of those cuts are starting to show up.

What Did I Learn Over the Weekend?

I learned that the new Republican Party will take an ax to the defense budget if it means the wealthy will get to keep their tax loopholes. There’s no question that President Obama overplayed his hand by using fear mongering tactics that were proved to be wrong. It gives credence to the old saying “if you lay down with dogs you will get up with fleas.” The president has a 51% approval right now and the GOP has a 29%; the difference is that 29% translates into a 81% approval in the representative’s district.

Joe Scarborough parroted the GOP line this morning by saying that cutting 1% of the budget will not bring on the doom and gloom the administration was trying to shove on the American taxpayer. At first, it was 3% of GDP, then 2%, and now it’s 1% but the fact remains that the current 1% applies to the next seven months, and it is not applied evenly across the board. Those states that depend on government contracts will feel the pain more than those that do not. The furlough of government workers will not improve the unemployment picture. Even Joe Scarborough admits that the cuts will be taken out of growth incentives like education, research and development and infrastructure projects. Congress will take up a bill to give the president the budget-cutting options, but they might as well say, “You have to cut off one of your fingers but we’ll let you pick the one you want to cut off.”

John Boehner stuck to his talking points this weekend on “Meet the Press” with David Gregory. He said that nobody in Washington knows what the sequester will do. That’s just your personal opinion John, but you don’t pay much attention to leading economist besides you can’t see much as long as the Tea Party is pulling on your chains. He also said that he pulled out all the stops to avoid the sequester cuts by passing two budgets. John, the American people rejected those proposals in November, but now you expect the Senate to consider those bills which are loaded with poison pills. Congressman Ryan’s first budget called for vouchers which the public overwhelmingly rejected and his second budget doesn’t touch the defense budget at all, has no revenues, and makes most of his cuts on students, the elderly and the poor. Mr. Boehner, if the house had the filibuster rule, Ryan’s budgets would have never made to the floor for a vote. The House and the Senate rules are different as night and day. I get very upset when the so-call liberal media doesn't call out John Boehner or any other Republican when they revert back to "who me" I am on the side who passed a budget. I know when they start doing that,word will get out and they will be boycotted and then the offended party will go on a network who will coddle them.

 I just read where corporate profits were up to 14.2% yet personal income was down by $500 billion. The GOP will consider removing the tax loopholes for a cut in corporate tax rates. Corporate's profits are up to 14.2%, remind me again of why they need their rates lowered?

There was the “who cares” category such as the Dennis Rodman interview about his trip to North Korea, the email scandal between Bob Woodward and White House staffer Gene Sperling and the Mitt and Ann Romney sympathy tour. It didn’t surprise me that Ann Romney would blame the media for husband’s loss because America didn’t get to know the real Mitt. Come on Ann, Mitt has been running for public office for most of his life, but I will grant you that he took different positions on each run. Perhaps we didn’t get to know the 2012 version of Mitt Romney.

It doesn’t surprise me how the media will follow a story for ratings, but the politicians know that and take full advantage. John McCain and Lindsey Graham are fixtures on the Sunday shows because they are willing to give the networks the sound bites they desire.

We Definitely Have a Communication Problem

When Congress left town and allowed the sequester cuts to take place, they took with them any remaining doubt that the two political parties would ever be able to reach an agreement. In three weeks, we will have the continuing resolution battle and then in May; we will have another war over raising the debt ceiling. There will be no new revenues coming from the GOP, even if the Democrats concede on entitlements. The president could give in to the GOP's demands, but he will lose his party and would be ineffective for the rest of his term. He is not about to do that.

There is a little known Washington secret that both parties got what they wanted Friday after the sequester was signed into law, but it's going to be at the expense of the American people. The Republican's spin that it's only 2% of the overall budget is a farce because they know the impact of these cuts will slow our staggering economy. They also know that government contracts are based on outlining years, so if they don't get the necessary funds, they can’t plan for future expansion. And that's not to say that the defense budget is not bloated. Every credible economist will tell you cutting spending in this manner (austerity) will hamper our growth and keep unemployment high. The president misdiagnosed the current Republican party because he was not aware that 158 house members don't care if they take a hatchet to defense spending because to them, a cut is a cut no matter where it comes from. Anyway, the GOP came away a winner because there were no tax increases, and they got the cuts they wanted. Some Democrats got the defense cuts they wanted, so the social cuts weren’t as bad.

They would have been much better off combining all three battles into a more meaningful long term one. We shouldn’t be imposing austerity while our economy is struggling to grow. We need to get rid of the tax loop holes and use that money to fund education, infrastructure and innovation. Look at the growing stock market, we haven’t made a dent on the wealthy, and those sequester cuts will only hurt those who can least afford it. The Democrats need to come to grips with the fact that 50.7% of the Federal budget($1.73 trillion) comes from Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid and interest on the debt. With the baby boomers retiring at an alarming rate of 10,000 a day, Social Security and Medicare will grow by 40% by the year 2023. The Social Security Disability Trust Fund will be gone in three years. Walking away from entitlement reform is irresponsible.

The lack of communication doesn’t stop at Washington's doorstep because all you have to do is pick up our local newspaper and read a letter to the editor. For example, the letter written by Kim Smith stirred up the emotions of those who she was trying to reach. For one, the momentum for universal background checks is on the side of those who want to do something about the gun violence in the United States. The Second Amendment has been decided, so extending the reach of background checks does not infringe on any gun rights and imposing stiffer penalties for straw purchases doesn't either. The banning of high-capacity ammo clips might be a little harder, even though there's popular support to ban them because it involves the manufacturer’s bottom line. The Democrats know this so that’s why they separated the background checks from the high-capacity clips and the so -called assault weapons. It makes the gun lobbyist like the NRA spend more money on politicians giving Mike Bloomberg and others a more even playing field.

 You see Kim; you can't make a point with those who continue to make weak arguments because when you do;you are playing on their turf. This issue is not about automobile accidents, the definition of assault, responsible gun owners, the defense of one's home, the next American Revolution or the proverbial tyrannical government. This is about combating gun violence, which is become prevalent in our society. Do we allow the NRA to continue making gun policy for us? I know we can’t allow the fringe element of our society to make policy, so I suggest we confirm someone to head the ATF, and get enough support to pass universal background checks for now. Then we can work on getting legislators elected who are not bought and paid for by the NRA.

Monday Morning Tidbits

The Sunday talk shows were about the inevitable sequester cuts, which will start Friday. It’s never about a solution it’s always about who’s the blame and the one talking is defending their version of the facts. Spin is what it amounts to. The GOP is now  saying that the cuts aren’t really that bad because proportionately most of the cuts will not affect this year’s spending. I really like what Chris Matthews had to say this morning “ Republicans go to work looking for something they can cut other than defense spending, and Democrats will try to find some way of helping the people who are hurting. The taxpayers are pulling on the apron strings of both parties, so that’s the reason we have so much debt.” Republicans think they can only raise taxes once every thirty years, but that’s a philosophy they’ll all fight for. On the other hand, some Democrats want to reform entitlements, and some don’t. Someone said we could stop the crisis with a one-page bill repealing the sequester cuts, but that’s too easy.

I did see a good discussion Saturday morning about why Democrats and liberal- progressives should care about the continuing degeneration of the Republican Party. The panel on MSNBCs “Up with Chris Hayes “show came up with a conclusion that the Democrats will become complacent and the default party but nothing else, if they’re not pushed by a strong opposition party. There’s a good example of that in my opening paragraph, where we just play the blame game and pay very little attention to the merits of any argument. The GOP will eventually find a leader they can all coalesce around, and the Democrats need to be prepared for that. Right now, the Democrats are aligned, but they need to stand for something and not as just be the party with the most reasonable position at the time because the other solution is way out of the mainstream.

A week ago, a good friend of ours had tears in her eyes, as she told about a recent increase in their healthcare insurance premium. It seems that they were not warned of the $300 a month increase, but she immediately blamed Obamacare. That’s where we are these days; we find the most common villain and just dump our troubles there. If I heard it right, it was a private insurance company that raised the rates, but she never told us the reason why. Her being a good friend, we did what came naturally; we just nodded our heads as if we were in agreement. If we were in another venue and the circumstances were different, I would’ve told her to pick up the latest copy of Time magazine (I'm  still reading all the fine detains of the article for a future blog) so she could see all the waste, fraud, and abuse that’s going on in our healthcare system. I just had a 62-year-old friend of mine, who was fixing to retire, tell me that he was going to stay an additional three years because after this year, his company would no longer offer health insurance.

I was hoping that the “ Pro/Con: Minimum wage thread” would get some interesting comments but the first one I saw was about a city worker getting slammed because he favored a minimum wage increase. It’s one of those “I pay your salary, so I’ll decide if, when, and how much you get” standard answers when you mention public employees.

We are So Superficial

After looking for a word to describe what I heard on “Morning Joe” I finally settled on the word “superficial” because according to the dictionary I used that word means “Concerned with or comprehending only what is apparent or obvious; not deep or penetrating emotionally or intellectually.” Isn’t that what we do every day?

The topic this morning was the president’s phone calls to senators Rubio, McCain and Graham, congratulating them for their efforts in trying to get a comprehensive immigration bill through the Senate. The president only did this because he knows he has to play the political game for the media. The 2007 immigration bill is still the template, and you couldn’t squeeze a paper clip between the Senate's version, and the one drafted by the White House. The White House version threw out the red meat out for the naysayers because it put in an eight-year time frame for someone who’s here illegally to gain citizenship; bypassing border enforcement first. That language gave Marco Rubio the opportunity to jump up and down and cry foul and gain some support from his base.


There’s only one issue to be resolved, and it lies within the GOP. That elephant in the room is the 11 million undocumented immigrants. Those that vote Republican because they could never vote for a Democrat want attrition only and if that means bankrupting the country, the party, and maintaining this wedge issue; so be it. The Republicans want the president to get involved but when he does, they accuse him of derailing the bipartisan effort. The truth is, the Democrats at those meetings are just the potted plants because there are they ready to push the “yea” button but the Republicans need to reinvent the English language to try to convince their base that what they are proposing is not amnesty. If anyone saw the video clips of Senator McCain fighting for the Senate's proposal in his district; you would have a better understanding of what I’m trying to say. I think we all know why the GOP wants an immigration bill to pass.They have already lost the black vote, the Asian vote and the single woman vote and to keep losing the fastest growing demographic(Latino vote) by over 45 percentage points  will mean permanent minority status at the national level;no pun intended.It's very difficult for them because it's as if they are recruiting for the opposition party. They feel like they are using a coffee cup to remove water from their sinking boat. I don't feel sorry for them because they put themselves in that situation by allowing the hateful rhetoric to dominate their overall message.  

With so many issues to be concerned with, Fox News White House correspondent, Ed Henry, is throwing a fit because the media did not get access to the golf outing between Tiger Woods and President Obama. Really, how about an expose about the financial devastation the upcoming sequester cuts will cost? Talk about a superficial manufactured crisis; the stock market doesn’t pay any attention to Washington anymore because they know when push comes to shove, Congress will kick the can down the road and eventually come back to the same place they were three months ago. The truth is, you won’t get a republican excited by saying that 200,000 federal jobs will be lost.

For the past for four years, I’ve heard that this president is not like past presidents because he doesn’t reach out to his fellow Democrats or to the opposition party. The pundits don’t realize that whatever he’s doing; it gave him two terms, and he just might be setting precedent for successful presidents of the future. If we subjectively look back on this presidency; I think we will find that President Obama accomplished a lot more than most presidents. He was the first in 100 years to get a comprehensive health-care package passed, did not allow us to go into a deep recession, ended the war in Iraq, disposed of Osama bin Laden and Omar Qaddafi, ended “Don’t Ask Don't. tell” got the Republicans to vote for a tax increase for the first time in 30 years and there are still the immigration and gun universal background checks to go.

There’s a plus to being my age; you don’t have to play the superficial game unless you want to.

It’s Still A Message War

I'm no longer looking for a compromise coming from the Sunday talk shows or from tomorrow night's State of the Union address(SOTU); I'm just looking for the rephrasing of the same-old  message.  The Republicans want to cut spending, and the Democrats want to include revenue with every budget deal.

The big topic Sunday was the upcoming $85 billion in across –the- board sequestered cuts. The Tea Party freshmen are delighted because they think it’s the only to get the massive cuts they want. They only need to look at the U.K. to see what will happen if you make drastic cuts during a financial downturn. The U. K. is entering a triple- dip recession.

The president suggested the sequester cuts as a measure to make Congress hammer out a budget deal thinking that the massive cuts would never be a reality. Key Republicans supported the Budget Control Act and the consequences of doing nothing since then leaves us with the sequester cuts.
This morning Joe Scarborough said that Eric Cantor’s “[The president] just got his tax hike on the wealthy. And you can't in this town every three months raise taxes. Again, every time, that's his response" is a reasonable approach and democrats ought to get behind it or else the moderates will align themselves with the GOP. That’s ridiculous  because for one,it’s the first time in 20 years that the GOP has voted to raise taxes and they think it’s a one time thing. The president ran on a balance approach for every  budget deal and the American people agreed with him.

Republicans like to say that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem.I’m not going to say that the government doesn’t spend too much because it obviously does;I’m saying now that we are in this predicament; we need to take a balanced approach, so we don’t hurt our weak economy. After all we are mostly borrowing from ourselves, and interest rates are really low right now.

Joe Scarborough had a problem with Nancy Pelosi saying that we don’t have a spending problem. She keeps saying that we a have a jobs and growth problem. It’s all about the messaging because we know that we need to make some cuts but cutting tax loopholes to oil companies means we won’t have to make drastic gashes to nutrition programs for poor children.   Joe Scarborough was very angry  because Pelosi is not in favor of raising the eligibility  age for Medicare and Social Security. Joe doesn’t buy the Democrat approach of waiting to see how much Obamacare does to bring down the cost of healthcare before making unnecessary moves that might not be needed. The full implementation of Obamacare will take place next year.Social Security does not increase the deficit and it will only take a few steps to make it solvent for another 75 years.

Senator Lindsey Graham  has an obsession with hanging the administration for the failure of our Benghazi response that led to the death of four Americans. He’s insisting on more details like the timeline of events and the president’s curiosity throughout the seven-hour  event. He’s threatening to hold up the nominations of Chuck Hagel as defense secretary and John Brennan to head up the CIA until he satisfied.  Last time the GOP tried this, Hillary Clinton made them look like fools.  Representative  Tom Cotton, Bill Kristol and Lindsey Graham are trying to say the president was derelict in his duty in handling the Benghazi tragedy, Chris Wallace kept opening the door for Rep. Cotton and Bill Kristol to say the president is not fit to be the commander- in- chief.

I understand that in tomorrow’s SOTU address the president will not hold out another olive branch to republicans but instead challenge them to come to table as an opposition party not as a hostage taking party. Immediately after the SOTU,Senator Marco Rubio will give the GOP’s response and for those interested, Rand Paul will deliver the Tea Party response.