Ya Think?

Just another Liberal Political weblog

Bravo! We sent our message to the admin!

There was alot of changes in the House and Senate.  Still waiting on two Senate seat in Virginia and Montana, but they both are looking fairly good at this point.

 Sorry I haven’t been posting but I have been an election judge and have had two greuling days.

 Congrats to all the new Congressmen and Senators and the ones that held their office. Now it’s time to work hard for change in this country. Be ever vigilant even on these new members.  Don’t let up or they will get too comfortable and we will have corruption sneaking in again.

More posts once I catch my breath and my mind clears from election overload!

Advertisements

November 8, 2006 Posted by | Current News, Elections, Op Ed, Polls | 3 Comments

This Administration doesn’t like oversight!

Now why would they do this?

Congress Closes Federal Accounting Agency In Iraq…

Was it because they were finding too much graft, incompetence and mismanagement of money!?!

Here’s more from CQ:

Investigators Say Appropriations Panel Lost Appetite for Oversight

Last month’s mass firing of House Appropriations Committee investigators followed years of declining appetite for tough oversight and partisan squabbles that the investigators say often stalled their work.

Several members of the team, some of whom spoke on the condition that they not be identified by name, defend their record against committee spokesman John Scofield’s charge that recent work was not good. They suggest instead that majority Republicans had no appetite for oversight of the Bush administration.

The investigators said they identified billions of dollars in potential savings every year, particularly in the Defense budget, and that they heard no complaints until Chairman Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., dismissed 60 contractors on Oct. 16.
Joseph Stehr, a retired FBI agent who had been a member of the team off and on since 1985, said he remains stunned by Lewis’ action. “It reeks, it really does,” he said. “It just amazes me that after 60 some years, that just with the swipe of a pencil the thing could all go away.”

Stehr said the team gave the committee a unique window into Defense programs. “Who is going to look into all of this? GAO? I don’t think so. They’re slow-pitch Wiffle ball, where we throw 90 miles an hour.”

Scofield said the dismissals were part of a review of the team, and that the investigators might be rehired.

But Stehr, who worked on a now-stalled study of Katrina relief spending as well as on Pentagon budget scrubs, said many of the former investigators are so disillusioned that they would not return if the committee decides to reconstitute its investigative team in the 110th Congress.

Much more to this article here:

This admin has been secretive, lying, scandal ridden, and has morphed into arrogant.

Wake up America!!! Please!

November 4, 2006 Posted by | Current News, Iraq, Op Ed, Scandals, World News | Leave a comment

More on the VFW/Tammy Duckworth Non-Endorsment

Daily Kos has more on the story.  Of course this was a plan from the right.  Here’s what Kos found out:

 The botched endorsement

Fri Nov 03, 2006 at 03:15:35 PM PST

So Duckworth (D) lost both her legs when her Blackhawk helicopter was shot down in combat in Iraq. She’s running for Congress against a Republican, Pete Roskam, who quite typically never served. Suddenly, today, out of the blue, the national Veterans of Foreign Wars endorsed Roskam. Unlike SOP for these sorts of things, the VFW never sent Duckworth a questionnaire. None of the local VFW chapters were contacted.

Democratic congressional candidate Tammy Duckworth gave both legs in sacrifice to her country, but that apparently wasn’t enough for the Veterans of Foreign Wars to endorse her. Instead, the national VFW relied on the word of former Republican state Sen. Ray Soden of DuPage County to back Republican Peter Roskam in the down-to-the-wire 6th Congressional District.

Roskam tried to bill the endorsement as a major boost to his campaign in the final days, but found himself admitting he sat on the endorsement until the end for maximum attention. The VFW representative was unable to give much of a reason for the endorsement or explain how it happened, and Roskam looked stunned at the harsh questioning from reporters.

So if no local chapters were consulted (and they support Duckworth), and if she received no questionnaire, how did it happen?

Roskam said the national endorsement was based on the recommendation by a few 6th District VFW leaders. The only one he named was Soden, a former head of the Illinois VFW who was appointed to fill out former Republican Senate President James “Pate” Philip’s term in 2003.

 Buttice said Soden sits on the national VFW’s political action committee board but had surgery Friday and was unavailable.

Next time, the VFW may want to consult with their local chapters. As is, this endorsement is blowing up big time in Roskam’s face. If nothing else, it gives Duckworth yet another chance to hold press conferences surrounded by vets and have her story repeated in newscasts.

Well, it’s blowing up in the RIGHT face. Get it? “RIGHT”?

The LINK 

Update: The Daily Herald has more

November 4, 2006 Posted by | Current News, Elections, Troops and Vets, Veteran Affairs | 2 Comments

VFW Disses one of their own!

What were they thinking and who made this decision?  Two lost limbs and they endorse a Chickenhawk who likes to ban books! I think it is time for vetting some of the vets in the VFW!

From the AP:

VFW passes over veteran in Illinois

By DON BABWIN, Associated Press Writer 54 minutes ago

The Veterans of Foreign Wars’ political action committee Friday endorsed a Republican congressional candidate with no military experience over a Democrat who lost her legs in combat in Iraq.

The endorsement of GOP state Sen. Peter Roskam over Tammy Duckworth angered some Illinois veterans, as well as national figures such as former Sen. Bob Kerrey, a veteran who lost a leg in Vietnam.

“They should be ashamed of themselves,” he said. “They have some explaining to do to their members.”

Duckworth is a former Black Hawk helicopter pilot with the Army who lost her legs when her aircraft was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade.

Flanked by more than 20 veterans at a news conference, Duckworth said she was never contacted by the organization or asked to fill out a questionnaire, as typically happens when organizations are deciding which candidates to endorse.

“I think it’s unfortunate they did this,” she said.

Duckworth has said that invading Iraq was a mistake but now that American troops are there, withdrawal should be tied to an aggressive training plan for Iraqi forces.

Roskam has repeatedly said the military needs to “finish well” in Iraq. He caused a stir during a debate when he said the district wasn’t a “cut-and-run district” — something Duckworth supporters called inappropriate, given her injuries.

Here’s the Link

November 3, 2006 Posted by | Current News, Op Ed, Veteran Affairs | Leave a comment

Impending Economic Slowdown – Are you prepared?

Many Economists are predicting this slowdown.  At this point the concern is more recession than inflation.  Another article from the AP:

Halloween brings more US data to spook markets

By John AuthersTue Oct 31, 1:25 PM ET

Here we go again. On Tuesday, disappointing data from the US spooked world markets, appropriately enough on Halloween. Once more, the betting is that the US economy is set for a sharp downturn. Graphs of the dollar against the main alternative currencies, and of Treasury bond yields, all show the trajectory of a jet heading for a hard landing.

Following last week’s drab gross domestic product figures for the third quarter, yesterday brought an outright drop in consumer confidence. Analysts had expected the continuing fall in gasoline prices to fuel an increase in confidence, so this was negative. Add the survey of Chicago purchasing managers, which showed its weakest reading since August of last year, and everything was set for a run on the dollar.

Events elsewhere are compounding the dollar’s problems. The Bank of England seems certain to tighten rates at its next opportunity, and a December tightening from the European Central Bank is also firmly expected.

The dollar is at its lowest level against sterling for the year – almost $1.91 at one point on Tuesday. The pound has gained 3.5 cents since the Federal Reserve’s meeting last week. The euro has gained 1.8 per cent, and the yen has strengthened even more, moving from Y119.36 to Y116.82 since the beginning of last week. The Fed Funds futures market puts the odds of a rate cut by next March at 50 per cent, having priced out any such possibility by the beginning of last week.

The 10-year US Treasury bond yield has given up a cool 21.5 basis points over the last six trading sessions, dropping from 4.83 per cent to 4.61 per cent.

The Halloween “tricks” could come for those making money from the yen carry trade – borrowing in low-yielding yen-denominated accounts to go “long” elsewhere. But more dollar weakness could be a “treat” for equities outside the US. The flood of US investors’ money into foreign markets is fuelled by the dollar.

According to Morgan Stanley Capital International, the world outside the US has grown by 9.4 per cent this year in local currency terms, but by 16 per cent in dollar terms.

Wake up America!  The only way to really bring down this country is economically and we are letting this happen.  Think about it.  Who owns most of our debt? Where are the jobs going?  How many corporations are now off-shore and pay no taxes? And how many countries own or are running businesses here?  Remember Dubai has bought but never sold back the running of our ports.  Wake up and question this government and every politician on this subject.

November 1, 2006 Posted by | Current News, Economy, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Take heed of this and mind your future

Found this article on the AP today.  Comments to follow.

 Pressure builds on U.S. business to outsource: study

Tue Oct 31, 4:55 PM ET Pressure on the U.S. labor market from the outsourcing of traditionally white-collar jobs is just starting to build, according to a new study.

 Fortune 500 companies could potentially save $58 billion annually, or some $116 million per company, by offshoring general and administrative jobs, according to the Hackett Group, a strategic advisory firm.

 Hackett will formally issue the study next week.

 The study estimates that increased use of cheaper overseas labor could affect up to 1.47 million back-office jobs, or nearly 3,000 at a typical Fortune 500 company.

 Some of the job functions that can now more readily be shipped overseas than they could several years ago include IT, finance, human resources and procurement, the group said.

 “Over the past few years, the resources available offshore have matured to an extent no one could have imagined, creating a paradigm shift that companies can ignore only at their peril,” said Julio Ramirez, Hackett managing director.

The education base and skill set, and with it the potential savings on labor costs, is on the rise in India, China, the Philippines, Pakistan, Eastern Europe, Brazil and other emerging countries, the Hackett study contends.

Many companies are relying on outdated analysis to assess the benefits of outsourcing, and risk “under-scoping” such initiatives, Hackett said.

But once they get up to speed, it could be “Katie bar the (office) door.”

 Hackett is a division of Answerthink Inc. (Nasdaq:ANSR – news), a business and technology consulting firm.

This will hurt not just employment, it will hurt our economy.  These studies seem to stop at the savings for the Corporations but do not show how the loss of this many jobs, here, will effect our economy. Let’s face it…if people in the US can’t find good jobs, who will be able to afford the goods and services these corporations sell. And who will be able to afford to buy stock in these corporations.

Penny wise and pound foolish!

Time to put limits on these corporations and turn “free” trade into “FAIR” trade.

November 1, 2006 Posted by | Current News, Economy | Leave a comment

A Halloween showing by the stars

This is really a great picture for Halloween:

A spooky Nebula

 

SH2 136: A Spooky Nebula
Credit: Adam Block, NOAO, AURA, NSF Explanation: The dark nebula SH2-136 appears to be celebrating Halloween all of the time. The complex process of star formation create dust clouds of many shapes and sizes — it is human perception that might identify a ghoulish creature, on the right of the above image, chasing humans. Halloween’s modern celebration retains historic roots in dressing to scare away the spirits of the dead. Since the fifth century BC, Halloween has been celebrated as a cross-quarter day, a day halfway between an equinox (equal day / equal night) and a solstice (minimum day / maximum night in the northern hemisphere). With our modern calendar, however, the real cross-quarter day will occur next week. Other cross-quarter markers include Groundhog Day and Walpurgis Night.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap061031.html

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!

October 31, 2006 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What Republicans won’t tell you about the tax cuts

The secret to Bush’s tax cuts is that the middle class will pay more taxes. There is a great article at Bloomberg.com today.  Here are a few excerpts:

Candidates Are Ignoring $1.35 Trillion Minimum Tax `Time Bomb’

By Ryan J. Donmoyer Oct. 31 (Bloomberg) — Congressional candidates this fall are furiously debating Iraq, Medicare and extending tax cuts. Most are staying quiet about an imminent legislative challenge: how to stop a tax increase that will hit more than 20 million households next year, some with incomes as low as $50,000.

Unless Congress acts, the alternative minimum tax will gradually impose $1.35 trillion in additional taxes over the next 10 years. Yet only six candidates in the 28 most-competitive House and Senate races across the country even mention it on their campaign Web sites.

Most candidates are avoiding the subject because the cost of stopping the tax increase would obstruct key elements of their agendas, such as the expansion of prescription-drug benefits for the elderly planned by Democrats, or Republicans’ plan to make permanent President George W. Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

Looks like no one wants to talk about this. Although, lets give the devil its due, the Democrats have addressed this issue. Not locally in the individual races because people don’t want to hear about tax increases. 

The minimum tax was created as a parallel tax system in 1969 to prevent 155 wealthy people from reducing their liability through excessive exemptions, credits, and other deductions. Because it wasn’t indexed for inflation, the tax increasingly affects people with modest incomes by denying deductions such as personal exemptions, property taxes, and medical expenses.

45 Million Households

The tax affected 3.8 million households this year; that number will grow almost six-fold in 2007. By 2016, about 45 million American households face higher bills if changes aren’t made, according to an estimate this month by the nonpartisan staff of the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.

And what will happen if we don’t address this?

Rangel, who is in line to become chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee if Democrats win control of the House, has said fixing the minimum tax is Congress’s “responsibility.” Some of Bush’s tax cuts, especially those for investors and multimillion dollar estates, would have to be pared or abolished to pay for a permanent fix without worsening the budget deficit, he said.

“Clearly we’re going to have to raise the money within the system,” Rangel, 76, said in an interview last month.

Bush and other Republicans have responded that Rangel and other Democrats are planning tax increases if they take power.

`Taxes Are Going Up’ “If the tax cuts we pass are not made permanent and they are left to expire, your taxes are going up,” Bush said at an Oct. 26 fund-raiser for Republican House candidate Jeff Lamberti in Iowa.

 John Buckley, chief tax counsel for the Democratic staff of the House Ways and Means Committee, said the minimum tax reclaims many of the benefits provided by Bush’s tax cuts. That is because the tax cuts lowered rates under the normal system, without altering the alternative minimum tax rates. By law, taxpayers must calculate their liability under both systems and pay whichever is higher.

As a result, twice as many households will pay the minimum tax if Bush’s tax cuts are made permanent than if the cuts are allowed to expire.

More here

October 31, 2006 Posted by | Economy, Government Policies | Leave a comment

GAO Chief Warns Economic Disaster Looms

The signs have been there for awhile and yet everyone tells you what a great economy we have. I am posting the whole article with a reccommendation that you read it all. This is scary, folks, and if we leave this admin in for much longer we’re going to crash.

This is from My Way, Oct 28, 12:32 PM (ET)

By MATT CRENSON

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) – David M. Walker sure talks like he’s running for office. “This is about the future of our country, our kids and grandkids,” the comptroller general of the United States warns a packed hall at Austin’s historic Driskill Hotel. “We the people have to rise up to make sure things get changed.”

But Walker doesn’t want, or need, your vote this November. He already has a job as head of the Government Accountability Office, an investigative arm of Congress that audits and evaluates the performance of the federal government.

Basically, that makes Walker the nation’s accountant-in-chief. And the accountant-in-chief’s professional opinion is that the American public needs to tell Washington it’s time to steer the nation off the path to financial ruin.

From the hustings and the airwaves this campaign season, America’s political class can be heard debating Capitol Hill sex scandals, the wisdom of the war in Iraq and which party is tougher on terror. Democrats and Republicans talk of cutting taxes to make life easier for the American people.

What they don’t talk about is a dirty little secret everyone in Washington knows, or at least should. The vast majority of economists and budget analysts agree: The ship of state is on a disastrous course, and will founder on the reefs of economic disaster if nothing is done to correct it.

There’s a good reason politicians don’t like to talk about the nation’s long-term fiscal prospects. The subject is short on political theatrics and long on complicated economics, scary graphs and very big numbers. It reveals serious problems and offers no easy solutions. Anybody who wanted to deal with it seriously would have to talk about raising taxes and cutting benefits, nasty nostrums that might doom any candidate who prescribed them.

“There’s no sexiness to it,” laments Leita Hart-Fanta, an accountant who has just heard Walker’s pitch. She suggests recruiting a trusted celebrity – maybe Oprah – to sell fiscal responsibility to the American people.

Walker doesn’t want to make balancing the federal government’s books sexy – he just wants to make it politically palatable. He has committed to touring the nation through the 2008 elections, talking to anybody who will listen about the fiscal black hole Washington has dug itself, the “demographic tsunami” that will come when the baby boom generation begins retiring and the recklessness of borrowing money from foreign lenders to pay for the operation of the U.S. government.

“He can speak forthrightly and independently because his job is not in jeopardy if he tells the truth,” said Isabel V. Sawhill, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution.

Walker can talk in public about the nation’s impending fiscal crisis because he has one of the most secure jobs in Washington. As comptroller general of the United States – basically, the government’s chief accountant – he is serving a 15-year term that runs through 2013.

This year Walker has spoken to the Union League Club of Chicago and the Rotary Club of Atlanta, the Sons of the American Revolution and the World Future Society. But the backbone of his campaign has been the Fiscal Wake-up Tour, a traveling roadshow of economists and budget analysts who share Walker’s concern for the nation’s budgetary future.

“You can’t solve a problem until the majority of the people believe you have a problem that needs to be solved,” Walker says.

Polls suggest that Americans have only a vague sense of their government’s long-term fiscal prospects. When pollsters ask Americans to name the most important problem facing America today – as a CBS News/New York Times poll of 1,131 Americans did in September – issues such as the war in Iraq, terrorism, jobs and the economy are most frequently mentioned. The deficit doesn’t even crack the top 10.

Yet on the rare occasions that pollsters ask directly about the deficit, at least some people appear to recognize it as a problem. In a survey of 807 Americans last year by the Pew Center for the People and the Press, 42 percent of respondents said reducing the deficit should be a top priority; another 38 percent said it was important but a lower priority.

So the majority of the public appears to agree with Walker that the deficit is a serious problem, but only when they’re made to think about it. Walker’s challenge is to get people not just to think about it, but to pressure politicians to make the hard choices that are needed to keep the situation from spiraling out of control.

To show that the looming fiscal crisis is not a partisan issue, he brings along economists and budget analysts from across the political spectrum. In Austin, he’s accompanied by Diane Lim Rogers, a liberal economist from the Brookings Institution, and Alison Acosta Fraser, director of the Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

“We all agree on what the choices are and what the numbers are,” Fraser says.

Their basic message is this: If the United States government conducts business as usual over the next few decades, a national debt that is already $8.5 trillion could reach $46 trillion or more, adjusted for inflation. That’s almost as much as the total net worth of every person in America – Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and those Google guys included.

A hole that big could paralyze the U.S. economy; according to some projections, just the interest payments on a debt that big would be as much as all the taxes the government collects today.

And every year that nothing is done about it, Walker says, the problem grows by $2 trillion to $3 trillion.

People who remember Ross Perot’s rants in the 1992 presidential election may think of the federal debt as a problem of the past. But it never really went away after Perot made it an issue, it only took a breather. The federal government actually produced a surplus for a few years during the 1990s, thanks to a booming economy and fiscal restraint imposed by laws that were passed early in the decade. And though the federal debt has grown in dollar terms since 2001, it hasn’t grown dramatically relative to the size of the economy.

But that’s about to change, thanks to the country’s three big entitlement programs – Social Security, Medicaid and especially Medicare. Medicaid and Medicare have grown progressively more expensive as the cost of health care has dramatically outpaced inflation over the past 30 years, a trend that is expected to continue for at least another decade or two.

And with the first baby boomers becoming eligible for Social Security in 2008 and for Medicare in 2011, the expenses of those two programs are about to increase dramatically due to demographic pressures. People are also living longer, which makes any program that provides benefits to retirees more expensive.

Medicare already costs four times as much as it did in 1970, measured as a percentage of the nation’s gross domestic product. It currently comprises 13 percent of federal spending; by 2030, the Congressional Budget Office projects it will consume nearly a quarter of the budget.

Economists Jagadeesh Gokhale of the American Enterprise Institute and Kent Smetters of the University of Pennsylvania have an even scarier way of looking at Medicare. Their method calculates the program’s long-term fiscal shortfall – the annual difference between its dedicated revenues and costs – over time.

By 2030 they calculate Medicare will be about $5 trillion in the hole, measured in 2004 dollars. By 2080, the fiscal imbalance will have risen to $25 trillion. And when you project the gap out to an infinite time horizon, it reaches $60 trillion.

Medicare so dominates the nation’s fiscal future that some economists believe health care reform, rather than budget measures, is the best way to attack the problem.

“Obviously health care is a mess,” says Dean Baker, a liberal economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a Washington think tank. “No one’s been willing to touch it, but that’s what I see as front and center.”

Social Security is a much less serious problem. The program currently pays for itself with a 12.4 percent payroll tax, and even produces a surplus that the government raids every year to pay other bills. But Social Security will begin to run deficits during the next century, and ultimately would need an infusion of $8 trillion if the government planned to keep its promises to every beneficiary.

Calculations by Boston University economist Lawrence Kotlikoff indicate that closing those gaps – $8 trillion for Social Security, many times that for Medicare – and paying off the existing deficit would require either an immediate doubling of personal and corporate income taxes, a two-thirds cut in Social Security and Medicare benefits, or some combination of the two.

Why is America so fiscally unprepared for the next century? Like many of its citizens, the United States has spent the last few years racking up debt instead of saving for the future. Foreign lenders – primarily the central banks of China, Japan and other big U.S. trading partners – have been eager to lend the government money at low interest rates, making the current $8.5-trillion deficit about as painful as a big balance on a zero-percent credit card.

In her part of the fiscal wake-up tour presentation, Rogers tries to explain why that’s a bad thing. For one thing, even when rates are low a bigger deficit means a greater portion of each tax dollar goes to interest payments rather than useful programs. And because foreigners now hold so much of the federal government’s debt, those interest payments increasingly go overseas rather than to U.S. investors.

More serious is the possibility that foreign lenders might lose their enthusiasm for lending money to the United States. Because treasury bills are sold at auction, that would mean paying higher interest rates in the future. And it wouldn’t just be the government’s problem. All interest rates would rise, making mortgages, car payments and student loans costlier, too.

A modest rise in interest rates wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing, Rogers said. America’s consumers have as much of a borrowing problem as their government does, so higher rates could moderate overconsumption and encourage consumer saving. But a big jump in interest rates could cause economic catastrophe. Some economists even predict the government would resort to printing money to pay off its debt, a risky strategy that could lead to runaway inflation.

Macroeconomic meltdown is probably preventable, says Anjan Thakor, a professor of finance at Washington University in St. Louis. But to keep it at bay, he said, the government is essentially going to have to renegotiate some of the promises it has made to its citizens, probably by some combination of tax increases and benefit cuts.

But there’s no way to avoid what Rogers considers the worst result of racking up a big deficit – the outrage of making our children and grandchildren repay the debts of their elders.

“It’s an unfair burden for future generations,” she says.

You’d think young people would be riled up over this issue, since they’re the ones who will foot the bill when they’re out in the working world. But students take more interest in issues like the Iraq war and gay marriage than the federal government’s finances, says Emma Vernon, a member of the University of Texas Young Democrats.

“It’s not something that can fire people up,” she says.

The current political climate doesn’t help. Washington tends to keep its fiscal house in better order when one party controls Congress and the other is in the White House, says Sawhill.

“It’s kind of a paradoxical result. Your commonsense logic would tell you if one party is in control of everything they should be able to take action,” Sawhill says.

But the last six years of Republican rule have produced tax cuts, record spending increases and a Medicare prescription drug plan that has been widely criticized as fiscally unsound. When President Clinton faced a Republican Congress during the 1990s, spending limits and other legislative tools helped produce a surplus.

So maybe a solution is at hand.

“We’re likely to have at least partially divided government again,” Sawhill said, referring to predictions that the Democrats will capture the House, and possibly the Senate, in next month’s elections.

But Walker isn’t optimistic that the government will be able to tackle its fiscal challenges so soon.

“Realistically what we hope to accomplish through the fiscal wake-up tour is ensure that any serious candidate for the presidency in 2008 will be forced to deal with the issue,” he says. “The best we’re going to get in the next couple of years is to slow the bleeding.”

Let’s hope we can get a fiscally responsible government in because it is going to be a big job straightening out this mess.  I blame Greenspan for this.  What are your thoughts?

October 29, 2006 Posted by | Current News, Economy | 2 Comments

Seniors Protest….with donuts!

These Republicans are afraid of their own shadow!  Is it guilt maybe.  But what you are about to read is totally unbelievable!

Granny Get Your Gun…Oops, Make That Donuts

by James Parks, Oct 27, 2006

Seems like in Allison Park, Pa., near Pittsburgh, the biggest threat to public security is 40 senior citizens carrying donuts. Yesterday, staff at Rep. Melissa Hart’s (R-Pa.) district office called for three armed police from nearby Hampton Township to disperse the group of seniors, all members of the Pennsylvania Alliance for Retired Americans (PARA), who sought to deliver donuts to Hart’s office to protest the new Medicare law.

The AFL-CIO is urging members to call Hart’s office and tell her: Shame on you for treating your own constituents like criminals simply because they wanted to express their opinion. You can call Hart at her Allison Park office at 412-492-0161 or at her Ellwood City office at 724-752-0490.

Under the new Bush administration Medicare Part D rules passed by Congress in 2003, out-of-pocket prescription expenses between the annual amounts of $2,251 and $5,100 are not covered—a nearly $3,000 “donut hole.” Of the 11.8 million Medicare enrollees whose plans include a coverage gap, the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates at least 6.9 million of them could hit the donut hole.

The badly crafted law means some 170,000 seniors in Pennsylvania must pay full price for their prescriptions while still paying their full monthly premiums. Hart backed provisions in the Medicare drug bill that prevent the government from negotiating lower prescription drug prices with pharmaceutical companies and she voted for the bill that created the donut hole.

PARA issued a report this month that finds Keystone State seniors who received their medications through Medicare Part D paid more in drug co-pays and monthly premiums, were subjected to significant coverage gaps and had more significant restrictions on covered medications than those in the other major categories.

More at link above.

Evidently Ms Hart had no answers for these seniors.  I can’t believe she called the cops on Seniors. 

October 28, 2006 Posted by | Current News, Government Policies, Seniors | 1 Comment