Bent Corner

The $14 billion government bailout for the Detroit auto makers died in the Senate because all but ten Republican Senators refused to vote for it unless the union representing the autoworkers agree to massive pay cuts.

Congressional Republicans have been in open revolt against Bush over the auto bailout. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky joined other GOP lawmakers Thursday in announcing his opposition to the White House-backed bill, which passed the House on Wednesday. He and other Republicans insisted that the carmakers restructure their debt and bring wages and benefits in line with those paid by Toyota, Honda and Nissan in the United States.

I think I actually agree with the Republicans on this one. I think it would be great to get the pay and benefits that the average UEW worker gets. The problem is, the money just isn’t there. Because of the high cost of labor, Detroit automakers have to resort to not making cars, but expensive trucks, vans, and SUVs to absorb the high cost of UAW labor. When you are paying someone $69 in wages and benefits to turn bolts on an assembly line, it makes more sense economically for the big three automakers to make autos they can charge more for. Paying someone to turn bolts on a $9,000 car costs the same as paying someone to turn bolts on a $45,000 truck or SUV.

The automakers then have to spend millions on advertising to convince Americans that they need a truck or a sports utility vehicle to drive to work or to run errands. Unless you regularly haul around a full sheet of plywood, you don’t need a truck. You definitely don’t need a Ford F-150 truck, Ford’s best selling vehicle. It’s a vehicle that gets only 15 miles to the gallon in the city, 20 miles to the gallon on the highway. The fuel efficiency is even worse if the vehicle is hauling something heavy in the bed.

Not that this would ever happen.

If the big three automakers file for bankruptcy protection, UAW wages and benefits will be almost certainly be cut, but instead of the UAW leadership having any kind of say in the matter, it will be decided by a federal bankruptcy judge.

Even though Representative Roscoe Bartlett admits that since 2004 he submitted fraudulent incorrect personal financial disclosure forms that he is required to submit because he is a member of Congress, he claims that his taxes filed during that same time period with the Internal Revenue Service are correct.

Why would the two be any different?

When asked by the Frederick News-Post to release copies of his tax returns to the public, Bartlett spokeswoman Lisa Wright said he would not do so because legally he isn’t required to do it.

That doesn’t make any sense. The tax returns should contain the exact same information that is on his personal financial disclosure forms. That information is public record. Granted, that information is fraudulent incorrect, but he claims that he is “planning” on filing an amended personal financial disclosure.

My guess is that his tax returns were just as fraudulent incorrect as his personal financial disclosure. He’s probably just hoping he doesn’t get audited.

Good luck with that Roscoe.

Link

Wondering what Congress is doing about ending the war in Iraq? They are too busy investigating Major League Baseball. Specifically, they are looking into steroid and human growth hormone use by players before such substances were banned by Major League Baseball.

Not only are they sniffing around to find out what former players such as Roger Clemons were taking, they are evidently investigating baseball player wives.

From the New York Daily News:

Brian McNamee told congressional investigators Thursday that Roger Clemens’ wife took human growth hormone before she appeared with the pitcher in Sports Illustrated’s swimsuit issue in 2003, according to a Washington source.

I understand why Congress is looking into steroid and human growth hormone use by baseball players. The Constitution is quite specific that Congress is to provide oversight over professional sports leagues.* It doesn’t say anything about their wives.

* No it doesn’t. I was being sarcastic. I do that sometimes.

To help stimulate the economy, Congress and the White House have struck a deal to begin “rushing” tax rebates of $600 to $1,200 to tax payers hoping we will quickly spend this free money on something stupid and in the process shock this ailing economy to life. If I remember correctly, Bush did this shortly after he took office. It seems so long ago that I can’t really remember.

I’m glad that the federal government has so much extra money that they can just dispense it in such a haphazard way.

Even if the Senate quickly approves this free money scheme, the checks will not start going out till May. It could then take months before everyone gets their free money.

The fear is that people will not take this money and spend it. They might just do something responsible with it and put it away for a rainy day. That wont stimulate the economy. If they really want to make sure people use the money for it’s intended purpose, they ought to issue Visa or Mastercard debit cards. Make them so they can’t be used for anything other then something that would stimulate the economy. That means you couldn’t squirrel it away for the proverbial rainy day. You would have to use it.

I wont believe we are getting this money until we actually get the check and the check clears. Until that happens, I’m not counting on getting it.

Ron Paul claims that he’s been excluded from a New Hampshire January 6 Republican debate being organized by Fox News. This is the weekend before the New Hampshire Primary. Ron Paul says he is being excluded because Fox News is scared of him. Why is Doctor Paul constantly questioning everyone’s bravery? First a recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor and now a cable news network.

Ron Paul’s Internet fans aren’t taking this exclusion sitting down. They are organizing a boycott against any company that advertises on Fox News. They have a list. They are getting the word out to all followers of Ron Paul to not to buy products from these companies.

One of these companies is Gold Bond. That means if a Ron Paul fan were to get a rash in an embarrassing place, they would have to turn elsewhere to get some instant relief. Let’s just hope that they go rash-free.

What’s even funnier is that some Ron Paul supporters are also advising fellow Ron Paul supporters to contact the FCC and complain. This is from a post on a Ron Paul message board:

I’m actually surprised that I haven’t seen this tactic posted yet. Along with advertisers, this is the other major weakness of broadcasters/networks.

The other critical items we can influence directly are the FCC broadcast license for each affiliate, AND FCC approval for station purchases/mergers/trades. By specifically targeting FCC approvals, your comments will have a LOT more long-term weight. Endangering the local affiliate’s license with enough negative comments in the right way will change their attitude from “It’s the network, nothing we can do” and largely ignoring you to actually calling the NewsCorp on your behalf saying “OMG, fix this NOW!”

Remember, the FCC threatened to hit EACH broadcast station with a 6-figure fine for the half-second “wardrobe malfunction” at the SuperBowl*.

This is funny for two different reasons. First, Ron Paul represents a political philosophy that believes a big federal government is bad. If he had his way, not only would the FCC cease to exist, so would the IRS, the Department of Education, the CIA, the FBI, and a whole host of other federal agencies. What do Ron Paul supporters do when they think their man has been slighted? They whine about it to a government agency.

It makes you wonder why they are Ron Paul supporters in the first place.

Secondly, the FCC doesn’t have any jurisdiction over Fox News. It’s a cable network, not a broadcast network. Whining to the FCC about something a cable network is a waste of time. Then again, why should that stop a Ron Paul supporter?

And why is Fox News excluding Ron Paul from the debate? Because there is no debate. It was canceled three weeks ago because of it’s close proximity with another similar event. Ron Paul had been invited to attend, but reportedly his staff never got back with the event organizers to confirm that he would attend.

Why would Fox News exclude someone like Ron Paul from the debate? Including Ron Paul ensures more people will watch. Not only his rabid die hard fan base, but people like me that think he’s a loon. I would watch just for the entertainment value. Who knows what he would say.

My representative in congress Republican Congressman Roscoe Bartlett spoke at a town hall meeting on energy in Mount Airy and said he thought “gasoline needs to cost more that it already does” in order to promote conservation. He also said that “too many people are driving pickup trucks as personal transportation.”

I don’t know about people driving pickup trucks, but I know that gas already costs too much as it is. It doesn’t need to cost more then what it costs now. The fact that my elected representative in Washington D.C. actually hopes that gas goes up in price just confirms what I already know - I have a representative that does not represent my interests. Not only my interests, but the interests of my fellow neighbors in the Maryland 6th district.

Roscoe Bartlett uses the power of his office to satisfy his own whims. He doesn’t use his office for the benefit of the people he is elected to represent.

I also know that Roscoe Bartlett will continue representing the 6th district of Maryland until he either retires or dies. He will never lose an election. My fellow voters here in the 6th district of Maryland will continue to vote for Roscoe Bartlett no matter what he says or what he does. He can even say that he hopes our gas prices go up and people will still reelect him into office.

Supposedly the Democratically-controlled Congress and President Bush are heading to a showdown over the future of health insurance for more than 10 million children. Not that I doubt for a nanosecond that Bush is against the idea of health insurance for poor children. I just don’t know if I’m ready to believe congress is willing to actually fight for anything unless it’s a worthless non-binding resolution.

This from the New York Times:

The president says the measure, which would renew and expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, costs too much and would be “an incremental step toward the goal of government-run health care for every American.”

An incremental step toward the goal of government-run health care for every American? The government already runs health care in America. They control everything related to our health care. They control who can become a doctor. They control what drugs or procedures a doctor can administer to a patient.

There is a reason doctors in this country cannot prescribe marijuana to their patients suffering from glaucoma. It’s not because marijuana has not proven to be highly effective in treating glaucoma. It’s because the government wont allow doctors to prescribe it.

Americans are already used to having their health care micromanaged for them. The difference is that health care in this country is run by corporations interested in profit, not in the health and well being of the insured.

There is a reason every other country in the industrialized world has national health care.

George Bush criticized Congress as being “irresponsible” for going on spring break without first approving money for Iraq with no strings attached. They gave him all the money he asked for. The problem is that they tied the $120 billion dollars in military spending to a timetable for troop withdrawal from Iraq.

“They need to come off their vacation, get a bill to my desk, and if it’s got strings and mandates and withdrawals and pork I’ll veto it,” the president said. “And then we can get down to the business of getting this thing done.”

I never thought I would hear George Bush criticize anyone else for taking a vacation. He’s spent so much time on vacation that he actually set a presidential record. Hearing him criticize anyone about taking a vacation is just hypocritically weird.

What’s he going to do next, criticize someone for using a family connection to get out of going to Vietnam?

Update (5 April) : Unbeknown to me at the time when I first wrote this post, Bush left Washington shortly after criticizing Congress. He himself went on vacation to his ranch in Texas. Go figure.

The final non-binding vote was a non-binding 246 to a non-binding 182. Seventeen Republicans actually voted for the non-binding resolution.

What a waste of time. What’s the point? To let Bush know that they don’t approve of his war? Couldn’t they just do what I do and write a blog post? This non-binding resolution doesn’t do anything. A non-binding resolution has as much teeth to it as a blog post.

It seems a shame though that they didn’t allow the non-voting members of the House to vote. Since it was non-binding, what’s the difference? The representatives from Puerto Rico, Washington DC, the Virgin Islands, and Guam are allowed to pretend to be actual congressmen. They are not allowed to actually vote. This non-binding Iraq war resolution sounds like it would have been right up their non-voting alley.

If they were allowed to vote.

Non-Binding Link