Tonight’s star of the press conference was Schumer. While he lectured us on how the House needs to defer to the Senate (it doesn’t-it is coequal to the Senate). He mentioned compromise and how Republicans in the Senate need to compromise. And his most statesmanlike comment-’the House Members cannot even tie their shoes’. That’s the way to forge bipartisan compromise Chuck.

Have you ever noticed that when a liberal disagrees with you, you are always an idiot? Or some other gratuitous insult?

CCB would do three things as the name suggests. It calls for significant REAL cuts to the budget to bring it inline with revenues. Since most people get their understanding of budgeting from the media, they probably don’t realize that most congressional CUTS are not cuts at all. They are reductions in the growth of spending. So it would be like a person who earns 100 dollars but routinely spends 120 and is planning to spend 150 the next 100 dollars they get. A senator comes along and suggests that this person restrict their spending to 120 dollars from now on. Poof! That’s a 30 dollar spending cut. But our spender is already spending 20 dollars beyond their means. So the cuts in CCB would be real cuts. So our spender would be forced to cut to at least something less that 120.

I am jumping ahead but that is where balance comes in. Since we don’t just want to keep spending outside of our means, we have to balance. That means that spender has to cut back to 100 OR earn an additional amount equal to what he spends. Since government doesn’t earn, it only taxes or promotes growth to increase revenue, that is the harder side of the equation. When you consider that historical tax receipts as a percentage of GDP routinely range only between 14-20 percent (OMB tables available on Whitehouse.gov) taxation cannot be your only answer. That is because if you raise taxes too high, tax compliance goes down as people either do not pay or create aggressive tax avoidance strategies. Balance would be enforced via a Balanced Budget Amendment to the constitution.

And let’s not forget Cap. We know that it would be very difficult to put years of unsustainable spending growth back to balance immediately. However, by creating enforceable CAPS that are triggered toward spending imbalances, we could track a path toward deficit reduction that is predictable. So our spender may be able to balance, but they might have a three year deficit (60 dollars). So we might agree that he would cut 20 additional dollars each year for the next three to get in balance. That would mean he gets to spend only 80 dollars. Sounds very similar to what you do at home doesn’t it?

It is interesting that according to a CNN poll that they are not advertising, Americans like CCB by a margin of 2-1. Yet Harry Reid calls this the worst piece of legislation ever devised. Which should tell you something.

What about the gang of 6 proposal? The issue here is less about the alleged substance and more about the methodology. I will save the substantive issues for a later day as some of them have merit (tax code rewrite, cuts to various programs, etc). The issue with this plan is that it is not legislation at all. It is a promise that Senate committees will design specific proposals in the future to address doing what it says it is going to do. Remember the concept of passing the bill so you could see what’s in it? Do you trust that any committee in the senate will produce real spending cuts or even if you believe in tax hikes, will produce a tax regimen that doesn’t wind up hurting the middle class. I don’t. And I suspect most American do not either.

So the clear winner for America is CCB. Which is why this Congress and President will not do it.

[T]he governor — by once again protecting tax breaks for 16,000 millionaires and using line-item vetoes on the Democratic budget — dramatically reduced potential school aid to suburban and rural school districts throughout New Jersey….

Taxpayers and schools throughout the state, no matter their locale, deserve fair and adequate funding. That’s why the responsible budget plan we Democrats submitted was based on the simple concept of treating everyone fairly, whether living in a city or a suburb….

That’s why I sponsored legislation to increase the income tax rate on 16,000 millionaires and also, by the way, to provide a much-needed tax break to senior citizen retirement income.

This was a reasonable request. Under the bill, each additional $100,000 earned above $1 million would cost that taxpayer an additional $1,780. And this isn’t to vilify millionaires. Such success is what America can be all about, and we celebrate it. In fact, millionaires are more than willing to be a part of the solution, yet the governor again vetoed the concept.

The result: The governor cut $492 million for suburban and rural school districts.

Fewer than half of Americans pay net taxes as it is. How much more money do you want to force out of people at the top of the food chain before it’s considered “fair and adequate funding”? Is it fair to take 50% of their money? 75%? 90%?

No problem, McKeon says, because “millionaires are more than willing to be part of the solution.”

So, does the Governor’s veto prevent them from giving money to the schools? Because if it doesn’t, McKeon can spend his considerable oratorical powers (which I saw on display when he was pulling down two taxpayer-funded paychecks, as mayor of West Orange and Assemblyman) to raise funds from the willing millionaires. I’m sure some of the 16,000 would be willing to give some money to the cause.

That’s not sufficient for McKeon or his party cohort, though. They want to make sure that everyone coughs up money, whether they agree with him or not. He will not vilify millionaires, but he’s sure willing to force them to pay for the causes he likes.

$492,000,000 / 16,000 = a $30,750 average tax increase per millionaire. This would be on top of whatever additional taxes President Obama tries to force through. This is money that could be driven to the private sector through investments, purchases, and other job-creating activities. How about letting them spend it instead?

McKeon thinks Governor Christie is wrong to let the millionaires keep their money. I say that if his ideas are so great, he should be able to convince the millionaires to give it up voluntarily.

His point was that ever since Boehner has taken office, there has been absolutely nothing done in the House of Representatives. He then went on to call him a big mouth, trash talker and an idiot. And from there his discourse went downhill.

But is he right? There is no doubt that we have seen less legislation become law in the 112th congress and that would be expected in a time of divided government. There have been 24 pieces of legislation that have become law in the 112th so far. For those of you like my fellow train traveller, that means the House passed it, the Senate passed it and the President signed it. Of those bills, 14 were initiated in the House. That means that at the very least, that over 60 percent of legislation in this congress that has become law was initiated by the House under Boehner.

If you look at votes, the LA Times just last week tallied 112 Yea votes in the House of Representatives and 84 in the senate. That equates to 57 percent of all legislation in the mill has passed the house. So no matter how you look at it, you cannot badmouth the Speaker without at least badmouthing his counterpart in the Senate who is far less prolific in terms of legislation.

But think about another measure. It has been 804 days since he Senate has passed a budget. This started just before the route of the 2010 elections when Democrats were afraid to pass a budget because it might show the public how out of touch they have become. That situation continues to this day.

So my fellow train traveller, who is really the ignorant one? Perhaps it’s you.

Christopher M. Shelton, vice president of CWA District 1 which represents 175,000 workers in New Jersey, New York, and New England states as well as eastern Canada, began his address to thousands in attendance by saying, “Welcome to Nazi Germany.”

“We have Adolf Christie and his two generals trying to turn New Jersey into Nazi Germany,” Shelton said, also referring to Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney and Assembly Speaker Sheila Y. Oliver. “It’s going to take World War III to get rid of Adolf Christie. Not only is Christie a Nazi, but so are his two generals. Any politician who stands up against collective bargaining is not a Democrat, they’re Nazis.”

He punctuated the statement with a profanity.

Isn’t it interesting that when Democrat union leaders in our state speak, they almost always resort to name calling, exhort their colleagues to violence and even resort to death threats.  All while we continue to be lectured by liberals that a return to “civility” is in order because of horrible Tea Party people and Republicans.   If this is civility, than apparently anything goes.

Ocean Spray said it’s closing its 60-acre juice-manufacturing plant in September 2013 because operating a newly built facility in the Keystone State is cheaper than upgrading the Bordentown facility.

The juice plant has been a staple of the community and a major source of revenue for Bordentown since it was established in 1943. The imminent closure means the factory’s 250 employees will have to decide whether to move with the company or find new jobs.

That is a story that has been repeated so often I would qualify it as sad.  And the reaction of our local politicians is noteworthy.

City, county and state officials offered a number of incentives to keep Ocean Spray in the Garden State, but New Jersey Assemblyman Joe Malone, who lives in Bordentown, said the Massachusetts-based company didn’t negotiate in good faith.

The challenge of politics in this state is that our politicians are used to an entitlement culture that talks about jobs as “rights” and that companies should act as the government does, with no thought toward their responsibility to the shareholders.   And it doesn’t work that way in the real world.  Ocean Spray is a business.  It should evaluate the a major facility expansion just as it evaluates any business investment.  And even though it is painful, the fact that New Jersey was once very attractive to business and in the past several years has become the singularly most unattractive state in the country for business expansion must factor into their decision.

I don’t want to see Ocean Spray leave.  My wife’s grandfather worked there many years ago.  And I remember a New Jersey that was the leader in telecom, pharmaceuticals and others business that are rapidly moving away.  Perhaps soon the politicians of this state will realize that the government should act to encourage business growth and expansion instead of acting as a Lyme infected tick that will sooner or later sap every ounce of energy from the host. 

Read the entire article here.

“We do not have time for this kind of silliness,” Obama said in hurriedly announced appearance in the White House briefing room. “We’ve got better stuff to do.”

“We’re not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers,” Obama said before TV cameras at the White House.

He then proceeded to board Air Force one to fly to and appear on Oprah.  And then flew to New York to hold not one but three fund raising events.  You see, there’s no time for silliness…

Under the Obama tax plan, the Bush rates would be repealed for the top brackets. Yet the “cost” of extending all the Bush rates in 2011 over 10 years was about $3.7 trillion. Some $3 trillion of that was for everything but the top brackets—and Mr. Obama says he wants to extend those rates forever. According to Internal Revenue Service data, the entire taxable income of everyone earning over $100,000 in 2008 was about $1.582 trillion. Even if all these Americans—most of whom are far from wealthy—were taxed at 100%, it wouldn’t cover Mr. Obama’s deficit for this year.

Re-read the last line.  If EVERY PERSON who makes over $100,000 per year were taxed 100%, it still would not cover Obama’s deficit for this year alone!  And notice, that is the millionaire, or the $250,000 a year person or family, it is $100k.   And folks, in New Jersey for many families, that is just getting by.  So for the President to continue the rhetoric he is spewing he is either stupid (which he is NOT) or dishonest (which he very well may be) or his is doing this to PURPOSELY create a rift in the very fabric of our society. 

And THAT is scary.