The main reason so many Americans reject the idea of Government-Run Health Care is credibility. Frankly. there is none. There is simply no confidence that our elected officials can do anything right, much less improving something as personal and intimate as health care.

H.R.3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, all 2,409 glorious pages of it, is the end-game version that Reps. Pelosi and DeLauro are attempting ram through the House by St. Patrick’s Day at the latest.

To illustrate just how convoluted the reconciled health bill really is, let’s take a look at all the agencies and grant programs that will be implemented right after President Obama signs the bill into law. ResistNet provides this list, but honestly, it gets tiresome real fast:

1. Grant program for consumer assistance offices (§ 1002, p. 37)

STOP! Before we go any further, let’s take a look at H.R. 3590, Section 1002, and see what we’re getting for our money. Now, subsection (e)(1) says Section 1002 costs $30,000,000 for the first year, and (e)(2) promises “such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section” thereafter. Such sums could be more than $30,000,000 a year, of course. Here’s the text of the GPO version:

(a) In General- The Secretary shall award grants to States to … provide support for–

(1) offices of health insurance consumer assistance; or

(2) health insurance ombudsman programs.

(b) Eligibility-

(1) IN GENERAL- blah blah blah

(2) CRITERIA- blah blah blah.

(c) Duties- The office of health insurance consumer assistance or health insurance ombudsman shall–

(1) assist with the filing of complaints and appeals …

(2) collect, track, and quantify problems and inquiries …

(3) educate consumers on their rights and responsibilities…

(4) assist consumers with enrollment …

(5) resolve problems …

(d) Data Collection- blah blah blah.

(e) Funding …

Never mind funding. We’ve already established a price tag of $30,000,000 or more for program (1.) in our list, which establishes information offices to help people find their way through the Pelosi-Reid-Obama-DeLauro maze. (Does anyone believe these “help desks” will actually help anyone? Do they ever?)

Let’s continue on with our list, keeping in mind the whole time that Rep. Pelosi and DeLauro insist this bill will genuinely reduce the deficit:

2. Grant program for states to monitor premium increases (§ 1003, p. 42)
3. Committee to review administrative simplification standards (§ 1104, p. 71)
4. Demonstration program for state wellness programs (§ 1201, p. 93)
5. Grant program to establish state Exchanges (§ 1311(a), p. 130)
6. State American Health Benefit Exchanges (§ 1311(b), p. 131)
7. Exchange grants to establish consumer navigator programs (§ 1311(i), p. 150)
8. Grant program for state cooperatives (§ 1322, p. 169)
9. Advisory board for state cooperatives (§ 1322(b)(3), p. 173)
10. Private purchasing council for state cooperatives (§ 1322(d), p. 177)
11. State basic health plan programs (§ 1331, p. 201)
12. State-based reinsurance program (§ 1341, p. 226)
13. Program of risk corridors for individual and small group markets (§ 1342, p. 233)
14. Program to determine eligibility for Exchange participation (§ 1411, p. 267)
15. Program for advance determination of tax credit eligibility (§ 1412, p. 288)
16. Grant program to implement health IT enrollment standards (§ 1561, p. 370)
17. Federal Coordinated Health Care Office for dual eligible beneficiaries (§ 2602, p. 512)
18. Medicaid quality measurement program (§ 2701, p. 518)
19. Medicaid health home program for people w/chronic cond. & planning grants (§ 2703, p. 524)
20. Medicaid demonstration project to evaluate bundled payments (§ 2704, p. 532)
21. Medicaid demonstration project for global payment system (§ 2705, p. 536)
22. Medicaid demonstration project for accountable care organizations (§ 2706, p. 538)
23. Medicaid demonstration project for emergency psychiatric care (§ 2707, p. 540)
24. Grant program for delivery of services to ind. w/postpartum depression (§ 2952(b), p. 591)
25. State allotments for grants to promote personal resp. ed. programs (§ 2953, p. 596)
26. Medicare value-based purchasing program (§ 3001(a), p. 613)
27. Medicare value-based purchasing dem. program for critical access hospitals (§ 3001(b), p. 637)
28. Medicare value-based purchasing program for skilled nursing facilities (§ 3006(a), p. 666)
29. Medicare value-based purchasing program for home health agencies (§ 3006(b), p. 668)
30. Interagency Working Group on Health Care Quality (§ 3012, p. 688)
31. Grant program to develop health care quality measures (§ 3013, p. 693)
32. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (§ 3021, p. 712)
33. Medicare shared savings program (§ 3022, p. 728)
34. Medicare pilot program on payment bundling (§ 3023, p. 739)
35. Independence at home medical practice demonstration program (§ 3024, p. 752)
36. Program for use of patient safety org. to reduce hospital readmission rates (§ 3025(b), p. 775)
37. Community-based care transitions program (§ 3026, p. 776)
38. Demonstration project for payment of complex diagnostic laboratory tests (§ 3113, p. 800)
39. Medicare hospice concurrent care demonstration project (§ 3140, p. 850)
40. Independent Payment Advisory Board (§ 3403, p. 982)
41. Consumer Advisory Council for Independent Payment Advisory Board (§ 3403, p. 1027)
42. Grant program for tech. asst. to providers impl. health quality practices (§ 3501, p. 1043)
43. Grant program to establish interdisciplinary health teams (§ 3502, p. 1048)
44. Grant program to implement medication therapy management (§ 3503, p. 1055)
45. Grant program to support emergency care pilot programs (§ 3504, p. 1061)
46. Grant program to promote universal access to trauma services (§ 3505(b), p. 1081)
47. Grant program to develop and promote shared decision-making aids (§ 3506, p. 1088)
48. Grant program to support implementation of shared decision-making (§ 3506, p. 1091)
49. Grant program to integrate quality improvement in clinical education (§ 3508, p. 1095)
50. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (§ 3509(a), p. 1098)
51. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (§ 3509(b), p. 1102)
52. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health (§ 3509(e), p. 1105)
53. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (§ 3509(f), p. 1106)
54. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (§ 3509(g), p. 1109)
55. National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council (§ 4001, p. 1114)
56. Adv. Group on Prev., Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health (§ 4001(f), p. 1117)
57. Prevention and Public Health Fund (§ 4002, p. 1121)
58. Community Preventive Services Task Force (§ 4003(b), p. 1126)
59. Grant program to support school-based health centers (§ 4101, p. 1135)
60. Grant program to promote research-based dental caries disease management (§ 4102, p. 1147)
61. Grant program for States to prevent chronic disease in Medicaid beneficiaries (§ 4108, p. 1174)
62. Community transformation grants (§ 4201, p. 1182)
63. Grant program to provide public health interventions (§ 4202, p. 1188)
64. Demonstration program of grants to improve child immunization rates (§ 4204(b), p. 1200)
65. Pilot program for risk-factor assmts. prov. through comm. health centers (§ 4206, p. 1215)
66. Grant program to increase epidemiology and laboratory capacity (§ 4304, p. 1233)
67. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (§ 4305, p. 1238)
68. National Health Care Workforce Commission (§ 5101, p. 1256)
69. Grant program to plan health care workforce development activities (§ 5102(c), p. 1275)
70. Grant program to implement health care workforce development activities (§ 5102(d), p. 1279)
71. Pediatric specialty loan repayment program (§ 5203, p. 1295)
72. Public Health Workforce Loan Repayment Program (§ 5204, p. 1300)
73. Allied Health Loan Forgiveness Program (§ 5205, p. 1305)
74. Grant program to provide mid-career training for health professionals (§ 5206, p. 1307)
75. Grant program to fund nurse-managed health clinics (§ 5208, p. 1310)
76. Grant program to support primary care training programs (§ 5301, p. 1315)
77. Grant program to fund training for direct care workers (§ 5302, p. 1322)
78. Grant program to develop dental training programs (§ 5303, p. 1325)
79. Dem. program to increase access to dental care in underserved comm. (§ 5304, p. 1331)
80. Grant program to promote geriatric education centers (§ 5305, p. 1334)
81. Grant program to promote health professionals entering geriatrics (§ 5305, p. 1339)
82. Grant program to promote training in mental and behavioral health (§ 5306, p. 1344)
83. Grant program to promote nurse retention programs (§ 5309, p. 1354)
84. Student loan forgiveness for nursing school faculty (§ 5311(b), p. 1360)
85. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors and outcomes (§ 5313, p. 1364)
86. Public Health Sciences Track for medical students (§ 5315, p. 1372)
87. Primary Care Extension Program to educate providers (§ 5405, p. 1404)
88. Grant program for dem. projects to address health workforce shortage needs (§ 5507, p. 1442)
89. Grant program for dem. projects to dev. training prog. for home health aides (§ 5507, p. 1447)
90. Grant program to establish new primary care residency programs (§ 5508(a), p. 1458)
91. Program of pmts. to teaching health ctr. to sponsor med. residency training (§ 5508(c), p. 1462)
92. Graduate nurse education demonstration program (§ 5509, p. 1472)
93. Grant program to est. dem. projects for comm.-based mental health settings (§ 5604, p. 1486)
94. Commission on Key National Indicators (§ 5605, p. 1489)
95. Quality assurance and perf. improv. program for skilled nursing facilities (§ 6102, p. 1554)
96. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (§ 6103(a)(3), p. 1561)
97. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (§ 6103(b)(3), p. 1568)
98. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities (§ 6112, p. 1589)
99. Dem. projects for nursing facilities involved in the culture change movement (§ 6114, p. 1597)
100. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (§ 6301, p. 1619)
101. Standing methodology cmte. for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Inst. (§ 6301, p. 1629)
102. Board of Governors for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (§ 6301, p. 1638)
103. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (§ 6301(e), p. 1656)
104. Elder Justice Coordinating Council (§ 6703, p. 1773)
105. Advisory Board on Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation (§ 6703, p. 1776)
106. Grant program to create elder abuse forensic centers (§ 6703, p. 1783)
107. Grant program to promote continuing education for long-term care staffers (§ 6703, p. 1787)
108. Grant program to improve management practices and training (§ 6703, p. 1788)
109. Grant program to subsidize costs of electronic health records (§ 6703, p. 1791)
110. Grant program to promote adult protective services (§ 6703, p. 1796)
111. Grant program to conduct elder abuse detection and prevention (§ 6703, p. 1798)
112. Grant program to support long-term care ombudsmen (§ 6703, p. 1800)
113. National Training Institute for long-term care surveyors (§ 6703, p. 1806)
114. Grant program to fund State surveys of long-term care residences (§ 6703, p. 1809)
115. CLASS Independence Fund (§ 8002, p. 1926)
116. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (§ 8002, p. 1927)
117. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (§ 8002, p. 1931)
118. Personal Care Attendants Workforce Advisory Panel (§ 8002(c), p. 1938)
119. Multi-state health plans offered by Office of Personnel Management (§ 10104(p), p. 2086)
120. Advisory board for multi-state health plans (§ 10104(p), p. 2094)
121. Pregnancy Assistance Fund (§ 10212, p. 2164)
122. Value-based purchasing program for ambulatory surgical centers (§ 10301, p. 2176)
123. Demonstration project for payment adjustments to home health services (§ 10315, p. 2200)
124. Pilot program for care of ind. in env. emergency declaration areas (§ 10323, p. 2223)
125. Grant program to screen at-risk individuals for env. health conditions (§ 10323(b), p. 2231)
126. Pilot programs to implement value-based purchasing (§ 10326, p. 2242)
127. Grant program to support community-based collaborative care networks (§ 10333, p. 2265)
128. Centers for Disease Control Office of Minority Health (§ 10334, p. 2272)
129. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Minority Health (§ 10334, p. 2272)
130. Substance Abuse & Mental Health Svc. Admin. Office of Minority Health (§ 10334, p. 2272)
131. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Minority Health (§ 10334, p. 2272)
132. Food and Drug Administration Office of Minority Health (§ 10334, p. 2272)
133. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Office of Minority Health (§ 10334, p. 2272)
134. Grant program to promote small business wellness programs (§ 10408, p. 2285)
135. Cures Acceleration Network (§ 10409, p. 2289)
136. Cures Acceleration Network Review Board (§ 10409, p. 2291)
137. Grant program for Cures Acceleration Network (§ 10409, p. 2297)
138. Grant program to promote centers of excellence for depression (§ 10410, p. 2304)
139. Advisory cmte. for young women’s breast health awareness ed. campaign (§ 10413, p. 2322)
140. Grant prg. to prov. asst. to provide info. to young wmn. w/breast cancer (§ 10413, p. 2326)
141. Interagency Access to Health Care in Alaska Task Force (§ 10501, p. 2329)
142. Grant program to train nurse practitioners as primary care providers (§ 10501(e), p. 2332)
143. Grant program for community-based diabetes prevention (§ 10501(g), p. 2337)
144. Grant program for prov. who treat high % of medically underserved pop. (§ 10501(k), p. 2343)
145. Grant program to recruit studnets to practice in underserved comm. (§ 10501(l), p. 2344)
146. Community Health Center Fund (§ 10503, p. 2355)
147. Dem. proj. to provide access to health care for uninsured at reduced fees (§ 10504, p. 2357)
148. Dem. program to explore alternatives to tort litigation (§ 10607, p. 2369)
149. Indian Health dem. program for chronic shortages of health prof. (S. 1790, § 112, p. 24)*
150. Office of Indian Men’s Health (S. 1790, § 136, p. 71)*
151. Indian Country modular component facilities demonstration program (S. 1790, § 146, p. 108)*
152. Indian mobile health stations demonstration program (S. 1790, § 147, p. 111)*
153. Office of Direct Service Tribes (S. 1790, § 172, p. 151)*
154. Indian Health Svc mental health technician training program (S. 1790, § 181, p. 173)*
155. Indian Health Svc prog. for treatment of child sex abuse vict. (S. 1790, § 181, p. 192)*
156. Indian Health Svc prog. for treatment of dom. violence, sexual abuse (S. 1790, § 181, p. 194)*
157. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (S. 1790, § 181, p. 204)*
158. Indian youth life skills demonstration project (S. 1790, § 181, p. 220)*
159. Indian Health Svc Director of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Treatment (S. 1790, § 199B, p. 258)*

No doubt, this must be what Speaker Pelosi meant when she said “Health insurance reform is about jobs.  This legislation alone will create 4 million [Government Dependent] jobs, about 400,000 jobs very soon.”

Yes… 400,000 federal (dependent) employees, that is. Receiving on average $70,000 per year with mandatory 5% annual raises, $40,000+ “Cadillac” health care plans, and lucrative pensions. And the price for this new class of dependents is designed to increase.

At the same speech to the 2010 Legislative Conference for National Association of Counties, Rep. Pelosi also said, “You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other … But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”

Yes… We have known what’s inside her bill for about nine months, no thanks to the House Speaker. That’s why the Boaz ItsHaky for Congress campaign offers REAL hope and REAL change by promising: “The Age of Pelosi is Coming to an End.”

Anyone who hasn’t contacted their Representative to lodge a complaint about H.R.3590 should do so NOW.

How time flies. And how quickly people forget. About one year ago, it was revealed that our own Rep. Rosa DeLauro rented out the basement of her Washington D.C. apartment to Rep. Rahm Emmanuel, who had become Chief of the White House staff for President Obama. For free. Which raised some eyebrows.

As a scandal, the odium rested on Emmanuel, who was accused of violating the tax code for failing to report free rent at DeLauro’s as a taxable gift. Supporters of Rosa DeLauro gleefully insist there was no bad light thrown on the Congresswoman. On the contrary, they supposed Rep. DeLauro came out of the incident looking all the better for offering the homeless Rahm Emmanuel her charity: Shelter for five years (maybe 1,400 nights).

We highlighted the issue in last year’s article, Rahm & Rosa: Good Samaritan or Pay for Play?

Dick Morris opined further on the subject in the New York Post, pointing out the obvious: “Emanuel is a multimillionaire, but lived for the last 5 years for free in the tony Capitol Hill townhouse owned by De Lauro and her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg. During that time, he also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts. It paid Greenberg’s firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008. (Emanuel’s own campaign committee has also paid Greenberg more than $50,000 since 2004.)”

For our part, we simply asked,

Are sumptuous government contracts to Rep. DeLauro’s husband suitable compensation for a free room?

Who knows. The issue was dead in the water as Rep. DeLauro put on her brass knuckles to work over fellow Democrats to get the bankrupting budget passed, the sovereignty-wrecking Cap-and-Trade bill to the Senate, and force the monstrous health insurance bill down our throats.

And this is the main reason we are resurrecting Basement-Gate. Its not about hazy theories on pay-for-play. Its about reminding constituents of Rep. DeLauro’s concrete record:

• Over the last year, Rep. DeLauro has been the biggest pusher of radical policy. Nearly all of it originated either in Rahm Emmanuel’s White House office or was given his god-fatherly blessing.
• These policies had nothing to do with the reason for President Obama’s election (and Rep. DeLauro’s re-election), which was the economic crisis.
• They had everything to do with advancing unaffordable pet projects, special interests, and laughable failures such a cash-for-clunkers; all of which bear the signature of the Rahm-DeLauro pact.

And that’s why the voters in the Third District must remember Rahm & Rosa’s Basement-Gate: The two of them have worked hand-in-hand to push THEIR agenda, not to solve the American people’s problems!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE. 3/4/2010

As President Obama rallies the Democrat leadership in the Senate to violate its long-standing rules concerning simple majorities for expansive legislation, opponents of the Reid-Pelosi Health Bill are weighing their options.

Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma disputed suggestions that the legislation be rolled back after the President signs it into law. “Its not as easy as it seems,” he said. This is because there is no recent example of any major entitlement being repealed, regardless of how poorly it has performed for the people.

Boaz ItsHaky, candidate for Connecticut’s Third Congressional District, does not share the Senator’s misgivings.

“After November’s elections, those of us elected to the 112th Congress will have a very strong mandate from the voters to undo reckless and dangerous legislation such as the Reid-Pelosi Disease Care Bill,” Bo said.

Asked just how the legislation can be undone in the face of President Obama’s resistance, Bo replied, “A simple clause can be inserted into the next budget to prohibit funding for the dozens of federal agencies that must be formed. This will put the project on ice. After that, we may have to wait until the 2012 elections to bring in a new President who will sign a bill into law titled something like, Restore America’s Health Care Freedom Act.”

According to ItsHaky, the bill’s language would state, “Article __ of the U.S. Code is hereby repealed.”

All previous laws regulating the health care sector would come into force until the 112th (or 113th) Congress is sufficiently fit to address meaningful and much-needed reforms to America’s health care services.

“Despite what the pundits say, repealing the Reid-Pelosi fiasco is not the end of the road,” Bo insists. “There are meaningful reforms that Congress can adopt that do not infringe on the peoples’ choices or doctor’s ability or willingness to deliver quality care for their patients.”

Boaz ItsHaky is a practitioner of preventive medicine, which gives him a unique perspective on the subject. But, he says, first things first:

“The Reid-Pelosi Disease Care bill must be abandoned,” Bo said. “Its sole purpose is to empower the Democrat party over the long-haul. That’s why they are willing to sacrifice themselves in this election.”

Bo concluded, “We must go back and take the legislation in an entirely new direction. The voters will give us a mandate to do this. And it will be undeniable after Election Day 2010.”

After a generous victory in the 2008 elections, President Obama and the Democrat Congress were given a mandate by the American voters: Fix the economy. Save the American Dream. But this is not what happened. After suffering through an entire “Lost Year” in which the economy was sidelined in favor of frivolous waste, the American Dream is hanging by a thread.

When the Tea Parties first making waves last spring and summer, the mass media hounded them for being, among other things, “too white.” With the President’s approval rating sky-high and the Democrat incumbents passing ridiculously dangerous legislation such as the Bankrupting Budget of 2009, Cap-and-Trade, and college loan collectivization, it was safe to portray the Tea Parties as the reserve of an angry Anglo-Saxon middle class. It just so happens these were exactly the same people who gave Barack Obama his generous victory in November 2008.

Now, ruinous Democrat policies may seem like a problem for the middle class, but breaking the crucible of American enterprise will hit the poor and needy in ways none of us can really imagine. Our looming budget crisis is real, and squeezing the upper middle class will lower tax revenues very quickly. And that can have a harsh impact on the social benefits and welfare services millions and millions of needy people depend on.

Americans are using food stamps in record numbers. But what if there is no tax money for stamps? How will the needy feel if the government is forced to withdraw the expensive food stamp program and deliver only certain goods, such as bread and dry milk? Does anyone think the needy will be pleased with basic staples instead of flexible food stamps?

Progressives should take a long, hard look at the near future, too. Social programs that have received applause from progressive and activist interests will see the funding dry up. Entire agencies will close. Help centers and crisis intervention will be unable to function.

Federal employees should join the Tea Party in calling for sensible budget reform. They were fortunate to receive across-the-board pay raises during this crisis, but that cannot last. What happens when the tax money slows even worse than it already has? Will there be agency closures? Mass layoffs? Will federal pensions get the axe?

The Democrats always win progressive and needy votes by promising to protect benefits and social programs, and expand the federal payroll But they cannot do it much longer. Not by squeezing the last source of tax money. Not by crushing the same people who attend Tea Parties.

It is in the interest of every needy person, every progressive who cares about federal social programs, and every federal employee who values their jobs and pensions to join forces with the Tea Party and protect the middle class that provides tax revenue to the federal goverment and all of its programs and outreach.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 26, 2010.

Boaz ItsHaky, candidate for Connecticut’s Third Congressional District, has released his Stop The Lobbyist Legislator Law (ST3L) in order to contain the growing threat of special interests to our democracy.

Just because many Senators and Congress members are retiring does not mean they are leaving Washington. On the contrary. These ladies and gentlemen are permanent fixtures, as common on Capitol Hill as the iron lamp posts along Constitution Avenue.

Big international corporations offer former legislators salaries dozens of times larger than their public service pay to woo their old friends and allies in Congress. They would be fools not to accept. And that’s why Boaz ItsHaky believes legislators-turned-lobbyists represents a fundamental source of corruption.

He described his “Stop The Lobbyist Legislator Law” (ST3L) bill in simple yet concrete terms: “There must be a law prohibiting members of congress and their chiefs of staff and also directors of federal departments and their sub-directors from obtaining lobbyist positions for 10 years or more after leaving public office - sort of a chillin’ phase.”

Bo concluded: “In addition, the aforementioned must sign a restrictive covenant prohibiting them from obtaining positions in any firms that lobby their Congressional committees or subcommittees for a period of 10 years or more.”

Boaz ItsHaky admits ST3L will be a hard sell, mostly because of the attractive golden parachutes lobbying firms offer those who bail out of Congress. To make this happen, Bo said, “Only a major influx of freshman will have the principle and a very public mandate to carry through my reform.”

Incumbents are not expected to have the temerity to sign on, since they anticipate lucrative lobbyist positions after leaving public service.

Asked if the legislation would be made retroactive to deny members of the 111th Congress a lobbyist golden parachute, Bo said “It would be fitting, considering all the damage they have done. But its possible some more principled Democrats might take it as an anti-Democrat measure and resist, since the majority of defeats in November will be Democrat incumbents.”

Boaz ItsHaky intends to caucus with freshman Congressmembers in order to bring sweeping reforms to the floor of Congress. He hopes ST3L will be among the first items to make it to a vote.

“H.R.1 for the 111th Congress was the terrible Stimulus bill,” Bo pointed out, and optimistically added, “If my anti-lobbyist legislation is H.R.1 for the 112th, it will be a clear sign that the Age of Pelosi is one for the history books.”

Far be for us to nitpick our “friends” on the other side of the aisle (if “friends” is a proper term) but when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid puts his foot in his mouth, boot and all, we cannot help but stare:

A brilliant observation. Our esteemed Democrat leader basically admits his Stimulus Package has led to rampant domestic violence, broken homes, and devastated families. That in itself is as laughable as the complaint on which he is wasting debate time.

Let’s backtrack a bit. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act or ARRA (we pronounce it ERROR) was sold to us as an end-all solution to our economic woes. It would get those “shovel ready” jobs rolling and presumably get all those angry men off the couch and away from Jerry Springer (a source of rage for many) and out in the sunshine, building a better America for all while receiving a good wage.

That’s how it was sold.

How it ended up is quite different. The only bit of the Stimulus to get rolling were the unemployment insurance and COBRA extensions, both of which ensured angry men could sit on the couch that much longer to build rage against the people in their lives.

As we have pointed out, the bulk of the so-called Stimulus wasn’t supposed to get rolling until THIS YEAR, when it should magically turn the economy around just in time for the elections. (Sen. Reid must be counting on a drop in domestic violence some time by October, when disgruntled Nevadan males can be venting their rage with bulldozers and pickaxes on America’s highway and bridges.)

Maybe. We’re not convinced the Stimulus will get many men into useful work any time soon. We have had too much experience with the incumbent Democrat leadership, who have wasted an entire year and trillions of dollars on useless pork and payoffs.

Boaz ItsHaky has been critical of the Stimulus package since it was first unveiled in January 2009 as H.R. 1, the first piece of business for the 111th Congress. As such, it is the poster-child of failure, broken promises, waste, fraud, abuse, and, accord to testimony by Sen. Reid on the Senate floor, domestic violence.

Many economists approved of a massive targeted stimulus to get the economy rolling, but Congress targeted ARRA toward welfare and unstimulating special interests, such as Speaker Pelosi’s marsh mouse preservation scheme. (Naturally, Pelosi and Reid kept the economists’ endorsements!)

Come November 2010, voters of  Connecticut’s Third District will have a very clear choice:

Business as usual, with billions for special interests, breaks for big campaign contributors, and legislation for lobbyists?

Or Boaz ItsHaky: Discipline, integrity, principle, and common sense?

What is the “Washington Triangle” anyway? Is it a terrifying place where airplanes vanish without a trace? Hardly. It IS a place where hard-earned money disappears before our very eyes.

The Triangle represents our future. The federal budget sits in about the middle of our imaginary polygon. The sides represent streams of revenue flowing from the corners. But the corners hold the difficult choices our legislators will have to make in order to keep the federal government’s lights on.

Columnist Pat Buchanan tackles the problem in one of his most recent articles:

To assure the world we are not Greece writ large, the United States must soon adopt a visible plan for slashing the deficit. There are three ways to do it. One is through growth that increases the tax revenue flowing into the Treasury and reduces the outflow for safety net programs like unemployment insurance. But growth only comes slowly and can take us only so far.

Quite true, but the harsh reality is, growth doesn’t even factor in the face of our impossible debt burden. This is why we didn’t even include “growth” as one of the three corners of the Washington Triangle. Mr. Buchanan does correctly identify the other two corners of our geometric figure:

Needed is a combination of big budget cuts and tax hikes. But the only place one can get budget cuts of the magnitude required is from the big entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And the only place to get revenue of that magnitude is by raising taxes on the American middle class. And here is where Barack Obama hits the wall.

So, in the first corner, there are taxes. Big taxes. The sort of taxes we haven’t seen in generations. Taxes that equal just about what we must pay in order to enjoy the services our federal government provides.

In the second corner, brutal austerity. Cuts down the line. Agencies closed. Federal workers furloughed. Benefits slashed. Grants withdrawn.

And in the third corner? Well. We’ll get back to the problem-solving magic of the third corner in a moment. First, Mr. Buchanan explains just why President Obama will “hit the wall” by raising taxes on the Middle Class:

Republicans are not going to give him a single vote for a tax increase. Not only would this violate a commitment most made to the people who elected them, it would be politically suicidal. For behind the GOP today, and its best hope of recapturing Congress in 2010, are the Tea Party irregulars. And Tea Partiers now play the role of Red Army commissars who sat at machine guns behind their own troops to shoot down any soldier who retreated or ran. Republicans who sign on to tax hikes cannot go home again.

He may be correct, but on the other hand, neither are the Republicans going to sign onto brutal austerity, either. The result will be what Mr. Buchanan terms a “maelstrom” where the government is totally gridlocked. A federal shutdown would be the likely result, but it won’t happen. The GOP has learned from 1995, when President Clinton forced a shutdown and the media turned an angry public against the Republicans for failing to send the President a budget he could sign. It cost the GOP too much prestige. They won’t dare risk another federal shutdown.

No. There is only one solution to the President’s and Congress’ problems. The Printing Press!

The third corner holds one of the magical powers of the Washington Triangle. Just as the triangle sucks in our tax money, it also spits out vast quantities of currency. (Most of it goes right into the ledgers of the world’s biggest international banking cartels so they can speculate against small fry countries like Greece.)

So, the third corner is the money supply. Inflation. If the government is too paralyzed to raise taxes or impose austerity, then the Treasury will order the presses full speed ahead! They will pay for our benefits with more and more fiat (i.e., worthless) paper money.

Inflation will keep the lights on. The doors open. The checks in the mail. The mail coming to the mailbox. And make the fingerpointing go away.

And best of all for our dedicated elected public servants, it is almost invisible to We the People! At least to start. We will gradually notice how milk and bread will get more and more costly to the point of unaffordability. But its not as attention-getting as a new tax hike or a federal shutdown with people be ushered into the streets in front of the media cameras.

No, the inflationary third corner of our Washington Triangle is the most devious, stalking, and deadly of the budget crisis solutions. And it will strike the poor and needy especially hard, all while ruining the middle class and driving upper class capital clear out of the country!

But at least the President and the incumbents will not risk their plush careers by making hard decisions! 

Boaz ItsHaky is running to represent We the People of Connecticut’s Third Congressional District. He is a vocal supporter of sound monetary policy, and he is ready to stand up for our long-term stability and well-being. Unlike all the incumbents, Boaz ItsHaky will NOT vote for legislation that benefits his re-election in the short term. 

Come November, let’s think of the future. They say we are bankrupting our children, but we will all be still be around: Old folks unable to afford our own rocking chair!

Our Constitution gives Congress direct authority over America’s monetary policy. Among the enumerated powers Article I, Section 8 grants to Congress is this one:

“To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures …”

Boaz ItsHaky, Candidate for Connecticut’s Third Congressional District, considers Sec. 8 to be unambiguous. And, there is no amendment of the Constitution that permits any entity to meddle in this responsibility of Congress.

And yet, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 has effectively nullified a portion of Sec. 8 by granting the quasi-independent banking syndicate known as the Federal Reserve Banking System discretionary control over America’s money supply.

It wasn’t supposed to be this way. The Federal Reserve Act was designed to end a cycle of commodity bubbles that hurt the economy. And, the Act only permitted the twelve Federal Reserve banks to issue loans and inject cash as needed to ensure liquidity in their regional marketplaces.

Things went quite wrong from the start. A sharp recession in 1921 challenged the Fed as a commodity bubble expanded beyond their expectation. The Fed responded by loosening the money supply, but only after the recession had already ended. According to Great Myths of the Great Depression”,

Economist Murry Rothbard, author of “America’s Great Depression”, used a broad measure that includes currency, demand and time deposits, and other ingredients, to estimate that the Fed bloated the money supply by more than 60 percent from mid-1921 to mid-1929. Rothbard argued that this expansion of money and credit drove interest rates down, pushed the stock market to dizzy heights, and gave birth to the “Roaring Twenties.”

And the Great Depression. Once the money bubble burst, the Hoover administration undertook massive government intervention in the form of price controls and excessive tariffs. It would take nearly twenty years for America to climb out of the hole the Federal Reserve had dug. But the Fed’s position was strengthened by the event, not weakened.

By 1971, the Treasury Dept. ceded all powers to the Fed to regulate the value of our money. Recently, we have lived through several commodity bubble bursts courtesy of the Greenspan-Bernanke “loose money” policy: the dot.com bubble in 1998, the housing bubble in 2008, as well as many shifts and market seizures that the Fed was supposed to prevent–but rather created with its loose credit policies, shady deals with chosen favorites, and casino-style credit swaps.

Boaz ItsHaky is on record for auditing the Federal Reserve Banking System from top to bottom. He wants to know why the world’s most secretive and exclusive banking syndicate has been playing dangerous games with America’s hard-earned money.

Even more so, he will strive to uncover the special relationship between the biggest investment banks on Wall Street and the Federal Reserve banking system, as well as the deals these entities may have struck with Greece and other faltering countries abroad. Are We the People going to bail out member states of the EU? Boaz ItsHaky wants to know!

Furthermore, Boaz ItsHaky wants to restore the Federal Reserve Act to its original intent, and firmly uphold the U.S. Constitution to its purpose, beginning by restoring Congress as the regulator of our money. After all, “stop the spending” isn’t just a campaign slogan to harp on. Its a core principle that demands critical judgment from our elected representative. (And a lack of such principle among the incumbents has burdened us with deficits for the last decade.)

Boaz ItsHaky can do this for us if We the People send him to Congress in an historic election in 2010!

In the book “All the President’s Men,” journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein revealed how a break-in of DNC headquarters at the Watergate Hotel in 1972 reached all way into the President’s cabinet. The web of corruption pulled down vice-president Spiro Agnew and many aides, and eventually reached President Nixon who, although he protested his ignorance, nevertheless could not withstand accusations that he “must have known” what his aides were doing was criminal.

Now, in the last article, we discussed how AIG was on the hook for huge amounts of insurance claims, and how these contracts were placed on non-existent products called derivatives. In this case, the derivatives were credit-default swaps, which were bets that someone else’s assets were bad.

Back in 2006, Goldman-Sachs began a massive sell-off of mortgage-back securities held by itself and its clients. Immediately following this, the firm used the proceeds to purchase credit default swaps from AIG. The sales themselves may be a massive crime, a classic example of insider-trading (which, as we recall, sent Martha Stewart to jail for a good stretch).

Reason is, Goldman-Sachs needed to know whether their assets were good or bad. Its was their business. They held millions of mortgages. They had to keep up on the trends and currents in mortgage payments in order to figure the value of their assets, and how much “underlying value” of those assets could be sold and insured on the derivatives market. If anyone needed a word of comfort from their old associates working at the Federal Reserve and Treasury Dept., it was Goldman.

When the Fed signaled that interest rates were due to rise, and all those shaky mortgages were about to go toxic, Goldman-Sachs surely did the most sensible thing: they sold them off. Fast. Before the stuff went nuclear. Then they took the money from the sales over to the bookies at AIG, and bet on red, so to speak.

As the mortgage-backed securities went toxic and many other investment houses fell to their knees, Goldman-Sachs was one of the few sitting pretty. Really pretty. They had bet their competitors would go belly up, and so they had. Suddenly, there were dozens of failed banks and billions in assets waiting to be picked up. All Goldman needed was a lot of cash to buy them up for pennies on the dollar. It was time to cash out all those credit default swaps and buy up the suckers.

Only problem was, AIG didn’t have the money. So many insurance policies had been taken out on so many non-existent derivatives that the insurance giant was doomed! Just like Bernie Madoff, every client wanted their money NOW. They demanded their contracts be honored. And like a good son, Treasury Sec. Hank Paulson stepped in to help AIG honor their contracts with Goldman-Sachs and others.

Treasury could have allowed AIG to go bankrupt. All of the derivatives they insured were non-existent, and could have vanished into the aether for all we care. At worst, We the People would only have had to pay back Goldman-Sachs, Societe Generale, and Deutsche Bank for the policies themselves, NOT the actual claims. But Sec. Paulson had other plans.

During testimony on Capitol Hill, Sec. Paulson insisted that he did not bail out AIG in order to save Goldman-Sachs. Naturally! Goldman was never in better health. They just needed AIG to pay out so they could buy up their failing competitors. As Paulson was a former CEO of Goldman, his knowledge of the matter was crucial at the time of the bailout. As one may recall, Sec. Paulson sold the bailout to Congress for one purpose, to buy up toxic mortgage assets from ailing banks, but then used the funds for another purpose, namely, pouring our money through the AIG funnel, with $30 Billion alone going to Goldman, Societe, and Deutsche Bank for their “lucky bets.”

The AIG bailout scandal sounds something like laundering money. Timothy Geithner, then president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York City (Fed Bank No. ”2″ on your dollar bills) may have been instrumental in directing taxpayer bailout money to pass through AIG and on to other recipients who were “top secret” at the time. It sound like the mafia taking its racketeering gains and passing them through a legitimate family-owned laundromat.

Its one of the reasons why Rep. Steven Lynch said the whole affair “Stinks to High Heaven!” At the time all of this was happening, both Geithner and Paulson must have known just why AIG was on its knees–it was their job to know. But they weren’t about to say it in public.

Now, Rep. Marcy Kaptur asked Geithner under oath whether he had signed a statement of recusal from all affairs having to do with AIG. Geithner said he did not, and told Rep. Kaptur that it was generally “understood” that he was not involved. Signing the recusal should have been legally necessary because of Geithner’s numerous conflicts of interest. However, as he did not sign, he was under no legal obligation to recuse himself. Hence the scandal, as Bloomberg details:

The New York Fed is in the hot seat for its decision in November 2008 to buy out, for about $30 billion, insurance contracts AIG sold on toxic debt securities to banks, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., Societe Generale and Deutsche Bank AG, among others. That decision, critics say, amounted to a back-door bailout for the banks, which received 100 cents on the dollar for contracts that would have been worth far less had AIG been allowed to fail.

After basically perjoring himself, an email from Geithner was offered as evidence to the hearing. The email, from TFG75 (Timothy Franz Geithner) asked associates in the federal reserve board, “Where are you guys on AIG counter-party disclosure?” It was dated March 15, 2009, the same day the names of the counter-parties (such as Goldman-Sachs) were released. Clearly, Treasury Sec. “TFG75″ was undertaking damage control with his colleagues.

Even worse, there is speculation that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke knew what Geithner was up to and approved of it. As both gentlemen were former associates of the firms that received AIG’s bailout money illicitly, it makes Bernanke’s recent confirmation by the Senate to another four-year term as Chairman seem that much more unfortunate.

About $182 BILLION ultimately vanished down AIG’s throat. Many people in high places have committed massive crimes. These may be prosecutable under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which was originally written to prosecute the CEOs of giant corporations. It would be very ironic, indeed, if this law was used to send Federal Reserve executives and Presidential cabinet members to prison.

This may well turn out to be the biggest case of executive corruption in American history, spanning two Presidential administrations and involving a conspiracy between the largest banks and senior officials to defraud the American people and the legislative branch of the federal government out of 182 BILLION DOLLARS! All we can say is,

“Let the heads roll.”

Back in the 80s, Americans were glued to their televisions watching Congressional depositions of men such as Admiral Poindexter and Colonel Oliver North. The Iran-Contra scandal was unraveling, and the details revealed an ingenious yet highly illegal military operation for funding anti-communist rebels in Nicaragua by making covert weapons sales to Iran, which was boycotted under U.S. law and at war with U.S. partner Saddam Hussein.

This week, as testimony on Capitol Hill slowly unravels the AIG bailout, it is taking on all the rich flavor–and incomparable stench–of the Iran-Contra Scandal.

AIG is an insurance company. It is such an important insurance company that, in Congressional testimony by former Treasury Sec. Hank Paulson, allowing AIG to go bankrupt would have led to 25% unemployment all across America, instead of the 10% we have now. But what makes this insurance company so special, and why are the details of its taxpayer bailout causing such a scandal?

Now, the type of insurance AIG sells is unlike anything average people buy for their houses or cars or health. AIG insures derivatives, which are so ethereal and convoluted, many people in finance don’t bother trying to explain them.  Warren Buffet, the richest man in the world, has been quoted as saying he won’t touch derivatives and frankly cannot understand what they are. But the truth is, receipts for derivatives traded on American exchanges last year totaled HUNDREDS OF TRILLIONS of dollars.

Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan championed relaxing SEC rules that allowed derivatives to be treated like stable assets. And the SEC allowed AIG to insure derivatives just like they might insure a bushel of wheat.

So, what is a derivative? It is a novel “instrument” derived from the underlying value of an asset. That means, it is both nothing and can be anything. It’s very zen, which is probably why Warren Buffet said he didn’t understand them.

To illustrate, a derivative can be like the happiness one feels from owning a bag of gold. A rainy day can affect one’s overall happiness, and that’s where AIG comes in to help. AIG will insure your happiness against a rainy day. Not the gold itself, but the happiness. Its usually a safe bet, since it rains rather infrequently, and anyway, weather forecasts help set the insurance price. (We’re not kidding here!)

Even better, you can sell your happiness and AIG will insure the sale in case someone gets mad along way. Your happiness can be cut into pieces, pooled with others’ happiness (people pleased with their new McMansion or shiny Corvette), and resold as entirely new products. Again, all this happiness insured by AIG against rain, stubbed toes, or whatever else makes someone cross.

This whimsical description of derivatives is an example of what goes on all the time in financial exchanges. The ethereal, non-existent “underlying value” gets bought and sold and insured on a far greater scale than real commodities or stocks.

And that’s how AIG ran into big trouble: It “rained all week long,” and every insurance policy taken out “on happiness” had to be paid. Obviously, AIG never expected a full-scale cloudburst, and allowed the childish practice of insuring other peoples’ fantasies to flow like wine.  It was easy money! Money for literally nothing. So why didn’t the Treasury allow AIG to go bankrupt?

If they had, then two things could have happened: Either all those derivatives would have been wiped off the books since they literally do not exist and cannot have a real value, or else the American taxpayer would have been on the hook for no more than the purchase price for the policies themselves, which were probably a dollar for every ten thousand dollars of derivatives insured.

Fortunately for AIG’s clients, the Treasury came to the rescue and promised to pay 100 cents on the dollar for all contracts! Clearly, AIG had many friends in high places who made unwritten guarantees to protect them should something bad happen, such as a passing rainstorm ruining an otherwise happy day.

In the next installment of this article, we will examine the recent testimony on Capitol Hill and learn who in the upper echelons of the federal government knew AIG was funneling money like Iran-Contra, and what they might have done to the American way of life by insuring other peoples’ happiness.

Everything you ever wanted to know about the incumbent Democrat political strategy can be found in the film “Brewster’s Millions.”

In the classic comedy, Richard Pryor plays a down-and-out minor league pitcher who is challenged by a wealthy relative to spend a million dollars a day for 30 days, without having a single asset left. Inevitably, Brewster turns to politics, where wasting money is a by-word. At the climax of the campaign, the mercurial candidate holds up a ten dollar bill and declares, “I want to buy your vote!”

So it is with Rep. Pelosi’s Congress. Need proof? Simply juxtapose the plot of “Brewster’s Millions” to the first year of the Democrat administration. One will see that deliberately spending without care has been done to “buy your vote.” Just look at the timeline since the financial crisis began:

October 2008: The economy is in total meltdown and Sen. Obama joins Rep. DeLauro and hundreds of other Congressmembers to save the world’s biggest investment houses from their own bad bets. The shocking earmark-laden TARP Act costs $800,000,000,000, which is supposed to be paid back.

November 2008: Sen. Obama is elected on a platform of change by a very nervous population. To give him the tools he needs to make real change, 94% of all incumbents are reelected to office, including all Democrat incumbents. The other 6% of newcomers give their party complete authority to move forward on the Democrat agenda.

January 2009: But there’s no change. Just more of the same big spending, only accelerated and expanded as never before. The so-called Stimulus Package appears. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act or ARRA (we pronounce it “ERROR”) earmarks $787,000,000,000 for Democrat special interests, to be paid for by every American, including the 80% who are not registered as Democrat party members.

February 2009: Democrat incumbents force through Appropriations to keep the nearly bankrupted federal government going until the FY 2010 budget kicks in. At $410,000,000,000, they are the largest appropriations ever passed, and they are full of gifts to supporters and special interests that worked to reelect 94% of the incumbents.

March 2009: Bonus wars are in full swing. Democrats gave their friends at AIG big bucks for making bad bets, such as promising 100% coverage for ALL losses in risky derivatives trading, and turn around and complain that it’s not fair when their execs “spread the wealth” among themselves. That’s why we say “only in Washington, only in Washington!”

April 2009: We the People get GM and Chrysler for a bargain price of only $50,000,000,000. It keeps the Democrat union bosses happy, and they get a stake in the two firms.

May 2009: The Biggest budget in world history lurches into view, terrifying people who know a thing or two about sustainable finances. At $1,450,000,000,000, it is another major pay-off to Democrat supporters, such as those who work in the public sector, or depend on grants. Every department in the federal government receives massive pay raises and expanded budgets. Its the Democrats’ way of saying “Thanks for getting us reelected.”

June 2009: The incumbent Democrats attempt to shove Cap-and-Trade down America’s throat. In this scenario, the Democrats pay back their supporters in the green movement for pretending to care about our environment, and reward risky traders on Wall Street for their record campaign contributions last year. Initial costs for the bureaucracies and green energy grants would be over $30,000,000,000.

July 2009: This health care “reform” thing begins to take shape. It was supposed to be wrapped up by Labor Day. Initially it was being sold as a genuine reform that would make health care more affordable and with better quality. (But we know how THAT one turned out!) The President was supposed to be able to list this one as “mission accomplished” for 2009. But there’s something about a $1,400,000,000,000 liability for what would end up being more expensive and less effective health care that people just didn’t like. Anyway, all that closed-door haggling brought public resentment to a boil. (But its nothing new, as we reported a year ago.)

August 2009: Cash for Clunkers pays lip service to the sort of “Good behavior” demanded by Cap-and-Trade but is really only good for sending China millions of tons of scrap metal as an interest payment on all that debt they own. It costs America $21,000 per car scrapped or a total of about $16,500,000,000 just so the incumbent Democrats can claim a “roaring success.”

September 2009: The fear-of-food act is passed, giving big agro-corporations a free pass while targeting small family farms. But that’s part of the plan: The huge agro-corps give huge donations to Democrat campaigns. What are small family farms to Democrats except convenient props to drag out at election time?

October 2009: Medicare is up on the chopping block in more ways than one. While Pelosi-care gets set to slash the benefit to “clear out” elderly, mostly Republican voters to make room for a more Democrat-leaning class of dependents, Democrats put the brakes on Medicare payment increases, which squeezes doctors   who treat elderly patients. But should compassion hinge on political affiliation?

November 2009: The President hosts a jobs summit at the White House. There are no results and it is promptly suppressed as a bad memory. Apparently, the push was for “Green jobs” in industries that do not exist, and could not exist except for government funds. No such funds were forthcoming. Yet. (see below.)

December 2009: The debt ceiling has been raised for an historic third time in a single Congress (now topping $14,000,000,000,000). This is because the Democrat incumbent leadership has been paying off their supporters and special interests at an historic rate. Never before have so many benefited in America for their political beliefs. And never has the rest of America suffered so much from bad legislative policy.

So what’s next for 2010?

In “Brewster’s Millions,” Brewster campaigned on the slogan “I want to buy your vote.”

And that’s exactly the game-plan for the rest of 2010. While the Democrats talk up jobs and talk down the deficit, the BULK of the so-called Stimulus Package will be spent. That’s right, the BIG money gets rolling this spring! The faster, the better, because an upswing in the economy is desperately needed by incumbent Democrats who fear for their seats, and $400,000,000,000 has got to do something in the short term.

Stimulus cash will flow toward union jobs, and re-energize a core constituency that has been greatly offended by the health plan tax (the so-called “Cadillac” tax) and the strange disappearance of “card check.” As stated before, think of the $800,000,000,000 Stimulus as being conveniently divided into blocks for each member of Congress facing reelection.

Its like a $2,800,000,000 campaign contribution from We the People to the each Democrat incumbent!

At the same time, Democrats will dodging all the graft and bribery and utter waste from 2009 and turn every conversation toward the Stimulus and job creation. The combination of fast cash and fairytale talk should stifle memories of the Tea Party protests and ugly Democrat failures in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts. That’s why, starting with the President’s State of the Union speech, 2009 never happened!

They do say art imitates life, but  “Brewster’s Millions” is on a much smaller scale than reality. As of January 27th, We’ve got to suffer through “Pelosi’s Billions,” and its all done Just to get her and the rest of the Democrat incumbent mob reelected in November 2010!

Yesterday, Rep. Rosa DeLauro issued a statement. It was not congratulations to the new Senator from Massachusetts, Republican Scott Brown, who made defeating her big government health care reform bill his top campaign issue. Rather, it was about a recall of 635,000 baby cribs made by Dorel Asia. From her website:

Congresswoman DeLauro said, “I am appalled that it takes a child’s death to prompt the recall of a supposedly safe item. We must improve and toughen the current consumer safety protections, and work to make sure they are implemented better. Any product sold to the public should be safe, but we must take extra care with items specifically made for our children—parents should be able to put their children in a crib and not have to fear for their lives.”

Its tragic. And we can’t help but wonder how it happened, since it was exactly one year ago that our Congresswoman was hailing passage of legislation to prevent dangerous products. So, we have One Question, and one question only, Congresswoman:

“Just where was your Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act?!”

Oh, right. CPSIA was a political knee-jerk reaction to the lead paint tragedy back in 2007, but allowed other potential problems to slip through, such as the structural failings that killed a child. Rep. Bobby Rush’s CPSIA was a foretaste of the Democrats’ authoritarian bureaucracy to come. And Rep. DeLauro was one of its strongest and most vocal supporters, insisting it would make consumer products more safe by imposing expensive tests and penalties on small producers and home industries.

Prophetically, Journalist John Stossel had a shocking program on just how the CPSIA is not just a colossal waste of legal paper, but its forcing second-hand and thrift stores to trash perfectly good toys, clothes, and housewares–all kinds of great things poor and low-income people depend on and can use.

Watch this video and see if you’re not as open-mouth astonished as we are!

Waste, waste, waste! Poor and low-income people get hurt the most by this ridiculous law.

The result of this tragic legislation is that America is more reliant on Asian imports than ever before! Why? Because the super-large corporations have the ability to meet the Act’s oppressive requirements, but small toy manufacturers and home industries often run by the poor cannot. The law was proposed because of lead paint in Chinese Imports. But the CPSIA (and expected legislation to target baby cribs) penalizes American toy makers and home workers!

Does this make sense to anyone outside the U.S. Capitol Building?

People of America and the Third District should be outraged by Congresswoman DeLauro. She helped push this wasteful pile of paper through Congress, announced the world was a safer place because craft fairs would be illegal, and here is the result:

We must improve and toughen the current consumer safety protections, and work to make sure they are implemented better.

Obviously, Rep. DeLauro is admitting her blanket-of-oppressive-legislation just isn’t working right, so maybe another quilt of burdensome regulations will do the trick. (What will CPSIA’s sequel look like?)

It’s a perfect illustration of just how completely wrong the entire legislative agenda of the Democrat Congress has been. No wonder the American people are terrified of putting their doctors in the hands of the incumbent Democrat leadership! If their legislation still allows killer cribs into the country, what will save us from Pelosi-Care?!

From now on, around here “CPSIA” means “Can’t Possibly Stand It Anymore.” Does anyone else feel the same way about our legislators?