A Conservative View

Praying that Donald Trump can save Americas freedoms!

Archive for the tag “taxpayers”

POEM By Illegal Immigrants

I cross river, Poor and broke, Take bus, See employment folk.

Nice man Treat me good in there, Say I need go see Welfare.

Welfare say, ‘You come no more, we send cash Right to your door.’

Welfare checks, they make you wealthy, Medicaid It keep you healthy!

By and by, got plenty money, Thanks to you, TAXPAYER dummy.

Write to friends in motherland, tell them ‘come, fast as you can’

They come in buses And Chevy trucks, I buy big house with welfare bucks.

They come here, we live together, more welfare checks, It gets better!

Fourteen families, they moving in, but neighbor’s patience wearing thin.

Finally, white guy moves away, I buy his house, And then I say,

‘Find more aliens for house to rent.’ In my yard I put a tent.

Send for family they just trash, but they, too, draw welfare cash!

Everything is very good, soon we own whole neighborhood…

We have hobby it called breeding, welfare pay for baby feeding.

Kids need dentist? Wife need pills? We get free! We got no bills!

TAXPAYER crazy! He pay all year, to keep welfare running here.

We think America darn good place! Too darn good for white man race.

If they no like us, they can go, got lots of room In Mexico.

 

SHARE THIS TO EVERY TAXPAYER YOU KNOW 

Often I receive a message from my friends like this one from Connie E that really do not need my words to explain the message. Even a Democrat will understand this. I think?  C Brewer 

EDUCATION TRAIN WRECK-TEXAS STYLE

I posted a letter I received from my State Representative, Wayne Christian, a few days ago. The following is my response to his message. I have also requested a chance to meet face to face and discuss the train wreck Texas is headed for if someone can’t bring common sense into the equation.  C Brewer 

March 25, 2011Wayne Christian, State Representative, Texas District 9

Dear Sir,

Thank you for the time you took to reply to my concerns related to education in Texas. Your response indicates that you have an interest in education.

How much money the state provides to educate our children is the Legislature’s responsibility. How we spend whatever is provided is also the Legislatures responsibility. If taxpayers ignore the way we waste money with expanded administrative programs we deserve the horrible results we have in Texas schools. Texas rankings nationwide related to reading and math scores are totally unacceptable. With all of the money we spend, that your letter emphasizes, why is performance so poor? Surely someone in the bloated Texas Education Agency (TEA) bureaucracy has an answer. They would never respond to me but they should respond to you if you asked!

I take issue with some of your stated facts. The Comptroller may be accurate that the spending for education has nearly doubled in the last ten years. The statement that Texas schools receive nearly $12,000 per pupil funding is not accurate or even close to being correct. It is true that some Texas school districts get that much funding. I actually found 3 school districts, out of 1265, that received over $12,000 per student from the state. Sabine County, in your district where I reside, has three school districts. None of these three received as much as $5,000 per student, why?

It appears you have used data from expenditures in the Comptrollers FAST Report? Those numbers are total expenditures that include capital expenses such as football stadiums, gyms, debt service and what appears to be a myriad of state agencies like the TEA.

One such agency I encourage you to review is the “Regional Education Service Centers” (RESC). The Legislature authorized the State Board of Education (SBOE) to establish this group in 1965. In 1967 the Legislature expanded the RESC role and created 20 separate regional centers. In 1984 the legislature directed the RESC to work closer with the TEA to raise the quality of district programs and enhance uniformity and consistency in school districts operations. In 1992 the SBOE revised the RESC rules to involve annual evaluations of each director’s performance and approve all 20 annual operating budgets. In 1997 the Legislature reauthorized the existence of the RESC’s. It produced a mandate that the RESC’s perform the following services;

*Assist school districts in improving student performance,

*Enable school districts to operate more efficiently and economically,

*Implement initiatives as assigned by the Texas Legislature and the Commissioner of Education.

RESC’s receive state funding and then charge the districts for all services. They are funded by the state from two different sources. Last year the RESC’s had more than $42,000,000.00 in profit. The current budget debate in Austin has proposed to cut the RESC state funding by only $2 million, why? The RESC should be totally eliminated.

Local districts have their own people to do the same functions as the RESC’s. Many of these positions are unnecessary and the majority of the money is expended to comply with a myriad of state unfunded mandates. Why?

Please have your staff evaluate the entire RESC program if you really desire to reduce wasted tax money. In addition to the above fiasco you will discover that the 20 RESC’s employ at least “4,046” non-instructional positions across the state. The number is approximate as many adjunct employees such as custodial staff were not included. I have spent two days trying to discover exactly how many dollars are actually spent by the RESC’s with no success.

It appears that you obtained some misleading figures from the Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute (TCCRI)

The Governor placed the blame on the school districts for the administrative growth. What he failed to tell us is that 90% of the growth in administrative personnel was created by the Legislature passing unfunded mandates. The staffing ratios you reference in 1975 compared to today is misleading at best. In 1975 the TEA did not code many non-instructional positions, so people like custodians, bus drivers, school nurses, librarians and cafeteria workers were not included. Also not included is the massive staff required to comply with federal regulations for Special Education students that did not exist in 1975. School districts now have to employ non-instructional positions such as speech therapists, occupational therapists, etc. School districts are also mandated by the state to hire testing coordinators to comply with state testing programs. Like the federal government the Texas Legislature creates these mandates but they have never funded the testing programs, why? 

If you truly wish to help the children of Texas with an education, stop the unbelievable waste of our tax money on these bureaucratic boondoggles.

If can find this many questions in less than 48 hours, your staff should have a field day with the power you have to obtain hidden education waste. If you agree with Governor Perry that the entire problem of educating our children with less money is the responsibility of each School Board, I have wasted a lot of time compiling this message. Senator Nichols did not even acknowledge receipt of my letter and the Governor does not really care. Texas could privatize education, reduce the costs by 50% just eliminating waste, and provide our children a real education. The State Board of Education (SBOE) is as worthless as the U.S. Department of Education by using children as pawns to amass political power. Both of these agencies should be eliminated.

Sincerely yours,

Clyde W. Brewer

Http://cb75948.wordpress.com

Copies to:  State Senator Robert Nichols, Sabine County Reporter, Governor Rick Perry, SBOE, Barbara Cargill   

US Debt Ceiling Fiasco

I received this by “E” mail and I am unsure who wrote it. It is too good not to share with all.  C Brewer

 

There’s currently a lot of talk about deficits and debt among the new House Republican majority; much of it is contentious intra-party debate about whether to raise the “debt ceiling.”

For the purpose of clarity, let’s reiterate a few definitions: 

    The national budget deficit is the difference between the total spending budget (including interest on debt) authorized by Congress for each year, and total tax receipts.  

    For this fiscal year alone (October 1, 2010, to September 30, 2011), the shortfall is projected to be 1.15 trillion dollars.

    The national debt is the total of all outstanding U.S. Treasury obligations held by domestic and foreign individuals, institutions and governments, and is currently 14.05 trillion dollars.

    The debt ceiling is the self-imposed limit Congress sets for what it can legally borrow to pay for all the government services that it can’t afford. A year ago, Congress increased that limit to 14.29 trillion dollars. But since Congress has authorized spending almost five billion dollars a day more than it takes in, that debt ceiling will be hit sometime between the end of March and mid-May.

Complicating matters further, the then-Democrat-controlled Congress failed to set a new budget for the current year, instead opting for continuing resolutions (CR) that authorize the prior year’s spending levels. The Democrat leadership purposely dragged their feet on proposing a FY 2011 budget in order to avoid greater accountability to American taxpayer’s and avoid greater losses in the midterm election last year. The current CR expires on 4 March, and House Republicans are using that expiration date to force Barack Hussein Obama into a budget-cutting submission.

Here is how the key Republican players in this crisis — and it is a crisis — have positioned themselves on the issue of deficits and the debt ceiling.

House Speaker John Boehner notes, “We have to work our will in the House. We have to work with our colleagues in the Senate and put something on the president’s desk. If the president is going to ask us to increase the debt limit, then he’s going to have to be willing to cut up the credit cards. … [Default] would be a financial disaster not only for our country, but for the worldwide economy. Remember, the American people on Election Day said we want to cut spending and we want to create jobs. You can’t create jobs if you default on the federal debt.”

Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA), president of the powerful freshman class of the 112th Congress, adds, “If there is a vote put forward to increase the national debt ceiling and that is all the legislation does, I think it will fail overwhelmingly.”

Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) is advancing a budget plan with $32 billion in spending cuts for the current budget year (FY11), well short of the Republican Pledge to America’s “$100 billion in the first year alone.”

But House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) explains, “It fulfills the pledge because we said in a year’s time we were going to cut spending by $100 billion. As you know, we are five-twelfths of the way through the fiscal year by the time the expiration occurs. We will be proposing this again in the next fiscal year, and if you look at it on an annualized basis, I assure you it will be over $100 billion.”

Rep. Cantor adds, “We are simply not going to accept an increase in the debt limit without serious cuts and reforms. … What we need to do and are committed to doing is making sure that we achieve spending cuts and effect real reforms so that the spending binge ends. We look at the debt limit vote as an opportunity for us to accomplish those goals.”

In the Senate, Tea Party favorite Jim DeMint (R-SC) says that Obama administration claims that holding the debt ceiling at current levels would be “catastrophic” are true only if the administration elects to default on interest and debt obligations.

His Senate colleague Pat Toomey (R-PA) has proposed the Full Faith and Credit Act, which would “require the Treasury to make interest payments on our debt its first priority in the event that the debt ceiling is not raised.” However, Toomey is not prepared to hold the debt ceiling, noting, “Congress should make increasing our debt contingent on immediate cuts in spending and effective reforms of the spending process that helped get us into this mess. We can do so without jeopardizing the full faith and credit of our country — and we should.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who along with DeMint is a member of that body’s Tea Party Caucus, has proposed a much more aggressive plan, which cuts $500 billion from the federal budget this year alone. This plan is something of a straw-man target, especially its proposed cuts to defense spending at a time when that budget has been trimmed to limits that increase threats to our frontline warriors.

However, the other domestic spending cuts in Paul’s budget should not be discounted, as those cuts have the overwhelming support of the aforementioned Tea Party, a formidable movement that continues to pick up steam across the nation.

Additionally, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and my friend Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) have introduced a bill to cap federal spending at about 20 percent of the U.S. GDP. That is still a very big budget, but it cuts out more than $8 trillion in spending over the next decade. It is, I believe, an admirable first attempt to establish a cap in a Senate where Republicans are still the minority party.

Of course, for his part, Obama is banking on the assumption that the American people are just too stupid to understand the consequences of the debt bomb he’s dropping on the nation. This bombing mission was launched with the politically fortuitous collapse of the U.S. real estate and securities markets, which Obama rode into office in order to launch “the fundamental transformation of the United States of America.”

To that end, Obama and his minion’s will blame Republicans for the hardships — and there will be hardships — associated with moving toward a balanced budget.

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, was the first out of the gate with the Obama memo tactic: “Basically what [Republicans] are saying is ‘pay China first.’ We’re going to forget about the American public and the things that they need? Somehow they’re secondary? And paying the Chinese and the Japanese is the first priority of this country?”

In the debate about raising the debt ceiling, expect Democrats to deploy a plethora of slight variations on that theme and be aided and abetted by a willing media. 

Obama proposed a paltry $775 million in budget cuts, little more than “rounding error’s”.  To put that into perspective, view this budget graphic.

Fortunately, there is a congressional caucus made up of a group of conservative lawmakers and includes most members of the Tea Party caucus.

To sort the wheat from the chaff in the coming budget battles, I recommend you rely on the Republican Study Committee for clarity about which legislation to support, and on the Heritage Foundation for why to support it. Long before the advent of the Tea Party movement, the RSC was dedicated to “a limited and Constitutional role for the federal government, a strong national defense, the protection of individual and property rights, and the preservation of traditional family values.”

Currently under the chairmanship of Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the RSC is our last best defense against detonation of the Obama debt bomb. If more legislator’s will honor their oath to abide by our Constitution, as the RSC members endeavor to do, then the nation will avoid the economic catastrophe that looms.

However, if the Left successfully uses their “pay China first and forget about the American public” propaganda to derail the RSC/Republican effort to enact massive deficit and debt reductions, then batten down the hatches. I can assure you that when Obama’s debt bomb detonates, it will completely transform America by breaking the back of free enterprise. The result will be the collapse of the dollar and mass unemployment accompanied by civil unrest.

First Principles and Rule of Law as enshrined in our Constitution must trump propaganda if Liberty is to survive the current foray into meaningful change.

Footnote: The Wall Street Journal reports, “Governors around the U.S. are proposing to balance their states’ budgets with a long list of cuts and almost no new taxes, reflecting a goal by politicians from both parties to erase deficits chiefly by shrinking government.” Of course, most governors are required by their state constitutions to balance their budget. It is high time, then, for a balanced budget amendment to our federal Constitution, which the RSC also advocates.

Thanks Ron

Post Navigation