Government Waste - Pelosi Burned Many Air Miles and Taxpayer Dollars

During Nancy Pelosi's reign as Speaker of the House she took advantage of, and seriously abused, her position. All at taxpayer expense.

According to documents obtained from the US Air Force, through the Freedom of Information Act, Judicial Watch discovered that during the first nine months of 2010 Pelosi flew 90,155 miles on Air Force aircraft 43 different times. That is an average of almost five flights per month.

An example of one roundtrip flight: A May 6-10, 2010, Congressional Delegation to Afganistan and Germany "to discuss issues of mutual interest in Qatar and Afghanistan, as well as conduct oversight on women’s issues (troops) in Afghanistan and to visit with US troops and meet with government officials in Germany."

The total cost of military travel was $204,135.00. Makes one wonder what other costs, aside from military, Main Street USA incurred during that trip.

A blazing question is even more basic, however. Why on Earth did Pelosi have to fly to these countries to speak to others about these topics? And a visit to US troops? What could possibly have been achieved by her appearances that would have been of great benefit to American taxpayers?

Perhaps visiting those countries were on her bucket list.

Even more evidence of her blatant disregard towards American citizens is the fact that many of the trips she took were to visit her San Franciso-area home.

Sorry, but this blogger feels that if someone runs for national office they know well in advance that they will have to live in Washington DC and if their family elects not to move then that elected person should foot the bill, through commercial air travel, to visit home. Either that or they can charter a private jet, out of their own pocket, to do so.

Afterall, it is not as if they do not earn a few dollars for talking the talk in DC for several months a year.

It is about time that Capitol Hill discovers webinars and cuts down on excessive and abusive travel, as well as other perks, that they seem to enjoy all too much.

Of note, is that during one two-year period as House Speaker Pelosi racked up military travel expenses of $2,100,744.59. Not a bad perk, Nancy. But, of course, you do feel our pain, don't you?

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Voters Issue Strong Rebuke of Incumbents in Congress

This latest Gallup Poll should tell those on Capitol Hill to Wake Up.

Voters Issue Strong Rebuke of Incumbents in Congress

One has to wonder whether or not they will listen to Main Street USA.

Supposedly they are elected to serve the people.

The people are saying, rather loudly and clearly, that our elected representatives are not serving us properly or correctly.

Main Street USA does not want more and more deficit spending, our alleged trillion dollar Heath Care Rights Bill, usage (or other types of) taxes to help pay for under-funded programs, borrowing from government agency trust funds to cover "shortfalls" in other areas, earmarks and pork, etc., etc.

Senator Reid, Speaker Pelosi, take heed the warning.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Quotes That Will Make History

For posterity, these quotes are being saved for future reference:

"We proved that this government — a government of the people and by the people — still works for the people." President Barack Obama

"We will be joining those who established Social Security, Medicare and now, tonight, health care for all Americans." Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi

"This is the civil rights act of the 21st century." Representative Jim Clyburn

"The president was and the Congress were sent here to address the problems that people face in this country, and that's what voters want us to see." WH Press Secretary Robert Gibbs

"We have failed to listen to America and we have failed to reflect the will of our constituents." Representative John Boehner

"It's very unusual that you have a major policy that doesn't have a majority of support in the public." George Edwards, Texas A&M University presidential historian

For the record (from the Associated Press):

A Gallup poll showed more Americans believe the measure will make things worse rather than better for the country as a whole and for them personally.

And most polls show most people don't like the plan although some surveys showed Americans giving high marks to individual elements.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Representing Whom ? ? ?

Those elected representatives who have had secret meetings with the powers-that-be regarding their vote on the proposed Trillion Dollar-plus healthcare reform legislation are NOT representing those who voted for them.

Polls show that Main Street USA does, indeed, desire reform in the health industry.

Polls also show, however, that those tax-paying citizens DO NOT want the reform currently presented.

So, who are those people in the House of Representatives representing?

Certainly not those persons who placed them on Captiol Hill.

At least, as reported by the Associated Press, there are 36 states working on legislation to block many of the extreme, liberty-eroding policies that would be enacted under this "reform."

The worst may be that ALL Americans would be required to purchase health insurance.

At present, it is estimated that some ten million people, who can afford insurance, have elected not to purchase it at this point in their lives. If this law passes, these same individuals must get insurance, or be penalized through fines and/or special fees.

Hopefully, better sense will prevail in the House than what Nancy Pelosi envisions.

Whatever the outcome, those members of Congress who are voting for such sweeping legislation that does far more than is stated, and is chock full of earmarks and pork in an attempt to sway votes, should be voted out in November or impeached.

Their crime is treason.

They are blatantly going against what tax-paying citizens of this country want.

That is betrayal after trust.

That is treason, by definition.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

House Speaker Speaks Up, Defies Polls

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, on ABC television's "This Week," stated, without any doubt, that if President Obama decides to use the reconciliation method of political maneuvering she will deliver the votes without the support of any Republicans.

Make no mistake, polls also show reform is needed and wanted.

However, poll after poll bring into the open that the majority of Americans do not approve of either of the bills that passed the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The strong-arm tactic that will apparently be used on these earmarked pieces of legislation that will affect 17% of the U.S. economy is not representative of what Americans need or want.

Why won't our elected representatives listen?

It has been voiced by some Democrats that objections regarding the healthcare reform bills are due to mis-information delivered by Republicans.

There probably does exist some of that.

However, Democrats are guilty of the same activity.

Consider that the bills are supposedly going to provide coverage for some 30 million Americans who do not currently have any form of healthcare insurance.

Yet, one third of that total, ten million people, have elected not to carry insurance, despite the fact that they can afford it. These people are exercising their own free will and making their own decisions about what they need and want.

Not if this legislation passes.

They will be forced into obtaining and paying for insurance, or be fined.

This type of political activity, economic ramifications aside, erodes our Bill of Rights.

This type of political activity drastically increases the role of government in the lives of all Americans.

It used to be that when the People speak those who have been elected to follow the will of the People respond to that will.

Evidently, no longer.

As Pelosi stated on ABC TV, "We're here to do the job for the American people -- to get them results that gives them not only health security, but economic security, because the health issue is an economic issue for America's families."

If she truly believed those words, then the Speaker would respond to, and support, the People, Main Street USA. She would champion their cause and scrap the thousands of pages of pork-filled legislation that currently exist and start anew with something meaningful and truly helpful.

Instead of ducking their responsibility on Tort Reform by passing it off to the individual states (which, as previously discussed, would become a national matter in the U.S. Supreme Court), the House and Senate should pass legislation immediately in this area.

Taxpayers do not need to pay for frivolous lawsuits that clog the Court system and, in the end, raise insurance rates each and every time they succeed. That is a double-whammy to the pocketbook of Main Street USA.

One last note.

Most of the articles that appear regarding passage of healthcare reform state that "Obama has the votes to pass reform" the way it is currently written.

Since when did the White House become more important than the collective voice, opinion and will of Main Street USA?

Yes, President Obama, we do need healthcare reform.

But not in the current state as presented.

Eliminate Medicare and Medicaid fraud-NOW.

Stop frivolous lawsuits with Tort Reform-AT ONCE.

Then, and only then, should we move forward with legislation that is significant and does not trample on the Rights of Americans to choose what they need and want.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Early Health Care Summit Notes

Writing this as the Summit is taking place.

Senator Lamar Alexander brought up the basic Republican platform. Most sounded pretty good. Once again, Tort Reform was on the list.

He quoted many past and current political figures as he presented his case, many of which were very relevant.

Speaker Pelosi pleading her case was interesting.

Yes, Main Street USA wants much of what she mentioned, but not at the cost being proposed.

Yes, Senator Reid, Americans do want healthcare reform, but not the reform that has been passed in the House and the Senate.

Why cannot the Democrats allow Tort Reform in the healthcare package?

In terms of facts that Senator Reid brings up, anyone can bring up a "fact" that supports their cause.

There is a fact that 10 million people who are not covered have decided, themselves, not to purchase it, even though they can.

Why do people sitting on Capitol Hill think they can force people to do something?

And, why is it that they feel that they can then force these people to obtain insurance or be fined?

Reid seemed to start on a bit of an attack mode, and kept it up.

As President Obama brings up issues where Democrats and Republicans agree and disagree it seems as if he would like to work together, but it is ironic that, in a national stage such as this, Democrats do not answer or respond to Tort Reform.

Cost control is definitely a concern as the president brought up in remarks, yet his only response to Tort Reform (ie frivolous lawsuits, etc.) is to have Secretary Sebelius is working on something that allows the states to do that. Why, on Earth, would that be a state matter, when many of the earmarks (to be funded by all of Main Street USA) should be, in this taxpayer's opinion, handled by their own means?

Dr./Senator Coburn was brilliant in his presentation on how to lower healthcare costs 15% on a right now, immediate basis; fraud in medicare and medicaid, extortion on medical malpractice, no new government programs, etc.

This forum seems as if it will, at some point, heat up quite a bit.

Initital thoughts and ideas as to how this is developing.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Americans Are Dissatisfied With Government

According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll surveying 1,004 randomly selected citizens on February 11, 2010, "two-thirds of Americans are either dissatisfied or downright angry about the way the federal government is working."

The poll further revealed, per the article appearing in the Washington Post, that, "on average, the public estimates that 53 cents of every tax dollar they send to Washington is wasted."

The level of dissatisfaction by Main Street USA with our government (and, hence, the elected officials "leading" us) is at its highest level in 14 years.

Of significant note is that eight in 10 people who identify themselves as conservative Republicans hold negative views about the way our government is currently working, while just shy of six in 10 (59%) of the people who called themselves liberal Democrats responded they were "enthusiastic or satisfied about the role government was playing."

In order to have the total poll results at 67% negative that leaves the middle ground, the moderate Democrats, Republicans and Independents, as the group of citizens who tipped, and kept, the dissatisfied balance at a "super-majority-plus."

As stated earlier, it would be nice if our elected officials, from President Obama, to Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid, as well as each and every member of Congress, listened to what America has to say.

Main Street USA does not want, or need, a super-size government that regulates every little thing or decides that a government-run activity can do something better than the private sector.

The most recent examples are state-run pension plans, now one trillion dollars in debt. And, that is not from the 2008 economic collapse.

The super-majority-plus of taxpayers does not desire a government that does not spend within its budget with no thought of the future consequences and has, in reality, absolutely no accountability.

That an elected representative may get voted out of office due to voters being upset with their actions is not really accountability. Afterall, that deposed member of Congress will still reap the rewards of handsome retirement pay and benefits (courtesy of Main Street USA).

A person who uses credit to the maximum, and more, pays the piper in the end, either in the form of excessively high interest rates with loans and cards never being paid in full, or ends up having to file bankruptcy.

And, based on months of polling American citizens, it is not a desire that the federal government be our healthcare provider. Period.

So, why is Washington trying to ram this down our throats?

Whose agenda is it that this occur?

The US Government, in the immortal words of President Abraham Lincoln, is supposed to be of the people, by the people, for the people.

Does today's leadership, despite Main Street USA flatly stating that we do not want government-run healthcare, feel that American Citizens do not know what is in our own best interest? That only those who sit on Capitol Hill know what is good and best for its voting public (i.e., taxpayers)?

Wake Up Everybody!

The people have spoken.

Many times.

Start listening to your constituency.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

Politics or Blackmail: Is There A Difference?

Speaking openly and quite candidly about the House Democrat Blue Dogs, House Energy and Commerce Chair Henry Waxman was quoted in U.S. News & World Report as saying, "I won't allow them to hand over control of our committee to Republicans," because the 52-member group is not toeing the healthcare reform party line.

Must we remind Mr. Waxman that healthcare reform is NOT about a party but about MAIN STREET USA!

That he would threaten to have the bill bypass the committee he chairs because his democrats are being fiscally restrained about spending One Trillion Dollars that we do not (and will not) have in the next decade is ludicrous, at best.

Waxman reiterated his point stating that, "I don't see what other alternative we have, because we're not going to let them empower Republicans on the committee."

Empower Republicans?

Please, Mr. Waxman, even Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi doesn't support your stance.

And, speaking of healthcare reform, President Obama continues his rhetoric that we must have his plan pass in order to create a healthy economy.

Even though healthcare is NOT the reason for the current state of the economy and that private economists, as reported this morning by USA Today, state that they see the recession ending in the 3rd Quarter this year (which is coming up mighty soon), and without healthcare reform having passed.

I am not saying that we do not need some form of healthcare reform.

I am saying that the reform should not - and cannot - cost Main Street USA One Trillion Dollars we do not and will not have. (Remember folks, that sum of money is the equivalent of spending One Million Dollars a day, each and every day, for about 2,740 years.)

I am also advocating Tort Reform as a means of getting healthcare costs (especially the cost of insurance) under control. But, with attorneys and lawyer firms being among the biggest political contributors and lobbying spenders, perhaps that is an unreasonable request on my part. Afterall, don't attorneys earn quite a sum when huge tort decisions are rendered?

And that we need to ensure that only U.S. Citizens are covered under any plan that is implemented. This is imperative and non-negotiable.

Another point is that the government should not, under any circumstances, be involved in providing a national healthcare insurance, competing, as it were, against traditional insurance companies. Our government, unfortunately, does not possess a good track record of keeping costs under control, nor of achieving revenue projections.

As well, there cannot be any pork in the bill because some various elected representatives want lamps in their parks and others want walking trails, etc., etc. Didn't President Obama promise, while campaigning, that there would be no earmarks in legislation under his watch?

Communities, if they really want such things, will find a way to get them built themselves, without having every tax-paying American contribute to their city beautification.

And, as I have stated previously, no one can say with any certainty that spending billions on such earmarks will increase the health of the Nation.

How about getting physical education back in school as a mandatory activity, along with health-related classroom teaching and activities? What's that wise old saying, something about it being better to teach someone to fish than to fish for them…

Over For Now,

Main Street One

Healthcare Reform: Yes, Taxes . . . No, Taxes ? ? ?

While President Obama continues to say that national healthcare reform will not put Main Street USA further into debt, the bi-partisan Congressional Budget Office says otherwise.

Even though the president campaigned with the promise that "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime," those making over one quarter of a million a year most likely would be shouldering a large chunk of the burden.

Plus, if projections are not on target in two years, there will be an automatic tax increase for those folks.

And even President Obama's Chief Economic Advisor, Larry Summers, is not ready to rule out higher taxes for middle class America.

I, for one, cannot recall a major government program that did not end up costing all Americans (other than those who are not working) more in taxes and other forms of taking-away-our-earnings, such as the proposed sugary drink consumption tax.

On another front, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is telling her Democrats to inform their constituents what's in it for us and we will support it.

The problem with that is anything can sound good presented in the right way. That does not make it right.

Why not explain to everyone the elusive concept of one trillion dollars…spending one million dollars a day, each and every day, for over 2,700 years.

That is a whole lot of money, of national debt.

Senate Democrat John Rockefeller doesn't want to support something that "sounds user-friendly" like a public co-op and espouses that a co-op cannot take on the "gigantic insurance" companies.

Senator Rockefeller, how big are your family holdings in oil and banking (and other things we don't even know about)?

Besides, this isn't about anyone "taking on" the insurance companies, least of all our government, because if we are to do that, we are surely doomed. The "government" (i.e., Main Street USA taxpayers) will subsidize lower and lower insurance costs in order to "compete."

When there are so many disagreements about what this healthcare reform is really going to cost I think it is time to put on the brakes.

You cannot project revenue on assumptions and goals. You must have realistic figures; otherwise it all becomes pie in the sky.

And, I continue to state, not one of our elected officials are talking about Tort Reform as a way to reduce insurance costs, which it absolutely would accomplish. Perhaps that is because attorneys and law firms are one of the major lobbying blocks and that sector earns substantial fees for tremendous tort verdicts.

As a matter of fact, I have not counted them up, but I'd venture to say that a large percentage of Senators and House members came from those very ranks.

Coincidence, I suppose.

What Main Street USA must must must demand is accountability from our elected officials.

What if they take a pay cut, or don't take a vacation, or take a cut in their hefty pension plan if they can't balance a budget, or enact some legislation that doesn't earn the revenue they plan on or costs go over the allotted amounts.

Accountability goes both ways.

Some things to think about.

Over For Now,

Main Street One

Social Security and Big Business

I do not think that anyone is very happy that the Social Security Administration spent some $700,000 on an Arizona get-away, in their words, a motivational management conference.

To me, this type of mindless expenditure for a bankrupt section of the US Government only makes me want to know MORE about other areas of our public arena and their “costs” of doing business in the best interest of Main Street USA.

The Executive Branch has definitely been spending more money than any other administration for being so young. I think that President Obama has appointed more new positions, more new envoys, more new advisors, more new czars than any of his predecessors. (I may be wrong, and, if so, please let me know.)

Along with each of these new positions are attached “budgets” so that they may be able to operate. That would include offices, staff, travel, etc., etc.

Now, more than ever, I want to see Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, make good on her expense transparency statement and allow Main Street USA see how each and every member of the House spends what they are allocated.

The US Senate must do likewise.

Our United States Government is, indeed, becoming much much bigger.

And the proposed health reform will only multiply that, considerably.

One of the most pressing problems facing this monstrous growth is oversight.

Thus, more than just being able to view and dissect these expenses, I believe that our officials need to be fully accountable to the American people for what they spend.

If an expense is deemed elaborate or frivolous or, shall I say, not in the best interests of Main Street USA, the person responsible should be required to pay back every cent of the expense.

And any repeat offenders should be booted from the Hill and lose their precious pension, be they Democrat, Republican or Independent.

If the US Government can and does demand such from the private sector, then the opposite must be true, for Abraham Lincoln summed it up best by declaring that this is a government “of the people, by the people, for the people.”

And that means in the best interests of Main Street USA, not the elected/appointed officials on Capitol Hill.

I can only hope that President Barack Obama holds his chiefs accountable “to the people” for what many consider lavish spending in these uncertain times. And he should be starting with the Social Security Commissioner.

Over for Now,

Main Street One

Even More Discord Among The Troops

Despite Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi promising President Obama that health care reform would be on his desk in the White House before the House adjourns for their August break, a group of conservative Democrats, the Blue Dog Coalition, seem to be a major roadblock to her commitment.

It is interesting that with each new story that is released a little bit more information finally comes forward.

This morning I asked in my blog how much money would be raised by taxing those individuals who earn $200,000 (couples, $250,000) and, lo and behold, a number comes forth: $100 Billion. Great, one answer down. That’s $10 Billion a year if the projections are accurate and hold up over time.

Then again, I could not help but laugh when I read that some Democrats actually want the Government to compete with private businesses in the sale of insurance. But it is not that funny. In fact, that one really frightens me.

Are we to believe that our Government, which does not have a great track record in meeting budget obligations, should be allowed to compete in the open marketplace for products and services? What’s next, will we have a proposal for a chain of Uncle Sam’s Gas Station/Convenience Stores?

At least Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) voices one of the main concerns that I have repeatedly stated, there are not enough cost containment measures included in the current legislation.

Let’s face it, if there are not enough factors to control costs and if the revenue estimates are shy of the projections what will result is an absolute calamity.

But wait, according to news reports, “officials” have other brilliant suggestions.

One of the ideas would be to levy “fees” on insurance companies or perhaps the drug industry. Do our elected officials not understand that if the cost of a product or service goes up, whatever the reason, the cost of that product or service increases to protect the bottom line.

That fact is not only something taught in college in a very basic business class, but, as an example, I learned that specific point when I was 16 working in a Texaco station. When the cost increased from a distributor on a tire or an oil filter, we adjusted our retail prices accordingly to maintain a certain markup percentage.

That is standard operating procedure for any business.

Another idea is to allow states to issue health care bonds. With the economic problems many states are currently facing at present, with no signs of relief readily in sight, is this where investors will want to risk their hard-earned money? Doubtful.

Of course, they would probably be “government insured,” meaning that Main Street USA will ultimately pay if the state cannot.

That seems to be the sticking point in all of this.

Whether it be through direct or product and service taxes or by way of increased prices paid for goods and services due to company costs increasing, Main Street USA will ultimately be paying for every penny of the $1-plus Trillion health care system.

Regardless of how our representatives try to paint the picture, that is how it really turns out.

I have to keep reminding myself of what Patrick Henry believed: "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."

And, right now, there is not enough restraint.

At least there are some Democrats and Republicans who seem to be asking the hard questions on this nationalized health care issue. And there are no good answers coming forth.

Over For Now,

Main Street One