July 24th, 2009
Our congressional lawmakers are living like kings and queens… well, almost.
They have the best retirement that they could vote in for themselves as well as the best health insurance. Thanks to the Civil Service Retirement System and Federal Employees’ Retirement System Act of 1986 many of them can retire with almost 2/3 of their salaries and life-time health insurance.
Members of Congress are not eligible for a pension until they reach the age of 50, but only if they’ve completed 20 years of service. Members are eligible at any age after completing 25 years of service or after they reach the age of 62. Please also note that Members of Congress have to serve at least 5 years to even receive a pension.
The amount of a congress person’s pension depends on the years of service and the average of the highest 3 years of his or her salary. By law, the starting amount of a Member’s retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary.
According to the Congressional Research Service, 413 retired Members of Congress were receiving federal pensions based fully or in part on their congressional service as of Oct. 1, 2006. Of this number, 290 had retired under CSRS and were receiving an average annual pension of $60,972.
If I am elected, one of the first bills that I will introduce will be one that makes Congress live like the rest of us - no more special health or retirement plans that only “Congress” can have. Congress should be forced to save into a 401-k plans like the rest of us. They should have to purchase their own Health Care Insurance. [Stan Cooke]
One person said - “If socialized medicine is good enough to force on American taxpayers, it’s good enough for Congress” I guess we will see!
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
Comments Off
July 23rd, 2009
Story From “Politics 4 All”
http://politics4all.com/users/theworldaroundyou/blog/1853-now-we-understand-why-bachus-is-ranting
Now We Understand Why Bachus is Ranting
Thu. Apr. 16, 06:41am EST
Now we understand why Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) has been railing against Socialists in Congress…capitalism hasn’t been too kind to Spencer lately…
Alabama Rep. Spencer Bachus , the top Republican on the committee that oversees Wall Street, lost enough in campaign investments to register a rare negative fundraising quarter for the first three months of 2009.
In a report filed with the Federal Election Commission, the ranking Republican on the Financial Services Committee disclosed $35,125 in contributions received — most of it from an assortment of political action committees and pawnbrokers — and “other receipts” of minus $61,700.
With a few other numbers factored in, Bachus ended up losing nearly $25,000 from Jan. 1 through March 31.
Bachus spokesman Tim Johnson confirmed that the unitemized “other receipts” in Bachus’ filing represented investment losses.
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
Comments Off
July 22nd, 2009
The New York Times reports this about Spencer Bachus…
Under the Big Top, Washington Style
By CYRUS SANATI Published: March 25, 2009
HARDLY a day goes by without another drawn-out Congressional hearing concerning all things Wall Street. Congress has dragged down dozens of economists, regulators and so-called masters of the universe from their respective ivory towers, faceless government buildings and glass-laden high-rises to face the wrath of the American people. While the hearings have yielded important insights on the global financial crisis, they have also illustrated how little some members of Congress know about the very system they are supposed to be overseeing.
Those who have watched the hearings from their desks at work or their couches at home have seen it all in the past few months: grandstanding, off-topic questions, the butchering of names, bad jokes, backhanded compliments, folksy insights and political rancor.
The public’s interest in the economy is at a peak, and more hearings should be expected in the months to come. Here is a look at some of the more bizarre, insightful and hilarious comments uttered by members of Congress in this modern-day inquisition.
“This is going to be a good ‘Saturday Night Live’ skit.”
REP. SPENCER BACHUS, R-ALA., making an off-mic comment at a hearing on TARP accountability
What was Bachus thinking? With thousands of Americans being laid off each day and the unemployment rate in Alabama reaching 10% - does Bachus not realize that this is not a joke… but maybe to him it is. Maybe he really does not care about the Americans in the 6th District of Alabama as long as he has his Big Bank Buddies continue to give him money.
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
Comments Off
July 20th, 2009
This is Obama’s Health Care Bill in ‘bullet’ form.
The fact that our legislators could even consider passing such an invasion of privacy and of your basic rights is inconceivable.
All members of the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government enjoy a “Cadillac” health care plan. If what they propose for Americans is so great, why aren’t they giving up their current plan and jumping on board to this one? The answer is simple. Theirs is much better.
48 Important Things to Know About Obama’s Healthcare Plan
- Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
- Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
- Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
- Page 42: The “Health Choices Commissioner” will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
- Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
- Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
- Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
- Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
- Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
- Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
- Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
- Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
- Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
- Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No “judicial review” is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
- Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
- Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
- Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
- Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
- Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
- Page 167: Any individual who doesnt’ have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
- Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
- Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
- Page 203: “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax.” Yes, it really says that.
- Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected.”
- Page 241: Doctors: no matter what speciality you have, you’ll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
- Page 253: Government sets value of doctors’ time, their professional judgment, etc.
- Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
- Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
- Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
- Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
- Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
- Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
- Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
- Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on “community” input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
- Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
- Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
- Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.
- Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
- Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
- Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
- Page 425: Goverment provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
- Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
- Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient’s health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
- Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
- Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
- Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
- Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
- Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
Comments Off
July 19th, 2009
Govtrack.us Report On Spencer Bachus
[http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400010]
Govtrack.us reports the following information on the career of Spencer Bachus in Congress:
- 1. Bachus is a follower. Bachus tends to cosponsors the bills of other Members of Congress who do not cosponsor Bachus’s own bills.
- 2. Spencer Bachus has missed 411 votes.
- 3. The Washington Times and Govtrack reports that Spencer Bachus has voted 624 times against the Republican Party and with the Democrats. This does not include the 411 missed votes.
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
Comments Off
July 17th, 2009
Story From Politicology
http://politic.ology.com/2008/12/10/young-out-bachus-remains/
Young Out, Bachus remains
Posted by D.R. Foster , Dec, 2008 @ 2:40 pm
Don Young (R-AK) gave up his post as ranking Republican on the House Committee on Natural Resources, or was forced out, depending on who you ask.
“For the good of the Republican Party, the right thing for me to do is temporarily step down from my post as Ranking Member…while my name is cleared. At that time, I look forward to regaining my post,” Young said in a statement.
Spencer Bachus (R-AL), another target of House Minority Leader John Boehner’s wrath, will keep his post as ranking member of the Financial Services Committee. According to Politico:
“Bachus was widely criticized by House Republicans for his involvement in early negotiations over the $700 billion Wall Street bailout package in late September. In what amounted to a public comeuppance, Boehner eventually had Blunt replace Bachus at the negotiating table.
But a senior GOP staffer, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the problem with Bachus is bigger than that. “He’s proven to be quite inept as [ranking member] on that committee,” the staffer said.”
Originally designated as the point man for House Republicans in bipartisan talks, Bachus was replaced after he attended a press conference alongside Democrats, appearing to endorse a deal before party leaders had signed off. He was quickly replaced by Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.).
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
Comments Off
July 17th, 2009
Spencer voted for both - NAFTA and CAFTA. You can thank him for the flood of illegal aliens flooding our country, unsafe food entering into the USA food supply without proper inspection, unsafe trucks crossing the US border, and the loss of American jobs and farms.
It Is Time For Real Change In The RIGHT Direction ! Vote Stan Cooke
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
Comments Off
July 16th, 2009
Since it was founded over 35 years ago, the National Taxpayers Union’s Number One job has been helping to protect every single American’s right to keep what they’ve earned. Our guiding principle has always been: “This is your money and the government should return it to you.” We are a nonprofit, non-partisan citizen group whose members work every day for lower taxes and smaller government at all levels.”
The voting record on tax issues by Spencer Bachus has earned him “C” according to the National Taxpayer Union.
Another Tax Loss———————————————————–
“FreedomWorks fights for lower taxes, less government and more economic freedom for all Americans. FreedomWorks combines the stature and experience of America is greatest policy entrepreneurs with the grassroots power of hundreds of thousands of volunteer activists all over the Nation.”
Bachus only made a “d” on their score-card!
It is time for real change in the right direction… Votestan.com
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
Comments Off
July 16th, 2009
The web site - themiddleclass.org - is an organization than ranks elected officials by how their votes impact the “Middle Class” in America. See their page at - http://www.themiddleclass.org/legislator/spencer-bachus-9?gclid=CKmglvLX85sCFQq3sgodS0E0-Q
For the years 2003 - 2008 their have give Spencer Bachus the Grade of F!
Again - it is time for real change in the Right direction…
Vote Stan Cooke - Congress - 2010
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
No Comments »
July 14th, 2009
House RES - 861
Spencer Bachus did not vote to support the troups or the war in H-RES-861. He did not vote against a deadline for withdrawing troups from Iraq. While his fellow Republicans voted YES in support of the Troups in Iraq and the Democrats voted NO - Bachus just decided not to vote at all. We guess he could not figure out which way the political winds were blowing at the time.
Not voting is the same as voting with the Democrats.
THE WASHINGTON POST…
This vote approved a non-binding resolution that pledged support for President Bush’s war policy and rejects setting a date for the withdrawal of U.S. forces.
The Washington Post noted that Democrats denounced the resolution as “political gamesmanship aimed at providing ammunition to use against them in November’s midterm elections. They argued that the intent was to force lawmakers who oppose Bush’s Iraq war policy to effectively cast a vote against winning the war on terrorism if they wanted to register their objections.” Republicans held that the vote provided legitimate and necessary support for U.S. troops.
The resolution says that since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, “the terrorists have declared Iraq to be the central front in their war against all who oppose their ideology.” It “honors the sacrifices” of U.S. and allied forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and “declares that it is not in the national security interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment” of U.S. troops from Iraq.
The language of the resolution relates the struggle against al-Qaeda and Islamic terrorism with the ongoing conflict in Iraq — a connection President Bush has made in recent public speeches.
The resolution also “declares that the United States is committed to the completion of the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure and united Iraq,” and it congratulates the new Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, and the Iraqi people for participating in the 2005 elections and forming the first democratic government under Iraq’s new constitution.
In an indication of the political divisiveness of the war in this election year, 42 Democrats crossed the aisle to vote in favor of the resolution (three Republicans, in turn, voted with the Democrats).
RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0
|
No Comments »
Join Email List
