TitleBarRed

TitleBarRed

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

What Do They Have in Common?

Remember all the fun late night comics had over the Senator from Idaho who did a little toe tap in a Twin City restroom and was laughed out of office. Well get this, he's back in hot water for using campaign funds to cover his more then $200,000 defense fee. His lawyers argued that using campaign money for a legal defense over his 2007 arrest was proper because, wait for it, he was arrested while on official business. Not to be confused with getting his business done, officially.

Larry Craig, a Republican from Idaho, was arrested during a sting at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Craig used a bathroom there during a layover, when an undercover officer said Craig sexually solicited him by tapping his foot. Craig had pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor but after his case became public he tried to renege. Now, the Federal Elections Commission is suing him for using more than $216,000 in campaign money for that legal fight.

The Judge overseeing the suit, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, reminded Craig of his prior guilty plea. Referring to his statement 'That had no connection to his duties, other than being in an airport,' and citing a letter that was written by Craig and his lawyers to the Senate Ethics Committee in 2007 describing Craig's arrest and conviction as 'purely personal conduct unrelated to the performance of official Senate duties.'

Compare this case to others like former Democratic California Rep. Gary Condit, who used more than $100,000 in campaign funds for attorneys during a 2001 police investigation into missing intern Chandra Levy. New York Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel used more than $300,000 from his political action committee to pay attorneys during a 2009-2010 House ethics investigation. Former Florida Republican Rep. Tom Feeney used more than $100,000 in campaign funds to pay attorneys during a 2007 ethics investigation.

Republicans soliciting sex? Democrats skipping out on paying taxes? The only thing these politicians seem to be able to agree on is that they hate paying lawyers out of their own pocket. A sentiment that I can wholly get behind, especially when you consider that there are far more lawyers then any other profession in congress.  

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

A Study in Absurdity

We have an issue in this country, and I think most people would agree with me on this, that people just generally don't know that much about money. It doesn't matter if it's the ability to balance a checkbook or how best to manage a retirement fund, people just struggle to wrap their brains around what they are supposed to do in today's money market.

No, I'm not going to try and sell you gold now, do you read this blog? Do whatever you want with your money, I don't care. What I wanted to talk about is a hilarious hypocrisy in how we use our federal dollars when it comes to addressing the aforementioned issue. Let's put on our imagination caps for a moment, who is the best, by which of course I mean worse, entity to try and educate the general public on how they should manage their money? If you said the same entity that has borrowed more money then they could ever hope to repay in their lifetime, then you would be correct.

The federal government is worried that you, yes you, don't know what to do with your hard earned money. The same government that takes 2 percent more of your money through a payroll tax increase and then wails louder then a kid who's binky was taken away when it had to tighten it's belt by basically the same amount.

Take a look at a recent report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) concerning the goals for an initiative called 'National Strategy for Financial Literacy'. Who's goal, simply stated, is to educate the general populous on how to manage their money;

Recommendation: To help ensure that the National Strategy for Financial Literacy serves its goal of improving the nation's financial literacy and education, the Secretary of the Treasury, in concert with other agency representatives of the Financial Literacy and Education Commission, should incorporate into the national strategy clear, specific goals and performance measures that would serve as indicators of the nation's progress in improving financial literacy and benchmarks for what the Commission sets out to achieve.
Agency Affected: Department of the Treasury
Status: Closed - Not Implemented
Comments: The Financial Literacy and Education Commission released a new strategy in 2011 and subsequently has produced an accompanying implementation plan (still in draft). The strategy and plan do not include the types of goals, performance and benchmarks that we recommended.

That's right, with over 50 organizations and programs lending their know how towards educating the general public on how to manage money, it was recommended that take some time to actually decide how and if we are accomplishing anything, an apparently major shift in the status quo of just doing something without worrying about those pesky things like results and effect. Note that this recommendation was over 7 years after the program was started back in 2003. They poo poo'ed the recommendation saying that their goals would be changing really soon anyway, not to anything that it was recommended them to be, and we haven't actually published them yet. Kind of sounds like a 'yeah, we'll get back to you on that one' comment.

Now, let's look at a senate hearing about this project conducted in 2011, discussing these recommendations. Specifically the line of questioning from Senator Johnson (R-WI) to the head of the GAO, Mr. Dodaro. I'll paraphrase a little here;

Senator Johnson: So who is in charge of this program, now 7 years since it started?
Dodaro: I dunno, I guess that guy over there. (Points to a group of 20 agencies,a guy from treasury points to himself and mouths "Me?")
Johnson: How much have we spent on this program?
Dodaro: I dunno.
Johnson: Can you guess? Millions, Billions?
Dodaro: No, I really wouldn't feel comfortable guessing.
Johnson: Well, we've been doing this for several years, what have we accomplished?
Dodaro: Glad you asked! We have a website! It's very pretty.
Johnson: So 7 years in, and we still haven't even really established what you guys are supposed to be doing?
Dodaro: Did you not just hear me say 'website'?

So there you go folks. Someone, we don't really know who, spent god knows how much money to put together a website with no real goal or way of measuring if they are being successful so that they can educate you on how to manage your money. What a country!

Don't stop reading now folks, The final kick in the pants to this story is that in 2012, someone decided that their tactics and priorities, whatever they where, where old and tired, so they appointed a committee to look into this whole thing. Not so much as to take a step back and see how silly they look, heavens no, but rather to forge a path forward. There conclusion? Well, on top of once again stating that they really need to say what it is that they do, they concluded that they are failing their "objectives" on several fronts, then they continue a narrative that we've heard before, "Overall, participants agreed that additional funding is needed to address data gaps presented by these priorities."

No real definition, no idea how well we're doing it, so please give us some more money so that we can continue the good fight.

By the way, that really neat website can be viewed here. We don't know how much taxpayers spent on it, so you better look at it and try and get your money's worth.

Friday, March 1, 2013

My God, MORE LIES!!

This is getting silly, but here we go again...

In a press conference today, Obama was going on about the horrors that lye in wait to steal food out of your mouth and the TP from your bathroom as the sequester begins it's reign of terror. He once again blamed republicans for all the grief and all the damage that it will cause, stating "They [republicans] have allowed these cuts to happen, because they have refused to budge on closing a single wasteful loop hole to reduce the deficit."  - President Obama, 3/1/2013

Had I still had food in my mouth, I would have spit it out as I nearly fell off my TP-less toilet when I heard this. Sure the term wasn't labeled 'wasteful' when Mitt Romney proposed this very idea as part of a tax reform idea that was 'defeated' back in November, but when John Boehner tried to submit a plan to the White house in December to avoid raising taxes, like we just did as part of the Fiscal Cliff Deal. I believe the words used at the time where "a step backwards" and "not serious". On top of that, to steal a page from the White House playbook, was this not an idea submitted by Bowles in the Bowles-Simpson plan as a way to reduce the deficit. A Democrat in a committee created by... wait for it... the President?

On top of that, while fielding questions, he just kept on making stuff up, he mentions that Custodial staff at the capitol have already been given a pay reduction, well GUESS WHAT! There is a document sent to the employees that work at the capitol, doing things like taking out the garbage and sweeping the floors. Turns out, that they saw these coming a mile away and planned and prepared for it. Kudos to the managers on the Hill for having no faith that their bosses wouldn't figure out anything to help them out.

This, however, does not change one little fact, that this President is lying through his teeth, he can't figure out what story to sell us, he's running low on ways to keep blaming the right for why nothing there is working. I'm just so frustrated that the guy who was hired to lead is instead taking cheep shots and so blatantly misleading. Is he that confident that he won't be called out on this? Does he know he has a majority of people in his corner no matter what? Is the 47% Romney talked about finally at 51%?

My head hurts, I need a nap. Wake me when it's over.

Press Conference from 3/1/2013