One way for Congress to finally get moving on passing a budget? 

Perhaps none of them should be paid if the Government shuts down or if they cannot pass one.  They should not paid retroactively, not paid at all — for the entire time the Government is shut down.  This continuing budget problem is their fault.  It is not the fault of just the Republicans nor just the Democrats.  As long as this country is operating without a budget they are both at fault.

I believe that if Congress and the President were truly serious about doing the work of the people, then they should volunteer that if they do not pass a budget by the time the current Continuing Resolution expires then they will not take any form of compensation until one is passed.

Attention Congress and Mr. President:  Any volunteers?

All of us know it is inevitable that our Congress must come up with ideas to strengthen the financial shape of our Social Security System, and the sooner that Congress deals with this problem the better.  

There is no easy solution, and as a result we usually hear ideas such as raising the retirement age, reducing benefits, or even scrapping and replacing the system.  And no-one does anything but use typical scare tactics for political gain, because in any case someone is going to be unhappy and that usually endangers political careers.  Hence fixing the system never gets started.

I am not afraid to tackle tough problems therefore I am putting an idea out there, and I am sure I will get attacked by someone as a result.  That is ok because at least I am offering an idea, and I challenge others who disagree to not be afraid to offer their ideas as a result.   I was taught at an early age that one should be prepared to offer suggestions for solutions to problems that they raise.

To me, it does not matter if one is a Democrat or Republican because the problem with Social Security still exists and has to be dealt with.  I believe that people with different perspectives exchanging constructive ideas (rather than towing their party line or bickering or accusing each other of evil motives) is a great way to solve such complex problems.  And I don’t believe that most people care whether a Democrat or Republican fixes the Social Security problem, for they just want the problem fixed. 

An employee’s contribution to Social Security is limited up to the wage base limit, which currently stands at $106,800 per year.  Why not require the employee to contribute their share of Social Security regardless of what income they make, even above the $106,800 threshold?  As an example an employee who is making $200,000 per year currently contributes 4.2% of $106,800 or $4,485.60 per year.  If the wage base limit were eliminated they would then pay 4.2% of $200,000 or $8,400.00 per year.  (For comparison reasons a person making $35,000 per year pays 4.2% = $1,470 per year).  Also note that the contribution rate is usually 6.2% but for 2011 Congress has reduced the rate.

I do not consider the above to be a total solution, but at least it is a start when considering the revenue side.  Solving the problem on the cost side of the equation is a different challenge of course but there are many ideas that can be developed as well. 

What do you think?

As reported just a couple of hours ago on the Willis Report on Foxbusiness.com, this video offers some very disturbing news regarding our new Health Care system made possible by the Affordable Health Care Act (otherwise referred to as “Obamacare” passed by Congress last year. Below are many of the highlights, but I encourage you to watch the video for yourself. It is only roughly 3 minutes long but very disturbing.

Remember that the Affordable Health Care Act:

1. Was supposed to keep health care costs from skyrocketing, increase jobs, let all of us keep health care insurance, and reduce the deficit.
2. Was supposed to expand coverage for 32 Million uninsured people.

How does the program look now, one year later after passage?

1. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), when estimating the insurance subsidies required by law, projects them to increase by 8.6%. CBO estimates that the Total Cost of the Program will now equal $1.45 Trillion.
2. Premiums for families were supposed to decrease $2,500 by 2012. However a poll of businesses by Towers Watson estimates premiums increasing by an average of 12% this year alone. Furthermore CBO estimates that premiums will rise $2,100 over the next 5 years (by 2016). What happened to costs going down? Where is the affordability?
3. CBO estimates that the Health Care sector will lose 800,000 jobs because of the law. What happened to increasing jobs? 
4. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) estimates that 51% of US businesses will change their plans over the next 2 years (by 2013). And 80% of small businesses could lose coverage to opt into the federal program. Large businesses may no longer be covering their employees after weighing payment of the $2,000 fine per employee imposed on them if they do not cover the employee vs. the cost of covering the employee. I thought that we were going to be able to keep our insurance if we liked it? How is that going to happen?
5. In 19 states people can no longer buy insurance for children because insurers stopped selling policies due to concerns of cost control. How is that helping our children?

One word = UNACCEPTABLE!

You be the judge. Does this sound like as advertised and what we wanted from our health care system?

Those who were pushing this law (Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz), and other Congressional Representatives from South Florida (Congressman Alcee Hastings), should be held accountable.  

Remember how the Liberal, Progressive Congressional Representatives that held a majority last year had to rush to pass it, saying that we will find out what’s in the law once we passed it, but that we would like it?  Do you like it so far?

Here’s the link to the video.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4603956

This article and others like it should be required reading by all of our Congressional Representatives. 

Since our Congress has no problem putting together 2,000+ page bills, they should have no problem taking a few minutes to read this article, which gives a few examples of how the budget impasse can and is affecting us.  It does not matter if you are Republican, Democrat, or Independent, all of us understand this and so should our Congressional representatives, whether they are Republican, Democrat, or Independent.

And since our Government just loves acronyms, here are a couple we should make popular.

“NMCR” = NO MORE CONTINUING RESOLUTIONS!

“PAB” = PASS A BUDGET!

“IYDYAF” = IF YOU DON’T _________________ YOU ARE FIRED!  (Insert desired action in the blank)

Here’s the link to the article.

 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42117009/

While appearing at a recent press conference with Rep. Rob Andrews (NJ), Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL) made a couple of comments that all of us can certainly agree with, especially during these days of $3.50+ per gallon gas prices.  She said that that we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and specifically that we need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.  Wasserman Schultz also stated that over 1 year ago in 2010, with the passage of the Recovery Act, Congress made significant investments in “creative energy projects” and “alternative energy”.   As all of us know, investments should be made in areas that are evaluated to have a probability of a good return on such investment and avoid investments that have a low probability.  To that end, since our Government has made “significant investments” of our tax money, we should be updated on the amount and status of these projects, the justification of why such projects were chosen, and the timeframe that they would likely produce some results (hopefully good results). 

Furthermore, it is important to understand that sometimes “creative” projects are not necessarily ones that are likely to produce good results.  I believe that we should ask for the list of such creative projects so as to make sure that “creative” does not mean “ridiculous”.  The main point I am trying to make is that while I agree we should reduce our dependence on foreign oil in the future, we should also realize that TODAY American families are struggling in this economy to put gas in their cars to go to work (for those who have jobs), pay higher prices for groceries, and pay higher prices for nearly everything else that depends on energy.  Therefore we need to always pay attention to the realities of TODAY and, while we are investing in alternative sources of energy, we should also be doing the best that we can with the best alternative at the moment … Oil. There is nothing wrong with investing in new alternatives AND drilling more AND increasing our refining capacity until the time comes when there is a better alternative.

What do you think?

The 2011 Fiscal Year for our Federal Government is nearly half over, and a major task that was initially the responsibility of the last Congress, which included Debbie Wasserman Schultz, remains unaccomplished by this Congress as well.  Put plain and simple this is unacceptable  This is embarassing for this country and keeps it from moving forward.  Businesses, individuals, families, states, municipalities, non-profits, and any other entity cannot operate effectively and efficiently without a budget.  Therefore neither should our federal government operate without one. Our kids are taught in school the principles of budgeting.    

Congress should be leading by example.  I don’t care if they work day and night.  Order pizza and burn the midnight oil. Break out the cots. If they have time to be pursuing other legislation that most Americans would consider much less priority than getting this country’s fiscal house in order, then they have time to work on the budget.

 Get to work.  No more Continuing Resolutions.  

As many of you employers out there either know or will be finding out soon, many of us are receiving special assessments from the State of Florida Department of Revenue because the state borrowed a reported $1.8 billion from the Federal Government to pay unemployment benefits due to the high unemployment in our state. The interest on that loan, $61.4 million, is due and many employers are required to pay their assessed share.  This is on top of the rate that employers already normally pay each year per employee.

This is yet another example of there being no free lunch.  The money that pays for those benefits comes from somewhere.  It is also another reason why improving our economy and creating incentives for businesses to create jobs should be top priority for our legislators.  By this lawmakers should also realize that what they do always has consequences (some intended, some unintended), in this case not only to those who are unfortunately unemployed but to the businesses that create jobs as well.  And it is another reason why our elected officials with little to no experience in business are prone to creating negative consequences to both employers and employees.

It is time.  Our Congress must do its job and pass a budget, not pass continuing resolutions as they have been doing recently.  This is about doing what is best for our country regardless of personal feelings , party affiliation, or who got us into this mess.  This is about serving ALL citizens of the United States. 

Our Congress and President have a responsibility to make difficult decisions and get our fiscal house in order.  Our country’s deficit problems cannot be fixed without a budget, and how can one understand how much money that they have coming in or going out if they don’t have one?  How can we plan and invest as a country?  The entire process begins with making a budget, just as individuals, families, businesses, young professionals, colleges, state & local governments, senior citizens, single mothers, the kid who wants to use his allowance to get that new toy, and everyone else does.  

The problem with not passing a budget?  Doubt is created in everyone’s minds, and this doubt is not necessary and unacceptable.  Government agencies need to know what they can and cannot spend, and it is much easier to know if they are overspending if they have a budget.  The soldier in the field needs to know that his country has his back while he or she is fighting for our freedom and that there will be no shortage of supplies or the best possible equipment, especially when they need them the most.  The stock market and investors need more certainty that our Government has its fiscal house in order.  The senior citizen or person nearing retirement needs that assurance that their benefits will be there.  The unemployed need to know that there is promise of a new job opportunity.  The business needs certainty so that it can plan to hire more employees and invest in new equipment, which in turn will create more jobs.  The consumer needs confidence so that they will buy goods and services, or even a new home.  The student in school needs to know that his or her Government is leading by example and living by a budget, just like the student is being taught in school to do.

And with regards to expenditures, there are many areas that can be cut.  In my book there are no cuts that can be too small, therefore it is unacceptable to hear that excuse from any elected official, but that is the subject of another posting.

It is Time.

One has to wonder how on Wednesday Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz made a claim that in last 2 years they [Congress] have delivered “over 1.3 Million new private sector jobs”.  Perhaps this many new jobs have indeed been created somewhere, but this job creation does not appear to have been occurring in Congressional District 20 (Wasserman Schultz’s District since she took office in January 2005) and other districts in South Florida. 

Close examination of the Bureau of Labor Statistics for Unemployment (Not Seasonally Adjusted) presents some interesting trends regarding the numbers and percentages of unemployed in the Miami – Ft. Lauderdale – Pompano Beach Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) between the years 2004 and 2010. The numbers, which were taken from the BLS website, are repeated below.  Note that the 2010 numbers are currently identified as preliminary.                                                                                                                           Unemployment

Year             Labor Force     Unemployed                     Rate

2004             2,618,899              132,744                        5.1%

2005             2,673,193               111,421                       4.2%

2006            2,742,169                99,377                         3.6%

2007            2,807,483                115,080                       4.1%

2008           2,852,784               174,094                         6.1%

2009           2,851,263                290,725                         10.2%

2010  (Prelim)  2,887,736           338,975                          11.7%

Source:  Bureau of Labor Statistics Website (http://data.bls.gov/)

First, it is apparent that the unemployment rate has consistently grown every year since 2006, not just over the last two years.  The unemployment rate has grown a whopping 225% since 2006.  Since 2004 the unemployment rate is now 6.6% higher and there are now 206,231 more unemployed then there were then.  Furthermore since 2007, while the labor force has only grown by 80,253, the number of unemployed has grown by 223,895 and the unemployment rate has grown by an additional 7.6%. 

The point is not only that this area has lost a tremendous number of jobs over the last couple of years, but that it has consistently lost jobs for several years, despite what congressional representatives Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Alcee Hastings, Robert Wexler , and Ted Deutch have done for their respective districts.  And despite whatever job creation efforts they have made, stimulus-based or otherwise,  substantial job creation has not been a result. 

Why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Alcee Hastings, and Ted Deutch all vote against this bill, which is titled United Nations Tax Equalization Refund Act of 2011?  It would request the return of U.S. taxpayer money that has been overpaid to the U.N.  All of us should expect some explanation. 

 Some of the text taken from the bill is as follows: