Budget Cuts - Congress Fighting - What's New

So after hearing all about the looming spending cuts and the internet search I did on the same topic,  I have to say I am ashamed of our Congress.  Just last week they were off, knowing that these cuts were imminent unless they do something about it.  If they would actually stay in Washington and work we wouldn't have this problem.  The deadline to avoid these latest automatic cuts is Friday and according to one article I read neither the House or the Senate has any kind of vote for the looming cuts today.  They continue to let these deadlines come down to the wire.  Any why, for political grandstanding? 

Instead of Congress working together and in unity with the President, I see the typical it's not my fault, it's your fault crap we usually get when something important needs to happen.  Plus, there is a stalemate between President Obama and Congressional Republicans.  Republicans are wondering if they are being set-up to look like the bad guys by the President, Democrats are busy saying it will be the Republicans fault when these cuts happen, and President Obama is saying "These cuts do not have to  happen."  But you don't see him trying to compromise or work with Republicans.  Let's be real, it's all of their faults; Congress seems to be more concerned about their political future than the American people ( in my opinion, this is the norm) and the President, well let's just say he's the reason we are in such a bad spot anyway.  Senate Republican Leader, Mitch McConnell says,
“There are smarter ways to reduce the size of government. And with the national debt well over $16 trillion dollars, it’s time for the White House to stop spending all its time campaigning, and start finding smarter ways to reduce the deficit."  Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, said "The White House needs to spend less time explaining to the press how bad the sequester will be and more time actually working to stop it."

Is this budget cut issue being blown out of proportion just like the "fiscal cliff" issue we had at he beginning of this year?  That remains to be seen.  All Congress has to do to avoid these cuts is to approve funding at today's levels through September 30th and then use the time to come to an agreement on cuts and taxes, just like they did to avoid the "fiscal cliff."  Smoke & mirrors seems to be the game.

I don't pretend to know everything the U.S. Government spends money on, God forbid they be transparent to the American people, but I truly believe there are ways to cut spending and set-up taxes to be even across all income levels.  Republican Senator, Tom Coburn, agrees, "They have plenty of flexibility in terms of discretion on how they spend money. There are easy ways to cut this money that the American people will never feel. What you hear is an outrage because nobody wants to cut spending."

The articles I read are:

Trending: With the deadline looming, White House details cuts

Spending Cut Countdown: What's Congress Doing?

Spending Cuts Showdown may drag on

Comments on a Fellow Student's Blog

Legalization of cannabis (marijuana) is a very controversial subject.  In the blog titled, The Legalization of Marijuana, the writer, Jessica, is pro-legalization for medical and recreational use in the State of Texas.

I think there are medical benefits to using cannabis, such as nausea and glaucoma.  However the FDA states "marijuana has a high potential for abuse, has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and has a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision". I found a Wikipedia article which gives very detailed information about its medical uses, the benefits derived, and the history of use.

In the blog, Jessica states “…federal government are recognizing the good uses that marijuana carries…” According to the research I did, this is not the stance of the federal government. Any use of marijuana remains illegal, per the Controlled Substances Act and is classified as a Schedule I drug (the strictest classification, same as heroin, LSD and ecstasy). In contrast to this position, there are new federal guidelines which have been enacted about pursuing the prosecution of medical users.  According to the U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, "It will not be a priority to use federal resources to prosecute patients with serious illnesses or their caregivers who are complying with state laws on medical marijuana, but we will not tolerate drug traffickers who hide behind claims of compliance with state law to mask activities that are clearly illegal."

I think there are many other criminals that are much worse than someone dealing marijuana and believe the law should provide for a less strict punishment so the jail systems have more room for hard criminals, such as murderers.  I also think the legalization of marijuana could be a beneficial tax revenue stream for the government.

Regardless of a person’s personal view the rules are changing when it come to the legalization of marijuana.

Immigration: Where to start?

Our government is currently trying to come up with a bipartisan plan to "fix" the immigration issues facing this country.  I'm glad to hear they are attempting this.  So far the bare bones of the plan seems like it will work.  Of course, the meat of the plan has yet to be revealed and like most things in Congress, I doubt they can come up with a cut and dry plan.  They will be trying to insert this here or there or cater to a special interest group.  I hope for the sake of our country they can actually come up with a good plan.

The first problem is the borders.  Illegals come here all the time, the borders are not secure in the least and they aren't sent home.  What are they going to do about that; dig a fence that can be dug under, or climbed over, have unreasonable searches of every vehicle and boat that comes from another country?  So far I have seen nothing that addresses this issue.  I think once you make the laws tough enough on them, they'll stop coming illegally.

The second problem is what to do with the illegal aliens already here.  The plan somewhat addresses this in that they state they will have to go to the end of the immigration line for citizenship.  Okay, do they have any idea how many illegals are in this country; what would that do to the timeline of obtaining citizenship; does it mean they have to leave the country until it's their turn in line or do they continue to live here until it's their turn?  More questions for this problem are what if the illegal alien doesn't want to get their citizenship; are law enforcement personnel going to have the authority to send them back to their home country?

The third problem is how are you really going to collect back taxes?  How do expect get to proof of their wages?  I think this part of the plan is ridiculous.  They should just pay taxes from day one once they obtain their citizenship.  Of course, this goes back to the second problem.

Here are some more of my thoughts.

Arizona took a hard stance against illegals and was criticized by some other states and the U.S. Government.  The State ended up in the Supreme Court.  Arizona had the right idea, a good plan to curb illegal immigration, a way to secure their border and a way to send them back home.  Their hard line attitude reduced the number of illegal aliens going into Arizona. Maybe our Congress should take a look at what Arizona did and get some ideas from them.

Illegal aliens are a drain to our economy.  They use our programs and don't pay taxes.  Yes, I know that here in the Southwest they make up a good portion of blue collar workers and without them we would have a lot of jobs to fill.  I have heard it said they do the work that lazy Americans don't want to do.  Is that true; if all illegal aliens were sent home, would the Americans do the work?  Who knows, there is only one way to find out.

Immigration and illegal aliens is a very tough subject and a fine line to walk.  I believe the U.S. Government needs to change the process for becoming a citizen and limit the bureaucracy in the Immigration Department.  It is very time consuming and cumbersome to become a legal citizen.  Why wouldn't someone want to sneak into the country and reap all the benefits when it's much easier than coming in legally?  Even work visas are cumbersome to obtain.  I did a Google search to see how long the process is and the immigration government website doesn't give a clear answer, they state it depends.

Let me conclude by stating I respect anyone willing to work to support themselves and/or their families.  I don't care what you look like or what country you come from - just come legally!

Mandated Birth Control - Big Religious War

Another recent hot topic is mandating birth control for all insurance plans.  I read a political blog from National Review by James C. Capretta on this issue.  The blog is a little long, 2 pages, but is a good read and I recommend it for people who want to stay in the know.

The issue is the Obama administration wants to mandate that all insurance policies issued by employers have to have a provision for free birth control for women.  The controversy is making religious institutions adhere to the mandate.  Many believe it's against the U.S. Constitution, although the constitutionality of the proposed mandate has not been determined.  You can read more on that here.

James Capretta (James) was commenting on a column in the Washington Post by E.J. Dionne.  The column in the Washington Post says the Obama administration's proposed compromise on this issue should end the "Big Religious War."

James agrees there is a "Big Religious War" but that the proposed compromise by the Obama administration will not end it.  James goes on to thoroughly discuss the downside of the proposed compromise.  He goes into detail about about the whole issue and points out the proposed compromise is not an olive branch; it's just another way that will not allow religious institutions, that offer insurance, "to dissent from the prevailing secularism of the day."  He makes a very compelling argument backed by facts. 

One of the highlights is his statement, "Never mind that access to free and low-cost contraception has been the norm in the United States for years."  He goes on to remind everyone of the subsidies already in place from the Federal government to offer free and low-cost contraception.

I would say the information presented and James are creditable.  It appears he really did his homework and wasn't just speaking off-the-cuff.  It is noted at the end of his blog he is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center; he was also an Associate Director at the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) from 2001 to 2004, where he had responsibility for health care, Social Security, education, and welfare programs; and he currently at the American Enterprise Institute, he will be researching how to replace the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (best known as Obamacare) with a less expensive reform plan to provide effective and secure health insurance for working-age Americans and their families.. 

This whole blog caught my attention and I agree totally with James' viewpoints.  In my opinion, this is just another way for the government to try and take more control of our lives.  This issue has been in debate since last year.  It will be interesting to continue to follow it and see what happens.  I personally hope this mandate does not happen because in my viewpoint it will infringe upon religious beliefs.