HR 5146 freezes congressional salaries at $174,000 for 2011 and passed 402-15.  I would have voted FOR this bill.  The incumbent representative, Charles Dent, voted FOR this measure.  The Democrat challenger, John Callahan, has not stated an opinion on this bill to my knowledge.  The video below has a rough transcript.

However, this bill does not quite go in the direction we need Congress to take — which is cutting their salaries and freezing their benefits.  Their rampant spending and economic interventions over the past decade has resulted in the current troubled times.

If representatives desire to cut back on federal spending, they should start with their OWN salaries.  I have pledged to only accept the district median household income, and will donate the remainder to local non-profit hospitals to provide care for those who need it the most.  I have also pledged to not enroll in the congressional pension plan which pays out up to 80% of their salaries for the rest of their lives, nor the elite congressional health care plan.  The incumbent, Charles Dent, is enrolled and eligible for both programs.  The other challenger has not stated he would voluntarily give up these benefits to my knowledge.

Federal spending needs to be cut to the bone just so the safety nets of Social Security and Medicare can stay solvent into the future for the Baby Boomer generation now retiring.  Military expenditures need to be slashed, including the costly foreign policy of interventionism, which costs over $1 trillion annually.  Redundant and unconstitutional departments like the $100 billion federal Department of Education need to abolished and phased out immediately.  The federal income tax is immoral and unnecessary provided these cuts are made.  Congress must stop the economic interventions in the labor, tax, and regulatory markets to end the unemployment problem.

A slash in congressional salaries – while symbolic in terms of the overall dollar amount – would go a long ways to communicating to the American people that Congress works for them.  However unpleasant the truth is, the real truth is that the people are working for the government.  Well over 50% of the wealth created by the American people is consumed by the government every year.

HR 5017, the Rural Preservation and Stabilization Act

HR 5017, the Rural Preservation and Stabilization Act, passed the House by a vote of 352-62.  This bill doubles the upfront tax required for special privileged single-family housing loans run by the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Housing Service and would result in an additional $24 million in taxes for the federal government per the CBO.  I am opposed to the RHS government subsidies and special favors given to special groups, as this is not the purpose of the federal government.  There is no constitutional authority that creates the authority for Congress to do this, and the most practical step for Congress to take is to figure out how to best phase this program out. (Video link)

That said, instead of raising the entry tax, I would rather freeze the entire program and proceed to phasing it out.  The boon given to these privileged rural families is paid for by the taxpayers who must provide the funds required.  Since GOVERNMENT HAS NOTHING, in the end subsidizing special loans in the rural areas will simply make living there easier for the loan recipients at the expense of everyone else in society.  The bill is simply centralized socioeconomic planning that shifts the population from land requiring lower costs to land requiring higher costs. It does not increase the total wealth and prosperity of our country, it curtails it, as those favored by the loans could have lived for less at a different location or rented, and the taxpayers could have used the funds themselves to increase their wealth and satisfaction.  Obviously, the salaries of the bureaucrats who run the RHS are not totally insignificant as well.

Now, if the tax increase was part of a plan to end the program, I may have been persuaded in its favor. The RHS runs a total of $12 billion in loans, and its share of the FY2010 budget is $173 million.  This tax is NOT proposed as part of a phase-out, but simply because the RHS program will run out of funding in May 2010.  Hence, the program is bankrupt and not well run… by Congress and the massive DC bureaucracy.  Yet another example of “desperado economics” by Congress and yet another reason to end this program.

However, the bill’s sponsor, Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania, also stuck in a $30 BILLION EXPANSION of the loans the RHS is allowed to guarantee in 2010.   This will more than triple the current RHS subsidies.  I condemn the expansion of the federal government in today’s pressing economic times in the strongest possible terms.

The incumbent representative, Congressman Charlie Dent, voted FOR this measure, reasons unknown.  The Democrat challenger, John Callahan, has not stated an opinion on this bill to my knowledge.

I would have voted AGAINST this measure for the reasons described above.

HRES 1131 National Assistant Principals Week

H.Res. 1131 declared last week “National Assistant Principals Week” and passed 411-0.  I would have voted PRESENT for this vote, and not in favor of the measure as the incumbent Congressman Charlie Dent did, not because I do not believe that the role of assistant principals is not important to society – but because it is very difficult if not impossible for the Congress to decide which professions should or should not have their own weeks dedicated to them.   Not to be humorous, but just as an example, National Trash Collectors Week could also have been proposed, as they are also important to society, just in a different way than Assistant Principals.  As stated above, Congress at the moment has far greater responsibilities and actions.  A “present” vote would not have been against this measure, but would have communicated that there are more pressing matters.

HR 4861 and 4543 Renaming Post Office Buildings

HR 4861 renamed a post office building in Chicago, IL, and was passed 371-0.  HR 4543 renamed a post office building in California.  I would have voted FOR these bills as the selection of the names are best left to their local representative and constituents.  Congressman Charlie Dent voted the same way.

HRES 1103 Sam Houston Birthday

H.Res. 1103 commemorated Sam Houston’s birthday and passed 375-0.  I would have voted PRESENT for this bill. Congressman Charlie Dent voted FOR this bill. A “present” vote would not have been against this measure, but would have communicated that there are more pressing matters.  Sam Houston was a colorful character in American and Texan history, to say the very least.

May 3, 2010

Article Archives