New polling shows union members have grown disatisfied with Obama by a 58 percent margin.

By John Rossomando
The Daily Caller
Published: 1:15 AM 09/08/2011

New polling shows reliably blue Pennsylvania, a state that hasn’t voted for a Republican for president since 1988, could be up for grabs in 2012. And in a wisdom-bending development, organized labor could help the state trend red.

A new poll from the Center for Opinion Research at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, Pa. shows 52 percent of Pennsylvanians want someone other than Barack Obama elected president in 2012. Just 41 percent say he deserves another term.

But most telling in the Franklin & Marshall poll is remarkably high dissatisfaction with Obama in households where rank-and-file union members live.

Although 61 percent of all Democrats polled said they want to see Obama re-elected, 59 percent of union households told the pollsters they wanted to see someone else in the White House.

“Depending who the Republican nominee is, this state should be very competitive,” said Dr. Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Opinion Research, who runs the poll several times a year. “It’s 80 percent about Obama.”

The poll of 525 Pennsylvanians included 216 declared Democrats and 140 declared Republicans, mirroring the massive voter registration advantage Democrats enjoy in the Keystone State. As of mid-May, that gap was more than 1.1 million voters wide.

Madonna told The Daily Caller that the key to putting Pennsylvania in the “R” column will be for voters there to see the eventual nominee as a viable alternative to Obama. (RELATED: AFL-CIO’s Trumka won’t condemn Hoffa’s remarks)

These union numbers mirror overall polling data from overwhelmingly blue-collar, Democratic areas of the state such as the Pittsburgh area, where 58 percent of all voters say it’s time for a change. Only 31 percent from that region said Obama should be re-elected.

Allegheny County, where contains Pittsburgh, sided with Obama over John McCain by a 57–42 margin. But now that same majority — 57 percent — want Obama out of the White House.

Read more:


By John Rossomando
The Daily Caller
Published: 10:12 PM 08/28/2011

Republican staffers tell The Daily Caller that new tax cuts and regulatory reforms aimed at jumpstarting the economy will be on the agenda in the House of Representatives when it returns from recess after Labor Day.

Staffers say no specifics have been locked in yet. But a significant tax reform package could come this fall, they say, because nothing is likely to be accomplished after the 2012 election cycle begins in earnest.

“Republicans need to lay out a tax proposal sooner rather than later instead of just focusing on spending,” said Texas GOP Rep. Kevin Brady, the vice-chairman of the congressional Joint Economic Committee. “A strong economy is key to reducing our deficits.”

The conservative House Republican Study Committee is also reportedly planning to supplement the Cut, Cap, and Balance plan with a “growth” element including tax cuts and regulatory reforms.

Hill staffers tell TheDC that details will become clearer in September. But Ohio Rep. James Jordan, the RSC chairman, sent a letter to his members on Aug. 24 asking for input on “adding robust growth components, like tax reform and regulatory reform” to Cut, Cap and Balance.

According to Rep. Brady, the RSC’s eventual proposal will be a force to be reckoned with in the House Republican Conference because the two groups’ memberships overlap significantly.

Tax cuts were a key part of the budget plan, proposed by Wisconsin GOP Rep. Paul Ryan, which passed last spring. That plan sought to reduce corporate tax rates from 35 percent to 25 percent and similarly lower the top personal income tax bracket from 35 percent to 25 percent.

The Ryan budget also proposed closing corporate tax loopholes that allow some companies to avoid paying any taxes at all, and eliminating $800 billion in new taxes included in President Obama’s health care overhaul.

A committee spokesperson told TheDC that Michigan Republican Rep. David Camp, who chairs the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, intends to make tax reform a priority after Congress reconvenes and push for the same tax rates contained in the Ryan budget.

Rep. Brady told TheDC that the tax rates contained in the Ryan and Camp plans will enjoy strong support from most House Republicans.

“Both regulatory reform and broad tax reform — to simplify the system and lower rates — are priorities for the speaker,” Brendan Buck, spokesman for Speaker of the House John Boehner, wrote in an e-mail to TheDC. “Both are part of our ‘Plan for America’s Job Creators.’”

But Rep. Brady cautioned that many members of Congress will want to influence how changes to the tax code are made, so it remains to be seen what form a final bill will take.

He predicts that passing tax reform into law will be difficult as long as President Obama occupies the White House and Democrats control the Senate.

Former Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Holtz-Eakin urged Republicans to provide a clear alternative economic vision to the one Obama and the Democrats advocate. He called on them to hold the line on developing a tax reform package.

Holtz-Eakin said a proposed Republican tax-reform strategy could be a “spectacular” messaging tool for GOP congressional candidates entering the 2012 election cycle.

“Good policy makes for good politics,” Holtz-Eakin told TheDC. “All policy needs to focus on growth, considering the abysmal track record of this administration, which has placed social programs before growth.

Read more:

The Obama administration's policies could result in the dismantling of the Alaska pipeline according House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings.

By John Rossomando
The Daily Caller
Published: 12:10 AM 08/25/2011 | Updated: 12:13 PM 08/25/2011

The Obama administration is setting the stage for the dismantling of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline and poses the greatest threat to its existence today, according to House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings.

The 800-mile pipeline cost $8 billion to construct in the 1970s, and has moved more than 18 billion barrels of crude oil. Three oil companies constructed it, in the face of significant opposition from environmentalists, in response to the 1973 Arab oil embargo.

The federal government approved the pipeline as part of a strategy to secure domestic alternatives to oil from the Middle East. But the Natural Resources Committee notes that the law authorizing the then-controversial pipeline’s construction came with a caveat: If the pipeline should ever cease being viable, it must dismantled.

That day could come within the next decade.

Hastings told The Daily Caller the Trans-Alaska Pipeline remains an important national-security asset today just as it was in the 1970s, because it helps reduce Americans’ dependence on foreign oil.

According to Hastings, the Obama administration has shown a greater interest in appealing to “far-left environmentalists” than in preserving a pipeline that carries approximately 10 percent of the nation’s daily oil output and is responsible for one-third of Alaska’s economic output.

Read more:

A group of mental-health professionals hopes to normalize pedophilia at an upcoming conference by pressuring the American Psychiatric Association to remove pedophilia from the list of mental disorders.

By John Rossomando
The Daily Caller
Published: 10:00 AM 08/15/2011
If a small group of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals have their way at a conference this week, pedophiles themselves could play a role in removing pedophilia from the American Psychiatric Association’s bible of mental illnesses — the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), set to undergo a significant revision by 2013. Critics warn that their success could lead to the decriminalization of pedophilia.

The August 17 Baltimore conference is sponsored by B4U-ACT, a group of pro-pedophile mental health professionals and sympathetic activists. According to the conference brochure, the event will examine “ways in which minor-attracted persons [pedophiles] can be involved in the DSM 5 revision process” and how the popular perceptions of pedophiles can be reframed to encourage tolerance.

Researchers from Harvard University, the Johns Hopkins University, the University of Louisville, and the University of Illinois will be among the panelists at the conference.

B4U-ACT has been active attacking the APA’s definition of pedophilia in the run up to the conference, denouncing its description of “minor-attracted persons” as “inaccurate” and “misleading” because the current DSM links pedophilia with criminality.

“It is based on data from prison studies, which completely ignore the existence of those who are law-abiding,” said Howard Kline, science director of B4U-ACT, in a July 25, 2011 press release. “The proposed new diagnostic criteria specify ages and frequencies with no scientific basis whatsoever.”

The press release announced a letter the group sent to the APA criticizing its approach, and inviting its leaders to participate in the August 17 conference. “The DSM should meet a higher standard than that,” Kline continued. “We can help them, because we are the people they are writing about.”

APA spokeswoman Erin Connors told The Daily Caller in an emailed statement that her organization was not participating in the conference and would not comment on its aims.

Child advocate Dr. Judith Reisman, a visiting professor at Liberty University’s School of Law, said the conference is part of a strategy to condition people into accepting pedophiles.

Read more:

ObamaCare's regulations are causing many doctors to think twice about staying in medicine as the implementation approaches in 2013 and 2014.

By John Rossomando
Human Events

ObamaCare’s defenders promised the law would increase patient access to care, but a closer look shows that increased regulations combined with higher demand for health services could cause many physicians to give up practicing medicine.

“You are seeing a change that I haven’t seen in my over 30 years in the practice of medicine,” said Tennessee GOP Rep. Phil Roe, who worked as an OB/GYN before getting into politics. “I think what you are going to see is people going in to see a nurse practitioner, not a medical doctor, as has been the case for decades.”

According to Roe, Medicare will pay doctors less than Medicaid by 2020 should ObamaCare remain in place, which means that doctor who runs a solo practice with three employees and who grosses $300,000 could see a 30% cut in his reimbursements.

Doctor who use approximately half of their gross receipts on paying overhead costs would still have to do so even when their reimbursements are cut.

“His cut will be $50,000, meaning instead of making $150,000, he will only be making 50 or less,” Roe said. “It only takes a year or less of that to see why they are terrified of this.

“They have bills to pay. They have mortgages. They have school loans.”

Georgia GOP Rep. Tom Price, a fellow physician in the House Republican caucus, warns regulations will also cause doctors to change their minds about staying in medicine because they will make doctor-patient interactions more difficult.


By John Rossomando
© 2011 WND

Barack Obama’s refusal to compromise with congressional Republicans on taxes and spending reductions in the debt ceiling fight could cost him re-election next year, according to those who oppose him.

Congressional Republicans say the debt ceiling fight shows that Obama, unlike Bill Clinton, failed to learn the lessons of the midterm elections, and that could come back to bite him.

“What the president does here is going to speak volumes for him for 2012,” said Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee, a key leader in the balanced budget and debt ceiling fights.

According to Lee, Obama’s handling of the debt ceiling fight will harm his re-election chances.

“He has yet to come to the table and take proposals that we’ve offered and say, ‘I can’t necessarily go this far, but I can do this, this, and this,'” Lee said. “He campaigned as one who wanted to solve problems rather than just shift blame, and yet the blame shifting seems to be his preference at this point.

Read more:


By John Rossomando Published: 10:16 AM 07/23/2011
The Daily Caller

Environmental regulations drain hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. economy each year, and it mostly goes unnoticed by the public.

But proposed legislation from Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe could make the cost of such government interference more transparent.

“Everybody here is focusing on spending and taxes,” Inhofe said, “but what most people don’t realize is the cost of regulation is just as much as the cost of all of the taxes … it’s just less detectable.”

The legislation, known as the CARE Act, would require the U.S. Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency to publicize — in terms of jobs and money — the direct economic costs of the regulations they publish under the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.

Inhofe’s bill currently has more than 20 Republican senators onboard, and he hopes to attract support from centrist Democrats like Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

Inhofe contends that the EPA issues regulations without considering how they will affect the economy, and that it imposes regulations without taking into account whether or not they will kill jobs. (Rep. David Rivera reportedly under investigation by FBI, IRS)

EPA Deputy Administrator Mathy Stanislaus underscored the senator’s point when he testified before a House subcommittee that his agency had not taken jobs into account when it issued regulations this year pertaining to coal ash and other fossil-fuel byproducts.

The CARE Act would require the EPA and the Department of Transportation to consider the impact on employment of all new air pollution regulations.

“The costs of the regulations on greenhouse gases are about $300 to $400 billion a year,” Inhofe said. “The ozone regulation that he [President Obama] is about to announce next week is huge, and we are talking about some $90 billion.”

Inhofe’s bill would also establish a Cumulative Regulatory Assessment Committee comprised of the secretaries of agriculture, commerce, defense, energy, and labor, the chairperson of the Council of Economic Advisers, the EPA administrator, the administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the president and CEO of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, and the chief counsel of the Advocacy Office of the Small Business Administration.

Read more:


By John Rossomando
The Daily Caller 1:08 PM 07/16/2011

The House GOP leadership might have scheduled a vote on his version of the balanced-budget amendment next week, but Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh has a problem with the timing.

According to Walsh, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is making a mistake scheduling a vote in the coming week because he has doubts it will garner enough Democratic support to pass.

Cantor and House Speaker John Boehner announced Friday that they plan to hold a vote next week on a House version of the Cut, Cap and Balance Act.

The Cut, Cap and Balance Act, co-sponsored by Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz, along with freshman Reps. Mick Mulvaney of S.C. and Reid Ribble of Wisconsin, would allow the president to increase the debt limit to $16.7 trillion and make the hike contingent on passage of a balanced-budget amendment and its being sent to the states for ratification.

This increase would be in exchange for reducing non-defense discretionary spending to $78 billion and cutting mandatory spending $38 billion below the president’s budget request. The bill would also cap federal spending at 19.9 percent of GDP by 2021 — down from close to 26 percent of GDP today.

Walsh believes Republicans would have a better chance getting Democratic votes were the majority leader to push the vote back closer to the administration’s August 2 debt-ceiling deadline because the balanced-budget amendment could be an even more powerful bargaining chip.

“The balanced-budget amendment could be a game changer,” Walsh said. (House to act on Cut, Cap and Balance)

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer had terse words for his GOP on the House floor Friday.

“I don’t think cut, cap and balance is going to get us there,” Hoyer said . “I hope he has some other plan.”

Hoyer was a firm supporter of the balanced-budget amendment in 1995 when it came up for a vote as part of the Contract With America.

At the time, he had a far different attitude.

The number two ranking Democrat sounded like a Republican in a news conference following the 1995 passage of the Balanced-budget Amendment.

Read more:

Ted Kennedy's CLASS Act could be a significant factor haunting Obamacare for years to come because benefits will quickly outpace revenues.

By John Rossomando
Posted 07/12/2011 ET
Human Events

ObamaCare’s long-term care component is only a couple of months old and analysts on both sides of the aisle are in agreement that it is on life support and needs long-term assistance or outright elimination.

Democrats included the provision, known as the CLASS (Community Living Assistance Services and Support) Act, in ObamaCare as an accounting gimmick to make it seem as though the law would shave billions off of the federal deficit over the next decade because its revenues are front-loaded from now until 2017, when the first benefits are paid out.

The program establishes a new entitlement under ObamaCare that aims to provide a “voluntary insurance program for purchasing community living services.” It will be paid through employer payroll tax deductions, and participating individuals will pay into the program for five years before they can reach the eligibility criteria.

Eligibility will be limited to adults who have functional limitations or cognitive impairments that will be defined by Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Benefits will be based on the degree of disability or impairment and will average around $75 a day or $27,000 a year, and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) anticipates premiums will average around $123 a month for life without any underwriting.

Proponents say this will have the net effect of reducing the demand for Medicaid by caregivers.

“Ted Kennedy set it up so that it would require a bailout,” said Ryan Ellis, tax policy director with Americans for Tax Reform. “It was the first bite of the apple like some of these welfare programs in that they are underfunded, so that the only way to be responsible is to need to raise taxes later in order to bail it out.”

President Obama’s own debt commission, led by former Wyoming GOP Sen. Alan Simpson and former Clinton Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles, found the CLASS Act would be “unsustainable” and was “fiscally unsound,” and that it needed to either be significantly reformed or repealed.

Sebelius provided a similar assessment last February when she told a Senate panel the long-term care provision was “totally unsustainable.”

The Obama administration promised Americans could keep their health insurance if they liked it, but increasingly they are finding out this is not the case. Ultimately, Americans could end up finding themselves dumped into a system of rationed care..

By John Rossomando
Human Events

Health care rationing could be the end result of ObamaCare, as smaller insurers are forced out of the market and as employers race for the exits amid rising costs stemming from the law.

“A lot of people are saying it’s cheaper to pay the penalty for not offering health insurance and to force their employees to go find their health insurance in the marketplace,” said Tennessee GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander. “The insurance in the marketplace is going to be more expensive than the insurance they have from their employer now because of the requirements of the ObamaCare law.

“It will lead to higher costs and to employees losing the insurance that they now have.”

ObamaCare’s features, such as the minimum-loss ratio, the ban on lifetime health coverage limits, eliminating annual caps on payments and preventing insurers from refusing to cover preexisting conditions, will require insurance companies to pay more money out, resulting in dramatically higher premiums.

Insurance industry executives have told Congress they anticipate that ObamaCare’s medical-loss ratio requirement of 80% in individual and group markets or 85% in large markets will have a dramatic impact on health care consumers, employers and health insurance plans.

The medical-loss ratio dictates how much private insurers need to spend on medical claims and how much can be spent on overhead costs such as payroll and advertising, and on the profit they can earn.