HOUSE Republican Leader John Boehner

The Case of the Foreign Loophole: Congress Leaves Millions of AIG Largess on Other Side of the Pond

The recently enacted “stimulus” bill contained a provision inserted by congressional Democratic leaders to allow bonuses to be paid if they were part of a contact signed before February 11, 2009 - bonuses just like the $165 million in exempted bonuses to current and former AIG employees in its London-based financial products division, a division viewed by many as the unit most responsible for AIG’s collapse.  73 employees received bonuses in excess of $1 million each, and a substantial number of bonus recipients are or were working outside the U.S.

Scrambling to provide political cover for themselves and embattled Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, Congressional Democrats today rushed legislation to the House floor (H.R. 1586, authored by Ways & Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel of NY) to impose higher individual income taxes on bonuses paid by certain companies.  Generally, the bill requires employees to pay federal income tax at a 90% rate on bonuses paid by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and any company that received at least $5 billion in TARP assistance.

There is a major problem with the Democratic plan though.  The tax code provides that non-U.S. citizens are only subject to U.S. tax for services actually performed in the U.S.  Therefore, a foreign person performing services for any company, including AIG, in a foreign country is not subject to U.S. individual income tax, even if the foreign person is working on matters that relate to the U.S. activities of his or her employer.  In short: taxpayer-funded AIG bonuses paid to non-U.S. citizens and individuals who currently live overseas (in London, for instance), cannot be recouped for taxpayers under the Democratic bill.

By contrast, an alternative bill offered by Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-MN) and House Republicans directs the Treasury to implement a plan to recoup 100 percent of the taxpayer-funded AIG bonuses within two weeks.  At the command of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), House Democrats voted in lockstep against the bill when it was brought to the House floor earlier this week, effectively killing it.

H.R. 1586 is a badly flawed bill that leaves the taxpayer on the hook twice: by only trying to collect at best 90% of the $165 million in bonuses paid - leaving $16.5 million out there to line the pockets of those directly involved in the collapse of AIG - and by letting non-US citizens who received bonuses in AIG’s foreign offices get off scot-free.

For further information, click HERE.

Permalink | 4 Comments »

---

House Republicans Push for Congressional Inquiry on Treasury Role in AIG Fiasco

House Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI) and Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-OH) held a news conference yesterday to highlight a resolution of inquiry they have authored to give taxpayers a full account of the Obama Administration’s communications with AIG regarding their receipt of bailout funds.  Reps. McCotter, LaTourette, and their House Republican colleagues believe taxpayers deserve an investigation to determine exactly how the provision paving the way for the executive bonuses got into the bill - and why the President didn’t know it was in there.  Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) has 12 days to act on this resolution of inquiry.  Will House Democrats give taxpayers the investigation they deserve?

Full video of Reps. McCotter and LaTourette’s news conference follows.

Permalink | 4 Comments »

---

President Barack Obama and the Website of “NO”

Yesterday in his statement on the budget, President Obama once again called for bipartisan solutions to the problems our economy faces, saying:

The answers don’t have to be partisan, and I welcome and encourage proposals and improvements from both Democrats and Republicans in the coming days.

Responding to President’s call, yesterday Leader Boehner outlined the principles of the Republican budget in brief video:

With both the President’s and the Leader’s statements now featured on YouTube, what better way to offer the American people an opportunity to compare and contrast the two visions for the country than seeing them side by side?   Unfortunately, when we attempted to post the Leader’s statement as a response on the White House YouTube channel, we received this message:

The promise of social media lies in its ability to connect people and start a conversation.  While the Obama administration has received much praise for its use of the web, it’s becoming clear that they intend to have a very one-sided conversation: no YouTube responses, no comments on the White House “blog”, and no Twitter.  Let us know what you think of the White House’s web-policy of “No” in the comments below, by replying to @GOPLeader on Twitter, or in a video response on our YouTube channel.

Permalink | 15 Comments »

---

President’s Budget: No Charity for Charitable Deductions

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH), in remarks made today on the House of Representatives floor, said that the President’s budget “spends too much, taxes too much, and borrows too much.”

Just how much does the administration’s plan tax and spend?  The President’s budget calls for $1.4 trillion in new taxes that will affect every American.  There’s a $646 billion “cap and trade” energy tax; a $636 billion tax on income and small businesses; new  taxes on investors by raising capital gains and dividend rates; a resurrection of the death tax; and a reduction in charitable deductions which will result in $4 billion less in donations each year to charities across America.

This is a budget Americans simply can’t afford right now.

The proposed reduction in charitable deductions is especially troubling, since it would hurt charities at a time when American families are struggling and in need of assistance.  The Wall Street Journal recently noted in an editorial:

According to the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, total itemized contributions from the highest income households would have dropped 4.8% — or $3.87 billion — in 2006 if the Obama policy had been in place.  That year, Americans gave $186.6 billion to charity, more than 40% from those in the highest tax bracket.  A back of the envelope calculation by the Tax Policy Center, a left-of-center think tank, estimates the Obama plan will reduce annual giving by 2%, or some $9 billion.

For some perspective, the following is what $4 billion in donations looks like:

• Equal to the total yearly budget for the Salvation Army
• Larger than the total budget for the American Red Cross
• Four times the amount the American Cancer Society spends to support cancer victims and cutting-edge research

The President’s proposal has alarmed Republicans and some prominent Democrats, including Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, who questioned the plan: “I would never want to adversely affect anything that is charitable or good.”  His Senate counterpart, Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) , echoed Rep. Rangel’s concerns when he told Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner he is “wondering about the viability of that provision.”

The United Jewish Communities, an umbrella group for Jewish social-service charities, said in a statement that “[d]uring the current economic downturn, which has forced nonprofits to do more with less, any proposal which would result in a decrease in private giving will be a disaster for America’s charities, and for those who depend upon them.”

House Republicans couldn’t agree more.

Permalink | 2 Comments »

---

Newspaper Editorials: On Earmark Reform, It’s Say One Thing, Do the Other

On Wednesday, President Obama signed a massive $410 billion omnibus spending bill - a piece of legislation that contains nearly 9,000 earmarks and increases non-emergency federal spending to levels not seen since the Carter years.  Newspaper editorials blasted the President’s decision to sign a bill loaded with earmarks on the very day he was announcing earmark “reform.”

Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) had called on the President to veto the omnibus, promising to deliver Republican votes to sustain his veto.  Unfortunately, the President signed the bill - behind closed doors.  On the very same day he OK’d a bill with 9,000 earmarks, the President made a big public showing of “reforming the earmarking process” - which prompted Leader Boehner to ask, “where’s the beef?  Where’s the reform?”

At the very least, earmarks lead to wasteful government spending; in the worst of cases they are simply corrupt.  And the earmarks in the omnibus are no different.  As the Los Angeles Times reported this week, “The spending bill Obama signed Wednesday is packed with such earmarks, including 13 that benefit clients of the PMA Group, a lobbying firm in Washington under federal investigation for alleged campaign-finance abuses.”

Leader Boehner has maintained a ‘no earmarks’ policy throughout his 18 years of service in the House of Representatives.

Newspapers were flummoxed by the President’s actions.  Reaction from around the country:

Christian Science Monitor: “Obama’s weak snort at pork”

Many Americans seem ready for Mr. Obama to veto this bill as proof he will exercise the fiscal discipline he so often promised in his campaign and continues to advocate.  They already have doubts about his $787 billion stimulus bill that received scant review in Congress before being passed and is likely laced with poorly thought-out mandates to spend.  These earmarks add insult to injury.  When will the president stand up and say thus far and no farther to such dubious spending?

The Washington Post: “He’ll Quit Tomorrow”

Earmarks are symbols of broader indiscipline, and they also are conducive to corruption.  So it was disappointing that Mr. Obama shied away from a tougher stance even as he congratulated himself for doing more.  He called earmarks for private companies ‘the single most corrupting element of this practice.’  Why, then, not do away with such earmarks entirely?

Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink | 3 Comments »

---

Anti-Worker “Card Check” Bill Introduced: Democratic Support Erodes Amid Union Infighting, Testimony of Union Boss’ Intimidation

Yesterday, Democrats introduced a job-killing “Card Check” bill only to find that support continues to erode among Democrats in Congress, despite increased majorities in both Houses after last year’s elections.  Several Democrats, including Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), have called “Card Check” “divisive” and a bill that “we don’t need that right now.”

In fact, there are fewer co-sponsors of “Card Check” legislation in the 111th Congress than there were in the 110th Congress.

The unveiling of “Card Check” was also met by growing union infighting: as Roll Call reported yesterday, “A leading union for hotel and restaurant workers on Tuesday accused the Service Employers International Union of trying to steal its members by using a negative direct-mail campaign to sow discontent within its ranks.”

Public backing of the secret ballot remains strong - 86% of Americans do not wish to see the elimination of the private ballot in union elections in the workplace, according to a McLaughlin & Associates poll conducted in January.

Shortly before “Card Check” was introduced, the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions heard testimony from Larry Getts, a worker who saw firsthand what he called the pressure, badgering, and intimidation that comes from a card check public sign-up process:

Union organizers waited for us in the break room, sat with us at lunch whether we wanted them to or not, and walked us to our cars at the end of the day.  The entire time they were constantly badgering us to sign the cards. …I refused to sign the card every time they asked, and I know many others shared my sentiment.  But none of that mattered to the UAW, because the pressure did not let up.  In fact, one day, an official approached me again claiming fifty percent of the plant had signed — so now I was going to have to sign the card to ‘get my information in the system.’

I signed the card then because I thought I had to. I didn’t learn until later that even then, I should not have been forced to sign the card.  I hope you’ll vote to defeat the misnamed Employee Free Choice Act.

Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) supports the secret ballot and opposes the Democrats’ bill that would lead to worker intimidation and, according to a recent study, would cost 600,000 jobs. 

Leader Boehner stated that:

The right to a secret ballot is a cornerstone of our American democracy, and it is equally vital to protect privacy in the workplace.  No one should have the right to pressure workers into making their personal views on unionization known to their co-workers, their employers, and union officials.  Working families across America are struggling amid this recession, and they deserve better than what Washington Democrats and their special-interest allies are trying to thrust upon them.  They deserve to have their privacy respected on the job, and they deserve to know their leaders in Washington are not compromising Americans’ job security in a not-so-thinly-veiled payback to special interests that helped Democrats get elected.

Leader Boehner and House Republicans do not believe that eliminating the secret ballot and empowering union bosses is the way to grow our economy and create jobs in America - that’s why House Republicans agree with Warren Buffett that “the secret ballot’s pretty important.”

Permalink | 2 Comments »

---

President’s Move on Embryonic Stem Cells Divides and Distracts America

Yesterday, President Obama reversed a long standing executive order that barred federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.  The President’s decision opened the door to federal support for the divisive and destructive practice of embryonic stem cell research - a move which has distracted and divided America at a time when a bipartisan and unified nationwide focus on the economy is desperately needed.

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) stated that the president’s decision to use federal money to support embryonic stem cell research “runs counter to President Obama’s promise to be a president for all Americans.”  Leader Boehner continued: “Creating and preserving jobs should be our No. 1 priority right now. . .Checking the boxes on the list of liberal special interest groups’ priorities simply makes it harder to get the type of bipartisan cooperation we need to get our economy back on track.”

The President’s action has divided the nation and caused a needless distraction at a time when American families and small businesses are looking desperately to Washington for bipartisan solutions on the economy.  Reaction from around the country:

New York Daily News: “President Obama reverses Bush’s stem cell research ban; debate rages along abortion fault lines” (emphasis added)

President Obama made good on another campaign pledge Monday, but stirred up fresh criticism that pet projects are sidetracking him from fixing the tanking economy.  The President. . .scored points with his base by overturning a Bush administration order and promising to ‘vigorously support’ embryonic stem-cell research that could lead to cures for deadly ailments like diabetes and Parkinson’s disease. . .The move to reverse an executive order signed by George Bush in 2001 triggered another backlash over Obama’s decision to move quickly on agenda items like health care, education and the environment that won’t help cure the ailing economy - and could cost him political capital.

Ryan T. Anderson in The Weekly Standard: “Perpetuating a Needless Stem-Cell War”  (emphasis added)

Bad ethics and bad science, Obama’s decision earlier this morning is bad politics, too.  Obama ran on a platform of fulfilling George W. Bush’s promise to be a uniter, not a divider–to be the president of the entire United States, and not just of special interests.  He acknowledged this morning that ‘many thoughtful and decent people are conflicted about, or strongly oppose, [embryo-destructive] research.’  He said that he “understands their concerns” and that ‘we must respect their point of view.’  As such, he promised ‘that we will never undertake this research lightly.  We will support it only when it is both scientifically worthy and responsibly conducted.’  But by his actions today, Obama has shown himself to take unnecessarily divisive approaches to controversial questions. He has committed the nation–and all its taxpayers–to supporting unethical, lethal research.

Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink | 1 Comment »

---

Senator Bayh Backs Boehner, Calls for President to Veto Omnibus and Institute a Spending Freeze

Last night on Fox News’ “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren,” long-time Obama supporter Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) called on the president to veto the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, echoing Republican Leader John Boehner’s (R-OH) statement this weekend on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that Washington tighten its belt by enacting a spending freeze.  Senator Bayh also stated that the omnibus “is just general government spending.  It’s not targeted at creating jobs.”  He called the record deficits Democrats are running up “unsustainable” and warned that “the day of reckoning is coming.  We can’t run deficits like this forever.”

This past weekend, on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Leader Boehner said that, “American families are tightening their belts, but they don’t see government tightening its belt.  I think that we can get through this year and lead by example and show the American people that the government can go on a diet as well.”

The Senate is slated to vote today on the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, which grows the federal government by 8% this year and represents the largest increase in non-defense spending since the Carter administration (save for the aftermath of 9/11).

A growing chorus of Democrats - from Evan Bayh and Russ Feingold in the Senate to the 20 Democrats who voted against the omnibus in the House - agree with Leader Boehner and House Republicans that now is not the time to grow the size of government or the time to saddle our children and grandchildren with even more debt.

When the American people are being forced to find savings because of difficult economic times, shouldn’t their government be expected to do the same?

Permalink | 2 Comments »

---

Warren Buffett Blasts Two Key Democratic Priorities, Criticizes “Cap-and-Trade” & “Card Check”

This morning on CNBC, billionaire investor and prominent Obama supporter and economic advisor Warren Buffett slammed two key priorities Democrats have been pushing for in Washington.  First, Buffett called the President’s $646 billion “cap and trade” proposal a “regressive tax” that “customers are going to pay for.”

Mr. Buffett also called the anti-worker “card check” proposal “contentious,” and said “I’m against card check to make a perfectly flat statement.”

The Wall Street Journal echoed Mr. Buffett’s sentiment on “cap and trade” in an editorial published today, calling “cap and trade” the “tax that dare not speak its name.”  The Journal stated that:

Hit hardest would be the ‘95% of working families’ Mr. Obama keeps mentioning, usually omitting that his no-new-taxes pledge comes with the caveat ‘unless you use energy.’  Putting a price on carbon is regressive by definition because poor and middle-income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries or home heating…

In his budget, Mr. Obama wants to recycle $525 billion through the ‘making work pay’ tax credit that goes to many people who don’t pay income taxes.  But $400 for individuals and $800 for families still doesn’t offset carbon’s income raid, especially in states with higher carbon use…

Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth — but in a very curious way.  It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street ‘green tech’ investors who know how to leverage the political class.

House Republicans, led by Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH), have condemned the “cap and trade” proposal as a “carbon tax” that will hit every single American and criticized “card check” as job killer - as a new study confirmed - that would deny secret ballot elections to workers.

At a time when American families are hurting and businesses are struggling, now is not the time to tax the American people every time they flip on a light switch or ship American jobs overseas by passing “card check.”

Permalink | No Comments »

---

Newspapers Condemn Administration’s “Cap and Trade” as a Carbon Tax on All Americans

Earlier this week House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) declared that the administration’s “cap and trade” proposal was nothing more than “code for increasing taxes, killing American jobs, and raising energy costs for consumers.”  As the details from the administration’s $3.6 trillion budget have sunk in, newspapers across America have echoed Leader Boehner’s comments about the $646 billion “climate revenue” provision, dubbed “cap and trade,” that would affect every American:

The Detroit News: “Cap-and-trade plan will sink Michigan“

The president is asking for a system of government limits on carbon emissions.  The right to emit carbon would be auctioned off to generate revenue for more government spending programs…Doing so will drive up the cost of nearly everything and will amount to a major tax increase for American consumers.

Such a tax will hit the Midwest particularly hard, which is why House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, told the New York Times, ‘let’s just be honest and call it a carbon tax that will increase taxes on all Americans who drive a car, who have a job, who turn on a light switch, pure and simple.’

Investor’s Business Daily: “Capping Economic Growth”

The problem is that capping emissions based on dubious climate science will also kill hopes for a rapid economic recovery.  Any good that comes from the stimulus package will be wiped out by this energy tax that will be passed on to every consumer through everything we produce and consume….

The carbon tax will also violate Obama’s pledge not to increase taxes for 95% of Americans.  By hiding it in the costs of what companies produce, government gets the revenue while the blame for ever-rising prices will be put on greedy corporate America.  The tax will also eat up the $400 “Making Work Pay” tax credit that Obama has promised American workers.

Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink | 1 Comment »

---