Saturday, February 7, 2009

The Trojan Pig

On Friday, Hot Air documented Congressman David Obey's response to questions on stimulus waste: “So what?”  Why does Obey (D-Wisconsin) not care that his left-wing "stimulus package" will waste taxpayer money?  The answer:  he and his fellow liberal Democrat co-sponsors and supporters never intended it to provide an economic stimulus.  Clearly, they do not even care who winds up with a lot of the "pork".

However, they do care deeply about one thing:  bringing into existence and funding key programs on the left-wing ideological agenda.  The "stimulus" legislation and the "pork" with which it is laden are parts of a ruse designed to deceive and mislead the voting public.  Call it the "Trojan Pig". 

The Trojan Pig is designed to hide programs that would be rejected, or at least seriously questioned, in the light of day.  These programs are wrapped in the mantle of "economic stimulus" (for business-minded citizens who believe, wrongly, that government can stimulate an economy) and seasoned heavily with pork-barrel spending (for those less-ambitious citizens who have been waiting since November 4, 2008, for their Obama handout).

House and Senate Republicans (and some moderate Democrats) have challenged all or parts of this legislation.  Meanwhile, President Obama has attempted to appear above the fray, but has in actuality been playing a key role, that of "Propagandist-in-Chief":  "A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe."  As Charles Krauthammer noted yesterday,  "[S]o much for the president who in his inaugural address two weeks earlier declared 'we have chosen hope over fear.'  Until, that is, you need fear to pass a bill." 

Americans should know that Obama plans to use this "crisis" as an ideological opportunity because his Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, openly declared this intention:

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.  Things that we had postponed for too long, that were long-term, are now immediate and must be dealt with.  This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before."

As quoted by Mike Pence, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stated that the "stimulus" is about "taking America in a new direction".

So what does the Trojan Pig contain?  Programs and policies designed to move the United States Government further towards the liberal Democrat majority's goal of a socialist "Nanny State".  According to National Review Online, these include:
  • Establishment of a universal, government-administered health care system (AKA "Medicare For All"):  $89 billion for Medicaid, added to the SCHIP expansion that passed as separate legislation.  Research by the Republican Study Committee revealed that the package also includes a provision of "1.1 billion dollars for Comparative Effectiveness Research".  This measure "provides the cornerstone for a national government-run health care system" by establishing a "Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER)".  The Council "will establish a permanent government rationing organization [charged with] prescribing care in place of doctors and patients."  In other words, the Trojan Pig would both found and fund a permanent bureaucracy in which "health care decisioins will be made by the government, not doctors and patients."
  • Redistribution of wealth ("Spreading the Wealth", per President Obama):  $30 billion for COBRA insurance extension, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, $2 billion for federal child-care block grants, $380 million for WIC (in the Senate version).
  • Funding for collectivist political infrastructure (i.e., "community organizing", or "spreading the ideology"):  $5.2 billion for community-development block grants and "neighborhood stabilization activities" (for which ACORN is eligible to apply).
  • Increased Federal interference in state government:  $79 billion for a "State Fiscal Stabilization Fund".
  • Increased Federal control of education:  $15 billion for boosting Pell Grant college scholarships, $4 billion for job-training programs (including $1.2 billion for "youths" up to the age of 24).
Conservative grassroots organizers and activists have been engaged in a massive effort to lobby Congress to vote down the Trojan Pig.  Much of their ire has been directed, rightly so, at the measure's wasteful spending, which will undoubtedly fail miserably to stimulate the U.S. economy.  Conservatives should be positively enraged, however, when they realize that the true intent of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is to enlarge permanently the scope and impact of Federal government intrusion into the everyday lives of American citizens. 
Blogged with the Flock Browser

Saturday, January 31, 2009

"Soak the Rich" Liberal Democrats, Wealthy Themselves, Don't Pay Their Own Taxes

Joining Treasury Secretary Tim "TurboTax" Geithner in the Obama Administration's "Tax Dodger Hall of Shame" today is Tom Daschle.  Daschle, the former Senate Majority Leader, is Obama's nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).  The Washington Post reported that Daschle "failed to pay more than $128,000 in taxes over three years".  Like Geithner, he did not file amended returns until he was in line for an Obama Cabinet position.  According to the Post, he was "alerted to the error by the presidential transition team just six days before his first Senate confirmation hearing."  On January 2 he filed amended returns and paid the delinquent taxes, along with approximately $12,000 in interest and penalties.

Daschle neglected to pay taxes on consulting fees, charitable contributions and the free use of a car and driver donated to him by a private equity firm run by Democratic Party supporter Leo Hindery Jr., who acted as an economic advisor to President Obama during his campaign and transition to the Presidency.  Regarding the car and driver, the Wall Street Journal reported, "Mr. Daschle told committee staff that he had grown used to having a car and driver as Senate majority leader and didn't think to report the perquisite on his taxes, according to staff members."  Translation:  Daschle has been a Democrat Washington insider for so long that he forgot that he is not above the law.

Geithner, who was a major architect (along with Bush Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke) of the failed TARP bailout scheme and other misguided government interventions in finance and banking, failed to pay self-employment taxes (witholding for Social Security and Medicare) while working for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) [see analysis of this issue by JustOneMinute].  Although he "apologized" for this "oversight" (N.B., only after being confronted by Republicans during confirmation hearings), his remarks implied that (1) TurboTax, the off-the-shelf retail tax software package, and (2) his CPA were to blame for the errors.

The "fox guarding the henhouse" metaphor fits both appointments.  Daschle has been tapped by Obama to "lead the fight for health care reform" as HHS Secretary.  Translation:  he will be the point man for foisting socialized medicine and a collectivist healthcare system on the American public.  This policy initiative alone will cause a massive expansion of the public debt and raise future taxes, while ultimately limiting Americans' access to and choice of care.  How will this be paid for?  By "cost savings" which will ultimately be achieved by forcing hospitals, physicians and other "providers" to accept a new status as low-paid government drones.  Geithner, a high-powered central banker who (we would be led to believe) cannot understand his own personal taxes, will be Treasury Secretary.  Treasury both oversees the IRS and has significant spending authority.  In effect, Geithner will be both the collection agent and a major spender of these funds.  So much for accounting controls - not that Geithner would understand them anyway. 

Meanwhile, turbo-charged taxation is the inevitable (albeit loudly denied) consequence of the Democrats' stated policy goals.  Obama's blunt refusal to discuss tax reductions with House Republicans this week ("I'm going to trump you on that.  I won.") belied his creative campaign-trail talk about tax cuts for "95% of Americans".  Less than two weeks in office, he has sought a massive expansion of the welfare state via liberal social entitlement programs.  This has been advanced in HR 1 (under the guise of "economic stimulus") by Obama's "change agent" in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi. 

How does Obama intend to pay for this?  Either through higher taxes now (less likely, due to the political costs to Democrats) or later (more likely, as borrowing seems to be the preferred method to finance the "new New Deal").  Democrats are counting on US taxpayers to be dumb enough not to be able to connect the dots between massive deficit spending now and higher taxes later.  Or, at least, too intoxicated by their addiction to government benefits and services to notice.

Vice President Biden's campaign-trail statement that paying taxes is "patriotic" apparently does not apply to Obama Administration insiders.  This begs the question of the "patriotism" of its members under Biden's own definition of the term.
Blogged with the Flock Browser

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Reading the Stimulus: the Blago Clause

1 SEC. 1112. ADDITIONAL ASSURANCE OF APPROPRIATE USE
2 OF FUNDS.
3 None of the funds provided by this Act may be made
4 available to the State of Illinois, or any agency of the
5 State, unless (1) the use of such funds by the State is
6 approved in legislation enacted by the State after the date
7 of the enactment of this Act, or (2) Rod R. Blagojevich
8 no longer holds the office of Governor of the State of Illi-
9 nois. The preceding sentence shall not apply to any funds
10 provided directly to a unit of local government (1) by a
11 Federal department or agency, or (2) by an established
12 formula from the State.

Speaks for itself.
Blogged with the Flock Browser

RNC Election Buzz from Twitter


Public Endorsements for RNC Chair Found or Linked to in Tweets on #RNCchair Stream During the Past Week
(please let me know if I missed anyone or made a mistake)


Mike Duncan (31 RNC Member endorsements)
Jim Burnett (AR RNC)
Reta Hamilton (AR RNC)
Priscilla Rakestraw (DE RNC)
Laird Stabler (DE RNC)
Willes K. Lee (HI RNC)
Matt Strawn (IA RNC)
Blake Hall (ID RNC)
Kris Kobach (KS RNC)
Mike Duncan (KY RNC)
Steve Robertson (KY RNC)
Gail Russell (KY RNC)
Ron Kaufman (MA RNC)
Jan Staples (ME RNC)
Mark Elliss (ME RNC)
Rick Bennett (ME RNC)
Ron Carey (MN RNC)
Evie Axdahl (MN RNC)
Cindy Phillips (MS RNC)
Betty Hill (MT RNC)
Bob Bennett (OH RNC)
Jo Ann Davidson (OH RNC)
Solomon Yue (OR RNC)
Donna Cain (OR RNC)
Carlos Mendez (PR RNC)
Luis Fortuno (PR RNC)
Zori Fondalledas (PR RNC)
Rob Roper (VT RNC)
Susie Hudson (VT RNC)
Jeff Kent (WA RNC)
Jim Reed (WV RNC)
Donna Lou Gossney (WV RNC)

Katon Dawson (18 RNC Member endorsements)
Mike Hubbard (AL RNC)
Steve Scheffier (IA RNC)
Kim Lehman (IA RNC)
Demetra DeMonte (IL RNC)
Dee Dee Benkie (IN RNC)
Harry Barbour (MS RNC)
Brad White (MS RNC)
Linda Daves (NC RNC)
Ada Fisher (NC RNC)
Curly Haughland (ND RNC)
David Norcross (NJ RNC)
Robert Gleason (PA RNC)
Bob Asher (PA RNC)
Christine Toretti (PA RNC)
Katon Dawson (SC RNC)
Glenn McCall (SC RNC)
Cindy Costa (SC RNC)
Robin Smith (TN RNC)
South Carolina Federation of Republican Women
@briansikma

Saul Anuzis (17 RNC Member endorsements)
Dick Wadhams (CO RNC)
Chris Healy (CT RNC)
Pat Longo (CT RNC)
Victor Cruz (GU RNC)
Peter Alecxis Ada (GU RNC)
Saul Anuzis (MI RNC)
Keith Butler (MI RNC)
Phyllis Woods (NH RNC)
Tom Wilson (NJ RNC)
Virginia Haines (NJ RNC)
Bo Palacias (NMI RNC)
Sue Lowden (NV RNC)
Giovanni D. Cicione (RI RNC)
Carl Mumford (RI RNC)
George Schiavone (VT RNC)
Herb Schoenbohm (VI RNC)
Fredi Simpson (WA RNC)
Aaron Marks (posted on rncchair.com)
Eric Odom (posted on rncchair.com)
David All
Randy Covington (posted on rncchair.com)
RNCChair.com
Rob Macomber
@rancov
@tom9d
@chadmiles

Michael Steele (15 RNC Member endorsements)
Sharon Giese (AZ RNC)
Shawn Steel (CA RNC)
John Frey (CT RNC)
Robert Kabel (DC RNC)
Betsy Werronen (DC RNC)
Jim Greer (FL RNC)
Paul Senft (FL RNC)
Norm Semanko (ID RNC)
Pat Brady (IL RNC)
Jody Dow (MA RNC)
Jim Pelura (MD RNC)
Joyce Terhes (MD RNC)
Holly Hughes (MI RNC)
Laine Johnson (MT RNC)
Reince Priebus (WI RNC)
Newt Gingrich
Lizzy Blackney (@MediaLizzy), AOL Hot Seat contributor and Managing Editor, Heading Right Radio
@Politisite
@penguinponders

Ken Blackwell (13 RNC Member endorsements)
Debbie Joslin (AK RNC)
Ralph Seekins (AK RNC)
Mark Hillman (CO RNC)
Roger Villere (LA RNC)
Ross LIttle (LA RNC)
Ruth Ulrich (LA RNC)
Gary Jones (OK RNC)
Peggy Lambert (TN RNC)
Tina Benkiser (TX RNC)
Bill Crocker (TX RNC)
Cathie Adams (TX RNC)
Holland Redfield (VI RNC)
Morton Blackwell (VA RNC)
Ken Blackwell
California Republican Assembly
Tennessee Republican Assembly
Perez Camacho (Governor of Guam)
@Cyclingroo
@bobs_my_uncle

Chip Saltsman (0 RNC Member endorsements)
Chip Saltsman
Bill Frist
Mike Huckabee
Jason Mumpower, TN House Republican Leader

Multiple Candidates
The American Resolve (on BlogTalkRadio):  Ali Akbar, Matt Margolis, Patrick Bell (Anuzis, Blackwell, Duncan, Steele)
@ltfngr (Anuzis, Blackwell)
@Rstubenrauch (Duncan, Steele)
@brittneylinvill (Steele, Anuzis)
Blogged with the Flock Browser

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

HR 256 and HR 262 Threaten Constitutional Free Speech Rights

All Americans need to take a close look at David's Law (H.R. 256) and its companion bill, The David Ray Ritcheson Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 (H.R. 262).  These two so-called "hate crime" bills, introduced by Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), are Trojan horses designed to silence Constitutionally-guaranteed free speech that is not considered "politically correct" by liberals.

Similar legislation did not become law during the previous Congress because President Bush threatened to veto it.  However, President Obama has pledged to sign this "hate crime" legislation if it reaches his desk.  As a State Senator, Obama helped pass "hate crimes" legislation in Illinois.  The White House website states that Obama is determined to pass the most pro-homosexual, free-speech destroying legislation ever to come before Congress, including expanded "hate crime" laws and legal "support for the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Transgender) community."

Obama's hate crime agenda is modeled after European and Canadian law. An Amsterdam Court of Appeals has recently decided to prosecute Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders for inciting hatred against Muslims. This came after Wilders made a film, Fitna, that linked the Koran to violence against Christians, Jews and even other Muslims. The film largely used footage of Muslim clerics giving speeches that incite violence. But for telling the truth, Wilders is on trial. Other nations that have adopted hate crimes legislation, like Canada, have deprived their citizens of their freedom of speech and religious expression.

Such "hate crimes" legislation divides Americans by creating special classes of people who receive special rights. It also undermines the Constitution by creating incidences of unequal justice for similar crimes. Every American should receive equal justice under the law.  Unfortunately, "hate crime" laws have already been enacted in many states like Pennsylvania. There they have resulted in the arrest of peaceful Christians, including one who was a grandmother, for simply exercising their 1st Amendment right to express their opinions about homosexuality in the public square.

HR 262 will also create $10 Million dollars in Federal funding to be given to non-profit groups to run the prevention program.  It will establish a federal hate crime "clearinghouse" or "resource center" and database.  Through a website and 24-hour hotline, it will receive hate crime complaints nationwide.  "Anti-bias" pro-homosexual education will pervade every level of American schooling – from kindergarten to graduate school.  It will "prevent" hate crime through an extensive curricula dedicated to eliminating those "seed ideas" which cause hate crimes, i.e., Christian disapproval of homosexuality.  Such reeducation will be enforced upon students, teachers, professors, and administrators everywhere. 

This means Americans will not be able to teach their children moral or religious values that are in opposition to those of special minority groups like homosexuals.  Schools and Anti-Christian groups will be able to promote homosexual activity to children and will be well funded to do so.  Parents will not be able to say a word against it, lest they be prosecuted like Geert Wilders.

Federal "hate crime" legislation like that introduced by Representative Jackson-Lee is a threat to Constitutionally-protected free speech.  I, for one, do not want to live in a European-style "Nanny State" that tells me what I can and cannot say and uses my tax money to enforce this tyranny.  Please encourage your Representatives to vote "Nay" on HR 256 and HR 262.
Blogged with the Flock Browser

Friday, January 9, 2009

Dems To Use "Fairness" to Push Leftist Economic Agenda in 111th Congress

Today's Wall Street Journal editorial (Trial Lawyer Bonanza - WSJ.com), highlights the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.  This bill is at the top of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's liberal agenda for the 111th Congress, "along with the Paycheck Fairness Act that would strengthen remedies under the Equal Pay Act of 1963 for women." 

In the 110th Congress, Democrat legislators proposed the Fair Pay Act in an attempt to reverse the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in re Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber, in which the Court upheld the statute of limitations on wage discrimination claims.  The Act passed the House, but was stopped by Republican in the Senate.

The WSJ's editorialist focuses on how this bill would be "pure gold" for tort lawyers because it "would create a new legal business in digging up ancient workplace grievances" and would allow suits "not merely for outright discrimination but for unintentional acts that result in pay disparities." 

Even more disturbing (if this is possible) is the WSJ's observation that "the paycheck fairness legislation would . . . require labor officials to use comparable worth in creating 'voluntary' wage guidelines for industries."  Congressional Democrats clearly intend to increase the presence and activity of the "cold hand" of government in the labor market.  This is not news to fiscal conservatives, but the November elections made clear that more than fifty percent of American voters have signed on to this interference.  The question that Americans need to ask themselves regarding the Fair Pay Act is "Fair to whom?" 

The answer is "nobody in the US".  Businesses will lose because the costs of labor, litigation and regulatory compliance will increase, leading to lower wages and benefits as these expenses are passed on to employees.  As the WSJ also points out, employees' "raises would be smaller as companies allocate more earnings to settle claims that might pop up years after litigating employees had departed."  Jobs could even be lost if US businesses increase their outsourcing of labor to other countries. 

The US economy would be the biggest loser.  Fewer jobs and lower wages resulting from this legislation will make it even less likely that workers and their families will increase spending anytime soon.  As consumer spending constitutes the bulk of GDP in this nation, this will further depress the US economy.  The real beneficiaries will be workers in other countries, such as Mexico, India and China, to which US corporations will turn if they offer a cheaper, less regulated labor force.

Democrats should know that the command economy was an experiment that failed.  Why else did Soviet Premier Gorbachev work with President Reagan to end the Cold War during the latter's second term in office?  He needed to remove the tremendous expense of the arms race, which was bankrupting the USSR, in order that his economic and political reforms (perestroika, glasnost) could begin.  As did some of his predecessors, Gorbachev realized that the command economy and closed society of the USSR were so "ossified" (to borrow Kissinger's description) as to be completely inflexible.  The USSR could not feed its people outside of Moscow, but was great at turning out predetermined quantities of products like pig-iron and steel.  It was, however, utterly incapable of responding to major trends in the world economy, such as the technology boom of the late 20th century, which was led by the United States.  The capitalist system of the West allowed it to ramp up production of microchips and plastic as the shift from industrial to technological products began, leaving the USSR behind.*

Nevertheless, look for Congressional Democrats to propose more legislation under the banner of "fairness".  Their strategy is to cloak the socialism inherent in such legislation in gauzy, vague terms.  In doing so, they are merely imitating the marketing success of President-Elect Obama, who won in November because he was able to convince US voters that "change" and "hope" constitute a meaningful policy agenda. 

As Seinfeld might joke in a standup comedy routine, "Who doesn't like 'fairness'?"  Republicans will find themselves repeatedly charged with being "unfair" to the "middle class", for whom the Democrats have appointed themselves champions.  Never mind that the membership of the "middle class" is in the eye of the political beholder.  Or, as an Admiral under whose command I once served said, "Where you stand on an issue depends on where you sit." 

My hope is that the Democrats will not "be able to roll enough GOP Senators" to pass this legislation the second time around.


*William E. Pemberton, Exit With Honor: The Life and Presidency of Ronald Reagan (1997).
Blogged with the Flock Browser

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Schwarzenegger Throws State Republicans Under The Bus

Capital Notes — From KQED’s John Myers » Governor “Forced” to Agree to Dem Only Taxes

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger admitted today what Republican state legislators have known all along:  he is working hand-in hand with Democrats to increase California citizens' taxes using the Dems' unconstitutional parliamentary tactics.  John Myers of KQED's "The California Report" asked Schwarzenegger "whether he would ever sign a tax increase that did not have approval of a two-thirds majority."  The Governor responded:

"In order to save California," said Schwarzenegger, "I am forced to go and just negotiate with the Democrats at this point, and then also resolve this issue just with the Democrats."

Myers pointed out that a "majority-only tax increase sets the stage for a certain legal challenge and... once again... a series of 'Arnold vs. the GOP' stories."  Schwarzenegger tried to spin the second issue by claiming that he has no choice:  "This [tax proposal] is an issue that I was, a situation that I'm forced in because of a lack of participation by the Republicans."  Regarding potential lawsuits, he added, "Some you win, and some you lose."

The fact of the matter is that Republicans have been more than "active participants" in efforts to resolve California's budget crisis.  They have submitted their own budget proposals (in late August and mid-December).  These proposals were fiscally responsible.  They did not contain new taxes.  They called for long overdue, significant cuts in spending.  The majority Dems rejected these comprehensive plans.

Schwarzenegger's antipathy to Republican legislators stems from their adamant refusal to vote for new taxes, not from their alleged "lack of participation".  Ahnold needs to go.
Blogged with the Flock Browser

Friday, December 19, 2008

California AG Brown Shirks Duty, Decides to Attack Proposition 8 in Court

Jerry Brown Seeks to Overturn Proposition H8 | The Liberal OC
One of the California Attorney General's most important jobs is to defend the State's laws.  Despite this duty,  Jerry Brown, the current AG, has attacked Proposition 8, which California's voters passed in the November 4 election.  In a sudden (but not unexpected) move, he decided to mount a legal challenge to it. 

His reasoning is contained in a lengthy legal brief that he filed this evening.  According to SFGate.com, Brown has decided that the referendum process was not legally valid:  "Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification," Brown said. 

According to The Liberal OC, "The group Protect Marriage (PM) intervened in the case and filed its own brief because it didn’t believe Brown would defend Proposition H8." 

Per SFGate.com:

The pro-Prop. 8 brief was filed by Kenneth Starr, the former Whitewater special prosecutor and now dean of Pepperdine University law school. He argued that the court should preserve the people's lawmaking powers by upholding the initiative and invalidating 18,000 same-sex weddings performed before the election.

Prop. 8 "does not broadly seek to diminish or eliminate the constitutional or civil rights of gays and lesbians," but is simply "about restoring and maintaining the traditional definition of marriage," Starr said. Decades of legal precedents, he said, require "judges - as servants of the people - to bow to the will of those whom they serve."

"As the 'chief law officer of the state,' Brown said in his brief, he is 'duty bound to uphold the whole of the Constitution' and not merely the power of the people to change the laws by initiative."  [SFGate.com

"It's unfortunate that the attorney general would not do his duty to defend the will of the voters," said Andrew Pugno, the attorney for the Yes on 8 Campaign.

One wonders whether Brown's future career aspirations have led him to shirk the duties of his office in order to pander to a political constituency.  Add AG Jerry Brown to the California Recall List.
Blogged with the Flock Browser

He Wants His "Economic Stimulus" Now: Schwarzenegger To Call Another Special Session

Capitol Weekly carried California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's announcement that he will call the State Legislature back into special session to work on the state's fiscal woes:

"I will sign an executive order and call them in again for a special session to continue working on this problem," Schwarzenegger said Friday. " I believe that we can solve this before Christmas. I hope that the Legislature stays in the building, I hope that they continue negotiating, Democrats and Republicans."

The problem with Schwarzenegger's plan is that Democrats in the California Legislature stopped "negotiating" with their Republican counterparts when they ran their unconstitutional end-around play earlier this week.  Although he vetoed the resulting package of eye-popping tax hikes, the so-called Republican Governor did not criticize the Dems' use of this cynical tactic.  His only problem with the package was that it did not contain his personal "economic stimulus" ideas.

We can expect another attempt to circumvent the California Constitution, not a "bipartisan" compromise, when state legislators return to Sacramento.  Schwarzenegger knows it and does not care.  The Governor and State Democrats are addicted to large, wasteful government programs funded by ever-increasing taxes and state debt.

Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (R - Irvine) published an excellent response to these tax hikers in Investor's Business Daily:  the last thing California needs is tax increases.

Here is a very short list of where to find more information about the opposition to the fiscal irresponsibility of Schwarzenegger and his Democrat allies:

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association

The John & Ken Show on KFI

FlashReport Weblog on California Politics

It is time for serious consideration of (1) an organized California tax revolt and (2) the recall of Governor Schwarzenegger from Sacramento.