Showing posts with label Government Waste. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Government Waste. Show all posts

Obama approves 2 solar loans worth $1B for bankrupt Solyndra

| Thursday, September 29, 2011 | 0 comments |
by Associated Press

Facing a Friday deadline, the Energy Department has approved two loan guarantees worth more than $1billion for solar energy projects in Nevada and Arizona.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the department has completed a $737 million loan guarantee to Tonopah Solar Energy for a 110 megawatt solar tower in Nevada, and a $337 million guarantee for Mesquite Solar 1 to develop a 150 megawatt solar plant in Arizona.

The loans were approved under the same program that paid for a $535 million loan to Solyndra Inc., a now-bankrupt solar panel maker that has become a rallying cry for Republican critics of the Obama administration's green energy program.

The latest loan program, approved under the 2009 economic stimulus law, expires Friday. At least seven projects worth about $5 billion are pending.

Read More...

No Room for Medicare Patients

| Monday, September 26, 2011 | 0 comments |
by Jane M. Orient, M.D.

When I went into solo practice of internal medicine in 1981, it was very easy to get a doctor to see a Medicare patient. All I had to do was make a phone call. A courteous receptionist answered. If the doctor couldn't come to the phone right away, I could count on a prompt callback.

Consultants saw patients quickly, and generally called me to discuss their findings and advice. And very often there would also be a letter in the mail: “Thank you for referring this delightful patient to me.”

How things have changed! Now a doctor gets the phone menu, just as the patients do, and it often ends in voice mail. It might be a few days before a staff member calls back—usually with the news that “we are not accepting any new Medicare patients.” At best, my patient might be offered an appointment in several months.

One very fine gentleman, who had recently moved to a rural area, found it easier to fly to Tucson to see me than to get in to see a local internist. That was in 2009. Recently, he has become unable to travel, so I needed to find him a local doctor.

I tried to expedite matters by ordering him an immediate diagnostic test: an abdominal CT scan. I don’t think anyone could argue that it wasn’t indicated under the circumstances. One little problem: I am not enrolled in Medicare and don’t have the proper government-issued number to enter into the computer. A license to practice medicine is not enough. This National Provider Identifier (NPI) is supposed to protect the system against being defrauded. Without that number, the imaging facility could not get paid by Medicare.

“Why not use the radiologist’s number?” I asked. After all, he was the one who would get paid. Nope, a referral was required. How about a self-referral from the patient? Nope, we can’t allow patients to decide what tests they need. “The patient is willing to pay for his own test,” I said. Nope, if he’s on Medicare, they aren’t allowed to take his money.

They gave the patient 24 hours to find a properly enumerated doctor to countersign my order. Fortunately, he found a specialist willing to do so, and assume potential criminal liability for committing “waste, fraud, and abuse” by ordering a “medically unnecessary” study. (Fortunately for the patient, he turned out not to have cancer, but that could be bad news for the doctor.)

So this is the status of retired Americans. They can’t just walk into a facility and request a medical test, and pay for it with their very own money. A man may be qualified to pilot a 747 across the Pacific, but once he’s on Medicare, he is unfit to make an unsupervised decision about his own medical care.

Read More...

Ethanol Subsidy Finally Eliminated

| Tuesday, June 21, 2011 | 0 comments |
by Lurita Doan

A stubborn Washington has taken a long time to finally come to its senses and kill ethanol subsides. Once heralded as a great "green" initiative, studies soon proved that diverting huge amounts of American farmland to the production of expensive corn-based ethanol actually increased green house gases. America's best scientists warned stubborn senators that the nation’s ethanol policy was not achieving the desired results, even as it consumed massive amounts of taxpayer money.

Read More...

High Speed Rail Subsidies in Iowa: Nothing for Something

| Tuesday, June 14, 2011 | 0 comments |
by Wendell Cox

The Federal government is again offering money it does not have to entice a state (Iowa) to spend money that it does not have on something it does not need. The state of Iowa is being asked to provide funds to match federal funding for a so-called "high speed rail" line from Chicago to Iowa City. The new rail line would simply duplicate service that is already available. Luxury intercity bus service is provided between Iowa City and Chicago twice daily. The luxury buses are equipped with plugs for laptop computers and with free wireless high-speed internet service. Perhaps most surprisingly, the luxury buses make the trip faster than the so-called high speed rail line, at 3:50 hours. The trains would take more than an hour longer (5:00 hours). No one would be able to get to Chicago quicker than now. Only in America does anyone call a train that averages 45 miles per hour "high speed rail."

Read More...

US to Sell GM Stake at $11 Billion Loss

| Tuesday, May 3, 2011 | 0 comments |
by Forrest Jones

The government plans to sell most of its remaining stake in General Motors in the coming months and lose $11 billion in the process, The Wall Street Journal reports.

With taxpayer money, the government rescued General Motors for $50 billion in 2009 To get that money back, the U.S. Treasury will need to sell its remaining stake of around 500 million shares at $53 apiece. GM is currently trading around $30, even dipping below that figure, on the New York Stock Exchange, below its $33-a-share November initial public offering.

The company, meanwhile, raised discounts to $400 per vehicle in January and February with the aim of boosting sales, which didn't help stock prices at all. Company CEO Dan Akerson says he supports the move. "I feel pretty good about that. I think we're in pretty good shape," Akerson says, according to the Associated Press.

Read More...

Is the U.S. Becoming a Welfare State?

| Thursday, March 31, 2011 | 0 comments |
by Daniel Indiviglio

Uncle Sam has been aggressively increasing Americans' allowance recently. Government entitlement programs have grown to account for 35% of wages, according to a new analysis by Madeline Schnapp, director of macroeconomic research at investment research firm TrimTabs. The magnitude of government assistance has increased in large part due to high unemployment. But she argues that even when unemployment declines, we aren't like to see this percentage drop much.

Here's the key chart from Schnapp, which shows the percentage of social welfare benefits, from programs such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and unemployment insurance, as a percentage of total wages and salaries (based on data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis):

Read More...

Amendment ends aid to countries opposed to U.S. at U.N.

| Friday, March 4, 2011 | 0 comments |
Of the 15 Biggest Recipients of US Aid, 14 Voted
Against the US Position More Than 50% of the Time

by Patrick Goodenough
(CNSNews.com) – U.S. aid should not go to countries that oppose American positions at the United Nations more often than not, according to one of the hundreds of proposed budget-cutting amendments currently being considered by the U.S. House of Representatives.

Whether successful or not, the measure put forward by Texan Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert draws attention to the issue of how many countries, including most major recipients of U.S. foreign assistance, regularly take positions at the U.N. at odds with those of the U.S.

According to the amendment, a U.N. member state would be ineligible for U.S. aid if it voted contrary to the U.S. stance more than 50 percent of the time during the most recent session of the U.N. General Assembly.

In 2009 – the latest figures available – 14 of the 15 biggest recipients of U.S. aid took opposing positions to those taken by the U.S. in U.N. votes more often than not. Israel was the exception, with a world-beating 97 percent voting coincidence with the U.S.

Read More...

US Republican lawmakers taking aim at UN

| Thursday, January 27, 2011 | 1 comments |
by Desmond Butler

WASHINGTON – Newly empowered Republican lawmakers are taking their first shots at the United Nations, depicting it as bloated and ineffective as they seek to cut U.S. funding for the world body.

On Tuesday, a House of Representatives panel aired criticisms of the U.N. at a briefing expected to prescribe congressional action.

Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs committee, is seeking cuts and has introduced a bill intended to pressure the United Nations to change the way it operates and to make dues voluntary. She also is promising investigations into possible corruption and mismanagement.

"U.S. policy on the United Nations should be based on three fundamental questions: Are we advancing American interests? Are we upholding American values? Are we being responsible stewards of American taxpayer dollars?" she said in a statement that was read at the briefing, which she could not attend. "Unfortunately, right now, the answer to all three questions is 'No.'"

Read More...

Famine by Choice

| Tuesday, January 25, 2011 | 0 comments |
by Investor's Business Daily

Man cannot control the weather. But famine today is as much man-made as it is a force of nature.

Zimbabwe, for instance, was once considered the breadbasket of Africa. It exported wheat, corn and sugar cane across the continent and beyond. But the country's agriculture industry has been destroyed by a Marxist government that has seized privately owned farms in the name of "land reform."

Over a short period, Zimbabwe went from being a net exporter of food to a country dependent on international handouts. The once-fertile nation is in a perpetual man-made famine, where more than 2 million go hungry in a population of 11.4 million.

Less known is the story of Malawi. Earlier this decade, kleptocrats within the government sold off the nation's grain and kept the profits for themselves.

Governments promote famine in more passive ways as well. Another African nation, Zambia, declined food aid, mostly corn, from the U.S. in 2002, even though it was facing a famine that would affect nearly one-third of its people.

Why? Because America was offering genetically modified food, and it was the country's policy — based on Europe's unfounded fear of such products — to reject it.

Through genetically altered organisms, which pose no health problems to humans, farmers are able to plant seeds that grow into crops which are resistant to drought, cold weather, insect damage, herbicides and disease. Nutrition can even be improved through genetic modification.

Given that we have the technology to grow larger crops on smaller parcels and fly fresh food around the world to where it's needed in a matter of hours, the obstructionism is inexcusable. We need policymakers who are as advanced as today's technology.

Read More...

World's Richest Man Gets US Tax Dollars

| Friday, January 14, 2011 | 0 comments |
Safelink Wireless phones-for-the-poor government program sends U.S. dollars to Mexican billionaire

by I Hate The Media
For those of you unfamiliar with the government’s free cell phone for the poor scam, we’ll start off with this brief summary:

If you’re poor and if you’re already receiving certain other government benefits, you can get a free cell phone and some free minutes every month through a company called SafeLink. If you want more background, you can read about the Safelink cell phone giveaway here and here and here and here. The program is paid for by the Universal Service Fund with fees added to every phone bill in America.

It would be bad enough if the money for this program was being channeled to an American phone company, but now we’ve discovered that all those hidden “taxes” are ultimately going to América Móvil, a Mexican phone company.

Even worse, América Móvil is the world’s fourth largest cell phone company, which just happens to be owned by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim. In effect, you are being taxed to subsidize the world’s richest man.

Read More...

European nations begin seizing private pensions

| Monday, January 3, 2011 | 0 comments |
by Jan Iwanik

People’s retirement savings are a convenient source of revenue for governments that don’t want to reduce spending or make privatizations. As most pension schemes in Europe are organized by the state, European ministers of finance have a facilitated access to the savings accumulated there, and it is only logical that they try to get a hold of this money for their own ends. In recent weeks I have noted five such attempts: Three situations concern private personal savings; two others refer to national funds.

The most striking example is Hungary, where last month the government made the citizens an offer they could not refuse. They could either remit their individual retirement savings to the state, or lose the right to the basic state pension (but still have an obligation to pay contributions for it). In this extortionate way, the government wants to gain control over $14bn of individual retirement savings.

The Bulgarian government has come up with a similar idea. $300m of private early retirement savings was supposed to be transferred to the state pension scheme. The government gave way after trade unions protested and finally only about 20% of the original plans were implemented.

Read More...

Democrats out-pork Republicans by a 50-to-1 margin

| Sunday, December 26, 2010 | 0 comments |
by Byron York

Press coverage of the budget frenzy on Capitol Hill has suggested that pork-barrel earmark spending is still a bipartisan problem, that after months of self-righteous rhetoric about fiscal discipline, Republicans and Democrats remain equal-opportunity earmarkers.

It's not true. A new analysis by a group of federal-spending watchdogs shows a striking imbalance between the parties when it comes to earmark requests. Democrats remain raging spenders, while Republicans have made enormous strides in cleaning up their act. In the Senate, the GOP made only one-third as many earmark requests as Democrats for 2011, and in the House, Republicans have nearly given up earmarking altogether -- while Democrats roll on.

In the 2011 House budget, the groups found that House Democrats requested 18,189 earmarks, which would cost the taxpayers a total of $51.7 billion, while House Republicans requested just 241 earmarks, for a total of $1 billion.

Read More...

Liberals' 50 Years of Dreadful Domestic Policy

| | 0 comments |
by Larry Elder

For the past 50 years, the Democrats -- and many Republicans who should know better -- have been wrong about virtually every major domestic policy issue. Let's review some of them:

Taxes.
The bipartisan extension of the Bush tax cuts represents the latest triumph over the "soak the rich because trickledown doesn't work" leftists.

President Ronald Reagan sharply reduced the top marginal tax rates from 70 percent to 28 percent, doubling the Treasury's tax revenue. President George H.W. Bush raised the income tax rate, as did his successor. But President George W. Bush lowered them to the current 35 percent.

President Barack Obama repeatedly called the current rate unfair, harmful to the country and a reward to those who "didn't need" the cuts and "didn't ask for" them. If true, he and his party ditched their moral obligation to oppose the extension. But they didn't, because none of it is true. Democratic icon John F. Kennedy, who reduced the top marginal rate from more than 90 percent to 70 percent, said, "A rising tide lifts all the boats." He was right -- and most of the Democratic Party knows it.

Welfare for the "underclass."
When President Lyndon Johnson launched his "War on Poverty," the poverty rate was trending down. When he offered money and benefits to unmarried women, the rate started flat-lining. Women married the government, allowing men to abandon their moral and financial responsibilities.

The percentage of children born outside of marriage -- to young, disproportionately uneducated and disproportionately brown and black women -- exploded. In 1996, over the objections of many on the left, welfare was reformed. Time limits were imposed, and women no longer received additional benefits if they had more children. The welfare rolls declined. Ten years later, The New York Times wrote: "When the 1996 law was passed ... liberal advocacy groups ... predicted that it would increase child poverty, hunger and homelessness. The predictions were not fulfilled."

Education.
The federal government's increasing involvement with education -- what is properly a state and local function -- has been costly and ineffective at best, and counterproductive at worst. Title I, a program begun 45 years ago to close the performance gap between urban and suburban schools, burns through more than $15 billion a year, and the performance gap has widened. The feds spend $80 billion a year on K-12 education, as if money is the answer. States like Utah and Iowa spend much less money per student compared with districts like those in New York City and Washington, D.C., with much better results.

Where parents have choices -- where the money follows the student rather than the other way around -- the students perform better, with higher parental satisfaction. But the teachers' unions and the Democratic Party continue to resist true competition among public, private and parochial schools.

Gun control.
Violent crime occurs disproportionately in urban areas -- where Democrats in charge impose the most draconian gun control laws.

Over the objection of those who warn of a "return to the Wild West," 34 states passed laws allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons. Not one state has repealed its law. Professor John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime," says: "There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate: As more people obtain permits, there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect, the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent and robberies by over 2 percent."

"Affirmative action."
Race-based preferences have been a disaster for college admissions. Students admitted with lesser credentials are more likely to drop out. Had their credentials matched their schools, they would have been far more likely to graduate and thus enter the job market at a more productive level.

Preferences in government hiring and contracting have led to widespread, costly and morale-draining "reverse discrimination" lawsuits. Where preferences have been put to the ballot, voters -- even in liberal states like California -- have voted against them.

Minimum wage hikes.
Almost all economists agree that minimum wage laws contribute to unemployment among the low-skilled -- the very group the "compassionate party" claims to care about.

Economist Walter Williams, 74, in his new autobiography, "Up from the Projects," describes the many low-skilled jobs he took as a teenager. "By today's standards," he wrote, "my youthful employment opportunities might be seen as extraordinary. That was not the case in the 1940s and 1950s. In fact, as I've reported in some of my research, teenage unemployment among blacks was slightly lower than among whites, and black teens were more active in the labor force as well. All of my classmates, friends, and acquaintances who wanted to work found jobs of one sort or another."

ObamaCare.
This ghastly government-directed scheme will inevitably lead to rationing and lower-quality care -- all without "bending the cost curve" down as Obama promised.

Any party can have a bad half-century. Merry Christmas.

Read More...