Page 365 – Taxpayers Protection Alliance

TPA Blasts Gibson Amendment to increase Rural Utilities Service Broadband Program by $10 million

Post author:David Williams
Post published:July 11, 2012
Post category:Agriculture Broadband David Williams Farm Bill Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Today, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance urged House Agriculture Committee members to vote against an amendment by Rep. Chris Gibson (R-N.Y.) which would increase funding for the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Broadband Loan program from $25 million to $35 million, of which $10 million is for grants that DON'T have to go to unserved areas. RUS’s primary goal is to provide loans to help bring Internet broadband service to unserved rural communities, which are generally defined as communities with populations of less than 20,000. A March, 2009 report by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) observed that while the 2008 Farm Bill modified the broadband program and narrowed the definition of “rural area,” the RUS continued to issue loans in exurban and suburban areas. Instead of funding deployment in unserved rural areas, the RUS had funded service in 148 communities which were within 30 miles of cities with 200,000 inhabitants, including communities near very large urban areas such as Chicago and Las Vegas.

TPA Joins Bi-Partisan Coalition to Oppose Farm Bill

Post author:David Williams
Post published:July 10, 2012
Post category:Agriculture Congress David Williams Farm Bill Taxpayers Protection Alliance

On July 11, 2012, a group of 11 center-right and center-left taxpayer and environmental groups sent a letter urging the House of Representatives to not approve the draft of the Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management (FARMM) Act released by the House Agriculture Committee. Rather than reform, as the bill’s title implies, the Committee’s draft Farm Bill reinforces the heavy federal and taxpayer role in the farm economy. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bill would save $35 billion over ten years compared to the ten-year baseline of $992 billion. The Committee shaved off a 3.6 percent whisker of spending from a bill that is 60 percent larger than the last Farm Bill. Only in Washington can you spend 60 percent more than previously and call it a cut. While eliminating direct payments is a step in the right direction, setting price floors for commodities and expanding crop insurance are steps in the wrong direction. Congress needs to go back to the drawing board and produce a more fiscally responsible Farm Bill that is more than just window dressing, but a real attempt at cutting spending and giving taxpayers assurances that the free market is alive and well on the Farm.

Tax Cuts Should be Permanent and All Inclusive

Post author:David Williams
Post published:July 9, 2012
Post category:Congress Corporate Tax David Williams House Taxes Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Today President Obama implored Congressto extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the middle class, while simultaneously asking for a tax increase on small business owners and others – the very group our nation relies on to create jobs and is counting on to turn around this 40-month streak of over 8 percent unemployment. To push his new plan, President Obama didn’t send out his economic advisor to the Today Show, he sent out Robert Gibbs, senior adviser to the Obama re-election campaign, a move that reeked of politics and more of a concern about the November election rather than getting the economy back on track. With Obama’s latest move, he hopes to cast his opponents as those who are only concerned about the wealthy and protecting their tax breaks. The problem with this charge is simple: it’s flat-out false. Just like when Obama said that an overall tax cut extension is “least likely to promote growth-we can’t afford to keep that up, not right now…” What Americans – and their pocketbooks – can’t afford “to keep up” is the reckless and out-of-control spending that this administration began on its very first day in office.

Taxpayer Property Rights and Wrongs

Post author:David Williams
Post published:July 6, 2012
Post category:David Williams General Services Administration Taxpayers Protection Alliance

The key to economic success for anybody who owns excess property is to either rent it out or sell the property. Holding vacant property makes no sense. What many taxpayers may not realize is that the federal government owns quite a bit of property. In fact, according to Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), “The federal government owns over one million properties across the county, making it the largest property owner in the United States.” And, as one can imagine, not all this property is being used. Sen. Coburn, along with a bipartisan group of Senators including Sens. Tom Carper (D-Del.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), want to rectify this problem. In a May 21, 2012 letter to the General Services Administration (GSA), “According to the Federal Real Property Profile, the government's real estate portfolio is comprised of nearly 900,000 buildings and structures worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Of these assets, we are told that nearly 80,000 are underutilized or excess, costing taxpayers more than $1.6 billion in annual operating expenses.”

Natural Gas is an Unnatural Government Subsidy

Post author:David Williams
Post published:July 5, 2012
Post category:David Williams Natural Gas Taxpayers Protection Alliance

When a company in the private sector identifies an opportunity to innovate and better meet its consumers’ wants all while earning a larger profit, the company doesn’t need any additional incentives to seize on such an opportunity. In short, this is the reason the government doesn’t need to hand out subsidies to a company in order to transition its vehicle fleet to natural gas. Ok, maybe a little more explanation and evidence are needed. The Hill recently reported on the findings of a report from IHS CERA that found that “low natural-gas prices mean that it’s economical to power heavy trucks with the fuel even without federal incentives.” And for anyone who’s been following this issue closely, the report’s findings bolster the arguments of those who oppose the NAT GAS Act, a bill in Congress that would offer financial incentives for companies to transition their vehicle fleets to natural gas. The IHS CERA study is not the only place one can look to find further evidence that a federal subsidy for natural gas is unnecessary. For those who’d like to see federal dollars go to natural gas vehicles, there have been plenty of news stories lately which provide examples of companies transitioning their fleets to natural gas entirely on their own volition, free from a government carrot.

Activist Hypocrisy

Post author:David Williams
Post published:July 5, 2012
Post category:Uncategorized

Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter are often used by the Left to rally folks to support or oppose a certain cause. Interestingly enough, Facebook has often been a venue to complain about the weak and ever changing privacy policies of Facebook. These liberal protests complain about the monolithic Facebook bureaucracy and urge their fellow citizens to “Like” a page that urges Facebook to be more transparent about their privacy settings being changed. In an ultimate case of irony, the protesters use Facebook to convince others to stop using Facebook. For some, Facebook has become an entitlement. Liberals claim to be on the side of the “little guy” and rally against the government. For example, the Occupy movement protested corrupt politicians and an inherent distrust in the government. I have always suspected that their distrust in government was conditional.

Taxes? We Don’t Need No New Stinkin’ Healthcare Taxes

Post author:David Williams
Post published:July 2, 2012
Post category:David Williams Healthcare Obamacare Taxes Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Last week (June 28) the Supreme Court ruled that the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, is constitutional under Congress’ power of taxation. The Taxpayers Protection Alliance’s reaction was swift (read here). Very few could imagine a day when our President and some in Congress would actually embrace (and exuberantly at that) a law that will create the biggest tax increase in our nation’s history. Rather than running from the fact that they are responsible for imposing such a hefty tax increase, the Obama administration and others have prized this as a victory. If the likes of Obama and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) are the “winners” of Thursday’s decision, then the losers are the American people, who will soon see tax bills rise as a result of this detrimental policy. Setting aside for a moment the grave financial implications this disastrous law causes, let’s look at one disturbing fact that deserves closer examination. The most troublesome aspect of the initial passage of the bill is that roughly half of the elected officials in Washington and others around the country willingly and eagerly opened their arms to a tax increase. And while for a second a few may contend this action warrants at least some positive recognition because of its honestly, we should quickly remember and subsequently be appalled by the fact that the policy proposal of Obamacare and its individual mandate was marketed throughout its debate and eventual passage as a fine. But you don’t have to take my word for it, take President Obama’s. From a 2009 interview on ABC, interviewer George Stephanopoulos asks, “But you reject that it’s a tax increase?” President Obama responds, “I absolutely reject that notion.” Oops!

The United Nations Should Stay Away From the Internet

Post author:David Williams
Post published:June 29, 2012
Post category:David Williams Internet Regulation

Last week the internet was abuzz with the idea that some countries were proposing that the U.N. should take over management of the Internet. Later this year in Dubai, at a meeting of the International Telecommunications Union, the technology arm of the U.N., a plan will be debated that would allow this international body to take over some control of the Internet. According to the Associated Press on June 23, 2102, “Secret negotiations among dozens of countries preparing for a United Nations summit could lead to changes in a global treaty that would diminish the Internet's role in economic growth and restrict the free flow of information.” Allowing the U.N. or some member countries to manage the Internet could result in a myriad of problems. As people often quip, if something is not broken, there is no need to fix it. As Ariel Rabkin told The Weekly Standard in 2009, “The management of the Domain Name System has been largely apolitical, and most of the disputes that have arisen have been of interest only to insiders and the technology industry. IANA [Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, operated on behalf of the Commerce Department] has concerned itself with fairly narrow questions like ‘Should we allow names ending in .info?"’ Commercial questions about ownership of names, like other property disputes, are settled in national courts.’” Rabkin as noted that allowing international government bodies to manage the internet could result in more problems like such as “Domain names presenting political questions. Which side in a civil war should control Pakistan's Internet domain. . . ” and the “Control of Internet names could become a lever to impose restrictions on Internet content.”

TPA: Obamacare is Largest Tax Increase in American History

Post author:David Williams
Post published:June 28, 2012
Post category:David Williams Healthcare Obamacare Taxes Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Alexandria, Va. - Taxpayers Protection Alliance president David Williams today released the below statement regarding the Supreme Court's decision on the Affordable Healthcare Act. "Obamacare today became the largest tax increase in American history. The health care law has nearly doubled in cost from $940 billion to $1.76 trillion and taxpayers deserve nothing less than full repeal and defunding by Congress. American taxpayers can't afford the tax increases in the law and seniors can't afford the reckless and irresponsible Medicare cuts in Obamacare." Williams is currently on the road with the 60 Plus Association's Healthcare Freedom bus tour where he has been talking to seniors about the healthcare reform law and how they will be impacted by the Supreme Court's decision.

Bio Fuel Mandate is Foolish

Post author:David Williams
Post published:June 27, 2012
Post category:David Williams Defense Energy Taxpayers Protection Alliance

After billions of dollars spent on a myriad of subsidies and year after year of failed policies, the government has now found a new way to force an uncompetitive industry into the marketplace. This time it is forcing the Navy to increase the consumption of biofuels. Like the government’s previous attempts, this one is bound to fail. Washington has no right to demand the type of fuel the Navy chooses for its fleet. Coercing the Navy and other branches of the armed services to use a product to prop up an industry for the sake of furthering a political agenda is not only imprudent, it’s downright bad public policy. Given that other attempts to create a market for biofuels have and will continue to fail, the government has discovered that there’s no better way to guarantee a market, albeit an artificial one, than to implement a policy forcing the purchase of a product. Not only is it an unwise use of taxpayer dollars, the attempt to force an industry into commercialization before the market has a demand for it is a futile effort. There’s no hindrance that precludes the private sector from moving forward with building out the biofuels industry if it were in fact economically viable. The government understands that on its own the market has not taken to biofuels, and this is how it justifies the contrived need to get the industry off the ground by having the Navy increase its consumption.