Kentucky 4th congressional candidate Alecia Webb-Edgington went on CN2 last week claiming that she had to vote against the House version of the state budget because of "fluff" in the bill. Asked to define the fluff, she explained that she couldn't vote for a budget that included a $14,500 appropriation for a curtain divider at a state park.
The amount of waste in both the House and Senate bills goes so far beyond $14k that it is incredible this example was all she could come up with.
I couldn't find the curtain divider in the Senate budget, but the last fifteen pages of both versions of HB 265, the executive branch budget, contain a framework for implementing ObamaCare in Kentucky through the Department of Insurance. That's a whole lot more than fourteen thousand dollars and much less useful than a curtain divider.
Also, both bills spend hundreds of millions of dollars we don't have and both do next to nothing to address the oncoming public employee pension system bankruptcy. Rep. Webb-Edgington should have to explain in greater detail how her incomplete lurch to the right on budget bills qualifies her to run for Congress.
Whether she votes for the final budget bill or not, Webb-Edgington missed a great chance to be a voice for fiscal reason before it is too late.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Worse than a tax increase
Rep. Alecia Webb-Edgington announced her signing of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge by stating that the "national debt is over $15 trillion and growing because the federal government spends too much of our money, not because it collects too little in taxes."
If she understands that, though, how could Webb-Edgington have voted for six of seven debt-filled House Democrat budget bills prior to this year? Her vote against the current budget bill is a good one, but her track record leaves voters to wonder if it was just an election-year move and whether she would stand strong in Washington D.C. when she hasn't in Frankfort.
The key to winning the Republican party nomination in Kentucky's 4th congressional district this year will be successfully navigating the distance between tea party and establishment Republicans. Alecia already started off the campaign on the wrong foot.
As tea party activists continue to grow their influence in Northern Kentucky, it will be interesting to see what the candidates do to bridge this gap.
If she understands that, though, how could Webb-Edgington have voted for six of seven debt-filled House Democrat budget bills prior to this year? Her vote against the current budget bill is a good one, but her track record leaves voters to wonder if it was just an election-year move and whether she would stand strong in Washington D.C. when she hasn't in Frankfort.
The key to winning the Republican party nomination in Kentucky's 4th congressional district this year will be successfully navigating the distance between tea party and establishment Republicans. Alecia already started off the campaign on the wrong foot.
As tea party activists continue to grow their influence in Northern Kentucky, it will be interesting to see what the candidates do to bridge this gap.
Thursday, March 08, 2012
Are you a Red Star Republican?
Current leadership of the Republican Party of Kentucky is now apparently excluding certain active Republicans from party activity with the use of a "Red Star" next to their names on voter lists.
There is nothing in party rules that allows such exclusion. Some insiders point to the preamble to party rules which states: "Devotion to our Party’s principles and loyalty to its candidates are and should be the only qualifications for holding any position in the Republican Party."
If that is what the establishment types are hanging their hat on to start kicking people out of the party, they are doing it arbitrarily. Repairing selective application of this "rule" would require expulsion of the entire GOP state Executive Committee, which voted in 2010 to not support the Republican nominee in the state Senate's 2nd district. If there is a specific statute of limitations on this imaginary "loyalty clause," it should be specified immediately. Otherwise, we might wonder if it applies to the state Senate President. A Republican, he supported Democratic Governor Paul Patton's re-election in 1999.
There is nothing in party rules that allows such exclusion. Some insiders point to the preamble to party rules which states: "Devotion to our Party’s principles and loyalty to its candidates are and should be the only qualifications for holding any position in the Republican Party."
If that is what the establishment types are hanging their hat on to start kicking people out of the party, they are doing it arbitrarily. Repairing selective application of this "rule" would require expulsion of the entire GOP state Executive Committee, which voted in 2010 to not support the Republican nominee in the state Senate's 2nd district. If there is a specific statute of limitations on this imaginary "loyalty clause," it should be specified immediately. Otherwise, we might wonder if it applies to the state Senate President. A Republican, he supported Democratic Governor Paul Patton's re-election in 1999.
If you don't support such shenanigans used to personally attack fellow Republicans despite (and arguably because of "devotion to our Party's principles", you just might be a Red Star Republican.
Tuesday, March 06, 2012
Get this camel's nose out of Kentucky's tent
Governor Steve Beshear has been scrambling around since passage of ObamaCare trying to find a way to implement the federal takeover of health care in Kentucky.
He has found it and stopping him is up to you.
Buried at the bottom of the House budget bill is language to resurrect the Insurance Coverage, Affordability and Relief to Small Employers (ICARE) program, started under Governor Ernie Fletcher despite opposition from some conservatives at the time. Fortunately, the health insurance subsidy scheme was soon defunded by the legislature despite Gov. Beshear's campaign promise to expand it.
Beshear is back with an eye toward bigger spending. Much bigger spending.
If you happen to be combing through HB 265 looking for differences between the old and the new ICARE, there are several but one big one that jumps out if you are concerned about stopping ObamaCare from inching its way into our state.
On page 176 of the bill, under the label "Section 6(2)," you will find the following language: "The department shall work with the Office of Health Policy within the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to review the availability of federal funds for the ICARE Program."
The available federal funds mother lode is ObamaCare. Beshear has already telegraphed his interest in implementing ObamaCare administratively and this would open the door widely for him in the name of paying for bigger state government with federal funds.
ICARE should also be removed from the budget bill because we don't need another government redistribution racket making health insurance more "fair," but stopping ObamaCare is the reason with more zeros behind it.
Call your legislators.
He has found it and stopping him is up to you.
Buried at the bottom of the House budget bill is language to resurrect the Insurance Coverage, Affordability and Relief to Small Employers (ICARE) program, started under Governor Ernie Fletcher despite opposition from some conservatives at the time. Fortunately, the health insurance subsidy scheme was soon defunded by the legislature despite Gov. Beshear's campaign promise to expand it.
Beshear is back with an eye toward bigger spending. Much bigger spending.
If you happen to be combing through HB 265 looking for differences between the old and the new ICARE, there are several but one big one that jumps out if you are concerned about stopping ObamaCare from inching its way into our state.
On page 176 of the bill, under the label "Section 6(2)," you will find the following language: "The department shall work with the Office of Health Policy within the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to review the availability of federal funds for the ICARE Program."
The available federal funds mother lode is ObamaCare. Beshear has already telegraphed his interest in implementing ObamaCare administratively and this would open the door widely for him in the name of paying for bigger state government with federal funds.
ICARE should also be removed from the budget bill because we don't need another government redistribution racket making health insurance more "fair," but stopping ObamaCare is the reason with more zeros behind it.
Call your legislators.
They want more special sessions in Frankfort
Senate Bill 7, filed Monday by Senate President David Williams, would move the candidate filing deadline to late April and primary election day to late August. The supposed rationale is to increase accountability for legislators' actions in election year legislative sessions.
It won't work that way.
What this bill will do is push more real legislative action into special sessions in the summer months after the filing deadline. Look at how uneventful most sessions are through the month of January and how the current one remained so as the redistricting process dragged things out this year.
The filing deadline should happen at the same time we want legislators to start working. Move it to the first of January and we will stop the even year practice of legislators sitting on their hands in January. That way, they might even get to work on the budget earlier and take away much of the need for expensive special sessions. Otherwise, we will only move more lawmaking activity to later in the year.
It won't work that way.
What this bill will do is push more real legislative action into special sessions in the summer months after the filing deadline. Look at how uneventful most sessions are through the month of January and how the current one remained so as the redistricting process dragged things out this year.
The filing deadline should happen at the same time we want legislators to start working. Move it to the first of January and we will stop the even year practice of legislators sitting on their hands in January. That way, they might even get to work on the budget earlier and take away much of the need for expensive special sessions. Otherwise, we will only move more lawmaking activity to later in the year.
Friday, March 02, 2012
Your next Kentucky sneeze may cost you
Kentucky's Senate Republicans passed a ridiculous Snot tax compromise bill that will require some people (not many, they promise, and surely not you) to get a doctor's prescription before they can get all the allergy medicine they need.
They are already talking about needing to come back next year and to tighten the current restrictions so that even you will have to get a prescription.
Can't they just settle on letting Senator Stivers and Senator Williams travel around to WalMarts and yell at people who appear to have allergies? This bill doesn't change anything in terms of methamphetamine production and just encourages the nanny state inclinations of politicians with too much time on their hands.
|