Crossposted from Flopping Aces

Just another socialist accomplishment for Obama to hang his hat on:

Prior to reform, the federal government simply gave the states more money for every family they added to the welfare rolls. The predictable result was that the states worked hard to maximize their welfare caseloads in order to maximize the amount of federal funding they could therefore claim. The system had zero incentive to help people make the transition from welfare to work and independence—in fact, the states were financially punished for doing so. The Clinton-Gingrich reforms replaced that bounty-hunter system with a flat rate for each state, based on population and other factors. That gave state-level welfare authorities a better set of incentives, encouraging them to use their resources in the most effective manner and to reserve them for the truly needy.

The results were successful—spectacularly so. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act was followed by reductions in both the number of families on welfare and the rate of poverty. Single women entered the workforce in substantial numbers and the household incomes of former welfare recipients went up. In other words, the incentives to reduce welfare dependence and help people to find work, worked.

Obama, in what is plainly a sop to ACORN and the rest of the “community organizing” gang, is overturning those reforms. Under the provisions in the stimulus bill, states will once again be paid a bounty for expanding their welfare rolls. As reported by Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, the federal government will now pay states 80 percent of the cost for each new family they sign up for welfare. That means that states will get $4 for every $1 they spend. This will leave the main welfare program, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), with a funding mechanism similar to the one that supports Medicaid. As Brian Blase argues here, Medicaid’s funding ratio, which gives states $1 to $3 for every dollar they spend, has caused state Medicaid spending to skyrocket. If Medicaid’s dollar-for-dollar model has proved ruinous, Obama’s new $4-to-$1 ratio for welfare will prove, in all likelihood, four times so.

~~~

Given that the states will receive $4 from the federal government for every $1 they add to their welfare budgets, even conservative governors will feel pressure to inflate their welfare rolls in order to wring every dollar they can out of Washington. And there are early rumblings about removing the already weak work requirements that rounded out the Clinton-era reforms.

The Democrats are stuffing years’ worth of legislation into their “stimulus” bill. They are operating in the legislative shadows, evading scrutiny and debate, while enacting an expansion of the welfare state that would never survive a more considered process. Obama’s right-hand man, Rahm Emanuel, put it bluntly if cynically: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

And it all starts Tuesday:

The bill-signing, an unusual event outside of Washington, will be Tuesday at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science in City Park. The president also will give a speech about the economy.

Attendance at the midday event is by invitation only, and all invitations have been distributed.

CNN reported that a senior administration official cited a desire to get “away from the politics of Washington.”

All part of the plan. Working folks being required to subsidize those who do not.

Ch…ch…change!

Also:

Wild Bill and The Fairness Doctrine

Bill Clinton:

“We either ought to have the Fairness Doctrine or we ought to have more balance on the other side, because essentially there’s always been a lot of big money to support the right-wing talk shows, and let’s face it, you know, Rush Limbaugh is fairly entertaining, even when he’s saying things that I think are ridiculous. I never minded having somebody be heard who disagreed with me. But if you only have one side like this blatant drumbeat against the stimulus program, this doesn’t reflect the economic reality we’re facing.”

Folks, anyone can see what a sham this is, and utterly laughable to boot. Look at ALL the MSM, with the exception of Fox Network who dropped their pants and spread ‘em months ago. Obama can do not wrong, there is not a Hint of criticism from the MSM on the ‘super spending’ bill to reward the Democratic faithful. The House bill just passed with not one single Republican voting in favor, yet, one would think from the MSM that the House passed a ‘hard fought’ bill when the end result was already ordained. The only question was which Democrats would not vote for it. The Senate the voted for their version and as predicted, the RINO’s; Specter, Collins, and Snowe voted for it.

“It is over a thousand pages,” said Representative Tom Price, a Georgia Republican. “It is physically impossible for any member to have read this bill.” Of course, it is! That’s the idea! It will be interesting to see those goodies as they come out, especially national health care ramifications. If you can’t persuade the public, put it in a ‘bill.’

Now, back to this ‘Fairness doctrine’, the whole point is to give the opposition free air time to air their ‘progressiveness’. Do you imagine Keith Olberman having a conservative on his program and giving him equal time? Nah, the television networks are exempt, it’s only for ‘talk radio’, which the conservatives control as a balance to the totally liberal MSM. How better to quite the conservative voice than to force equal time for those leftist pundits who cannot keep a radio program running on their own merit because viewers refuse to patronize it. “If you can’t beat ‘em, change the rules.”

excerpts:

Okay, Bill Clinton has said we gotta have enforced media accountability. “All the big money has gone to support right-wing talk shows.” Mr. President, if I may, all the big money is not in talk radio. It’s all your Library and Massage Parlor. What I wouldn’t give for the amount of money that’s been donated to Bill Clinton and his Library and Massage Parlor! That’s where the big money is in this country. Now, how unhappy can these Democrats be? They’ve got 60 votes in the Senate. They own the House of Representatives. They occupy the White House. They control the media. Just what do they want? Karl Marx said it. You know what “peace” is in Karl Marx’s definition? The absence of opposition to socialism. That is peace. The absence of opposition to a leftist, to a socialist, and that’s what they’re aiming for this is a major transformation of the United States, as Obama promised. Let’s not forget Clinton in 1994, June. He was flying in to dedicate some train station in St. Louis, and he called the morning show in our blowtorch affiliate there, KMOX.

~~~

We didn’t bring in people to our studios for coffee and shake ‘em down, promising not to criticize them on the radio if they will just pay us off. We don’t bring in interns here and start using cigars in nefarious ways. We don’t have massage parties here in our broadcast studios. Well, I can’t speak for some of the long-haired, maggot-infested FM types and what they’re doing in their studios. (laughing) But I haven’t had one visit from a ChiCom advertiser. I haven’t had a guy that owns a Chinese restaurant in Little Rock walk in to some office with $200 million in unsigned money orders for me for big money. I haven’t people from Dubai, from the United Arab Emirates, from Saudi Arabia pay me 150 to $400,000 for a speech ripping my own country while I’m in theirs! I don’t do things like this, Mr. President. My money, our money comes (just as government’s does) from the American people — and our money is puny compared to yours. Clinton Global Initiative? We don’t have anything like that. What big money, Mr. President?

Finally:

While We Weren’t Watching

While we weren’t watching, a new bill has been introduced into the House.

Bobby Rush-IL has introduced HR 45 on 1/6/2009. Currently, there are no co-sponsors and the bill has been referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security.

And here it is.

Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 – Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and renewal requirements.

Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.

Prohibits: (1) transferring a firearm to any person other than a licensee, unless the transfer is processed through a licensed dealer in accordance with national instant criminal background check system requirements, with exceptions; (2) a licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements of this Act; (3) failing to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72 hours; (4) failing to report to the Attorney General an address change within 60 days; or (5) keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury.

Prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions covered by this Act.

Directs the Attorney General to: (1) establish and maintain a firearm injury information clearinghouse; (2) conduct continuing studies and investigations of firearm-related deaths and injuries; and (3) collect and maintain current production and sales figures of each licensed manufacturer.

Authorizes the Attorney General to certify state firearm licensing or record of sale systems.

He wants to penalize people to require licensing for firearms. This includes precludes the free transfer of firearms. This would require all firearm sales to go through a licensed dealer. Even private party sales.

Lose or have your gun stolen? Report it in 72 hours or face jail time.

Move? Well, you now have to report that move to the government.

And while the media and the people are paying attention to the horrendous “stimulus” package, this has been completely ignored.

It is the beginning of control. However, if you look at these statistics, you have to wonder where the world will be with people like this trying to “save” us.

All data is for 2005, unless noted. Here’s the leading causes of death from the CDC.

Heart disease: 652,091
Cancer: 559,312
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 143,579
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 130,933
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 117,809
Diabetes: 75,119
Alzheimer’s disease: 71,599
Influenza/Pneumonia: 63,001
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 43,901
Septicemia: 34,136

For firearms, there were 30,964 deaths. These include all forms of death.

Out of those 30,964 deaths, 17,002 were suicides. Note that is over half of all deaths caused by firearms.

There were 13,962 homicides. These were intentional.

There were 789 deaths related to firearms considered unintentional. This would be accidental discharge, children playing with firearms, etc.

Now, here’s the striking part. You cannot regulate suicide. If the firearms weren’t available, you would have to assume that most of those suicides would have been completed using other means.

As for homicides, you have to conclude the same. While not quite as easy and expedient, the majority of those killings would still be committed.

And then we get to the crux of the argument. Those 789 people who lost their lives in 2005 due to unintentional accidents. Not all would be children.

So, look at the figures up above. Those account for 1,819,881 deaths. Then there’s transportation deaths of 47,894. Deaths by Poisoning: 32,691. Deaths by Alcohol: 21,081.

The total number of deaths was 2,448,017.

They want to regulate guns because of 789 accidental deaths. Those deaths, while each tragic, represents so few deaths compared to the other leading causes.

So the question is, where does big brother end? If they are willing to remove the rights for “our good”, then why isn’t the government taking on the responsibility of the other causes of death. At what point will the government manage caloric intake and mandate exercise, as those are two contributing factors Diabetes and Heart Disease.

Where is their outrage over people’s decisions to take their own lives in their own hands?

And where is the outrage of this attack on the Second Amendment?

I, for one, will be calling my representative early next week to state my displeasure. We must not let them take more rights away while they continue to reward failure.