Friday, September 30, 2011

With billions of dollars in Medicaid spending at risk in Congress

(Reuters) The "red" and "blue" states that mark America's political divide between conservative and liberal sympathies are often far apart on issues involving healthcare, including Medicaid, the $420 billion-a-year program for the poor.
But lobbyists say governors, legislators and other state officials, Republican and Democrat alike, have found common ground in a push to convince a special congressional deficit panel that White House-backed Medicaid cuts totaling $41 billion will only weaken a system that already struggles to deliver care to 60 million beneficiaries.
The 12-member bipartisan panel, dubbed the "super committee" because of its powers, is tasked with finding $1.2 trillion in savings to cut huge U.S. deficits. The full Congress is due to vote on their recommendations by late December.
State officials appear most unified on an alternative cost-cutting strategy, which they say could save more than $100 billion by changing the healthcare delivery system for the poorest, sickest and most costly patients. Known as "dual-eligibles," they qualify for both Medicaid and Medicare, the government-run program for the elderly.
There are about 9 million dual-eligibles and state officials see billions of dollars in savings from shifting them into managed care plans better able to eliminate unnecessary doctor's visits, tests and hospital admissions.
"Support for that proposition is very broad," Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley, who chairs the Democratic Governors Association, told Reuters.
States also hope the super committee will adopt proposals to control Medicaid prescription drug costs, combat waste and fraud, and relax federal restrictions on benefits and eligibility, lobbyists said. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/29/us-usa-debt-states-medicaid-idUSTRE78S0PK20110929

Freeze government salaries until the economy picks up again

Since 55 million retirees have received no cost of living increases for the last two years it only seems fair to freeze all government and elected officials' salaries until jobs in the private sector grow and tax revenues increase.

Moreover, there should be no bonuses for government employees until the economy becomes healthy enough to increase tax revenues.
These are ominous times and really tough decisions are needed. Printing and borrowing more money is not the answer.
Bill Huppert  
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bs-ed-social-security-colas-20110929,0,2739843.story

Thursday, September 29, 2011

Invite to Tea Party After He Calls Movement Racist


Actor Morgan Freeman has received a standing invitation to attend a Tea Partyevent after he dismissed the conservative grass-roots movement as racist.
morgan freeman_042511
Ali Akbar, a 26-year-old black small business owner who is one of the original national Tea Party organizers, wrote an open letter to the Academy-Award winning performer, who is African American, inviting him to a Tea Party in Tennessee, the place of Freeman’s birth, or any location in the country, to prove his opinion is wrong. 

McCaughey: Surge in Costs Start Of Obamacare Disaster

A new report claims that Obamacare is only negligibly responsible for the surge in health insurance premiums this year, but former New York Lt. Gov. and healthcare expert Betsy McCaughey says its provisions do come with a steep price and there is “no tooth fairy.”


The survey of private and public employers conducted by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation disclosed that the average cost of a family policy climbed 9 percent to $15,073 in 2011, the largest increase since 2005. Premiums for single coverage rose 8 percent.

The group’s findings also showed that health insurance is consuming a bigger share of employer costs, forcing many companies to eliminate pay raises and pass on more medical costs to workers.

Drew Altman, chief executive officer of the Kaiser Family Foundation, asserted that the healthcare reform bill enacted last year accounts for just 1 to 2 percentage points of the premium increases in 2011.

But McCaughey told Newsmax: "The early provisions of the Obama health law are bending the cost curve up, the opposite direction from what the president promised. The new rules — young adults on parents' plans, no annual caps on benefits, and no copays for preventive care — are not free. They add to the premium. There is no tooth fairy." http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/mccaughey-healthcare-costs-insurance/2011/09/28/id/412623?s=al&promo_code=D261-1



Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Liberal scare tactics: Death by government cuts

"To be a little melodramatic, the budget would kill people," New York Times columnist Paul Krugman recently told CNN about House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's Path to Prosperity. "No question." With the Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund set to run out of money Thursday, and with none of the federal government's 12 appropriations bills signed into law so far, you can expect a lot more melodramatic quotes like this one in the coming weeks.
Liberal assertions that cuts in government spending will cause certain death are nothing new. Sixteen years ago this week, Krugman's fellow columnist Bob Herbert warned New York Times readers that the welfare reform bill Republicans were then debating in the Senate "would hurt many people, would kill some and would help no one."  http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2011/09/liberal-scare-tactics-death-government-cuts

Obama's unserious plans are losing the future

In consecutive weeks, President Obama has presented two painfully unserious and economically misguided proposals. The first, his $450 billion "American Jobs Act," is another stimulus proposal, based on the ill-conceived notion that more government spending is the answer to what ails the economy. The second is the president's plan to raise taxes by $1.5 trillion on American job creators. Both plans are a far cry from "winning the future," as the president claims on the campaign trail.
Like the president's last stimulus, which cost nearly $1 trillion and failed to turn the economy around, Stimulus 2.0 assumes that massive government spending on feel-good projects (with the administration picking the economic winners and losers) will result in job creation and jolt the economy out of its doldrums. This assumption is already a proven loser.
Stimulus 1.0 ended in bad investments, massive corporate welfare, wasteful spending and more debt. What was supposed to keep unemployment below 8 percent, create millions of new jobs and hasten the economic recovery instead stands as a textbook example of the failed liberal notion that we can spend our way out of an economic hole.
The most egregious failure of the first stimulus is the now-infamous case of Solyndra, a California solar energy company, which received a $535 million stimulus loan guarantee from the Department of Energy. At the time, Obama said such investments were "leading the way toward a brighter, more prosperous future." Vice President Biden said, "We are not only creating jobs today, but laying the foundation for long-term growth in the 21st century economy."
Solyndra has now filed for bankruptcy and more than 1,000 jobs have been lost, sadly emphasizing the disastrous consequences of economic meddling by the federal government.
President Obama then followed up his poor jobs plan with an equally unserious and overtly political deficit reduction proposal. It relies heavily on enormous tax increases at a time when the economy can least afford them.  http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/2011/09/obamas-unserious-plans-are-losing-future

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Replace the property tax

I think everyone, including our legislators, would agree that school property taxes are out of control and only getting worse with relentless increases on the horizon.
My previous letter listed 10 reasons why we should replace school property taxes. Replace them with what, you ask? The answer is very simple. The state sales tax. The state Sales and Use tax was enacted in 1953 specifically to fund education. Why not broaden it?
The Pennsylvania Coalition of Taxpayer Associations, with 64 member groups statewide, has a plan to do just that. In simplest terms, the property tax replacement plan will replace school property taxes with a broadened 6 percent sales tax. The plan will not increase the sales tax rate, but simply broaden the base to include more services and items such as gum, candy, magazines and dry cleaning.
The sales tax was enacted to fund our schools; not property taxes. The property tax should be replaced with the most broad-based tax available so that everyone contributes. This heavy tax burden should not lie solely on the homeowners of Pennsylvania. This simple plan can work to ensure more equitable school funding and fairness for taxpayers and schoolchildren.
The plan has been vetted against numbers provided by the House Appropriations Committee and other economic entities and has been proven to work.
Do not let your legislators tell you that replacing the school property tax is too difficult. It's just not true. They just need the political courage to do what's right: replace the property tax!
For details on the plan, please go to www.ptcc.us. If you agree with the plan, contact your legislators (representative, senator and Gov. Corbett) and tell them you want them to replace the unfair property tax now. No tax should have the power to leave you homeless.
MARGIE LAVIN
EAST HOPEWELL TOWNSHIP http://www.ydr.com/letters/ci_18979709
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Monday, September 26, 2011

Government out of control


To the editor:
    Cache Valley Politicians say they’re cutting the budgets to the bone? The corporate State of Utah was never meant to be a state for profit, controlling private businesses or private property! The state can only tax properties of corporations and government officers within the three branches of government.
    The corporate county of Cache as well as Logan, Smithfield, etc. as state fostered political subdivisions for gain, are illegal, and are in contempt of both U.S. and Utah Constitutions!
    Governments have no lawful regulatory authority to regulate us, as if we were their corporate properties! The governments never were lawfully set up to raise profits, nor receive retirements and other benefits as politicians. They were to do one term, and go back to their private job. No one was ever to retire with pay for being a public servant!
    In Utah, control of rights and empire building are unbridled, because the majority of people have fallen asleep at the watch towers, due to their comforts and money.
    Governments can’t compete or assist private businesses, and by doing so have damaged the balance of free enterprise markets.
    Politicians are being bought by large corporations. In return, billion-dollar socialist projects, are given to big oil, auto, pharmaceutical, medical and insurance companies, whom are making unrealistic profits; yet we are paying more for fuel, etc. than we ever have; we lost our freedoms to regulations, taxations and are fleeced by price fixing monopolies!
    Remove empire building, along with revenue-making traffic courts, private property taxes, private income taxes, and stop enforcing private businesses to be income tax collectors, licensing, and Social Security number enforcers.
    We need to get back to basic governments of bare bones, protecting the people’s rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We do not want governments to regulate our lives! Leave us alone and allow us to work, earn wealth, keep or spend our wealth as we desire, and soon, all the unemployment, socialist government budget problems, etc. will disappear by themselves! Leave us alone!
    Do away with all government agencies that are not paid for by state and federal fuel taxes, sales taxes, and “corporate property taxes.”
    This nation must stop the war they declared on the people (war on drugs) and instead, focus to preserve our boarders, our language, our monetary system backed by silver and gold supporting our U.S. Treasury notes, getting rid of the giant leach called Federal Reserve Bank. Protect the rights and liberties of the people!
    If governments will not act lawfully, then we the people will make citizens’ arrests and rid ourselves of the socialist parasites that now have this nation to its knees, being  financially distraught and morally corrupted.
Don Dunbar

Sunday, September 25, 2011

How large is the federal debt?

Total Federal Debt and Its Coomponents (End of Fiscal Year 2010)Total federal debt—also known as gross debt—is the amount of the federal government's outstanding debt issued by the Treasury and other federal government agencies. Totaling about $13.6 trillion at the end of fiscal year 
Any yearly accounting period, regardless of its relationship to a calendar year. The fiscal year for the federal government begins on October 1 of each year and ends on September 30 of the following year; it is named by the calendar year in which it ends. Prior to fiscal year 1977, the federal government began its fiscal year on July 1 and ended it on June 30.2010, gross debt consists of two components: (1) debt held by the publicFederal debt held by all investors outside of the federal government, including individuals, corporations, state or local governments, the Federal Reserve and foreign governments. and (2) debt held by government accountsFederal debt owed to government accounts, primarily to federal trust funds such as Social Security and Medicare. The cumulative surpluses, including interest earnings, of these trust funds and other government accounts have been invested in Treasury securities, almost always nonmarketable. Whenever a government account needs to spend more than it takes in from the public, the Treasury must provide cash to redeem debt held by the government account. Consequently, this reflects a future burden on the economy. (also known as intragovernmental debt holdings), such as the Social Security and Medicare trust funds.http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/longterm/debt/debtbasics.html#heldbypublic

Saturday, September 24, 2011

Live blogging the US Sen. race, the CPAC, P5 edition


After languishing in the shadows of the Republican presidential race, the U.S. Senate race just took center stage at Conservative Public Action Conference and the Republican Party of Florida Presidency 5 event this morning.
First up at CPAC: Adam Hasner, the former Republican leader in the Florida House, a post he was given by former House Speaker and current Sen. Marco Rubio, whom Hasner invoked to much applause in the first 30 seconds of his 15 minute speech.
"He called me the most partisan Republican in Tallahassee. He meant it as a compliment. The mainstream media tried to make it an insult. I made it a badge of honor," Hasner said.
Hasner soon took a subtle shot at opponent George LeMieux, the former right hand mand of Charlie Crist, the Republican-turned-independent governor who lost to Rubio last year. Before Obama took the reins of power, Hasner said, "the establishment in the Republican Party was saying the best way for Republicans to beat the Democrats was to be more like them. I didn’t buy into that philosophy."
Hasner,, however, made himself sound like more of an opponent to the establishment and Charlie Crist than he was. As this story of ours shows,Hasner also supported a watered-down climate-change law that the Legislature now wants to repeal. And he voted for a budget with $2.2 billion in tax and fee increases and billions more in federal stimulus money. He also favored high-speed rail and SunRail, which tea party activists came to abhor. Though he privately mocked and fought Crist behind the scenes at times, Hasner also boasted of working with the governor on the federal stimulus program.
Hasner spoke forcefully at CPAC, garnering wild applause for his shots at Obama.
"The Obama administration doesn't have a messaging problem. They have a policy problem. They are waging class warfare," Hasner said, noting he has been a lifelong Republican despite being the son of two liberal Jews from New York.
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2011/09/live-blogging-the-us-sen-race-the-cpac-p5-edition.html
"Life as a Republican isn’t easy," Hasner said. "Being a pro-life pro-second amendment conservative from Boca Raton hasn’t made it any easier." 

Friday, September 23, 2011

NYT: Obama rebuffed as American influence wanes

A last-ditch American effort to head off a Palestinian bid for membership in the United Nations faltered. President Obama tried to qualify his own call, just a year ago, for a Palestinian state. And President Nicolas Sarkozy of France stepped forcefully into the void, with a proposal that pointedly repudiated Mr. Obama’s approach. 
Bailey Comment: What was that saying about the dog (France) that bites the hand that feeds it! http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44624040/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times/

Thursday, September 22, 2011

I know how to create jobs!

Fire all of the politicians and replace them with the laid off, out of money, out of work average American. Americans that could take care of their families on $50,000 a year. Why do we elect career politicians that are whining about they're only making $600,000 a year. Duh!!

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Who will eclipse America?


According to Voltaire, the Roman Empire fell “because all things fall.” It is hard to argue with this as a general statement about decline: nothing lasts forever. But it is also not very useful. In thinking, for example, about American predominance in the world today, it would be nice to know when it will decline, and whether the United States can do anything to postpone the inevitable.
Contemporary commenters despaired of the Roman Empire for several hundred years before it finally collapsed. Could America find its way to a similar extension?
In terms of providing an essential structure for discussion of this problem, Arvind Subramanian’s new book, Eclipse: Living in the Shadow of China’s Economic Dominance, is a major contribution. (Full disclosure: Subramanian and I are colleagues at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, and we have worked together on other issues.)
In particular, Subramanian develops an index of economic dominance that should become a focus of conversation anywhere that people want to think about changes in world economic leadership. There is no need to know any economics in order to be fascinated by this book: it is about power, pure and simple.
The basic facts are incontrovertible. The United Kingdom was the world’s dominant economic power from the rise of industrialization in the early nineteenth century. But it lost its predominance and was gradually eclipsed by the US, which, at least since 1945, has been the undisputed leader among market-based economies.http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/20/who-will-eclipse-america/

Monday, September 19, 2011

Job Wars / other side of the nickel


One week after President Obama addressed a joint session of Congress and proposed the American Jobs Act, House Speaker John Boehner responded for the Republicans. Not with a plan to address the U.S. jobs' crisis, but with conservative talking points that indicate how difficult it will be to pass meaningful legislation.
The Problem: The two Parties disagree on the origin of the crisis. In his September 8th addressObama indicated the crisis resulted from erosion of America's social compact: "[belief] in a country where everyone gets a fair shake and does their fair share -- where if you stepped up, did your job, and were loyal to your company, that loyalty would be rewarded with a decent salary and good benefits."http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-burnett/boehner-jobs-act_b_968381.html

Sunday, September 18, 2011

How Privatized Social Security Works in Galveston

 GALVESTON — Gov. Rick Perry has repeatedly called Social Security a “Ponzi scheme” and said that people ought to control their own retirement money. But if the social safety net program created in 1935 were eliminated — something President Eisenhower once said would be a politically stupid move — what might take its place? Go to the link and get the facts before saying no way! http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/us/how-privatized-social-security-works-in-galveston.html?_r=1

Saturday, September 17, 2011

A GOP Jobs Plan


House Speaker John Boehner rolled out the congressional Republican counteroffer to President Obama's American Jobs Act on Thursday. It wasn't a plan for fundamentally changing economic policy in Washington—the GOP candidates for president will need to do that—but it does set out the right pre-conditions for jobs and growth. And it establishes a no-fly zone to deter more Obama regulations and taxes that inhibit hiring.
Mr. Boehner emphasized what he called the "triple threat" from government now facing employers: federal regulations, out of control spending and a business-unfriendly tax code.
Associated Press
"Employers will hire if they have the right incentives," Mr. Boehner said, "but the incentives have to outweigh the costs. Businesses are not going to hire someone for a $4,000 tax credit if government mandates impose long-term costs on them that significantly exceed the temporary credit." That's a not-too-subtle shot at the White House, whose plan dangles tax breaks in front of employers in 2012, then snatches them away in January 2013.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903927204576574681944009962.html

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Rep. Gohmert: Obama's Jobs Bill Has Devilish Details

President Barack Obama’s jobs bill is even worse when you look at the details than it is at first glance, according to four-term Republican Congressman Louie Gohmert.

“It is a disaster,” the Texas representative said in an exclusive Newsmax.TV interview. And the whole bill should have been renamed from “The American Jobs Act” to either “The Save Obama’s Job Act” or “The Plaintiffs’ Lawyers Full Employment Bill,” he added.

Gohmert pointed to little-noticed aspects of the bill that Obama presented to Congress on Monday. One, he said, turns the unemployed into a protected class similar to ethnic minorities.


Read more on Newsmax.com: Rep. Gohmert: Obama's Jobs Bill Has Devilish Details
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Friday, September 9, 2011

U.S. Postal Service: Actions Needed to Stave off Financial Insolvency


By the end of this fiscal year--in less than one month--the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) projects that it will incur a $9 billion loss; reach its $15 billion borrowing limit; not make its $5.5 billion retiree health benefits payment; and thus, become insolvent. USPS recently summarized this situation as the equivalent of facing Chapter 11 bankruptcy. In August 2011, USPS outlined new proposals to address the crisis. USPS seeks legislation to remove itself from the federal health benefit program and sponsor its own program; change pension benefits for new employees; and eliminate the layoff provisions it negotiated with its unions in collective bargaining to accelerate its delivery, processing, and retail network and workforce downsizing. Other USPS proposals, such as moving to 5-day delivery, and pending legislation include additional options for consideration. This statement discusses (1) updated information on USPS's financial crisis and (2) GAO's review and analysis of proposals to address this crisis, including USPS's new proposals, and options in current legislation. The testimony is based primarily on GAO's review of pending legislation, past and ongoing work related to postal issues, as well as USPS's recent financial results and GAO's discussions with senior postal officials regarding USPS's recent proposals. GAO has reported that action by Congress and USPS is urgently needed to restore USPS's financial viability. GAO provided a draft statement to USPS for comments and did not receive any suggested changes.
USPS has experienced a cumulative net loss of nearly $20 billion over the last 5 fiscal years, including an $8.5 billion loss in 2010, and a net loss of $5.7 billion in the first 9 months of fiscal year 2011. USPS does not now have--nor does it expect to have--sufficient revenue to cover its costs without legislative changes. To conserve cash, USPS discontinued making its employer's contribution for the defined-benefit portion of the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) in June 2011, which it estimated would reduce its costs by about $800 million this fiscal year. USPS has said that mail volume decline has outpaced even its most pessimistic forecasts. USPS urgently needs to restructure its networks and workforce as its financial condition and outlook have reached a crisis level. A variety of proposals have been made to address USPS's financial crisis. These proposals affect USPS cost savings, postal rates, customer convenience, pension benefits for new employees, employee health benefits, collective bargaining agreements, and delivery and retail services. GAO has identified key issues needing consideration in determining the merits of these proposals. Examples of specific proposals and key considerations include: (1) USPS proposal to sponsor its own health benefit plan: USPS expects to save costs by increasing employee contribution rates, fully utilizing Medicare benefits, and administering its plan more efficiently than OPM. However, it is not clear whether USPS can achieve planned cost savings and what the implications are for the federal budget, as USPS has requested about $42 billion in retiree health benefit assets be transferred from Treasury to a USPS Fund. (2) USPS proposal to seek reimbursement of its $6.9 billion FERS surplus: Reimbursing the entire surplus all at once is a risk as the current FERS surplus is an estimate that could change as economic or demographic assumptions change. The President's Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request proposed amortizing the reimbursement over 30 years, which would be consistent with the approach taken for any deficits. (3) USPS proposal on workforce optimization: USPS expects to reduce costs by closing about 300 mail processing plants and 12,000 retail facilities; reducing service; and eliminating layoff protections in collective bargaining agreements so that it can reduce its total workforce by about 125,000 career employees by 2015. This proposal accelerates the pace of USPS actions in this area, but it is not clear how USPS will address public resistance to facility closures that could lengthen the timeframes for implementation; employee resistance to making legislative changes to layoff protections; and potential loss of customers if service declines or costs increase. Little time remains to prevent USPS---the largest federal civilian employer---from insolvency. The stark reality is that USPS's business model is broken. The decline in mail volumes is continuing. The gap between revenues and expenses is growing. USPS cannot continue providing services at current levels without dramatic changes in its cost structure. Difficult choices must be made. Now is the time to decide USPS's future.

Obama Now Underdog for Re-election

Independent pollster and political analyst Scott Rasmussen tells Newsmax that Wednesday night’s GOP debate was “rockier” than expected for leading candidate Rick Perry, and says his stance on the Social Security issue could be the “chink in the armor” of his campaign.
But Rasmussen asserts that the Texas governor now has all the “excitement and charisma” in the Republican race and could prove difficult to beat, while leading challenger Mitt Romney is an “awkward position.”
And Rasmussen believes that President Obama would be the underdog in a head-to-head race against any of the leading GOP candidates.
Rasmussen is founder and president of Rasmussen Reports and co-founder of the sports network ESPN. He has been an independent public opinion pollster for over a decade, and most major news organizations cite his reports.
He is also the co-author of “Mad As Hell: How the Tea Party Movement Is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System.”


Read more on Newsmax.com: Rasmussen: Obama Now Underdog for Re-election
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Obamateurism of the Day


Barack Obama had an excellent opportunity to put his Hope and Change promise into action this week, after having been introduced by union ally James Hoffa Jr on a Detroit stage with a call, “Let’s take these [Tea Party] sons of bitches out” and telling Obama that his army of union activists would do the job.  Obama may not have heard Hoffa’s speech when it happened, but he had all day yesterday to repudiate Hoffa’s comments about going to war against Tea Party activists.  That would have fulfilled his promise to change the tone in Washington and reduce the bitter partisanship — which is something that almost by definition has to start with one’s own allies.  It also would have matched his speech after the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona that called for constructive rhetoric in political debate.  Hoffa might have been miffed if Obama took the opening for a “Sister Souljah” moment, but it wouldn’t have damaged Hoffa at all and could have boosted Obama with moderates.
Instead, not only did Obama fail to take the initiative to rebuke Hoffa for his own gain, the White House couldn’t pick up the golden opportunity handed to them by ABC’s Jake Tapper yesterday.  Jay Carney could have distanced his boss from Hoffa’s remarks by scolding Hoffa, but instead just prattled about how the press corps wants to make “connections” between supposedly unrelated people and incidents — even though Hoffa introduced Obama at the event with the remarks in question.  It’s a response akin to, “Who are you going to believe — us or your lying eyes?”
Obama could have had a real presidential moment.  Instead, Obama looks clueless as to what his own promises of Hope and Change actually were, and ended up tacitly endorsing Hoffa’s remarks.http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/07/obamateurism-of-the-day-585/

Friday, September 2, 2011

Speech Stunt Backfires on Obama After Boehner Boxes Him In

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has asked President Obama to address a joint-session of Congress on Thursday, Sept. 8, when it wouldn't conflict with the Republican presidential debate.

Citing logistical difficulties, Boehner requested that Obama hold his jobs address, which Obama wants to deliver next Wednesday, one day later.

The Speaker's letter made no mention of the more obvious conflict: between the president's speech, and a Republican presidential debate scheduled on Wednesday night at 8 p.m. EST. That debate is the first of the post-Labor Day political season, and the first one in which Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) is set to participate.

The response by Boehner sets up an early showdown between Obama and the Congress just returning from its August recess....

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/179067-boehner-asks-obama-to-move-speech-to-thursday#ixzz1WnE1x3VN

CartoonsTrashyDemsRinos