Some say the world will end in fire and some say in ice.

But in Washington, a lot of people say it will end if we don’t continually raise the debt ceiling.

The statutory debt limit, or debt ceiling, represents the maximum amount of debt the federal government can carry at any given time. The limit was created in 1917 so that Congress wouldn’t have to vote every time the government wanted to increase the amount of debt (which was becoming a more and more frequent occasion). Since then, the Treasury Department has had the authority to issue new debt up to whatever the limit is to fund government needs. Last year, the limit was raised to $14.3 trillion, an amount that is about to reached.

As it approaches, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has said failing to raise the limit would likely mean the U.S. would default on its debt, creating “real chaos” in place of the fake chaos that’s out there now. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has said that failing to raise the limit would be “deeply irresponsible” and and Austan Goolsbee, President Obama’s chief economic adviser, has said that not raising the limit would create “the first default in history caused purely by insanity.”

Eh, maybe.

(more…)

Simply priceless to watch WI Democrat Gordon Hintz have this meltdown on the Assembly floor.  Take away his anger and you’d think he was talking about the Obamacare bill that was rammed down our throats this time last year.  But, I guess that was different–government takeover of one-sixth of the US economy, increasing health insurance premiums, and stripping doctors and patients of their rights is good, whereas fixing a $3 billion budget deficit and clipping taxpayer-funded public unions is bad.  And a life-threatening emergency if not passed–remember–people are dying.

Hintz touches on so many topics in his 3-minute rant–from transparency, public debate, having to read a piddly 144-page bill, to the 35,000 people outside clammoring to have their voices heard.

Really?

Where was he when the more than one million Americans gathered at the Capitol and were ignored by the Democrats?  Was Hintz outraged when Republicans said they needed time to read the 2,000+ page Obamacare bill?

(more…)

Steve DeQuattro, "Sustainable Liberalism In a Box" (2011)

You don’t have to be an art critic to see something tasteless going on at Pratt Institute. Since 1887, this venerable New York institution has been dedicated to educating “artists and creative professionals to be responsible contributors to society.” Yet teachers and administrators at Pratt have been nothing but irresponsible in their recent dealings with a fifth-year drawing student named Steve DeQuattro.

Mr. DeQuattro is a political artist. He uses his background in graphic design to illustrate the dominant political culture of his world. At Pratt, this means creating work that addresses, as he wrote to me, the “growing bureaucracy, higher tuition, new buildings for administration, new offices, and departments, and left-wing bias, all at the expense of the students.”

As part of his recent work, Mr. DeQuattro has designed a cereal-box-like sculpture that he calls, ironically, “Sustainable Liberalism in a Box” (the graphics are pictured above). He has developed a piece that takes the ubiquitous Apple iPod ad campaign to address abortion. He has designed a sobering five-foot-wide mural that tracks the Democratic Party’s record on race, from Jefferson’s slave-holding days up through the racially charged speeches of Senator Robert Byrd and Vice President Joe Biden.

As a senior in the school, Mr. DeQuattro has been working on this art in preparation for a group show for Pratt’s graduating students, which is scheduled to open on April 23. While his faculty advisor has been supporting him, his peers have not. Mr. DeQuattro says they recently wrote a letter to his professors, calling his work “offensive” and complaining about exhibiting alongside him. Last week, the chair of the fine arts department stepped in to prevent Mr. DeQuattro’s participation alongside the other students in the group show–an unprecedented move in the history of the department, says Mr. DeQuattro, despite the fact that none of his work is pornographic, libelous, or in violation of the laws of free speech. Mr. DeQuattro’s advisor did not return a request for comment.

(more…)

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is moving to “de-label” Avastin, the late-stage cancer drug for breast cancer patients. If successful, the FDA would allow Medicare and private insurance to deny coverage for the drug – even for patients who have relied on the drug to live.

The FDA has denied that the cost of the drug played a role in their decision but the evidence is mounting that is not the case.  During initial consideration of the decision an FDA advisor specifically cited the cost of the drug as the reason for revocation.  The drug costs $80,000 a year and allowing Medicare to deny coverage for the cost would “reduce the cost of health care,” as President Obama has demanded.

The FDA and their supporters deny cost is the basis of the decision.  George Soros’ Media Matters denounced the rationing claim proclaiming that the drug does not “does not significantly prolong life.”

Significantly? Is six months, the average time an Avastin patient gets in extended life, “significant”?  Is one year?  What about the cases of the “super responders,” the women like Erin Howarth, who have taken Avastin for years and credit the drug for saving their life?

(more…)

Our country has known a number of struggles and great debates that have further defined us as a nation. We are now in the midst of another one that, in the end, will determine whether taxpayers will continue to be enslaved by a political relationship between public union leaders and their elected representatives; one that guarantees entitlements for government workers and assurances of continued power for politicians and union leaders. This national debate began in Wisconsin and will likely be had from sea to shining sea.

As we embark on this great debate, an understanding of some of the key points is critical because the private sector vs. public sector dispute will remain with us as a pivotal issue in the 2012 elections.

First, we need to know the difference between the private sector and public sector unions. Many liberal Democrats and public union leaders are dredging up old images of sweat shops and brutal treatment of humans by big business. As we are exposed to these representations, that serve to tug at our heartstrings, we recall the Hollywood glamorization of unions as noted in films such as Norma Rae, which emphasized the deplorable working conditions in private sector factories prior to workers banding together against employers, with the help of a union organizer.

Drawing on these images, some of the Wisconsin public sector union members, like many liberal ideologues who hope that an outpouring of emotional images- albeit without any basis in reality- will sway their audiences, are outrageously likening themselves to the people of Egypt and Libya who, of course, have been struggling to free themselves from oppressive dictators.

As Lisa Fabrizio suggests, contrast these images with what is the truth: that public sector union members, unlike the people of Egypt and Libya, have some of the largest salaries, benefits, and pension packages in the country- courtesy of American taxpayers who, in the private sector, are struggling with a likely far higher than 10% rate of unemployment.

(more…)

Background Info: Charlie Sheen’s Tiger Blood, Congressman Wu’s Tiger Outfit
Cross-Posts: TobyToons, RedState, Big Government, Unified Patriots, TMR

In the ongoing battle between public employees and taxpayers, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has cited WEA Trust, a company that specializes in providing health insurance to unionized school employees, as the number one reason why collective bargaining must be reformed.

As Education Action Group pointed out last year, WEA Trust is controlled by the Wisconsin Education Association Council – WEAC – the state’s largest teachers union. EAG produced an in-depth report revealing how the teacher unions use the collective bargaining process to demand that WEA Trust be used as their health insurance provider. WEA Trust is typically the most expensive insurance on the market, but no matter. The union’s insurance company gets a fat contract, and the taxpayers are left with the bill. It’s a clever scheme, that’s for sure.

Even more evidence of the cozy relationship between WEAC, WEA Trust and Wisconsin politicians (especially Democrats), can be found in the 2009 election of Tony Evers as Wisconsin’s state superintendent.

For whatever reason, Wisconsin doesn’t hold its state superintendent election with all the others.  Instead, it is held in the quarter following a presidential election, when most voters aren’t paying any attention. Such off-off-year elections are prime opportunities for the special interests to come out and play.  So when the election for the state superintendent post was held in spring 2009, the special interests did some serious playing.

According to the left-leaning Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, Evers spent $228,419 on his campaign.  In contrast, WEAC spent a whopping $564,993 — nearly two and a half times what Evers spent.

(more…)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download Podcast | iTunes | Podcast Feed

On today’s edition of Coffee and Markets, Brad Jackson and Ben Domenech are joined by Roger Bate to discuss the need to criminalize the trade of counterfeit drugs in international law, then Pejman Yousefzadeh talks about Mike Huckabee.

We’re brought to you as always by BigGovernment and Stephen Clouse and Associates. If you’d like to email us, you can do so at coffee[at]newledger.com. We hope you enjoy the show.

Related Links:

Why and How to Make an International Crime of Medicine Counterfeiting
Establishing a Convention against Fake Drugs
Are Drugs Made in Emerging Markets Good Quality?
Study: Drugs from Emerging Markets Have High Failure Rates
Huckabee Questions Obama Birth Certificate
(more…)

Great question by Fox News’ Neal Cavuto to Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels: “I am wondering if you just got punked?”  Daniels responded that he did not understand the question, and then proceeded to answer his own question. (transcript)

Yes, the governor and Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma were punked by Big Labor Democrats in several ways:

• The Governor tossed aside a law providing every Hoosier the right to choose whether or not to belong to a union, better known as the Right To Work. With f Democrats rattling sabers, Daniels chose to discard Right To Work and got nothing in return.
• For months prior to the Democrats’ fleeing the legislature and the job for which they were elected, Daniels and Speaker Bosma went from meeting to meeting predicting that introducing Right To Work would cause Democrats to throw a legislative tantrum.  They telegraphed that they were not going to fight for this employee emancipation issue. Democrats knew that Daniels would quickly give them what they wanted most:  dropping Right To Work, and Daniels delivered.
• Because Daniels and Bosma said that they intended to blame the Democrats’ childish behavior on the Right To Work bill, the Governor handed Democrats an excuse to justify their actions.  Worse, Daniels continues to repeat his “blame Right To Work game” every chance he gets. Daniels’ actions provide cover for the scurrying Democrats.  But, as Cavuto pointed out, the Governor’s team quickly caved on Right To Work, and yet, the Democrats did not return.
• Sadly, the Governor weakened his own bargaining hand.  Because Right To Work was quickly tossed, Democrats have every reason to believe the Governor and Bosma will cave on everything else.  And, having already caved, it will be harder for Governor to justify standing his ground.  This is why Democrats aren’t back in Indiana yet!

Yep, Daniels was “punked,” if Cavuto means losing the battle before it began. Indiana gave public teachers the Right to Work in 1995, but Gov. Daniels refused to even fight for freedom for private sector employees. (more…)

From the Associated Press:

The Senate on Wednesday sent President Barack Obama a Republican-drafted bill to trim $4 billion from the budget, completing hastily processed legislation aimed at keeping partisan budget divisions from causing a government shutdown.

The Senate cleared the measure by an overwhelming 91-9 vote that gives the GOP an early but modest victory in its drive to rein in government. Obama has until Friday to sign the measure and keep federal offices open and operations intact. The House passed the legislation on Tuesday.

(more…)

A large number of Democrats voted with Republicans in the House yesterday to pass a two-week spending bill that includes $4 billion in cuts compared to what Obama requested.

This is a modest victory for the GOP since they can truthfully claim that they are on target to impose the equivalent of $100 billion of cuts over a full fiscal year.

And it appears the Senate will go along with the House proposal, as reported today by the Washington Post.

The deal, which eliminates dozens of earmarks and a handful of little-known programs that President Obama has identified as unnecessary, sailed through the House on a 335 to 91 vote. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), who initially resisted including any cuts in a short-term funding extension, predicted that it will pass that chamber as early as Wednesday.

Some people correctly note that a $4 billion cut is trivial since government spending has ballooned by $2 trillion during the Bush-Obama spending binge – especially since at least some of the supposed spending cut is based on the dishonest Washington practice of measuring “cuts” on the basis of how much Obama wanted to spend rather than nominal changes from one year to the next. Nonetheless, it is a very positive development that the conversation has shifted from “how much should spending be increased?” to “how much should spending be cut?”

That being said, the battle is far from over. Indeed, the GOP began the 1995 shutdown fight in good shape. As I explained in a recent National Review article, a significant number of congressional Democrats sided with Republicans and it appeared that Clinton was on the defensive.

(more…)

Those who thought Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s agenda would be tempered by two weeks of nonstop protests outside his Captiol office couldn’t have been more wrong.

State spending would be reduced, taxes would not increase and the University of Wisconsin’s flagship campus would be granted independence from the UW System under the biennial budget introduced by Gov. Walker on Tuesday.

“I’ve heard from Wisconsinites who are doing more with less and making sacrifices to keep their families going,” Gov. Walker said. “ Good people like the retired couple on a fixed income or the new parents paying for daycare and the mortgage on their first house or the middle-class working family where mom and dad still have jobs, but keeping them meant taking a pay freeze.  All of them, and others like them across Wisconsin, need true property tax relief and this budget delivers.”

(more…)

The American public is not satisfied that the major healthcare legislation that became law last year really does anything to improve the system. A majority of Americans surveyed in three recent polls — CNN, Fox News and Rasmussen – all said the new law makes things worse and want it repealed.

Quite simply, Americans don’t want a big government – one-size fits all bureaucracy dictating the terms of health care services.   Instead of reforming the system, the American public believes the new measure compounds an already broken process—a compounding that will inevitably lead to rationing.

Instead of centralizing control, Washington should consider innovations that give authority and responsibility back to patients and their doctors.

One truly interesting solution is the Heartland Institute’s Free to Choose Medicine initiative.  If combined with other market-based reforms, it would significantly improve our health care system and give Americans more control over their health care, and provide lower costs all the while getting government out of the way.

How does Free to Choose Medicine work?  FTCM makes an end run around the costly and time-consuming FDA reform approval process – a process that in some instances is approaching 10 years.    At present, the FDA has as its goal an impossible task – ensuring the absolute safety of all new drugs brought to market. Rather than admit that 100% safety can never be accomplished the FDA has come up with an ever more rigorous and time-consuming review process.

While providing modest safety protection, the longer approval times give little comfort to a patient with a terminal condition. In fact, there are literally hundreds of cases where a drug that would ultimately prove safe and effective was denied to patients – and tragically, the patients died before getting access to the drugs.

(more…)

Probably higher price today than it was yesterday. Hope and Change.

Art by Ethan Van Sciver

On Thursday, February 17, Democratic lawmakers in the Wisconsin Senate fled the state to avoid voting on a proposal by Governor Scott Walker to close the $3.6 billion budget deficit by asking government workers to contribute to their pensions and pay a little more of their healthcare premiums. Governor Walker also intends to levy restrictions on their collective bargaining rights, except on salaries, so the state can save scarce taxpayer funds. “Collective bargaining” is the coercive method that public employee unions use to extract extravagant taxpayer-funded benefits from local and state politicians. No less a liberal than FDR opposed collective bargaining for public employee unions.

And what was the reaction? Democratic Senators simply walked out. And it took a little while to find them, hiding out in a resort in neighboring Illinois. (By the way, Michelle Malkin has coined a new term for these cowardly legislators: “fleebaggers.”)

Meanwhile, union bosses, with help from the Obama White House and the Democratic National Committee, stirred the pot by staging protests. According to Politico, “Organizing for America, Obama’s 2008 grass-roots campaign organization posted a statement on its website late Thursday, announcing it ‘is mobilizing on the ground in Wisconsin to defend the rights of public employees from an attempt by the governor to take away their right to organize.’” This president and his leftist “organizing” allies have a remarkable disdain for republican, constitutional government and the rule of law.

President Obama himself inflamed the debate by incorrectly labeling Governor Walker’s plan as an “assault on unions.”

Now, the brush fire that started in Wisconsin is raging across the country as state governments continue to address their own bloated budgets receiving stiff opposition from powerful union bosses and their leftist political allies.

(more…)

The fount of business knowledge that is Forbes.com ran a bit dry this weekend when it published a blog by one Rick Ungar in which he made the case that taxpayers don’t actually fund public employee pensions in Wisconsin. Just let that marinate for a moment.

Ungar was attempting to disprove Gov. Scott Walker’s assertion that the state’s pension and health insurance systems for public sector workers are budget-busters that can only be fixed with the budget repair bill and the curtailing of collective bargaining privileges.

(The leading health insurance plan, WEA Trust, for example, is controlled by the state’s largest teachers union, the Wisconsin Education Association Council.  But I digress…)

As his ace in the hole, he cites a blog written by “Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter” David Cay Johnston. A Pulitzer – wow – why even waste my time scrutinizing that one?

Writes Ungar:

“The pension plan is the direct result of deferred compensation – money that employees would have been paid as cash salary but choose, instead, to have placed in the state operated pension fund where the money can be professionally invested (at a lower cost of management) for the future.”

If this is true – that pensions are simply “deferred compensation” – then why do taxpayers only ever hear about “low” teacher salaries, and not the teachers’ total compensation package? Because that wouldn’t fit the unions’ narrative that school employees are eating dog food and living one step above poverty.

(more…)

This past Saturday in Baton Rouge, La. a MoveOn union rally was thrown together to protest Gov. Scott Walkers union legislation in Wisconsin. After the rally was held, a MoveOn coordinator was caught on tape saying the Tea Party is fueled by “class envy” and “racism.”

The following is a partial transcript. We’ll call the person who wished to remain anonymous ‘Condor‘ for transcript reasons:

MoveOn: My opinion is that, first of all, Tea Partiers tend to be in a wealthier category so even if you don’t currently benefit from it, people don’t want to tax millionaires because everyone believes, kinda, in their heart of hearts that ‘I’m gonna be a millionaire one day’, you know? So there’s kinda that class envy that fuels it and also I personally believe, especially in Louisiana, for a lot of citizens it’s racism.

Condor: Not all over the United States?

MoveOn: I can’t speak for all over the United States but I tend to think that as well, but certainly here in Louisiana. When people think of the ones who are abusing these social programs they want to cut, I mean they think of a black, unwed mother. You know what? I get really mad because I make minimum wage. So part of it is racism, part of it is the fact that they want to cut programs that aren’t benefiting them because they think the people that are on it are lazy, are slackers, you know, that’s …

Condor: Kinda like the slave mentality?

MoveOn: Well, the welfare moms of the 80′s and 90′s they used to talk about. You know, the woman she sits at home and eats bon-bons and watches soap operas all day and keeps having children so that she can get more government benefits. Well that person doesn’t exist, but it’s a good stereotype to get people mad to cut these social programs.

(more…)