Amid the controversy over Chrysler’s “It’s Halftime In America” Super Bowl commercial, a glaring question remains: if Chrysler is back on top and so strong, then why hasn’t it repaid taxpayers the $1.3 billion it still owes them?

“I was, frankly, offended by it,” said Republican strategist Karl Rove. “I’m a huge fan of Clint Eastwood, I thought it was an extremely well-done ad, but it is a sign of what happens when you have Chicago-style politics, and the president of the United States and his political minions are, in essence, using our tax dollars to buy corporate advertising.”

Already, Democrats have begun co-opting the “It’s Halftime In America” meme, and President Barack Obama’s campaign team has already signaled that “saving” Detroit and the American auto industry will be a central campaign theme in Mr. Obama’s 2012 reelection bid. Indeed, in June 2011, Mr. Obama proudly declared:

Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency–and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule.  And this week, we reached a deal to sell our remaining stake.  That means Chrysler will be 100 percent in private hands.

The Washington Post fact checker, however, disagreed–strongly. (more…)

Big Government contributor Charles C. Johnson writes against California’s bid to abolish capital punishment in the Los Angeles Times. He thanks Big Government contributor and past assemblyman Chuck Devore of the Texas Public Policy Foundation for the Texas and California death penalty comparisons.

With a drug cocktail that puts death row inmates to sleep, California’s capital punishment can hardly be said to be cruel — but it is so unusual that death row inmates in the Golden State routinely die of old age or by suicide. When, or more likely if, justice comes, it doesn’t come cheap. By some estimates, it costs $100,000 a year per prisoner to keep California’s 718 inmates alive on death row, thanks in part to the endless, often frivolous appeals brought by inmates and death penalty opponents. If capital punishment is prohibitively expensive, it is because those professionally seeking to abolish it have made it so.

Even death penalty supporters, such as Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye of the California Supreme Court, have given up. “I don’t think it is working,” the newly appointed chief justice told The Times last week. California’s death penalty requires “structural change, and we don’t have the money.” Still, Californians need a “merit-based discussion on its effectiveness and costs.” But the chief justice ignored why that load continues to mount: death penalty opponents.

(more…)

Mid-size city Austin, Texas is expecting to spend $1,000,000 of taxpayer money on the Occupy Austin movement, effectively eating away at claimed reductions in the city’s police overtime budget only two months into their fiscal year.

According to the Digital Texan…

Occupy Austin has been inhabiting City Hall Plaza for two-months and at today’s Austin Public Safety Commission meeting came stunning news: The Austin Police Department has spent $412,000 policing the Occupy Austin protest since it began on October 6 through November 19. That figure is almost certainly higher today. The Commission admitted that the city could be on the hook for over $1 million before too long.

To put the $1 million figure in perspective, you need look no further than the city of Austin’s own budget for 2011-2012 – that’s what the city was hoping to save on police overtime this year. Austin’s fiscal year starts on October 1^st. The city budget made the following assumption…

The Police Department is generating savings by delaying the start of the next cadet academy by six months and reducing its overtime budget by $1.0 million, from $9.3 million to $8.3 million, to be more in-line with actual overtime costs experienced over the last few years. In the past three fiscal years, actual overtime expenditures have averaged $7.5 million.

What are Austinites getting for their money? In a pattern that’s been followed all over the country, the ‘Occupy Camp’ in Ausitn has become largely a homeless camp. The Digital Taxan…

(more…)

The Obama administration has admitted that it cannot move forward with a major feature of Obamacare, its long-term care insurance program, due to the fact that it contains a critical design flaw.

The Community Living Assistance Services and Supports program, known as CLASS, a pet program of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D- Massachusetts), was to have been sponsored by the federal government but maintained as a voluntary plan to which healthy, younger, working Americans would contribute in the event they became disabled later on in life. Participants would have paid a monthly premium that ranged widely between $235-$3000, depending on income, during their employment years, and then collected a daily cash benefit of at least $50 if they became disabled.

The tragic flaw in the plan is that unless large numbers of healthy people are willing to sign up for the program during their working years, the cost of the program would become prohibitive due to the needs of the disabled who would benefit from the plan. Unlike the purchase of long term care insurance in the private sector, CLASS did not offer lower premiums to healthier participants. Thus, the program attracted those who were already disabled in some way, yet able to work to some extent, and who anticipated the need for long term care in the future. Without healthy subscribers paying into the system, these individuals would not likely be able to afford the steep premiums. (more…)

Now this is the sort of corruption we are used to seeing in Illinois, eh? This week the Chicago Tribune and WGN TV have found up to 23 retired union operatives that are collecting millions in taxpayer dollars because they had pals in government tweak the state’s pensions laws to favor them.

These former government workers that were government union members got pliant politicians to alter the pensions laws to say that their pension remuneration would be calculated not on the lower pay they received when they retired from government, but from the much higher salary they received when they worked as union operatives. These folks worked as union bosses at the same time as working on the clock for government.

The “luck” of former union boss and Dept. of Streets and Sanitation worker Thomas Villanova is a typical example. Villanova last worked full-time for the city in 1989 and made $40,000-a-year. But he was also a union big wig making $198,000 annually upon his retirement in 2008 at age 56. His city pension, it appears, was calculated on the union salary of $198,000 instead of his real salary of $40,000 — itself obviously a no-show job in the first place.

Villanova stands to make millions off the taxpayers.

(more…)

Taxpayers across the nation are spending millions of dollars to pay the salaries and benefits of government employees to work exclusively for labor unions, an investigation by the Arizona-based Goldwater Institute has found.

The practice is called “official time” in federal law, or “release” time in local labor agreements reviewed by the Institute. At the federal level, it cost taxpayers more than $129 million in 2009, the last year for which figures are available, according to a report from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Similar provisions have become standard in labor agreements between unions and governments at the state and local level. Finding the total cost would require analyzing every government union contract in every state, county, city and school district in the country, a monumental task that those who have studied the issue say has not been done.

But one example exposed by the Goldwater Institute’s investigation shows the City of Phoenix spent about $3.7 million to pay its employees to do union work last fiscal year, which ended in June. Phoenix has agreements with seven unions that represent city employees, allowing them a total of more than 73,000 city-paid hours annually to do union work.

Other cities in the area have similar provisions in their contracts with labor organizations that represent municipal employees.

(more…)

Democratic and Working Families Party Governor Dannel Malloy of Connecticut dusted off the speech he had planned to make at the end of June, when state employee unions rejected a $1.6 billion concession package that would close a hole in the state’s budget. Embarrassed that their rank and file members rejected the plan that they agreed to with the first Democratic governor of the state in 20 years, the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition (SEBAC) agreed to a new vote after changing the bylaws to allow a simple majority of state employees, rather than 80%, to be the required threshold for ratification of contracts. The old bylaws also did not allow for revotes.

Following the governor’s threats of thousands of layoffs, the concession package, as anticipated, was overwhelmingly approved on the second vote on Thursday by 14 of the 15 unions. Ironically, the union representing corrections officers, AFSCME, which had rejected the package originally, approved it wholeheartedly this time, despite the fact that corrections workers have solicited membership in the National Correctional Employees Union (NCEU), charging that they were misrepresented by the vote to change the bylaws.

Upon ratification of the contract, the governor released the following statement:

“We have achieved something the skeptics said was unachievable: we’ve made the relationship between the state and its workforce sustainable. And, unlike in most other states, we did it without going to war with public employees. We’ve shown what’s possible when management and labor work together in a respectful fashion. Sure, this agreement took a few extra months to achieve – but so what? Those extra months are a small price to pay for the billions of dollars that extra time will save taxpayers, the critical services that time will preserve, and the peace of mind that comes from understanding the state now has a sustainable relationship with its employee base…”

The agreement calls for a two-year wage freeze and some changes to pension benefits and healthcare, such as required annual visits to a physician. In exchange, the unions obtained no layoffs for four-years and a pledge they would not be required to take unpaid furlough days. According to Mr. Malloy, the changes will save the state an estimated $1.6 billion over the next two years and $21.5 billion over the next two decades. As of July 1st, the governor’s budget plan called for “shared sacrifice” from taxpayers, who have consequently experienced the largest tax increase in the history of the state, including a hike in the income tax, retroactive to January 1st.

(more…)

This week, the 99th annual Wyoming State Fair hosted a swine show, a performance pork contest and even a “pig ‘n mud” wrestling championship. But the biggest hog of all? The fair itself.

The fair has become a pricey pork barrel project that uses Wyoming state tax dollars to subsidize more than three-quarters of the cost of operating the event each year.

In fact, state lawmakers snatched more than $1.4 million from taxpayers to bankroll this year’s fair, which ends its eight-day run on Saturday.

If the attendance figures hold steady this year, every time someone pays the fair’s $3 admission fee, taxpayers will spend $32.29 to subsidize the rest of the cost of the attendees’ visit to the fair.

So why is the Wyoming State Fair such a budgetary burden?

Part of the problem is that Douglas, where the Wyoming State Fair is held, is just this side of East Jesus. The town has a population of only 6,120 and sits 50 miles from Casper and 125 miles from Cheyenne, the only two cities in the state with a population over 50,000.

(more…)

We don’t recall when wordsmithing was used so liberally (by both parties) to confuse or mislead the public.  George Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” pales next to the complete abandon with which President Obama eloquently manipulates language and information to influence public opinion.

Bush’s“ Mission Accomplished” was just dumb wrong and “Bring ‘Em On” was just plain, well, never mind.  Bush, at least, meant what he said regardless of how wrong he may have been.

Obama, on the other hand, often, really doesn’t mean what he says.  Instead he frequently uses carefully crafted language to convey a message that distorts reality, but which he, or his speechwriters, believes will appeal to voters.  We look at this as a larceny of language. Let us hasten to add that many politicians on the right do the same thing.  Obama isn’t the Socialist those on the right often claim him to be.  We don’t believe President Obama wants the government to own American business, and he certainly doesn’t want to manage American business. We think he knows he would be a lousy manager.  He does, however, want to set the economic agenda and control, through regulation, how American business operates.  Growing government, at the expense of taxpaying businesses and individuals may be disastrous policy, but it isn’t Socialism.  It is, simply, a tried and true path to economic failure.

Saying he wants millionaires and billionaires and private jet owners to pay their “fair share” of taxes isn’t really what his tax agenda is about.  Not by a long shot. He really wants to ensnare the nearly four million taxpayers who earn at the $200,000 level and above ($250,000 for families) by vilifying the less-than-ten-percent of tax filers earning over $200,000 who actually report over a million dollars a year in income.

(more…)

This week I filed a lawsuit against the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), in federal district court in the District of Columbia on behalf of The American Tradition Institute’s Environmental Law Center. On the heels of obtaining a court order last month compelling the University of Virginia to produce the long-sought ‘Hockey Stick’-related records, ATI’s transparency project now seeks to force NASA to release ethics records for taxpayer-funded global warming activist Dr. James Hansen, specifically those pertaining to his outside employment, revenue generation, and advocacy activities.

What we are trying to determine is whether NASA approved Hansen’s widespread, well-documented, high-profile and, it turns out, extremely lucrative “outside employment and other activities”, permission for which must be obtained in writing, in advance. Public financial disclosures and other documents reveal that he has received at least $1.2 million in the past four years, more than doubling his taxpayer-financed salary.

You may have seen Monday’s Washington Post front page article, titled in the print edition “Deliver the sound bite, watch donors eat it up: incendiary comments can light a fire under candidates’ fundraising”. As we demonstrate in our complaint, the connection seems to exist elsewhere in government, too.

That is, although we removed from the final version a reminder of Hansen’s escalation to knee-jerk invocation of Nazi analogies, this remains a key point about this gusher of outside income. All of which comes on top of — and, more troubling, is all “related to” and is sometimes even according to his benefactors expressly for — his taxpayer-funded employment.

(more…)

This morning, Erick Erickson at RedState issued a much needed salvo against the latest wave of ‘this-time-we-really-mean-it” pledges to cut spending. He focused his ire on the many DC-based institutions and individuals who are peddling this new magic elixir, but I think the problem actually goes much deeper than that. Of course, he is already experiencing significant blowback and complaints. And, also, of course, Erickson is being urged to ‘be reasonable.’ That is always the last line of defense for those without the stomach for a fight.

I stand with Erickson on this one; the time for pledges is over.

For the past several decades we’ve had pledges, commitments, frameworks, understandings, ‘down-payments’ on reform and countless ‘baby-steps’ towards fiscal sanity. And, yet, here we are on the edge of an existential crisis. In addition to a looming fiscal collapse, our government has taken over auto companies, bailed out Wall Street banks, set in motion a government take-over of health care and so overburdened the economy with regulatory red tape that the private sector job engine is permanently stalled.

All these pledges have gotten us what, exactly?

This raises a question that has puzzled me for the last few years. What has the conservative movement been good for?

(more…)

At the Detroit Economic Club today, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner tried to claim the auto bailout is a success.

It certainly doesn’t seem like a success for the taxpayers. GM stock is about $30 today, and unless it gets up to $54, the taxpayers lose money on the deal. Why would it go up? You want to fight high gas prices by buying a Volt? How does $41 grand a pop sound? And still GM loses money on every one it sells even at that price. Not only that but we are seeing that government subsides for electric cars is good tax money wasted in any case.

It doesn’t get any better. Worldwide, U.S. cars aren’t selling worth beans and domestically, GM is lagging because people who hate the bailouts won’t support it with their car-buying dollars any more than they did with their votes last year when they kicked out every incumbent they could find who’d been for it. And GM still has all its old problems, too, like those big fat union pension obligations. Sadly, nothing that caused GM’s financial trouble has been fixed.

But the spin continues.

(more…)

Recently, Portugal officially requested a $116 billion bailout from the European Union and the International Monetary Fund. This makes Portugal the third European nation to seek such a bailout in the past year (Greece got $157 billion; Ireland $122 billion). What most people don’t realize is that the U.S. is the largest contributor to the IMF. Therefore, U.S. taxpayers are paying for Portugal’s bailout which – like the earlier bailouts of Greece and Ireland – was caused by too much government spending and borrowing.

Last year, here at BigGovernment.com I warned how the Obama Administration was making a Greek bailout more likely by agreeing in advance that U.S. taxpayers would help foot the bill. Later, the IMF set up a $356 billion bailout fund for European governments with the consent of the Obama Administration– even though the fund will likely cost U.S. taxpayers between $50-100 billion and possibly more – all without a Congressional vote or consultation.

On April 29, 2010, Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) and I wrote a letter to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner warning of the dangers of U.S. participation in a Greek bailout. “The Obama Administration needs to understand that bailing out Greece will not solve Greece’s problems,” I said at the time. “It will only create a moral hazard that gets America more involved in the gathering storm of European bailouts.” That storm has since consumed Ireland and Portugal and others may be on the way.

(more…)

Google’s growing influence with government is beginning to pay dividends for the company while leaving consumers and taxpayers on the short end of the stick.

Since donating over $1 million to the president’s campaign and building its online presence and fundraising base, the company has reaped continued returns on their investment, so much so, that Google’s former CEO is rumored to be on the shortlist to be the nation’s new Secretary of Commerce.

In order to pad its bottom line, Google made a conscious effort to grow its influence in Washington by hiring insiders and placing Google executives in the Administration. In a short period of time, Google has been rewarded with over 25 contracts with government agencies including the NASA, the Pentagon and the National Security Agency.

(more…)

News coverage of Government Motors over the past few weeks has painted an increasingly glowing picture, but here’s a dose of reality:  GM still has not repaid taxpayers for the bailout and it’s looking less and less like taxpayers will ever be made whole.

Unlike much of the media, we actually spent a considerable amount of time looking behind the press releases to see what GM’s numbers really say about the health of a company taxpayers now own.

This week, we will be sharing with readers a more realistic picture of the company’s health.  The bottom line:  The picture is far less rosy than GM would like you to believe.

1. GM’s Share Price:  Will taxpayers ever be made whole?

Remember these promises?

• “Recent progress at GM gives reason for optimism that it may be possible for taxpayers to get every penny back.” – Steve Rattner, Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry (11/18/2010)
• “American taxpayers are now positioned to recover more than my administration invested in GM.” – President Barack Obama (11/18/2010)
• “The government’s investment is well placed, and I think they’ll make a lot of money.” – Former GM CEO Ed Whitacre (11/18/2010)

GM’s share price closed below its $33 IPO price for the first time on March 1st.  The company has underperformed the S&P 500 by 15% since the beginning of the year.  The Middle East is in turmoil and gas prices are skyrocketing.  Not a good harbinger for GM’s share price.

Now the Feds say that they want to get out of their GM position as soon as possible. Their first opportunity to do so will be when the government’s “lockup period” ends in May.

But according to the House Oversight Panel’s January update on TARP and the auto industry, for U.S. taxpayers just to break even on the government’s historic $50 billion “investment”, GM shares will need to trade at $54.28 — a whopping 65% premium over GM’s March 1^st closing price.

(more…)

I keep hearing the narrative that somehow, as though it were written in stone, collective bargaining is a right for public sector unions. I would disagree entirely: collective bargaining is a privilege, not a right, for public sector unions. And you know what? About 50 years ago, the A.F.L.-C.I.O. agreed with me. The union’s Executive Council in 1959 said: “In terms of accepted collective bargaining procedures, government workers have no right beyond the authority to petition Congress — a right available to every citizen.”

And it is a privilege that has been badly abused for years; U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics show that public sector employees, many of them unionized, make nearly $40 an hour in combined wages and benefits versus roughly $27.50 for those in the private sector.

So I applaud what Scott Walker is doing in Wisconsin, but I actually feel he didn’t go far enough. All his Budget Repair Bill is doing is addressing the public sector unions’ right to collectively bargain over pensions and health care. I think it would have been nice to address the right to collectively bargain for wages, and here’s why: at the end of the day, the public sector unions are not collectively bargaining for a greater share of earnings, as do the private sector unions. They are bargaining to get a bigger slice of the pie of tax dollars, which the government has taken from the American taxpayer.

Now to be clear: paying a certain amount of taxes is a part of being involved in an organized civilization. If you want to make sure you have roads and national defense, you’re going to have to pay taxes. But that being said, taxes are removed through a threat of force from the taxpayers by the government (yes, I mean force. Try not paying property or income taxes and see what happens). So the government is run off of money earned in the private sector. Government does not create jobs; when there are reports of more jobs, but they’re all government jobs, the government is not creating anything: it is merely funding even more government jobs off the backs of the private sector. Which compounds the problem because by taking capital from the private sector to create government jobs, you’re not creating jobs that create more capital, as private sector jobs do.

So, public sector unions, unlike their private sector union counterparts, are not creating more capital. Do they provide services for the public good? Absolutely. Are they creating capital? Absolutely not.

(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…)

We are all supposed to sacrifice, right?  Well, not all of us:

The tennis court at former President Jimmy Carter‘s private home is swept twice a day, his pool is cleaned daily and his grass cut, his flower beds weeded and his windows washed on a regular basis — all at taxpayers’ expense.

Under an arrangement with the National Park Service, taxpayers are responsible for the exterior of Mr. Carter‘s home in Plains, Ga. — to the tune of $67,841 last year alone. In exchange, the government obtains the right to add the home to the Jimmy Carter National Historic Site when he and his wife pass away.

Other presidents have had similar life estate agreements calling for their properties to be turned over after their deaths, but to have taxpayers footing the bill for upkeep and maintenance of the Carters’ property appears to be unique, and it’s drawing fire at a time of tight federal budgets.

Who knew the character Archie Bunker had it so right.

(more…)

Thomas Paine in his Dissertation on First Principles of Government, published on December 23, 1791, wrote, “He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.”

Our nation is deep into the longest post World War II recession in our history, prolonged by the uncertainty created by the policies of the Obama Administration and the Democratic controlled Congress.  Businesses, large and small, are holding on to an estimated $3 trillion in cash and are not going to invest and create jobs without a dependable view of future taxation, regulation and health care costs.  The taxation question is the most pressing at this point in time because of the scheduled expiration of the current tax rates less than eight weeks away.

Mr. Obama and the Democrats in Congress must have never read Thomas Paine’s words, do not fully understand their meaning or simply choose to ignore them.  They are also acting like the recent election was not the repudiation of their agenda that it clearly was. They continue to divide the American people with class warfare by demonizing those taxpayers who earn more than $200,000 per year.

Mr. Obama and his supporters actually believe that the American people will be satisfied with only a temporary extension of current tax rates for those higher earning citizens while most others would see their current tax rates made permanent.  They are sure the private sector will embrace that move and unlock their capital.  They could not be more wrong!

(more…)

Today the Institute for Justice filed opening briefs in our fourth case to appear before the U.S. Supreme Court.

IJ’s first trip to the high court came in 2002 and resulted in a landmark victory for school choice.  We also won our second U.S. Supreme Court case, defending the American ideals of economic liberty and unfettered interstate commerce by striking down a ban on the direct shipment of wine.

Our third case changed America forever.  A local government in Connecticut decided to bulldoze an entire neighborhood and hand the land over to a politically connected private developer.  The law was stacked against the property owners in favor of the powerful special interests.  IJ, defending the property owners, lost in a controversial 5-4 ruling.

This was the infamous Kelo case, and it resulted in an explosion of outrage and grassroots activism all across the country.  Ed Morrissey recently wrote at Hot Air that it arguably set “the stage for the all-out eruption of Tea Party activism a few years later.” This epic battle to protect private property rights, ultimately vindicated by grassroots activists just like you, is one that will never be forgotten:

And now, as children nationwide get ready to begin a new school year, the Institute for Justice is defending Arizona’s innovative scholarship tax-credit program before the highest court in the land.

(more…)