EVERYONE KNEW IT WAS INEVITABLE. It always is. The unread, unvetted spending bill gets shoved down Americans’ throats whether they like it or not. Because they chose between what they believe are the lesser of (usually) two evils, these same destructive forces get reelected to do the same thing over again year after year. Two evils are just that: evil. Why should 2023 be any different?
It’s not. The monstrosity of a bill passed the Senate, as usual, 68-29, in the wee hours of the morning and goes to the White House as a mere formality. It spends $1.7 trillion over nine months. Some $45 billion goes to the 51st state of Ukraine. An unspecified amount goes to our new neighbors from the south who have invaded our neighborhoods illegally, but with Joey Biden’s blessings. It’s over 4,000 pages, so no one has read it through. It brings tears to my eyes, and the eyes of fellow patriots, who are close to giving up.
The full list of the 18 G.O.P. senators who betrayed their country, their party, and their constituents is too long, so instead, I’ll list those who did not fail us: Marsha Blackburn (R-TN); Ted Cruz (R-TX); Ron Johnson (R-WI); Mike Lee (R-UT); Rand Paul (R-KY); and Rick Scott (R-FL). Marco Rubio (R-FL) didn’t even bother to vote, apparently, since he was not named herein, but was named as voting in opposition in The Floridian. Not that it matters at this point. What should have happened is a continuing resolution until the new congressional members were sworn in in January so they could vote on it. After all, the people spoke last month, and expect to be heard. How the U.S. government could protect the borders of foreign nations and fail to protect our own is totally unforgivable.
THE FACT Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell even had to be told this is appalling, but a coalition of senators had to write him a letter urging him to ignore requests by Democrats to pass their massive omnibus spending bill before the new G.O.P.-controlled House is sworn in in January. Sens. Mike Lee (Utah), Ted Cruz (Tex.), Rick Scott (Fla.), and Mike Braun (Ind.) sent the letter on Wednesday. The letter is here.
Essentially, they said that nothing but a short-term Continuing Resolution funding the federal government until Jan. 2023 should be passed so that the new House can weigh in. There should also be no additional spending and no additional “policy priorities” included. If it’s claimed to be urgent, it must be considered on its own merits. Failure to do so, they say, disregards the wishes of the American public.
Not that Republicans are looking out for the taxpayers’ monies: they’re very keen on upping defense spending and aid to Ukraine, which has been nothing but demanding and parasitic since their dispute with Russia. The Dems, on the other hand, are looking to increase discretionary spending to $1.6 trillion. It’s enormous. Where on Earth do they the money is coming from? Never mind, the new I.R.S. agents will stick taxpayers up for the new long-range weapons, and wealth transfers to rebuild Ukraine, its infrastructure and power grid, along with a $400 million package Biden approved from U.S. stockpiles earlier this month. Lucky us.
“I think it makes absolutely no sense for a lame-duck Congress to pass Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer’s appropriations bills,” said Sen. Cruz. “[I]f a handful of Senate Republicans decide their outgoing act is to rubber-stamp Nancy Pelosi’s spending priorities, that would be a gross abdication of responsibility and also an affront to the voters who just voted to give Republicans a majority in the House.”
He’s right. But it’s the second time in a week the G.O.P. has coalesced around Dems in a uni-party fashion, so figure it will happen. The first was the passage, aided by the G.O.P., of the “Respect for Marriage Act,” which codified same-sex marriage into federal law. Regardless of where one may fall on the issue, the fact is, marriage has always been in province of the states — most of which have recognized gay marriage without any ‘help’ from Pelosi or Schumer. And in case that’s not good enough, in Obergefell v. Hodges, decided in 2015, the Supreme Court found same-sex marriage lawful in the decision that applies nationwide.
THE FACT JOE BIDEN is cognitively impaired, likely from Alzheimer’s Disease with a little bit of innate stupidity thrown in for uneasy measure, is not a secret to any American who isn’t on a ventilator, unconscious, due to Covid. Unfortunately, the rest of the world knows the Big Secret, too. That’s why illegal aliens arriving at the border are wearing “Biden: Let Me In” T-shirts: Biden can be conned into anything.
Biden’s cognitive problems have worsened in just the few weeks he was installed in the White House. It’s so bad, a bipartisan group in the U.S. Senate introduced a bill to remove Biden’s war powers after his unilateral strike on Syria. It was a bit mystifying, given there had been relative peace during Trump’s administration, but who knows? Maybe there really was a sound rationale espoused by the Pentagon.
The senators working the war powers removal bill are Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Todd Young (R-IN). Co-sponsoring the bill are Sens. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Mike Lee (R-UT), Chris Coons (D-DE), and Chuck Grassley (R-IA). There is also a growing bipartisan coalition growing in the House. “Congress has a responsibility to not only vote to authorize new military action, but to repeal old authorizations that are no longer necessary,” Kaine explained. He was being polite.
It’s true that Congress has a constitutionally-mandated oversight role in war authorization and has basically neglected that role for decades. Congress seemed okay with the executive usurping their role — until now. Either Congress is using Biden’s dementia as a means to get their oversight authority back after years of atrophy, or else it’s truly concerned Biden’s dementia could embroil us in a war even they cannot imagine justifying. And I’d wager it’s the latter.
The bipartisan concern over Biden’s mental functioning has also given rise to a demand by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for Biden to hand over the to the Nuclear Football to her — for safekeeping. A better kept secret is Pelosi’s own mental state which may have her rivaling Biden on the dementia scale. Nonetheless, House Dems want Biden to surrender the exclusive executive power to launch nuclear weapons and sent a letter (read here) to him making the request. Again, it could be reclaiming (and expanding) their own powers, or a legitimate existential concern. I’d wager it’s both.
IN ONE of the most cynical political moves in recent American history, a second round of “stimulus” payments was authorized by Congress on December 21st. The House, thanks to its leader of unicorns and ice cream cones, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, had purposely drafted and passed a certain-to-be dead-on-arrival bill months ago that would squander about $3 trillion of the nation’s treasure to feed pork to the politicos and gruel to the people.
Eventually, though, Pelosi et al. had to confront the needs of the people and the impending deadlines from the previously-passed, inaptly-named CARES Act, along with the reality that only a $1 billion package would likely pass. The new bill, totaling $2.3 trillion, was also paired with the budget, about $1.4 trillion, for the remainder of the fiscal year. This was entitled the “Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021” in an uncharacteristic moment of simplicity and clarity.
The bill itself, let alone, its expenditures, was, to use a Trump-ism, “yuge.” It was 5,593 pages long, and aides had difficulties printing it. It was ultimately uploaded to the House website and can be read here.
Only a few heroic senators voted against the pillage: Ted Cruz (R-TX), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Mike Lee (R-UT), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rick Scott (R-FL). Hardly anyone read any of the damn thing, relying on the Pelosi Method, as perfected under Obama: pass it to find out what goodies are inside. Still, the public was quick to discover its myriad failures.
Pandemic unemployment assistance at the federal level was extended through March 14, 2021 and allowed continuation of benefits for individuals for as a long as April 5, 2021 for up to 50 weeks total. The supplemental amount was cut in half, giving the unemployed only $300 bonus benefits on top of regular state benefits per week instead of the $600 weekly bonus given under the CARES Act. This still obviously gives people an incentive to remain unemployed. However, Congress thought of that and decided to require states to have some sort of method to be informed by employers when peoples’ jobs opened up but they refused to return to work. Why would they think, if the private sector isn’t working, that the public sector would be staffed to collect this data? And clearly, a business so badly affected by the pandemic as to lay its workforce off is not going to have any idea if their employees turned down suitable work elsewhere, so why even bother?
New “stimulus” checks or direct deposits will be issued to just over a majority of people, not necessarily taxpayers, which also includes children, yet many people who actually pay the taxes that ostensibly will finance this monstrosity are means-tested out, even though such means-testing is completely un-nuanced and screw those living in high cost-of-living states where incomes (and taxes that are never waived) are higher as a result. Phase-outs start at $75,000 ($150,000 for married couples) which is a pretty good income for most of the country. The full “stimulus” check amount is $600, one time.
Almost forgotten is the extension of deferred payroll taxes. This emerged in August when President Trump issued a directive to the Department of Treasury to permit a deferral of payroll taxes from 9/01 to 12/31/20. It was only a deferral, so the amounts has to be repaid by May 1, 2021, but it was extended under the new bill to December 31, 2021, meaning penalties and interest on the deferred unpaid tax liability would not accrue until 01/01/22. No one seems to know of anyone who availed themselves of this because, if it must be repaid, it could be devastating at the time. It’s not up to individual employees, but rather, their employers, who would definitely be unwillingly on the hook with the I.R.S.
The Employee Retention Tax Credit was extended under the new act. It gives a tax credit equal to 50 percent of the qualified wages each quarter to employers who kept employees on payroll from 03/12/20 to 12/31/20, but now is extended to 7/01/21 and has been bumped up to 70 percent of such wages. It can also be used in combination with Payroll Protection Program (PPP) funds (see below), which may be forgiven loans. The maximum was $10,000 per employee, but is now $10,000 per employee per quarter. There was a change to the gross receipts test used, as well: it is now 80 percent of receipts year over year from 2019.
The P.P.P. will be expanded to allow certain businesses with 300 or fewer employees to obtain additional loan money if they can show a minimum of 25 percent reduction in gross receipts year over year from 2019. The maximum loan is $2 million with the 60/40 cost split between payroll and non-payroll continues to apply. Businesses can borrow up to 2.5 times their average monthly payroll costs from 2019. The loans when forgiven are not taxable. After all, why would you want to tax anyone, except, of course, for the poor schmucks who don’t have a business with which to launder other taxpayers’ money? Interestingly, brevity is valued here: the forgiveness application cannot exceed one page. It sounds as if it’s all on the honor system, which we know works splendidly in Congress as well as in business: all one must do is “attest” the money was used properly.
There’s still a rental assistance program which extends the eviction moratorium through 01/31/21, as well as $25 billion for “rental relief” to be used for future rent and utility payments along with back rent. How Congress envisages getting the money to landlords is opaque, but it’s probably just another one of their income redistribution schemes, anyway. Who cares about landlords (and their mortgages?) They’re more despised than lawyers, for heaven’s sake!
In a similar vein, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children are expanded as are some senior programs. Has Congress has lost sight of how getting kids back to school and service providers back to work would help these vulnerable populations more than more free food?
For purposes of the non-Covid giveaways known as the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit, income from 2019 is used as it is most likely more advantageous to those claiming these refundable credits. I’d expect that to be quietly changed to be the more advantageous of either the 2019 or 2020 income, however, because that’s how Congress rolls.
For individual income tax returns, there’s charity deduction redux. We can deduct in 2021, above-the-line, $300 per single or $600 for joint filers if we donate that much or more to a bona fide charity. Apparently, $600 is a magical (and vast!) amount of money at the Capitol. And Flexible Spending Arrangements (F.S.A.s) will temporarily allow carry forwards for health and dependent care to 2021/22. The qualified tuition deduction is now replaced by an increase in the phase-out for the Lifetime Learning Credit: $80,000 for single, or $160,000 for joint filers.
A blast from the past promises to get businesspeople blasted with the return of the once popular 3-Martini Lunch. Such business meals and entertainment expenses are 100% deductible for 2021 and 2022. This is a plus for restaurants, bars, and other badly-affected businesses, but it’s not clear how that works in states that are in lock-down. It’s also not clear why only businesses should receive the deduction. After all, a family’s bill is paid with the exact same currency and has the same effect, dollar for dollar. Such parity would also make recovery swifter.
Missing this time is student loan repayment extensions beyond 01/31/21. This probably isn’t a big deal, anyway, given Joe Biden has been hijacked by “progressives” in his party and is under pressure to “cancel” all student loans, anyway, should he make it to the Oval Office. State and local funding, a demand of Democrats who tend to run socialist-style programs, was excluded too, but again, that will be addressed once Biden is installed, assuming he is. Funding issued under the earlier CARES Act may still be used throughout 2021, however.
Liability protection for corporations, insisted on by the G.O.P., was excluded from the package, as well. This represents a cave by Mitch McConnell, who inexplicably made it his primary concern. He apparently doesn’t understand that it’s fairly difficult to prove in court that someone caught a virus at one place as opposed to all others, even if they worked there. And that workers are governed by workers’ compensation acts, anyway.
At this point, the new spending bill, a continuing resolution to keep the government open, became known, with the ‘stimulus,’ as the “Porkulus Bill.” It was apt, given some of the unrelated measures it contained. Naturally, the phony-baloney climate change fraud was funded. But hey, the government would not shut down even if took a few short extensions to get there and oh, Happy Holidays!
Yet $600 in ‘free money’ wasn’t good enough for some greedy Americans and those who were suffering in spite of the nation’s robust welfare programs in addition to the CARES goodies. Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer were quick to make the G.O.P. look out of touch with the financial devastation befalling the nation. A revolt was brewing, but interestingly enough, it was a Republican who was instigating it.
President Trump promptly pointed out he wanted more for those making under $75,000. He had in mind $2,000 per adult and $600 per child. The election was over so his ‘generosity’ with taxpayer money wasn’t directly self-serving, but it would distinguish him from G.O.P. cheapskates when public goodwill would be helpful in contesting the election as he planned to continue to try to do.
The lack of party unity, however, could backfire in the imminent runoff Senate elections in Georgia. And his failure to sign the bill could leave some people out on the lurch with unemployment benefits and a possible government shutdown.
Pelosi and Schumer were quick to pounce when Trump expressed his desire to increase ‘stimulus checks’ to the people. Just do it, then, they taunted him, no Democrats will object, but the president wasn’t interested in them getting their way with the excess spending. Republicans were howling about how bigger checks to the people were unaffordable and the country couldn’t pay for it, but it was hard to take them seriously when massive amounts of money were earmarked for other countries and silly programs abroad.
Three days after Christmas, however, the president capitulated and signed off on the pork-laden $2.3 trillion packages. He had a message for Congress, however, and delivered it through something called the 1974 “Impoundment Control Act.”
Under the Act, the president would sign off on this bill, but redline certain objectionable provisions with instructions to lawmakers to review them. His red lines would be invisible to this Congress, but at least history records his concerns about excessive spending.
At this point, the $600 payments are now being direct-deposited to peoples’ bank accounts and the increased payment amount appears to be in the dust heap of history. Lucky for the rest of the world, the waste, fraud, and abuse in government financing continues.
Here is just a sampling of some of the foolish appropriations here (gender programs in Pakistan), here (truancy in Filipino youth), and here (providing Russian youth free gap years at American community colleges). Or foreign workers first, here. What a country!
With the announcement of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement from the Supreme Court of the United States, there has been much speculation as to his replacement will be.
Part One looked at four possible picks. Here in Part Two, we look at another four likely candidates.
Judge Thomas Hardiman is on the Third Circuit and was previously a U.S. District Court judge in Pennsylvania. He attended Notre Dame on scholarship and received his law degree from Georgetown. He litigated civil and white-collar criminal cases for years. George W. Bush nominated him for the federal bench in 2003 and he was unanimously confirmed to the appellate bench in 2007. Interestingly, some of his opinions, and his volunteer work, suggest a pro-immigrant disposition although he was rumored to have been a runner-up to a Supreme Court nomination with Neil Gorsuch under President Trump. He serves alongside President Trump’s sister, also a judge, which could help or hinder her chances for the top court this time around.
Judge William Pryor, Jr. of the Eleventh Circuit was previously the Attorney General of Alabama. His law degree is from Tulane. He clerked for the Fifth Circuit, practiced privately, and taught law. When Jeff Sessions was the A.G. in Alabama, Pryor served as a deputy A.G., and when Sessions became a U.S. senator, Pryor took over his A.G. position. Pryor received national attention when he called for the removal of then-Chief Justice Roy Moore, who had refused to obey a federal court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument. In 2001, President George W. Bush nominated Pryor to the bench, but the process was stalled for two years in a Democratic-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee. Using a recess appointment to bypass the usual process, Pryor was eventually confirmed in 2004. Some of his opinions have been controversial, though many were unanimous, but President Trump has publicly lauded him. He is Roman Catholic, but it is hardly a sure bet he would vote to “overturn” Roe v. Wade.
Judge Diane Sykes is on the Seventh Circuit and was a former justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. She graduated from Marquette University School of Law and previously worked as a reporter. She then clerked for the U.S. District Court, practiced privately, and won election to a newly created trial court in Milwaukee before going to the state Supreme Court. She was nominated by George W. Bush and was easily confirmed. She was apparently considered for Justice Sandra Day O’Conner’s seat on the Supreme Court. In an interesting opinion, Sykes wrote an opinion, for the unanimous court, holding the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act did not grant terrorist attack victims the right to attach the foreign country’s property. (It was affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2018.) While her credentials may not be as flashy as some others’, she is considered a strong candidate because of her originalist judicial philosophy.
Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) is also apparently under consideration. He clerked for the future Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito who at the time served on the Third Circuit. Lee practiced law privately and served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney until 2005. He then served as General Counsel in the administration of Utah Governor Jon Huntsman. In 2010, he challenged the incumbent GOP Senator and won. Interestingly, he represented a company storing low-level radioactive waste who wanted to import similar waste from Italy which he believed was permitted under the Commerce Clause. Eventually, the company abandoned its plans. The Tenth Circuit later ruled that an interstate compact could block the importation of radioactive waste. As a senator, he has urged limitations to the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, He was also among 13 senators drafting the senate version of the AHCA (Obamacare), which he ultimately voted against. Most laudably, Lee was one of two Republicans (the other being Rand Paul) to vote against extending three provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, making him a strong supporter of privacy rights, at least on a relative scale. He also worked with Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rand Paul (R-KY) to reform Social Security by raising the retirement age to 70 by 2032 and reducing benefits paid to upper income recipients. He also obstructed a deal to end a government shutdown in 2013 over the debt ceiling. He endorsed Roy Moore, in the 2017 Alabama special election runoff for Jeff Sessions seat. Moore had refused to take down a 10 Commandments monument, yet was reelected. But when rumors of improprieties with a 14 year old girl years ago erupted, Lee revoked his endorsement.
Any of these men or women have presumably been pre-vetted by the Federalist Society, from where President Trump is known to look for guidance. Some of the more recent appointments might be better choices since it would be difficult for lawmakers to suddenly find them unqualified when the confirmation process promises to be so terribly contentious.
Judge William Pryor, Jr. could be too controversial for some. Judge Brett Kavanaugh or Senator Mike Lee would almost certainly be the most interesting to watch. Joan Larson may be the safest pick.
Judge Diane Sykes would likely be my first choice. She has the combination of judicial and political skills necessary to do the job and endure a confirmation hearing. She has both trial court and appellate court credentials, and an originalist judicial philosophy. And, of course, there’s the woman thing.
Whoever the president ultimately puts forward, the nominee should be given a full, fair, and fast hearing. There is no basis at all to delay until after the midterm elections.
sua sponte 