Political Class Insanity Canine Style

In several past posts we reviewed some political class silliness that some current members of Congress were undertaking. A Congresswoman and her staff were working diligently on developing legislation that would regulate the sound volume on television commercials. A Congressman was working diligently on legislation that would ban the airing of erectile dysfunction TV commercials. Never mind that Congress and the political class have not yet solved the Iranian nuclear crisis, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, drug addiction, failing public schools, soaring deficits, high unemployment, high energy costs, etc. TV commercials are obviously much more important.

And tonight, we had another chapter of political silliness. According to a November 30, 2009 article in Parade magazine, Congressman Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan is developing Federal legislation, The Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years (HAPPY) Act, that would allow pet owners to deduct the cost of food, vet care, and other pet-related costs from their tax returns, up to $3500 a year. His theory is that with the economy in such bad shape, many people have had to give up their pets to save expenses. According to the Congressman: "If Americans are happy (since they kept their pets) and emotionally stable, they are going to be more productive and that helps the economy."

Okay, lets rip this effort apart like we tore open the two TV commercials efforts listed above (complete disclosure: I love my dog and would do anything possible and reasonable to keep her happy and safe):

• Obviously, the other pressing national issues should take second place to this situation. Better to get Fido back into the house than to bring our troops home. Any energy spent by the Congressman and his staff on this legislation is time they cannot spend on real issues.
• According to quotes in this article, this bill would apply to ALL Americans, even those that are not unemployed or having financial troubles. Theoretically, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Donald Trump could deduct the costs of pet care under this bill.
• The maximum deduction is $3,500 a year or almost $300 a month. I do not know about other pet owners but I spend nowhere near $300 a month on my dog. Who and how did they come up with such a large number? However, depending on the documentation requirements, I may all of a sudden start spending almost $300 a month. I am sure there are some dishonest vets who are willing to scam the system with bogus treatment receipts. This bill is probably unenforceable and subject to incredible fraud.
• Is it fair for pet owners to receive such a large deduction and have that deduction indirectly funded by non-pet owners?
• Would it not be better to work on ways to keep grandma and grandpa rather than Fido in their house in order to reduce the high health care costs in this country?
• The Federal deficit is soaring and this bill wants to increase that deficit by giving a pet deduction gift to tens of millions of Americans who do not need it?
• Finally, did anyone get hurt trying to come up with this convoluted acronym for the legislation?

Bottom line is that this is just another example of wasted taxpayer dollars. It also seriously damages the credibility of politicians by giving the impression that they are incapable of solving the most important economic, domestic, and foreign issues facing us today. Instead, they scratch around for insignificant non-problems like TV commercials and pet care deductions to convince themselves and their constituents that they are working on important stuff. Their priorities are screwed up because 1) they do not know what the real issues are or 2) they do not know how to fix the real issues. In either case, they come off as incompetent, trivial and pathetic.

Visit our website at www.loathemygovernment.com to order an autographed copy of the book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government -Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom and Destroying The American Political Class" and to sign up for the cause. The book is also available online at Amazon and Barnes And Noble.

YQF3W74UXXEA

Pimp My Ride, Taxpayers

Today's topic centers around an article from the NY Times (not my favorite publication) that ran on May 1, 2008. It tied in nicely to a story I heard recently on the tv news that stated Congressmen and Senators get free gasoline for their cars while in Washington while the rest of us pay not only for the gas but the state and Federal taxes that go with it. The title of the article was, "What Would You Drive if the Taxpayers Paid?" Apparently, members of the House Of Representatives are allowed to lease any car they want while in office and have the American taxpayer pay for the cost of the lease along with the gasoline that they use, a point brought up in the article, verifying the television report I referred to above.

As if this program of greed was not bad enough, you would hope that these United States leaders would at least be frugal in what they leased, would support domestic car manufacturers, and would be mileage conscious to minimize the impact on taxpayers. Not quite the case according to the article:

• Charles Rangel of New York leases a Cadillac for more than $777 a month (expensive and lousy mileage)
• Charlie Melancon of Louisiana leases a Chevy Tahoe (lousy mileage)
• Bobby Rush of Illinois leases a Lincoln Navigator (expensive and lousy mileage)
• Alcee Hastings of Florida leases an Infiniti M45 (foreign manufacturer and expensive)
• Maurice Hinchley of New York leases a BMW 530i (foreign manufacturer and expensive)
• Edolphus Towns of New York leases Lincoln MKX for $715 a month (expensive and lousy mileage)
• Gregory Meeks of New York leases a Leexus LS 460 for $998 a month (foreign manufacturer and way too expensive)
• Louise Slaughter of New York leases a Buick Lucerne for $808 a month (too expensive)

According to the article, not only do the taxpayers pay for the lease and gas but they also pay for maintenance, insurance, registration fees, and excess mileage charges. The article states that about 125 members of the House were using this program in mid-2008. If you take the monthly leasing costs of all examples mentioned in the article and multiply that average monthly lease cost by 125 participating House members, you get an annual taxpayer cost of about $1 million, just for the leases. Lord knows how high the costs go when you add in gas and these other perks of the program.

This is just one other example of this elitist mentality that has pervaded the American political class. It is not about solving the nation's problems, it is about taking care of themselves at taxpayers' expense. It is about getting themselves the good life while the nation and its citizens suffer. These are the same people whose $170,000 or so annual salaries put them in the top 5% of wage earners in this country, wage earners who have to pay for all of these car related expenses of their own household besides for these politicians' households. It is programs like this that Steps One and Two in the book would go after and thousands of other similar wasteful programs to get this country's debt levels and spending under control while not degrading the lives of ordinary Americans at all.

In closing, I loved the justification put forth by Congresswoman Slaughter whose lease runs taxpayers over $800 a month. She claims that she has a big district that requires her to drive around a lot in snow covered areas and the Buick along with its GPS system are necessary. However, what the Congresswoman does not mention is that US Senators do not have a similar program to this House giveaway program and seem to get by quite nicely despite having areas that are state wide and larger than Ms. Slaughter's district. These Senators seem to do quite nicely without a taxpayer perk, at least in this area. To them I say thank you.