OBOF SS & MORE PART 17

`WELCOME TO OPINIONS  BASED  ON FACTS (OBOF)

Name	Published
OVERVIEW	Dec. 28, 2010
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 1	Dec. 30, 2010
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 2	Jan. 10, 2011
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 3	Jan. 17, 2011
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 4	Jan. 24, 2011
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 5	Jan. 31, 2011
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 6	Feb. 07, 2011
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 7	Feb. 14, 2011
SPECIAL ISSUE	Feb. 18, 2011
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 8	Feb. 21, 2011
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 9	Mar. 01, 2011
SOCIAL SECURITY PART 10	Mar. 07, 2011
SS & MORE PART 1	Mar. 14, 2011
SS & MORE PART 1A	Mar. 21, 2011
SS & MORE PART 2	Mar. 25, 2011
SS & MORE PART 3	Mar. 29, 2011
SS & MORE PART 4	Apr. 04, 2011
SS & MORE PART 5	Apr. 11, 2011
SS & MORE PART 6	Apr. 18, 2011
SS & MORE PART 7	Apr. 25, 2011
SS & MORE PART 7A	Apr. 29, 2011
SS & MORE PART 8	May 02, 2011
SS & MORE PART 9	May 09, 2011
SS & MORE PART 10	May 16, 2011
SS & MORE PART 11	May 24, 2011
SS & MORE PART 12	Jun. 06, 2011
SS & MORE PART 13	Jun. 20, 2011
SS & MORE PART 14	JULY 05,2011
SS & MORE PART 14A	JULY 18, 2011
SS & MORE PART 15	JULY 19, 2011
SS & MORE PART 16	AUG. 03, 2011
SS & MORE PART 17	AUG. 15, 2011

SOCIAL SECURITY & MORE PART 17

IN THIS ISSUE

1.  Town Hall meeting w/Senator Coburn.

2.  Back in Black.

3.  My opinion.

4.  Independent agencies.

5.  Why I vote no on the debt deal - Senator Coburn.

SENATOR TOM COBURN MD.

OFFERS A

TOWN  HALL  MEETING

For those of you in the Tulsa, OK. area here is your chance.  Senator Tom Coburn MD. will hold a Town Hall meeting as listed below, Tuesday, the 16th at 6:00 p.m.  I am told that the Senator will open with 5 to 10 minute statement and open the rest of the evening for questions. 

Now, as most of you know, if you have been reading my blog, I am a proud Democrat, but this Senator, despite the fact that he is known as the strongest conservative in Congress, does have a heart and feeling for people, in my opinion.  I don't agree with him all the time, but I do have a great deal of respect for him and I think this is a real opportunity to get your questions answered right from the horse's mouth, as the saying goes.

You also, can certainly register your complaints and disagreements with Senator Coburn.  It's my understanding that Senator Coburn actually wants to hear of your disagreements.

There have been other notices put out about the Town Hall meeting and this is a little late, but it's not to late to plan to be there tomorrow night.

Tulsa Town Hall

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

6:00 p.m.

Tulsa Community College - Southeast Campus                
The VanTrease Performing Arts Center for Education
10300 E. 81^st St. (81^st Street South and Highway 169)
Tulsa, OK 74133

"BACK IN BLACK"

This is truly a HISTORICAL DOCUMENT in my opinion based on facts set forth.

I don't believe there has ever been as complete and as an in- depth study of all of the Federal Government, as has been done by Senator Tom Coburn MD. and his staff, as set forth in his 614 page document  entitled "BACK IN BLACK."   There have been, literally, thousands of hours spent developing such an exhaustive review.  I don't know how many months were involved, but I am sure it was many.

The fact that it is 614 pages is, in my opinion, immaterial. You could probably cut 200 pages off if you wanted to, by just adjusting the size of type and width of pages.  So the number of pages really doesn't say anything of importance, to me.

Now, I am not going to try to tell you that I have read all 614 pages, cause I have not.  I will list what I have read.  In addition, I have read a number of commentaries relating to the report and I believe this has given me enough info to, confidently, provide my reaction.  Regardless of any other statements that I may make, this, no doubt, is a AAA endeavor. 

IT IS A REPORT THAT  SHOULD GET SERIOUS ATTENTION FROM CONGRESS.  CONTRARY TO OTHER APPROACHES TO GETTING OUR HOUSE IN ORDER, IT DEALS IN THE REQUIRED DETAIL, INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING "CUT A % ACROSS THE BOARD."  THAT IS THE

SIMPLE  WAY

OUT AND DOES DAMAGE WHERE IT SHOULDN'T. 

SENATOR COBURN AND HIS STAFF SHOULD BE HIGHLY COMMENDED FOR THIS WORK.   

I have been somewhat familiar with the Federal Government, but I must admit that I had no idea of the enormity it has become.  I have listed below all of the departments and agencies that this plan has covered. 

Dr. Coburn's website provides a link to the "Full report, A section by section outline of the report, A summary of savings, and Highlights of the report. 

With the exception of the Full report, I have read all the others.  In each case of reduction, Dr. Coburn has gone into great detail to support his conclusion.  It is almost beyond comprehension as to what this Federal Government has become.  There is little point in my trying to paraphrase any of the parts that I have read.  I urge you to read them for yourself. 

      MY  OPINION

I believe that nothing like this has ever been produced before.  From what I have read, it seems to be realistic and shows the use of common sense.  There is no doubt that there will be a lot of criticism.  It steps on some toes of course, but that is going to have to happen, if we are going to get our house in order. 

At this point, I don't see anything that I would object to. His approach to keeping Social Security solvent for 75 years is quite reasonable, in my opinion.  The best, of course, would be if the $2.6 trillion that Congresses, over the years, have stolen from Social Security, could be paid back, but that is out of the question. 

One thing I really like, is that the plan would bring us to a balanced budget in 10 years.  That is realistic.  House Tea Party Republicans were wanting a balanced budget in two years, which is not realistic and lacks common sense.

The big surprise to me was the number of agencies, foundations, grants, and endowments that I have never heard of.  Below is a list of less than half of such parts of the government.  On the first list below, the item just above the heading "Entitlement Programs" is a listing "Other Independent Agencies."  These are the ones I have never heard of and I bet you haven't either.  As I said, I have only listed less than half of all and you should look at the entire group.  It blows your mind, at least it has mine.

I do want to point out, that in connection with the Scholarship programs, they would be turned back to be a private operated program, instead of government.  If you look at any of those in depth, it will tell you the full detail. 

Back in Black: A Deficit Reduction Plan

Dr. Coburn's plan to reduce our nation's long-term deficit saves roughly $3 trillion from entitlements, $3 trillion from discretionary and other accounts, $1 trillion in defense, $1 trillion from ending some spending in the tax code, and about $1 trillion in interest costs. This plan would gradually reduce the size of government by about 25 percent and balance the budget within ten years.                               

Executive Summary

Methodology
Highlights
Total Savings Chart
Duplication in Federal Programs Chart
Spending Reductions:
General Government
Congress
Executive Branch
Judiciary Branch
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Education
Department of Energy
Department of Health & Human Services
Department of Homeland Security
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor
Department of State and Foreign Aid
Department of Transportation
Department of the Treasury
Department of Veterans Affairs
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Environmental Protection Agency
NASA
National Science Foundation
Small Business Administration
Other Independent Agencies
Entitlement Programs:
Medicare & Medicaid
Social Security & Social Security Disability Insurance
Revenue:
Reforming Tax Expenditures & Ending Special Giveaways

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

 Legal Services Corporation                            Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $2.19 billion

Corporation for National &

Community  Service                                        Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $3.1 Billion

Barry M. Goldwater Scholarship and

Excellence in Education Foundation              Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $40 million

Institute of Museum and Library Services       Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $574.7 million

Eliminate Museums for America Grants         Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $217 million

Eliminate National Leadership Grants            Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $222 million

Reduce Administration Costs by 30 Percent    Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $57 million

Eliminate Laura Bush 21st Century

Librarian Grants                                             Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $272 million

Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation     Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $30 million

Morris K. Udall & Stewart L. Udall

Foundation                                                      Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $33 million

Christopher Columbus Fellowship

Foundation                                                      Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $11 million

Election Assistance Commission                     Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $161 million

United States Institute of Peace                       Year Estimated Savings: $377 million

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation     Estimated Ten-Year Savings: $19.65 million

I find the following to be very interesting and informative and it is a good ending to this posting that has been totally devoted to Senator Tom Coburn MD.

Why I voted against the debt deal

          By Tom Coburn, Published  Washington Post Aug. 3

The good news out of the debt debate is that Washington is now debating how much we can cut instead of how much we can spend. The American people deserve all the credit for forcing that change. Unfortunately, it’s still all talk in Washington. This deal is a victory for politicians but a defeat for families. 

In spite of what politicians on both sides are saying, this agreement does not cut any spending over 10 years. In fact, it increases discretionary spending by $830 billion.

I voted against this agreement because it does nothing to address the real drivers of our debt. It eliminates no program, consolidates no duplicative programs, cuts no tax earmarks and reforms no entitlement program. The specter of default or a credit downgrade will still hang over our economy after this deal becomes law.

Politicians on both sides are misleading the country by calling a slowdown in the growth rate of new spending a “cut.” Spending will increase at a time when real cuts are necessary to make us live within our means, repair our economy and preserve our credit rating.

It is true that next year there will be a genuine cut of $7 billion when discretionary spending drops from $1.05 trillion to $1.043 trillion. But with our government borrowing $4.5 billion a day, that $7 billion is enough to fund the government for about 36 hours. And after our day and a half of restraint, spending will increase $830 billion over 10 years.

Supporters say the real savings will come when the joint committee the deal empowers makes recommendations to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion (as we increase the debt limit by the same amount). But the enforcement mechanism designed to force these hard decisions — across-the-board cuts to defense and nondefense programs — will never work. Congress will easily evade these caps. In the Senate, all it will take is 60 votes — the threshold for passing anything. Some have complained about defense cuts, but everyone in Washington knows those cuts can be avoided through supplemental or “emergency” spending bills.

I proudly served on the president’s debt commission and spent months negotiating with senators of both parties in the Gang of Six. But I took a break from the Gang of Six because we were not offering enough savings, especially in entitlements, to heal our economy. And the truth is that the joint committee is likely to be a step backward from the Gang of Six and the Bowles-Simpson commission.

I am the first to admit that, with this plan, the commission process in Washington has become a farce. The plan’s joint committee has been called a “super” committee because it is anything but.

For our country’s sake, I hope I am wrong. Nothing prevents the congressional committee from recommending deficit reduction far in excess of $1.2 trillion. For that to happen, however, both sides will have to sacrifice their sacred cows and embrace real entitlement reform and tax reform.

Experience has taught me that to achieve real savings, there is no substitute for being specific. In Washington, however, wide is the road that leads to pledges, commissions and caps, and narrow is the road that leads to cuts. That’s why I have targeted specific excesses such as the “Bridge to Nowhere” and the ethanol tax earmark. It’s why I recently released a 620-page report, “Back in Black,” that makes hundreds of recommendations and calls for $9 trillion in deficit reduction. Congress could spend a year eliminating no-brainer examples of waste and duplication, such as our government’s policy of directing unemployment benefits to millionaires.

I understand that Congress is not ready to accept $9 trillion in deficit reduction even though changes of that magnitude are necessary to heal our economy. Congressional leaders are probably correct that this is the best deal they could have gotten. The only recourse the people have, then, is to elect lawmakers who will produce better results.

I was among the first members of Congress to call for using the debt-limit debate as leverage to force spending cuts. I’m glad I did. Even though the cuts didn’t materialize, the debate informed the American people of the scope and magnitude of the problem.

The real debt crisis is not a debate that has been imposed on Washington by Tea Party activists. It is a crisis Washington has imposed on the American people through laziness, incompetence, dishonesty and political expediency. Politicians can talk all they want about how they did something to address the problem. But when the flaws of this plan become apparent, another change election will be coming.

It is very unusual for me to devote one entire posting to one person and one topic, but I think this is worthy of such attention.  Now I am a Democrat, as I said before, and for me to devote this entire posting to a Conservative Republican is proof that I am a fair and open minded Democrat.  In my opinion, "Back In Black" is important. 

Will talk to you again on August 29th.

Floyd