Is Ron Paul Taking Over The Nebraska Republican Party?

by: Kyle Michaelis

Mon Jun 04, 2012 at 22:58:06 PM CDT

Here's what the OC has to say (with select emphasis added):

On Thursday May 31, we took note of the effort by the Ron Paul folks to hijack the Nebraska Republican Party county and state conventions (Ron Paul Still Seeking Nebraska Convention Delegates), the ultimate aim being to send as many Paul delegates to the Republican National Convention in Tampa as they can.  Based on the Sarpy County Republican Convention on Saturday, it appears that the Paul delegates are well organized and on track to do exactly what we've suggested.

Virtually all of the members elected to the state central committee on Saturday were Ron Paul delegates.  Virtually all those selected as delegates and alternate delegates to the state convention where national convention delegates are chosen were Ron Paul supporters.

In Sarpy County it was clear that the Paul supporters were well organized.  They had slates on their phones and a few paper ones.  They knew whom they were to nominate and vote for for each elected position.  Some even cast more than one vote which required at least one caucus to have to vote several times.  Even the very conservative Nebraska State Senator Jim Smith could only be elected as an alternate delegate to the state convention!

What are the ramifications of this?  First and foremost, we suspect that Governor Heineman, Mitt Romney's State Chairman, is going to be highly embarrassed if the Nebraska delegation in Tampa casts the majority of its delegate votes for Ron Paul rather than Mitt Romney.  Given the results from Sarpy County, the organization in Douglas County (which holds its convention next Saturday) and across the state (see below) we fully expect that will, indeed, happen.

Secondly, Governor Heineman is the titular head of the Nebraska Republican Party.  It appears likely that the party central committee will be governed by Ron Paul folks for the next two years and it appears that while the governor has anointed Mark Fahleson, Darlene Starman and Brian Buescher to become the party's leadership that, in fact, the Paul folks may very well have the ability to elect their members to control the party in defiance.  The state party has already had a difficult time raising money.   Having it controlled by the Ron Paul folks would virtually dry up all contributions from so-called 'establishment' donors and put the state party's finances, assets and ability to elect candidates this fall at risk.  In what was likely to be a leadership election that was challenged anyway (one other non-anointed female has started soliciting votes for national committee woman position), it appears that there will be a leadership slate for the national committee seats as well.

For the last several years, the State Republican Party has been poorly financed and supported and shown little or no organization or concern about dealing with the Ron Paul folks or any organizational issues.  The inattention to these issues may very well come home to roost and the embarrassment for it will fall at the feet of Governor Heineman and current party leadership.

Objective Conservative is probably our state's best source for covering internal Republican Party politics.  I suspect they're exercising some degree of alarmism to wake up the party's establishment figures and get them to mobilize in the remaining counties and to protect the status quo at state convention.

However, I'm not entirely convinced that the GOP "establishment" perceives the same threat from Paul's supporters.  Throughout the 2012 presidential primary, there were signs of collaboration and shared interest between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney.  Rather than being ostracized, the Paul-supporting Republican Liberty Caucus actually hosted our state's first Senate debate back in February.  Then, there's the Heineman administration's mysterious hiring of two inexperienced leaders of the Paul campaign's Young Americans For Liberty as the state's chief policy analysts implementing health care reform.

Do all these things connect?  Maybe not, but it certainly doesn't appear our local Republian leaders (besides one blog) are doing anything to squelch Paul's particular brand of extremism in our state.

Of couse, these inner party conflicts are easily blown out of proportion.  But, the establishment players in state politics have grown increasingly indistinguishable from those in the Republican Party.  A threat to that status quo would have reverberations far beyond this year's convention season, so this could all be worth keeping an eye on in the weeks and months ahead.

Deb Fischer Didn't Embrace Extremist Pledge Until Senate Campaign

by: Kyle Michaelis

Thu May 31, 2012 at 02:45:53 AM CDT

Maybe Fischer had to make this commitment to win the Republican Senate nomination.  I'm sure there are plenty of Tea Party voters who prefer to hear empty, anti-tax rhetoric rather than genuine solutions to our nation's fiscal woes.  Had Fischer not signed the pledge, it may well have stood in the way of her crucial endorsement by Sarah Palin.  Even more importantly, it could have cost her the hundreds of thousands of dollars in last minute TV ads that ripped Jon Bruning's character to shreds and propped up her campaign in his place - all courtesy of multibillionaire Joe Ricketts and his "Ending Spending" Super PAC.  The problem is that Fischer doing what it took to win has made it impossible for her to do what it will take to lead.  Worse, she is unrepentant and shows no signs of second thoughts - or, honestly, any thoughts independent from her newfound fealty to Norquist's rightwing ideology.

This has not always been the case.  It is important to note that Fischer had the opportunity to sign Norquist's pledge during her campaigns for the Nebraska Legislature.  She declined to do so - as have the vast majority of her fellow State Senators, including the body's most conservative members.  In fact, only two of 49 State Senators have signed Norquist's pledge - Tony Fulton of Lincoln and Scott Price of Bellevue.

Why so few?  For starters, the nonpartisanship of our Legislature serves as a powerful and much-needed check on such irresponsible extremism.  There just aren't the same electoral benefits when you're competing for every vote in the primary and can't count on a letter next to your name carrying the day come November.  Secondly, there's a general understanding by Nebraskans that this sort of pledge is about pleasing the special interests rather than serving the public interest.  Deb Fischer understood that - right up until she decided to run for the U.S. Senate.

Signing Norquist's pledge is a big step backwards for Fischer.  It should cause genuine concern for Nebraskans who want independent leadership and would prefer Congress work together to fix problems rather than playing endless political games.  Those voters have only been left with one option - Bob Kerrey for Senate.  And, the Kerrey campaign has already been hard at work making this contrast clear.  Today's Lincoln Journal-Star reports:

This week, Kerrey's campaign manager, Paul Johnson, put Fischer's decision to sign anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist's pledge not to vote for any tax increases up front.  "It's no wonder Joe Ricketts, the Koch Brothers and Karl Rove are pouring tons of money into electing Deb Fischer and defeating Bob Kerrey," Johnson said. "They want to preserve the tax breaks and loopholes that benefit them."

Johnson said the pledge leaves Fischer no room for compromise in the national debate about cutting deficit spending and helping to balance the federal budget.  "How can she be an effective legislator and a senator when she's already committed herself to no compromise?" Johnson asked.

Aaron Trost, Fischer's campaign manager, said Fischer stands by her no-tax pledge. Fischer argues that there are ways to balance the budget without raising taxes, Trost said.

Fischer's Legislative District now extends pretty close to Wyoming, and it's safe to say that people on both sides of that border share a lot of the same principles.  She needs to give a serious listen to former Wyoming Senator and fellow Republican Alan Simpson:

Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) lashed out at members of his party on Sunday, slamming them for their unwillingness to compromise on proposed tax increases... "You can't cut spending your way out of this hole," Simpson, who was appointed as co-chair of President Obama's Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform in 2010, said..."This is madness."

Simpson continued: "If you want to be a purist, go somewhere on a mountaintop and praise the east or something. But if you want to be in politics, you learn to compromise. And you learn to compromise on the issue without compromising yourself. Show me a guy who won't compromise and I'll show you a guy with rock for brains"....

"For heaven's sake, you have Grover Norquist wandering the earth in his white robes saying that if you raise taxes one penny, he'll defeat you. He can't murder you. He can't burn your house. The only thing he can do to you, as an elected official, is defeat you for reelection. And if that means more to you than your country when we need patriots to come out .... you shouldn't even be in Congress."

Republicans Threaten To Hold Economy Hostage Again

by: Ronaldo

Sun May 27, 2012 at 21:44:15 PM CDT

Sometime in December, the debt ceiling will have to be raised again.  House Speaker John Boehner is already threatening to hold the U.S. economy hostage again.  In a recent speech, Boehner stated:

"We shouldn't dread the debt limit. We should welcome it. It's an action-forcing event in a town that has become infamous for inaction. I put forth the principle that we should not raise the debt ceiling without real spending cuts and reforms that exceed the amount of the debt limit increase ... When the time comes, I will again insist on my simple principle of cuts and reforms greater than the debt limit increase. This is the only avenue I see right now to force the elected leadership of this country to solve our structural fiscal imbalance."

Boehner is wrong when he says the only way to address spending and the deficit is threaten the U.S. economy with a double dip recession.  If the GOP genuinely believes that spending and the deficit are a serious problem (they don't), they should use the normal legislative process to advance their deficit and spending cut goals.  They could hold a series of hearings in the relevant House committees and call economic experts to testify about what they believe to be the best way to reduce spending and the deficit.  After those hearings, they could vote the legislation out of committee for a debate on the House floor.  Let the American people listen to the debate and make an informed decision about our fiscal future.

However, the Republicans would prefer the reckless and irresponsible path of threatening to default on our obligations.  Thankfully, our state and our nation do have more reasonable leaders who understand the dangers of these political games.  The Lincoln Journal-Star reports:

Sen. Ben Nelson said Wednesday the partisan obstruction that "put us on the brink of default last year (is) shameful" and may be repeated this year despite warnings that it could push the country into economic recession.  "They'll seek to do it again this year," the Democratic senator said, "and it will put the country at risk."

The Republicans in the Congress should heed Ben Nelson's warnings and raise the debt ceiling in December without a hostage crisis.  Lest we not forget, raising the debt ceiling was a routine event during previous Republican presidencies.  For example, the debt ceiling was raised 18 times during Reagan's Presidency and 7 times during George W. Bush's Presidency.  We Nebraskans should contact our representatives and demand that they do the responsible thing in December and not put the world's economy at risk.

Fight Against LGBT Protections Is All About Prejudice & Politics

by: Kyle Michaelis

Thu May 24, 2012 at 09:00:00 AM CDT

Of course, none of us are probably surprised by the hypocrisy of these faux pro-family organizations actively working against non-traditional families that are bonded by as great a love as any in our communities.  But, they're now hiding their blatant prejudice behind arguments over process.

The executive director of the Nebraska Family Council, Al Riskowki, explains their call for a referendum vote by declaring, "This is about the process, not about whether you are for or against the ordinance."  But, no one is fooled.  This is about prejudice, not process.  And, it's telling that they know they are losing when they can't even be honest about their efforts and have to give supporters an excuse to sign their name and cast their vote without hanging their heads in shame.

Unfortunately, Nebraska has its share of rightwing pandering politicians who are more than happy to play this game with complete shamelessness.  Chief among these are Attorney General Jon Bruning and Governor Dave Heineman.  Just days before the Senate primary he would eventually lose, Bruning released a poorly-reasoned, politically-motivated opinion (like most from his office) stating, first, state law does not allow cities to expand protected classes and, second, even if it did that could only be done through a vote of the people.

This specious argument deliberately disregards state law specifically providing that "civil rights are a local as well as state concern" and that "the Legislature desires to provide for the local enforcement and enactment of civil rights legislation concurrent with the authority of the State of Nebraska."  I don't know that the law could be much more explicit granting cities the right to enact just these sorts of protections.  And, that's exactly the way it's been interpreted for years as the city of Lincoln adopted protections based on family status, age, disability and national origin - all greater than provided under state law and all without a vote of the people.

Bruning's opinion is an assault on all of these very popular and much-needed protections.  That's why no one will actually pursue legal action on its ridiculous-on-its-face basis.  Those hostile to the rights of the gay and transgender community just wanted the piece of paper to help muddy the waters so their appeal might appear to be grounded in something other than bigotry and prejudice.  This was good enough for Lincoln City Councilmen Adam Hornung and Jon Camp as both relied upon Bruning's opinion to abstain from voting on the ordinance. The Omaha World-Herald reported:

Hornung said his oath as a lawyer requires him to adhere to the attorney general's opinion.  "The Attorney General's Office, for right or for wrong, has the authority to enforce the laws of the state of the Nebraska," Hornung said. "A lot of attorneys can issue opinions, but some opinions mean more than others."  

Camp said he agreed with Hornung's analysis.

In his desperation to hold onto the Republican Senate nomination as it slipped from his grasp, Bruning's actions are pretty easily understood.  However, earlier this week, Gov. Dave Heineman entered the fray without any such excuse.  He's just cruel, petty, and evidently sees some political advantage in putting the rights of a minority to a public vote.  The Omaha World-Herald reports:

Gov. Dave Heineman said Tuesday that the gay civil rights ordinances passed in Omaha and Lincoln should go to a vote of the people.  "None of us want to see discrimination in the workplace," the governor said. But he said he does not support the ordinances, which would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity....

In commenting on the issue, Heineman referred to arguments made earlier this year in support of allowing cities to raise sales taxes with a vote of the people.  "If we can trust the people to vote on tax increases, surely we can trust the people to vote on one of the most fundamental values that we have in this state," the governor said....

Heineman declined to say whether he would support or oppose adding [gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people] to the list of groups protected against discrimination.  "That's certainly something we'd want to review in some detail with the attorney general," he said.

Of course, what Heineman fails to mention in his call to "trust the people" with a vote is that he fought against that very argument on allowing voters to raise the sales tax and his veto ended up being overriden by the Legislature. So, he's not even being consistent.  He's just being opportunistic and playing political games.  Nothing new about that.

The only progress we've seen from Heineman, Bruning, Hornung, and those seeking to undo Lincoln's fairness ordinance is that they can no longer be open about their intent.  They have to speak out of both sides of their mouths for fear of putting too honest a face on the bigotry and prejudice they are defending - from which they've always been able to draw so much political power.  But, they are losing the fight.  They have lost the people.  And, part of them knows it - which is why they resort to these political games hoping to squeeze out a few more election victories from a dying hate in a Lincoln, a Nebraska, and an America that are so much better than this.

Deb Fischer Is Pledged To Grover Norquist, Not Nebraskans

by: Kyle Michaelis

Sun May 20, 2012 at 13:59:37 PM CDT

Fischer touts her signing Norquist's so-called "Taxpayer Protection Pledge" on her campaign website. This is nothing more than a pledge to protect corporate tax loopholes and unsustainable tax cuts for the rich. It is also a pledge to continued deficits and debt for any candidate who can't point to the $1.3 trillion in government spending that they want cut from the federal budget.

Sure enough, Fischer's website declares "Our first priority must be to cut federal spending."  However, she doesn't offer a single example of what she'd actually like to cut.  You might hope for those answers from the 5-point Plan To Reduce the Size and Scope of the Federal Government she released last month.  But - there - Fischer only cites $30 billion in supposedly duplicative programs after promising to blow-up the federal deficit by repealing health care reform (Obamacare) and again endangering the U.S. economy by repealing Wall Street reform (Dodd-Frank).

It also appears that Fischer wants spending on national security protected while "everything else should be on the table."  But, how exactly would Fischer propose we cut $1.3 trillion in federal spending without touching national security?  Does that mean eliminating every dime of discretionary spending outside the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security?  Oh wait, that would still leave us more than $700 billion short of $1.3 trillion.  To follow through on her pledge to Norquist, that only leaves Fischer the option of breaking America's commitment to our senior citizens and families in need through draconian cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment, and our social safety net.  So, let's hear it, Deb.  What do you propose?

If this weren't ridiculous enough for you, it gets worse.  While staring at all this deficit and debt, Fischer continues to suggest more tax cuts - both on her website and in the Lincoln Journal-Star.  The math just doesn't add up, speaking to the candidate's shameless pandering and outright deception.

Interestingly, 1st Distict Congressman Jeff Fortenberry made a key endorsement of Fischer in the week leading up to her primary victory.  He also made headlines last year when he declared he no longer considered Norquist's pledge binding.  A Lincoln Journal-Star editorial immediately defended Fortenberry. A few weeks later, an Omaha World-Herald editorial did the same, writing:

Difficult problems can require innovative solutions. Locking a candidate into an inflexible position takes healthy debate out of the democratic equation. It restricts an officeholder's ability to adapt to changing circumstances. Is negotiation even possible if both sides are pledged to support only one position?....

There is one pledge that matters. It's the one candidates make to the voters in their state, their district, their community. Not to a special-interest group.

At this point, Deb Fischer has absolutely zero credibility on balancing the budget and reducing the national debt.  Thankfully, Nebraska voters will have a more responsible and more honest choice on the November ballot.

In his primary victory speech, Democratic Senate nominee Bob Kerrey stated, "Everyone who looks at the facts knows that it's going to take budget cuts and it's going to take revenue increases to solve the problem."  When reporter Joe Jordan subsequently pressed him on the political dangers of being open to raising taxes, Kerrey explained that his first focus would be on getting spending down and asking how much can we cut.  But, he then continued:

"If you lock yourself in to no tax increases under no circumstances, you're not part of the solution.  You're part of the problem."

A whole lot more will be said in the coming months, but the fundamentals of this race aren't going to change.  Deb Fischer is part of the problem.  Bob Kerrey is part of the solution.  I trust Nebraska voters will choose to be part of the solution as well.

Johanns Votes To End Medicare As We Know It - Again

by: Ronaldo

Thu May 17, 2012 at 19:22:16 PM CDT

We've discussed the Ryan plan here in the past on numerous occasions so there isn't any reason to revisit all of the details.  In a nutshell, it ends Medicare's guaranteed benefit, takes health care coverage from millions of Americans, brings back pre-existing conditions clauses and cuts taxes for corporations and the wealthy.  In other words, the Ryan plan cuts Medicare, Medicaid and other programs that benefit seniors, the middle class and the poor to finance tax cuts for the wealthy.  

The Ryan plan isn't a bona fide deficit reduction program - it doesn't even balance the budget until 2040.   Instead, the Ryan plan is more of a blueprint for the implementation of the Republican party's radical and regressive agenda of slashing the safety net and redistributing money upwards.

Once again, Johanns stood with the wealthy and corporations and ignored the best interests of his constituents.  On the other hand, Nelson continued to stand with the people who elected him as opposed to the special interests. Nelson - unlike Johanns - represents our values.  Nelson continues to prioritize Main Street values over Wall Street values.

One of the more interesting aspects of the Senate campaign will be whether or not Deb Fischer endorses the Ryan plan.  Thus far, Fischer has avoided endorsing the Ryan plan and claimed several months ago that she hadn't read it yet.  I say it's time for Fischer to read the Ryan plan and tell us where she stands.  She needs to get off the fence and commit herself.  The voters of Nebraska need to know whether she stands for us or for the corporations.

Nebraska Senate GOP Primary: The Special Interests Win

by: Ronaldo

Wed May 16, 2012 at 19:52:45 PM CDT

In my opinion, the biggest factor in the race was the spending of outside Super PACs.  The Club For Growth and Senator Jim Demint's (R-SC) PAC - in an effort to elect Stenberg - dropped $2 million of negative advertising on Bruning.  The coup de grace was the $300,000 in negative ads financed by Joe Ricketts over the weekend before the election that blasted Bruning's exploitation of his public service for vast financial gain.  Those ads seemed to crystallize the doubts that many Republican voters had about Bruning.

What we have now is a Republican Senate nominee that was made possible by the U.S. Supreme Court's controversial ruling in Citizens United that opened up the door to unlimited and secret spending by outside groups in political campaigns.  Senator Ben Nelson said it best: "There's no question that special interest money won that election."  Bob Kerrey said he wants to know what happens when Fischer hears from Joe Ricketts.  "When he calls on her, what's he going to get," asked Kerrey.  "What does (Rickett's) want, lower taxes? Probably.  Does he want less regulation? Probably."  

This massive intervention by the special interests make Fischer's victory a bit of a fluke.  During most of the campaign, Fischer had the lowest name recognition among the three leading Republican candidates, the smallest amount of campaign money and she campaigned the least because she was tied down in Lincoln for more than three months during the 2012 legislative session.  Fischer mainly won because outside money destroyed the frontrunner, not because of any particular thing she did or said during her campaign.

Fischer's upset of Bruning probably marks the end of Bruning's political career.  Bruning was a politician who had never been in a tough race in his life.  Due to his charmed political career, Bruning had faced little scrutiny or accountability until the 2012 campaign.  Bruning took advantage of that lack of scrutiny by exploiting his public service to make himself a very, very wealthy man.  Somehow Bruning was able to amass a net worth in the tens of millions of dollars on a government salary of $95,000.00 per year.  Ultimately, it was Bruning's greed and exploitation of his public service that brought him down.  Bruning's now tarnished reputation makes him politically radioactive and makes it very unlikely he can ever run for higher office again.  Bruning's downfall is one of the most significant outcomes of this campaign.  

What lies ahead in the general election?  The Nebraska U.S. Senate race will be one of the marquee races in the country.  What happens here in Nebraska could very well determine which party will control the Senate.  

On the Republican side, we have a nominee who has served eight years in the Nebraska Legislature.  Fischer's biggest "accomplishments" were raising the gas tax and diverting money from education to earmark for roads.  The GOP nominee is also a bitter partisan.  She has promised to draw a sharp contrast with Kerrey and failed to identify one Democratic Senator she could work with if she is elected.  

On the other hand, Bob Kerrey is a genuine war hero who has served his country with distinction in the Navy SEALs, as Governor of Nebraska, in the U.S. Senate and on the 9/11 Commission.  Kerrey has a record of accomplishment and reaching across party lines to get things done.  As Kerrey said today: "I will not be a reliable vote for my caucus. I will be a reliable vote for Nebraskans.  Now the voters of Nebraska face a simple choice - partisanship or leadership."

In my opinion, most Nebraska voters are practical people - not partisans - who want to see our great country move ahead and make progress.  In the end, a majority of Nebraskans will choose Bob Kerrey because he has the best chance to help our country solve its problems.  

Douglas County Voters, Share Your Experience

by: Darwin

Tue May 15, 2012 at 19:08:08 PM CDT

The new location, of course, was a bit further away than the old one.  My old polling place was just about four blocks away and I used to walk there.  The new location is more than a mile away and the best walking route is along a major city street with lots of truck traffic.  Driving isn't much better.  The old location was no more than three blocks off of major streets to the North, South, and West, with multiple side streets off of each to take you there.  The new location can only be accessed from the North and the South and the two streets from the North both wind through an industrial area.  Still, getting to the new polling place was not a major inconvenience.

Once I got to the polling location, I pulled up to the front of the building near the sidewalk with the "Polling Place" banner.  I walked up to the front door and it was locked.  I looked around a bit and found a small sign on the next building with an arrow that led to a small alleyway between buildings.  The polling place was at the back of the building adjacent to the parking lot.  It would have been nice if there were signs directing vehicles to the parking lot.  I don't know if a wheelchair could have made it through that alley.

The first thing I noticed about the  polling place was that it was much smaller than the old one.  The old location was a large room with a bank of carrels and three or four rows of four tables.  The new location had a bank of carrels and two tables in the corner.  There was one person at each table, so there was no room for privacy.  There weren't many people there so I voted at one of the carrels.  I cannot imagine the general election being held there.

Overall, I'd have to rate the new location as inadequate.

So, Douglas County voters, how would you rate your polling place?

Are Palin, Fortenberry & The Ricketts' Fortune Enough To Push Fischer Past Bruning?

by: Kyle Michaelis

Sat May 12, 2012 at 09:35:04 AM CDT

We've all seen for months as outside groups have kept Don Stenberg's campaign alive, touting him as if he's some sort of national hero while tearing down Jon Bruning at the same time.  That effort may have been successful chipping away at Bruning's support, but it doesn't seem to have boosted Stenberg's chances (which is sad because it would have been great to see him try that "patriot" nonsense against Bob Kerrey).  Instead, it appears the window of opportunity may have opened for Deb Fischer, and she's making a hard push to capitalize in the closing week of the campaign.

Last weekend, word began trickling out of a poll by the Fischer campaign showing their candidate less than 5 points down to Bruning, 25.6% - 29.8%, with Stenberg having fallen to third at 18% and 24% remaining undecided.  Then, on Wednesday, Fischer produced a letter from Sarah Palin endorsing her campaign.  The next day, 1st District Republican Congressman Jeff Fortenberry put up an online video endorsing her as well.  

Then, just last night, word hit the street of Joe Ricketts (Pete's dad) making a major ad buy for unknown purposes.  That had to cause a bit of panic for the Bruning campaign - rightfully so as the fruits of Ricketts' fortune have hit the airwaves, pointing a big finger explicitly stating "FOR CHARACTER, ANYONE BUT BRUNING":

I still think it most likely that a much damaged and tarnished Bruning emerges from this primary.  He's the candidate with an actual campaign, and the vote against him is simply split in too (i.e. "two") many ways.  But, we'll know soon enough.  Stay tuned!

Nebraska Republicans Support Corporate Tax Evasion

by: Ronaldo

Tue May 08, 2012 at 20:37:47 PM CDT

Under a territorial tax system, the offshore profits of a U.S. corporation would be exempt from U.S. taxes. The Ryan plan's territorial tax would encourage companies to shift all of their intellectual property out of the U.S. so that even if they actually earn profits in the U.S.,  they then can magically send those profits to some off shore tax have like the Cayman Islands. So even if they are making things here in the U.S., they`ll be able to move profits out of the country by moving their intellectual property out of the country.  In other words, the Ryan plan would allow U.S. corporations to disguise U.S. profits as foreign profits. The IRS would then never see a dime of U.S. corporate profits and corporations would pay the low corporate rates they pay in notorious foreign tax havens like Switzerland and Luxembourg.  

Tax experts also say that the Ryan plan's territorial tax would give corporations a greater incentive to shift actual operations - and American jobs - to other countries.  

The losers in the Ryan plan's territorial tax are the workers, farmers and senior citizens of Nebraska.  Nebraskans would end up paying for this outrageous and unnecessary corporate welfare in the way of larger deficits and the cuts the Ryan plan makes in Medicare and programs that help the poor.  It's obvious that the Ryan plan radically redistributes income upwards.

Why in the world did the Nebraska Congressional delegation vote in favor of this free lunch for U.S. corporations which are making record profits?  Why does Bruning support this ridiculous give away?  Did these guys even read the bill?  Or is this corporate tax give away something they genuinely believe in?  It's time for the voters and the press to ask them about this vote and to get some answers.

It's obvious that once again, the likes of Bruning, Johanns, Fortenberry, Terry and Smith don't represent Nebraska values.  We all here believe in people paying their fair share of taxes, a secure retirement for seniors and a safety net for the less fortunate in our society.  It's clear that these radical Republicans either have rejected the values of the people who sent them to Washington or they negligently failed to read and understand the Ryan plan.  It's time for new leadership in Washington.  Let's send these guys home and replace them with Kerrey, Ewing, Howard and Reiman - who will truly represent us and our values in Washington.  

The 2009 Stimulus Bill Was A Success

by: Ronaldo

Sun May 06, 2012 at 20:58:50 PM CDT

According to a recent study by Fitch Ratings, the recession might still be going on in the absence of the the TARP bill, the $831-billion stimulus package passed by the Congress in 2009 and the Federal Reserve's near-zero interest rates.

The boost from those policies helped the nation's gross domestic product increase 3% in 2010 and 1.7% last year.  As a matter of fact, absent the stimulus, the U.S. "might still be mired in a recession," according to this study, done in conjunction with Oxford Economics.

The U.S. economy would have seen little or no growth the last two years without the policies, the report says, and those actions appear "to have significantly softened the severity of the decline" in GDP in the year immediately after the recession ended in mid-2009.

Though the Fed's monetary policy actions were helpful, the 2009 stimulus bill "had the strongest positive impact on consumption during the recent recovery," the study found. This conclusion by Fitch Ratings corroborates  findings in February by the Congressional Budget Office and a 2010 study by former McCain economic adviser Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder about the positive economic effects of the $831-billion stimulus package, officially called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Proof of the success of the stimulus bill can be found closer to home here in Nebraska.  In 2009 and 2010, Governor Dave Heineman balanced the State's budget with hundreds of millions of dollars in stimulus funds.  This federal money prevented the layoff of Nebraska state employees and even more severe program cuts. The federal stimulus money tided Nebraska over until the economy began to improve in 2011-12.  Despite that success, Heineman hypocritically claimed that he was opposed to the 2009 stimulus bill.  However, the fact remains that Heineman took the stimulus money and ran - making the State's balanced budget the centerpiece of his 2010 re-election campaign.  I would say to Governor Dave that actions speaker louder than words.

In other states, Republican members of Congress said the stimulus didn't create any jobs and termed it a failure.  Nevertheless, many of those same Republicans sought stimulus money behind the scenes and said that it would create permanent jobs in their district. For example, Right Wing firebrand Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) quietly sent at least six letters to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood urging stimulus funding for transportation projects in her district. In one of them, in support of $300 million in spending for the $700 milliion replacement-bridge project crossing the St. Croix River, Bachmann cited a MnDOT estimate that the project would create nearly 3,000 jobs. In others, she noted that the projects would have economic benefits beyond just the projects in question, spurring development and private sector hiring in the communities  surrounding the proposed stimulus projects.

If one of your Republican friends tells you that the 2009 stimulus bill was a "failure," please cite the examples here of the hypocrisy of Heineman and Bachmann. The actions of these Republicans who took the stimulus money and ran is strong evidence that the 2009 stimulus bill was actually a success.

On the issue of the 2009 stimulus bill, we can once again thank Senator Ben Nelson for supporting this vital legislation.  At the time of the vote on the stimulus bill, there were 58 Democratic Senators.  The Democrats didn't have a 60 vote filibuster proof majority.  That means that every vote counted.  It is evident that Senator Nelson recognized the gravity of the economic crisis and made the wise decision to support legislation ended the recession and has benefited the economy to this very day.  Ben Nelson's vote in favor of the 2009 stimulus bill will be an important part of his positive legacy as our U.S. Senator.  

Obama Campaign Features Eugene From Omaha As Super Volunteer

by: Kyle Michaelis

Sat May 05, 2012 at 03:34:01 AM CDT

We should all take heart from Eugene's explaining why he's worked so hard and will keep on working as long as he is able:

My name is Eugene Browning. I was in the U.S. Army for seven years, and was a paratrooper during the Korean War. I'm 84 years old, and I'm dedicating the rest of my life to Democratic causes like President Obama's campaign here in Omaha.

During Barack Obama's first campaign, I made telephone calls six days a week. This time around, I haven't been able to make as many phone calls, but I've been writing all kinds of letters to the editor.

The state of Nebraska is very conservative, which can be frustrating. Currently the worst thing I'm seeing is their attitude about women's rights-I just can't stand still for that. So I'm doing everything I can to support the candidate who is working to help average people like me-the one who knows that health care should never be something only the wealthiest Americans can afford, and people who are out there working hard should get paid a fair wage.

I recently helped out at a rally by passing out an information sheet about President Obama's top 50 accomplishments-there are so many. He's done so much that he doesn't have time to stop and publicize it; that's where we come in. I love getting the word out about health care reform, student loan reform, and tightening the rules on Wall Street and the financial industry. During the recession, he helped states keep teachers, firefighters, and police officers on the job, and helped repair sidewalks and roads all over the country. I'm always happy when I can get out there and explain the situation to people.

That's where you'll find me for the next six months: making more phone calls, doing whatever needs to be done. I just hope everybody stays on the same page and doesn't relax. We need to keep our heads down from here to November, because we can't afford to lose all of the progress we've made.

Eugene's doing his part.  Are you?