Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute in Stanford, California, posted an article at Front Page Magazine today about the current Congressional debate over extending the current tax rates before they expire on January 1.

He comments, “The fact that this decision has been left until late in the eleventh hour, even though the expiration date has been known for years, tells us a lot about the utter irresponsibility of Congress.”

The discussion has been that we need to extend unemployment benefits rather than cut tax rates for the wealthy.  There are some problems with this statement.  Extending unemployment not only does not stimulate the economy, it slows down the process of laid-off workers finding jobs.  Statistics show that unemployed people are most likely to return to work within two weeks of the time their unemployment insurance runs out.  That is a basic statement about human nature–it’s not rocket science.  Cutting tax rates for the wealthy is not what is happening here–the actual issue is whether or not taxes will be raised on the wealthy on January 1.  No one’s taxes are being cut–the question is whether or not to raise taxes on certain Americans.  The Democrats argue that the ‘rich’ don’t need tax cuts, but the unemployed need more benefits.  The Democrats argue that extending unemployment insurance will stimulate the economy and that continuing the current tax rates will not.

Mr. Sowell concludes:

“What does that record say? It says, loud and clear, that cuts in tax rates do not mean cuts in tax revenues. In all four of these administrations, of both parties, so-called “tax cuts for the rich” led to increased tax revenues– with people earning high incomes paying not only a larger sum total of tax revenues, but even a higher proportion of all tax revenues.

“Most important of all, these tax rate reductions spurred economic activity, which we definitely need today.

“These are the facts. But facts do not “speak for themselves.” In terms of facts, the Republicans have the stronger case. But that doesn’t matter, unless they make the case, which they show little sign of doing.”

I hope someone begins making an effective case for keeping the current tax rates soon–the rates expire at the end of the month.

The Colorado Independent reported yesterday that recently-reelected Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet was caught on C-SPAN by an open microphone saying, “It’s all rigged. The whole conversation is rigged. The fact that we don’t get to a discussion before the break about what we’re going to do in the lame duck. It’s just rigged.”  

Evidently that kind of honesty is not intended to be heard by the American people. 

The article further reports:

“Republicans have been bolstered in their opposition by their midterm election victories and seem determined to put off all voting until the new Congress begins next year. Today Democrats face an uphill battle trying to pass an overdue unemployment insurance extension for millions of Americans, and conservative Democratic Senators like Ben Nelson are already voicing strong opposition to Democratic priority bills like the DREAM Act, which would grant citizenship based on certain military service and education achievements to illegal immigrant young people brought here by their parents and raised in the U.S.”

I have a question.  The Democrats have controlled Congress since 2006.  They have had total control of Congress and the Presidency since 2008.  Why couldn’t any of these issues have been settled before now?  We have known since 2001 that the current tax rates would expire on January 1–why is this being discussed now instead of last year or earlier this year?  The answer is very simple.  The Democrats have never had the votes to pass any of the things they are in such a rush to do now.  They still do not have the votes, and they will have even fewer votes after January.

The way I see it, the role of the Republicans currently in Congress is to limit the amount of damage the Democrats can do before they have to leave office.  There is a reason that the Democrats were voted out of office.  If they continue to attempt to pass unpopular legislation during a lame-duck session, they can expect to continue to be voted out of office.

The Washington Post is reporting today that the Obama Administration will announce Wednesday afternoon that they will not allow offshore oil drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico or off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts as part of the next five-year drilling plan, 

This move reverses the announcement made in March by the Obama Administraiton that they would open up the eastern Gulf and parts of the Atlantic to offshore oil and gas exploration.

This is not good news for America.  It pushes us further away from energy independence.  Also, as Wikileaks shows that the Saudis are funding terrorism, the banning of offshore drilling makes us more dependent on the Saudis for oil and forces us to give them more money to fund terrorism. 

This ban is also a danger to our national security.  If we cannot supply our own fuel for our military vehicles and airplanes, how in the world will we defend ourselves if we are called upon to do so at home?

We need a new President with a new Department of the Interior.  Hopefully, we will get both in 2012.

The best thing about the new Congress that will be seated in January is that they will be able to stop some of the laws President Obama is attempting to put into effect without the benefit of legislation.  One of these laws concerns the ability of the government to control the internet.

Today Big Government posted an article by Phil Kerpin about the “network neutrality” regulation.  The article reports that the Federal Communications Commission announced its agenda last night at midnight for their December 21 meeting–the FCC is going to regulate the Internet! 

According to the article:

“Network neutrality (also known by the even more lovely sounding marketing term “open Internet”) is an outgrowth of the larger so-called media reform project of radical left-wing activists like Robert McChesney, the socialist founder of the misnamed group Free Press, which has enormous influence on the FCC, where its former communications director, Jen Howard, is FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s press secretary.

“McChesney explained where net neutrality leads to SocialistProject.ca: 

“You will never ever, in any circumstance, win any struggle at any time. That being said, we have a long way to go. At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies. We are not at that point yet. But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.”

The idea here is to have the government control the internet.  Keep in mind that the internet is probably the most powerful outlet for alternative news sources.  The aim of the Obama Administration is to control the news. 

The article concludes:

“Congress should act immediately next year to overturn the FCC’s network neutrality regulations with a joint resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, which the new Republican majority can pass in the House and which can then be forced onto the Senate floor with 30-senator petition.  It cannot be filibustered and would need just 51 votes to pass.

“Obama could veto it, but to do so he would have to take full personal responsibility for ending the most remarkable driver of economic growth, innovation, and free expression we have in this country: the free-market, unregulated Internet.

“Congress must show the White House that the strategy of pushing hard left inside the executive branch won’t stand.  Congress must do what the American people asked for in this election: stop Obama’s big government agenda.”

Government control of the internet (and thus control of the news) is the end of our democracy.  Hopefully the Republicans in Congress will have the courage to end this move quickly.