Below is a cartoon from today's issue of Roll Call that is particularly appropriate given President Obama's recent release of his budget and other current events.

For the last few days here at the Greeneyeshade Blog, I have highlighted the atrocities of the Obama budget, and the enormous amount of debt, deficit, spending, and taxes that will result. But, you should feel comforted that the Democratic leadership of this Congress has the situation well in hand…note my heavy sarcasm.

Assuming House Democrats proceed with yet another vote to increase the debt limit, it will have been seven weeks since they last voted to increase the debt limit by $290 billion. In that time frame, House Democrats have:

-  Passed 7 resolutions congratulating sports figures or teams
-  Passed 23 resolutions honoring individuals or entities or promoting awareness of certain issues
-  Passed 5 bills naming post offices 
-  Authorized $50 million in spending to construct a new National Park in the Virgin Islands
-  Passed 0 bills to reduce spending or lower the deficit. 

Fit to Lead? I’ll let you be the judge.

In previous posts, some of you indicated in the comments section about the solutions that I support.  Throughout the course of the year I try to provide a glimpse at substantive solutions I support, here on the Greeneyeshade Blog. 

Last week at the Republican retreat in Baltimore, Maryland, House Minority Leader John Boehner offered a booklet of Republican solutions to the President when he came to speak during our retreat.  Everyone ought to have a chance to a take a look at these, so you can find them here:   http://www.gop.gov/solutions

Additionally, under the leadership of Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI), I have worked on and support, the Patient’s Choice Act .  This proposal is a bill designed at helping to improve our healthcare system without an intrusive and unnecessary government takeover.

You should also take a minute to look at another proposal I support, which is considerably broader and encompasses health care security, retirement security, federal tax reform, job training, and budget process reform.  This initiative is called the Roadmap to America’s Future, and you can read more about using the link I have provided.

As I mentioned yesterday, the President’s budget will increase spending, increase taxes, increase the deficit, and increase the debt; all in spite of the fiery rhetoric of President Obama’s State of the Union speech, which called for a decrease in each of the above areas.

Here is some information based on a top line analysis:

Debt: The President’s Budget doubles the debt in 5 years and triples it by FY 2019, from FY2008 levels.  It aims to push the debt to $9.3 trillion this year, or 63.6% of gross domestic product (GDP).  This would be the largest debt in history, and the largest debt as a share of our economy in 59 years. 

You may remember Congress passed a debt limit increase just prior to the holidays, but under this budget, that debt limit will again have to be increased before October 1, 2011.  The interest alone on this debt will reach $840 billion in 2020.

Deficits: This budget boosts the deficit to a record level this year, to $1.6 trillion or 10.6% of GDP.  To put this in context, this is the largest deficit as a share of the economy since the Second World War.

Taxes: By the White House’s own estimates, the budget increases taxes by more than $2 trillion over 10 years – this of course excludes the impact on revenue of the costly Cap-and –Trade proposals (which amounts to $834 billion by CBO’s estimate of the House version, in case you were wondering). 

Contrary to previous statements made by President Obama, he is indeed attempting to increase taxes on those earning less than $250,000 including the new cap-and-trade taxes, and a tax on those who do not purchase health insurance.

This morning, President Obama unveiled his Budget proposal for fiscal year 2011.  There is no doubt that the Democrats of the House and Senate Budget Committees will have their own budgetary ideas, to say nothing of Republicans who agree with virtually nothing of the flat out unsustainablity of this President’s budgetary visualizations.

But there are 4 things that this budget will do quite well:  It increases spending, it increases your taxes, it increases the debt, and it increases the deficit.

I will have more on this throughout the week, which will include analysis and numbers, so put your thinking caps on.

This morning, following the President’s State of the Union speech last evening, Americans for Tax Reform sent out a ‘Fact Check’ document this morning.  I have highlighted two examples here:

MYTH:    “We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families…we haven’t raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person.  Not a single dime.”

FACT:    It’s mathematically impossible to cut taxes for 95 percent of working families.  According to the IRS, fully one-third of all tax returns owed no income tax last year.  Nearly 20 percent of returns had neither an income nor a payroll tax liability.  These people cannot see their taxes cut any further.  Anything given to them is pure spending.

Obama, Pelosi, and Reid may not have raised income taxes last year, but they surely tried to.  Last year’s administration budget submission had dozens of tax hikes.  The health care legislation they are still pushing has 18 separate tax hikes.  All told, ATR has calculated that President Obama proposed or supported $2.1 trillion in tax hikes in 2009.  And let’s not forget that he signed into law a $65 billion tax hike on cigarette smokers 16 days into his administration.  The median income of a smoker is $36,000.

MYTH:    “To encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it's time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs in the United States of America.”

FACT:    Obama is no doubt referring to his tax hikes from last year’s budget.  ATR has compiled a series of one-pagers detailing his $210 billion in proposed tax hikes on American companies who have overseas income.  How raising taxes on American companies will incent them to remain in the United States is a mystery. 

The reason these tax breaks are in place is to avoid double taxation of international corporate income.  To take away these tax breaks is to tell an American company that they will potentially have to pay taxes twice on the same income.

Information courtesy of Americans for Tax Reform

A lot is going in DC right now and a lot has gone on since I sent you my first missive of the year yesterday. Here is a quick rundown of my thoughts on a few of the goings and comings.

Because of their singular obsession with government-run health care, the Democrats punted a bunch of issues on deadline to the end of February. However, this new deadline is fast approaching. Among the issues that should have been taken up last year yet still remain unresolved include: new permanent death tax exemptions and rates; a 21% cut in the rates doctors are paid by Medicare; a proposed increase in the national debt limit of $1.6 trillion to cover the enormous deficits for one year; reauthorizations of the Department of Transportation and the FAA; and a host of other issues.

Tonight, the President apparently will call for a freeze in non-defense so-called discretionary spending. That is about 15% of the total federal budget. It also was increased by $140 billion last year. So he is freezing spending after he increased it by 25% in one year. It’s a little like the guy who robs your house and then returns your toaster-oven and expects you to be happy about it.  Interestingly, Democrats on the Appropriations committee are already criticizing the President’s freeze as “too tough.” This says that at least some Congressional Democrats still do not understand how severe our fiscal problems are, and that they no longer feel compelled to support their President on all of his policies. The honeymoon ended rather quickly.

There have been a number of recent stories exposing the complete folly of the so-called "stimulus" plan and the number of jobs claimed to have been "created or saved" by this rapacious spending undertaken by the Obama Administration.  Take for instance, the 935 jobs at the Southwest Georgia Community Action Council, the administration it claimed to have 'saved', even though they really only employ 508 people.   Or how about the 129 jobs that were said to have been 'created' at a childcare center in Florida when the money was actually used for employee raises, and not new jobs.

Using these methods, in Obama speak, today I created or saved 3,000 calories towards my diet. Clearly, I could have eaten 300 more calories if I tried, but I "saved" those calories due to my stimulus plan. At this rate, I could lose 100,000 calories while still gaining weight! Now, that is Obamanomics.

Well, many have already become expert 'Obamanomists.' I asked some of my constituents in Orange County, CA for their experiences using 'Obamanomics,' and I recieved many good responses, but the one below is by far my favorite.  I am interested in hearing your best example of 'Obamanomics.'

Dear John:

Using Obamamath, I've just saved, nay, created a great deal of money. How? I had wanted to buy a new Lamborghini Gallardo roadster so that I could drive to the White House to personally thank our beloved President for all that he is doing to save us from financial ruin. The trip, via New Orleans in order to view the results of former President Bush's failure to forestall Hurricane Katrina, would have been an approximately 6,000-mile roundtrip.

I didn't buy the Lamborghini, as it wasn't manufactured by Government Motors. I not only saved (created) some $243,000 (including tax) by not making this purchase, but I saved (created) an additional $1,500 by not purchasing fuel for the trip.

Since both the Gallardo and its fuel would have been imported, I'm sure that the Governmental Accountability Office would classify these as "green" savings.

Thus by not buying a Lamborghini Gallardo, and not driving it to visit our President, I will have created a total of $244,500 in Green Savings. Not bad for an amateur!

But think for a moment: If each of the approximately 4 million families who live in Barack Obama's Illinois and Joe Biden's Delaware were to NOT buy a new Lamborghini, and NOT drive to the White House (via New Orleans), we would create an additional $1 trillion in new Green Wealth. Now that's Obamawealth with a vengeance!

 Add Congressman Campbell on Facebook!

For you avid 'Greeneyeshade' readers, I would like to invite you to follow me on Facebook.  There you will be able to follow all of my work in Washington and in California.  I frequently post floor speeches, my Laptop Reports, press releases, photos, and articles on Facebook which provides some insight on the latest developments in Washington.

I hope you join me on Facebook!

Death Tax: Last week, the House passed a permanent extension of the Death Tax, setting the tax rate on any estates over $3.5 million at 45%, not indexed for inflation. The vote was 225-200 with ZERO Republicans voting in favor and 26 Democrats voting to oppose. The Senate is talking about a much preferable 35% on estates over $5 million, indexed for inflation. I favor complete repeal of the tax, although the Senate proposal would be a step in the right direction. Here is a clip of my 2 minute floor speech on why I oppose this bill and this tax.

You may or may not know why this blog is titled the Greeneyeshade Blog.   I am a CPA by training, a self-professed bean-counter.  I also sit on 3 of Committees available to Members of the House that hold jurisdiction over areas of federal economic policy, budgeting, and economic analysis.  I feel it is particularly instructive that we take a look at some history…because after all, the numbers don’t lie.

- In February 2009, Democrats enacted a debt increase, with the premise and promise that by borrowing another trillion dollars would create jobs for more Americans and that it would happen immediately, thereby thwarting the unemployment rate from rising above 8%...we are now at 10.2%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, this is a 26 year high.

- Since taking control of Congress in January of 2007, Democrats have presided over a 39% increase in the nation’s debt from $8.670 trillion to $12.039 trillion.

- According to the President’s budget, the national debt will soar from $9.961 trillion at the start of 2009 to more than $24.4 trillion in 2019…that’s an increase of 144%.

“It is important though to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession.”

—President Barack Obama, November 18, 2009

Recently, the White House indicated that it has plans to raise the national debt limit as part of a larger upcoming piece of legislation.  What this means is that the United States Government has run out of its statutory borrowing authority…just like the credit card you have in your wallet or purse…there is a limit on what one can spend.

This is the second time in 2009 that the debt limit has been increased. 

Here is a brief situation report of our economy right now:

• - The national debt has increased to $12.039 trillion or 85 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
• - The debt limit was raised from $11.315 trillion to $12.104 when Speaker Pelosi and President Obama passed their ‘non-stimulating’ stimulus bill, nine months ago.
• - The government is now roughly $70 billion away from reaching the current limit.
• - The White House is now seeking a debt limit increase of at least $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion—increasing the limit to anywhere from $13.1 trillion to $13.6 trillion.

I will have more on this and a historical glimpse in the past tomorrow.

There are some extra congressional districts in California receiving stimulus dollars…the trouble is, they don’t exist.

Recovery.gov, the web portal designed by the administration to provide transparency and information on where and how the President’s stimulus dollars were being spent lists 9 congressional districts in California that don’t exist, yet they apparently have received $5,740,757 in stimulus dollars, creating 24.2 jobs, which equates to about $237,221 per job.  This odd reporting isn’t limited to California either; ABC News has reported that instances of the same problems are popping up all over the country.

When asked about the problem, Ed Pound, director of communications for recovery.gov said "We're not certifying the accuracy of the information.”  Asked why recipients would pluck random numbers - 26, 45, 14 - to fill in for their congressional district, Pound replied, "who knows, man, who really knows. There are 130,000 reports out there.''

I don’t know about you, but I don’t see how the White House can allocate over $1 million in stimulus dollars to California’s 00 District, nor how you can claim to create jobs in a district that doesn’t exist…but if the White House can’t keep track of $787 billion, how are they going to track the $1.6 trillion for health care?!

Two weeks ago, the Department of Labor released their latest unemployment numbers which put the current unemployment level at 10.2%.  You may remember, in a recent blog, I mentioned that there was more behind the 10.2% figure than one would hope and that the actual number is closer to 17.5% because the calculation does not account those individuals who have given up on finding work or those who are underemployed, such as individuals working part time but looking for full-time work.

According to a review by the Wall Street Journal there are a number of inconsistencies in the way the number of jobs ‘saved or created’ are calculated by the White House in regards to its Stimulus package. 

Take these examples for instance:

“A Kentucky shoe-store owner claimed to have created or saved nine jobs with an $889.60 contract to supply work boots to the Army Corps of Engineers. The owner said he supplied nine pairs of boots and that the mistake arose from confusion over the government form.”

“As many as 86% of the jobs estimated by recipients of Head Start grants could have been inaccurately reported, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. The department said 277 of the 1,601 reports it had received were being reviewed after being contacted by the Journal. Those reports claimed 7,753 jobs created or saved out of a total of 8,997 reported.

"Holy moly, that's not right," Teresa Cox, executive director of the Mid-Willamette Valley Community Action Agency in Salem, Ore., said of her organization's report. It indicated that 205 jobs were created or saved with the agency's $397,761 federal grant. The money, she said, was used for pay raises.”

“Stetson University in DeLand, Fla., counted every part-time work-study position funded by the stimulus, and, in some cases, more than one work-study position held by the same student. That led to the university reporting that it had created or saved 483 jobs with a $193,469 grant for its work-study program. University spokeswoman Cindi Brownfield said the campus has since realized that the actual jobs number should have been written as the full-time equivalent of the jobs -- probably between 18 and 30.”

Last week I highlighted a story from Politico that indicated a shift in strategy by the Obama administration in 2010, to focus on the economy and jobs.

I along with many of my colleagues have been arguing since January that you absolutely cannot tackle any other domestic issues without the benefit of a strong economy and a pervasive jobs market.  Right now, we have neither.  Yet the Obama Administration has insisted on pursuing initiatives that are detrimental to jobs and job growth.

The main domestic focus for any President at a time like this should be…jobs, jobs, jobs.

Don’t take my word for it, here is a comparison chart produced by the Heritage Foundation based on White House estimates and reality…