Here’s some news that federal bureaucrats in Washington — and indeed around the country — don’t want to hear: According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report released this week, federal workers are paid higher than their private-sector counterparts.
The “alarming news” hit the national media yesterday, but there’s a funny thing about the report. None of it is really “news” — in fact, The Heritage Foundation long ago uncovered the truth about federal pay. The CBO’s report this week was spurred in part by two years of workonfederalcompensation conducted by Heritage and the American Enterprise Institute.
In July 2010, Heritage’s James Sherk explained that Americans are overtaxed to pay the civil service. Salaries and benefits–for identical jobs–are 30 percent to 40 percent higher in the federal government than in the private sector. And in June 2011, Heritage’s Jason Richwine authored a study showing that workers who change jobs receive a substantially larger raise when they switch into federal employment rather than into another private job. In fact, Sherk testified before Congress on this very subject in March 2011, bringing the fact of the pay disparities to the House’s attention:
The federal pay system unnecessarily inflates federal pay. My research shows that, on average, federal employees earn hourly wages 22 percent higher than otherwise comparable private-sector workers. Numerous studies by researchers whose personal views span the political spectrum come to similar conclusions.
Federal employees also receive premium benefits. They receive both a defined-benefit and defined-contribution pension plan, can retire with full benefits at 56, and receive significantly more paid leave than their private-sector counterparts. Accounting for the value of these benefits raises the federal compensation premium to between 30 percent and 40 percent above similar private-sector workers. All told, the federal compensation premium will cost taxpayers $47 billion this year.
Their analysis drew significant and at times vicious criticism. Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry described their work as “a misinformation campaign.” The public-sector employee unions weighed in, of course, with the National Federation of Federal Employees calling our work “lies;” the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers labeling it “scapegoating;” and Colleen Kelley of the National Treasury Employees Union smearing the work as “self-serving, self-created data.” Their attempt to deny reality and attack the messenger isn’t surprising. After all, those unions exist to inflate the wages of those they represent, and the taxpayers are the ones left footing the bill.
But the unions weren’t the only ones on the attack. The liberal ThinkProgress blog asserted that Heritage’s work was “riddled with errors” and that the “claims are baseless.” Meanwhile, Economic Policy Institute President Lawrence Mishel said that the idea that federal workers are overpaid is “a conservative myth.”
Despite the criticism from the left, Heritage continued making its argument, explaining its methodology, and carrying the message that, based on the research, federal workers are in fact overpaid and that action is warranted. Specifically, Congress should implement a pay-for-performance system, expand the contracting of federal work to private companies, reduce the generosity of federal benefits, and end the near-absolute job security for underperforming federal workers. Now it’s time for the critics on the left to recognize this truth and get on board with reality.
Cato Institute scholars Malou Innocent, Chris Edwards, Neal McCluskey, Ilya Shapiro, Jerry Taylor, Dan Mitchell and Dan Ikenson respond to President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union Address.
Tina‘s biological daughter turned 8 this week, but she has not seen the girl since Dec. 22, 2008, because of a custody fight with her former lesbian partner. The partner is unrelated to the child, but gave birth to her.
“I thought I’d have her back on her birthday,” said Tina, a law enforcement officer, whose name was never on the birth certificate and who has been denied parenting rights under Florida state law.
For 11 years, the Brevard County couple forged a committed relationship, living together, sharing their finances and raising a daughter. Tina’s egg was fertilized with donor sperm and implanted in her partner’s womb.
But when their romance fell apart when the child was 2, the Florida courts had to decide, who is the legal parent, the biological mother or the birth mother who carried the unrelated child for nine months in her womb?
A trial court summarily sided with Tina’s ex-partner, citing Florida statute. “The judge said, ‘It breaks my heart, but this is the law,’” according to the birth mother’s lawyer, Robert J. Wheelock of Orlando.
But on Dec. 23, a state appeals court rejected the law as antiquated and recognized both women as legal parents.
Citing the case as “unique,” the 5th District Court of Appeal ruled that both the U.S. and Florida constitutions trump Florida’s law, according to the Orlando Sentinel, which first reported the story.
“I am elated and I am thankful,” said Tina, now 41. “I am hoping things will run smoothly from this [point] forward, but it may not be the case. She is appealing and trying to keep me away from my daughter.”
Court papers identify both women only by their initials. ABCNews.com is withholding Tina’s last name to protect her privacy.
Wheeler has asked for a stay of Tina’s rights and said the case will surely go to the Florida Supreme Court and, he hopes, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“I made a decision to have a child and raise her, not so someone else could keep her away from me,” said Tina. “I want to see her grow and be a part of her life. The longer time passes the more I am missing out.”
Wheelock would give no personal details about the birth mother, including where she is living with the child. He said she could not be available to talk to ABCNews.com on “such short notice.”
The case, he said, is an important one.
“Anything to do with gay rights is a big deal,” said Wheelock. “It will probably raise the level of conversation significantly for the next few years.”
But he said the case, which has lingered for two years, will take time. “Nothing is that quick or easy,” he said.
“The real person who is being affected is the kid, who has had a very stable life for a long time and now it’s thrown in the mix here, a pawn in some grander scheme,” said Wheelock. “There is a human side to this.”
The plight of both women and their young daughter highlights the murky laws that surround same-sex families, particularly in states like Florida that do not recognize gay marriage. The state only legalized second-parent adoption last year, too late for Tina.
“I was told to see a counselor and I should have gone to a lawyer to get surrogacy paperwork so that didn’t give her all the rights when she shares no biology with her,” she said.
Milk might do a body good, but if it’s unpasteurized milk sold by an Amish farmer across state lines, it’s a whole other story… or at least according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Washington Times reports:
A yearlong sting operation, including aliases, a 5 a.m. surprise inspection and surreptitious purchases from an Amish farm in Pennsylvania, culminated in the federal government announcing this week that it has gone to court to stop Rainbow Acres Farm from selling its contraband to willing customers in the Washington area.
The product in question: unpasteurized milk.
It’s a battle that’s been going on behind the scenes for years, with natural foods advocates arguing that raw milk, as it’s also known, is healthier than the pasteurized product, while the Food and Drug Administration says raw milk can carry harmful bacteria such as salmonella, E. coli and listeria.
And so, let the nanny state regulation begin. Well, actually, let it continue. We’re seeing an awful lot of it these days, especially when it comes to food. Take vending machines, for example. Heritage’s Diane Katz writes:
To temper the snack food cravings we are supposedly incapable of controlling, Congress is forcing vendors to post the calorie counts of vending machine items. Thus, we’ll supposedly pick the healthier brand of potato chips, cookies, candy, and soft drinks.
Expect to see more of it. Last year, President Barack Obama signed the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, which grants the FDA a host of new powers. Katz explains:
The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act would authorize the FDA to dictate how farmers grow fruits and vegetables, including rules governing soil, water, hygiene, packing, temperatures, and even what animals may roam which fields and when. It would also increase inspections of food “facilities” and tax them to do so. And, fulfilling the dream of a long line of agency officials, the bill grants the FDA unilateral authority to order recalls.
On top of being costly ($1.4 billion in new spending between 2011 and 2015), the necessity of new regulatory powers is questionable. The motivating force behind FDA regulations — and the reason for the crackdown on Rainbow Acre Farms — is a concern over food-borne illness. Katz says that incidents of such illnesses “have actually been declining for more than a decade, in spite of higher consumption of the raw foods that are most often associated with outbreaks of food-borne illness.”
Report: Presidents of 3 Largest Unions Make Between $400,000–$500,000 Per Year…
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, scores of union leaders make well into the six-figure range all funded by members’ dues.
As the standoff between unions and Wisconsin Republicans wages on, an analysis of the nation’s 10 largest labor unions shows some top leaders — who are being derided as “union bosses” — make six-figure salaries funded by members’ dues.
Leaders earned between $173,000 and $618,000 at major unions, the Center for Public Integrity found in examining 2009 tax records, with some groups paying dozens of employees in the six figures. At the three major unions , which together represent more than 5.6 million public workers, presidents’ salaries in 2009 ranged between $400,000 and $500,000.
Gerald McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, was paid $479,328 in salary and benefits in 2009. He was one of 10 employees of the 1.5 million-member union who made more than $200,000 that year.
At the 3.2 million-member National Education Association, President Dennis Van Roekel made $397,721 in salary and benefits in 2009. Thirty other officers and employees of the nation’s largest teachers’ union made more than $200,000 that year. Public school teachers, by comparison, were paid a national average of $54,319 in 2009.
The American Federation of Teachers, a smaller teachers’ union, paid President Randi Weingarten $428,384 in salary and benefits. Eight others at the 887,000-member union, which also represents college faculty and school support staff, earned more than $200,000 in 2009.
Republicans have worked to separate union members from the leaders of their organizations, arguing that the “union bosses” who represent public workers aren’t looking after the best interests of their members. Salaries that are far larger for union leaders than for their members don’t convey the image that their leaders are on the side of workers, GOP lawmakers say.
“When they say it’s about worker rights, it’s really about big union bosses running their own political dynasties,” Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said last week. Union political action committees and employees spent $400 million in support of President Barack Obama’s campaign in 2008 and another $280 million supporting Democratic candidates in 2010.
Last month, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said that while his state’s unions “think I’m attacking them,” he’s not. “I’m attacking the leadership of the unions because they’re greedy; they’re selfish.”
The Republican National Committee began airing a TV advertisement in Wisconsin on Wednesday that blasts “Obama and the union bosses” for “standing in the way of economic reform.”
The Muslim Brotherhood, which was founded in 1928 by Egyptian schoolteacher, Hassan al-Banna, is inciting rebellion against the Mubarak regime in Cairo. The Brotherhood’s goal is to inflict Islam on the world. Its motto is: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”
On Thursday, February 10, 2011, Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper claimed in testimony on Capitol Hill that the Muslim Brotherhood is largely secular, has “eschewed violence” and doesn’t need to be speculated upon.
“The term ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam,” Clapper said. “They have pursued social ends, a betterment of the political order in Egypt, etc…In other countries, there are also chapters or franchises of the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is no overarching agenda, particularly in pursuit of violence, at least internationally.”
Let’s review. Do these words sound largely secular? “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” Nope. No mosque-state separation there.
The Brotherhood has not only described itself as an Islamist group, but is committed to implementing Sharia law. Its progeny is Egyptian Islamic Jihad which was responsible for the murder of Anwar Sadat in 1981 and later joined forces with al Qaeda. And let’s not forget their bloody offshoot, Hamas, the terrorist group that lobs scud missiles into Israel.
Jamie Smith, director of the office of public affairs for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence later in the day said in a statement to ABC News: “To clarify Director Clapper’s point—in Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood makes efforts to work through a political system that has been, under Mubarak’s rule, one that is largely secular in its orientation—he is well aware that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a secular organization.”
Ambassador Dore Gold, a world renowned expert on Middle Eastern affairs, offers this instructive background: “The current Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Muhammad Badi’, gave a sermon in September 2010 stating that Muslims today ‘need to understand that the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death, just as the enemies pursue life.’ In short, the Muslim Brotherhood remains committed to supporting militant activities in order to advance its political aims. From looking at the biographies of its most prominent graduates, one can immediately understand the organization’s long-term commitment to jihadism.”
If Egypt falls to the Muslim Brotherhood, it will embolden other fanatical revolutions throughout the region and the world. As surely as day turns to night, they will come after Europe which is almost gone and America, which still has time to save itself.
1 comment - What do you think? Posted by
Jody Morales -
02/11/2011 at 8:13 PM
My name is Betsy. I’m a wife and proud soccer mom, a writer, and a small business owner. I’m also a killer.
On the morning of January 8, 2011, I intentionally entered a gathering held by Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and shot her at near-point-blank range. I injured fourteen others, killing six — among them a beautiful, curious, doe-eyed, nine-year-old girl. I didn’t actually pull the trigger, but I’m as guilty as the psychopath who did.
Here are just a few of the charges against me:
I am a conservative.
On occasion, I listen to Beck, Limbaugh, and Fox News.
I’ve been known to pick up a book or two by conservative authors: Thomas Sowell, Andrew McCarthy, or the Founding Fathers, for example!
I believe that the federal government is too large, far too intrusive, and dangerously powerful.
I believe in personal responsibility and the amazing generosity of Americans to aid those in need rather than permanent entitlements.
I believe that the private, not the public, sector is the backbone of our economy.
I believe that our progressive tax system is punitive. We are over-taxed, over-regulated, and over-lectured.
I believe in the power of the free market to correct itself, without government (taxpayer) intervention.
I believe that the Constitution is intended to limit government and empower the individual.
I believe in holding our elected officials’ feet to the fire, be they Republican or Democrat (incendiary pun intended).
I believe that our sovereignty is at risk via unsecured borders, out-of-control spending, our crippling deficit, reckless abuses of the Constitution, and the moral decay of Washington.
In short, I’m a madman. Guilty as charged, and armed with the belief in my 1st-Amendment right to peaceably question those we elect to serve.
The only person who actually pulled the trigger on that terrible, fateful day was Jared Loughner — by every account, a deeply troubled young man. But the real guilty walk among us: senior citizens in red, white, and blue, armed with signs saying “Taxed Enough Already”; flag-wavers clinging to guns and religion; doctors; the wealthy; business owners; talk radio; and any citizen — particularly a conservative — who dares exercise his or her right to free speech.
We’re called greedy, stupid, and racist. We’re ridiculed with snide “slurpee” innuendos and called lewd and malicious names, such as “teabaggers.” Ordinary citizens are maligned by their own government while the pious, liberal elite get a free pass on reason and truth, while Islamists invoke their religious cloak, while the ideologue professes his moral superiority, while the media uses the power of spin, and while leftists, including Robert Gibbs and Barack Obama, employ their bully pulpit.
We defend conservatism by our very way of life: as self-reliant, taxpaying, moral citizens, and as faithful defenders of limited government and the power of the individual. We are violent inciters only insomuch as we threaten the current leftist, agenda-driven stranglehold on government. So alarming is our threat that the real inciters wasted no time in politicizing the tragic deaths of six innocent citizens, not to mention one revered congresswoman still fighting for her life. And they will waste no time in shamelessly exploiting a “crisis” at the hand of a lone psychopath to further enact gun control and squelch freedom of speech under cries of “civility.”
Does the left really believe that the “rhetoric” of Palin, Beck, Limbaugh, and Fox is incendiary? Do they fail to understand that the language of conservative “talk” is the echo of ordinary citizens calling for limited government and individual freedoms? Or do they silence us because we know our current leaders don’t actually believe in their own limited power? Truth be told, even Jared Loughner undermines their agenda. And they know it. They know that their “transformation” of America is failing and that people like me are not afraid to say so.
My name is Betsy, and I’m a killer. They are determined to stop me before I kill again.
When I saw this video I laughed so hard. Of course it’s all in the name of comedy. I would never want to see something like this happen in real life. But, I can’t help but wonder if, at some point in her life, she was hit on the head with something! I mean, I have never in my life seen a more dishonest, ignorant, delusional person in Congress! There are many that come close, but none that was third in line to the Presidency.
She’s lied so many times, I don’t know where to begin. Lets start with the fact that she claims that in her four years as Speaker, the libs never added a dollar to the deficit, even though not a dollar gets spent without congressional approval, and the debt has gone up $5.2 trillion since Pelosi was elected Speaker and the libs took control of the House. And now that she’s out of power she warning us all that we had better be concerned about GOP deficit spending now that we’re in control of the purse strings. Give me a break…please!!
The biggest lie of all came during her farewell press conference as Speaker yesterday: “Deficit reduction has been a high priority for us. It is our mantra, pay-as-you-go.”
What?! Are you kidding me? The Botox has paralyzed parts of her brain into outright revisionism. She has been, in my opinion, the most catastrophic failure of a Speaker in recent American history. Her successor now faces the incredibly difficult task of repairing the damage she’s done.
After babbling on longer than any outgoing House Speaker in recent memory and talking about all the crap and bull that Democrats jammed down America’s throats over the last four years, Nancy Pelosi proved yet again what a low class pile of you know what she really is.
Despite the media’s continual use of the statement, “The Constitution guarantees the separation of church and state.”, it should be understood, by all Americans, that the U.S. Constitution makes no such statement. There is only one fragment of a sentence in the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights that addresses religion, it reads; “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…” These are the only words the U.S. Constitution offers on the topic of religion.
As far as I know, Congress is not engaged in making a law establishing a state religion, therefore there is no Constitutional issue. The intent of the Founding Fathers is clear, the State should not mandate a particular religion, nor should it prohibit “the free exercise thereof;”.
This idea that God be forced from the public square at the point of a legal sword is progressive judicial activism, and nothing more.
Further, it is obvious that the Founding Fathers had no intention of prohibiting prayer or religious displays in public or Governmental places. Also, it should be noted that the use of the word God in Government oaths, affirmations or pledges was common during the framing of the Constitution. Clearly, this is yet another instance of “Judicial Whimsy” based on personal values and goals, not on the Constitution.
Furthermore, I note that the 9th and 10th Amendments leave issues, not addressed by the Constitution, to the discretion of the States and the individual citizens of the United States.
The Constitution is written in plain English. It’s not a long document and it can be easily understood by just about anyone. A little historical perspective helps, but it was written by men who wanted it understood by and to protect the common people. Why then do, “we the people”, allow the Federal Courts and The Supreme Court to continually interpret it based on their individual ideals and political agenda? The members of these courts swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, not to distort it. It is our acquiescence in this that I find so saddening.
The Constitution is what defines the character of our nation. It puts a face on the land and imbues rights and values to the people. It defines the role of Government and sets limits on its power. The Constitution and, in particular, The Bill of Rights set us apart from other nations. It espouses ideals shared by all peoples, but sadly, often denied to them. It is the moral strength and legal compass of our country and whenever it is subverted, for any purpose and by whatever authority, it weakens the collective character and scars the face of our nation.
1 comment - What do you think? Posted by
Jody Morales -
12/10/2010 at 7:02 PM
