Major Stakeholders in Health Reform Debate Call for Improvements in Scoring of Congressional Health Care Proposals

/PRNewswire / -- More than 100 members of the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) - an organization representing some of the nation's biggest voices in health care - today called on leaders in Congress to encourage updates in the manner in which the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) produces estimates for the cost of legislative proposals in health care. Specifically, they called out limitations in the current methods that, once corrected, would more accurately recognize the value of health care efforts aimed at attacking a significant driver of health care costs: the unchecked growth in common and costly chronic diseases, and related problems such as obesity.

In a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the 150 partners and affiliated organizations that signed the letter ask that, "As our nation considers comprehensive health reform proposals, we hope that you will encourage the Congressional Budget Office to address barriers to recognizing the economic value of prevention and chronic disease management."

The group outlined several recommendations for updating the manner in which CBO scores health care proposals including:

-- A revision of "baseline" cost estimates to take in to account the
deteriorating health status of the population and the estimated impact
of this trend on spending in the years ahead
-- The ability to score savings beyond the commonly-accepted 10-year
scoring window in order to sufficiently capture the long-term value of
population health improvement programs
-- An estimate of the broader economic impact a policy change to promote
population health will have on productivity, and ultimately, the
economy


In particular, the group said that it wants to encourage the CBO to find ways to incorporate the benefits of targeted interventions with proven success, as identified in the growing body of research on this issue, and estimate what the impact of these changes could be over the short and long-term.

Chronic diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease, are responsible for seven out of 10 deaths and affect more than 130 million Americans. The annual economic impact on the U.S. of the seven most common chronic diseases is estimated to be $1.3 trillion, which could balloon to nearly $6 trillion by 2050.

Full text of the letter to Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid follows.

About the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease:

The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) is a national and state-based coalition of patients, providers, community organizations, business and labor groups, and health policy experts committed to raising awareness of the number one cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs in the U.S.: chronic disease. For more information about the PFCD and its partner organizations, please visit: www.fightchronicdisease.org.

April 21, 2009

Dear Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid:


As members of the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD), we thank you for your leadership in Congress and support of President Obama in making health care reform a priority in 2009.

When it comes to the health of the American people, our nation currently faces a crisis. Despite all the resources being spent on health care in the United States, many Americans struggle with their health. Millions suffer from common and costly chronic health conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, and obesity. The rapid growth in these problems has caused individual health costs to soar, undercut U.S. competitiveness and burdened the public health insurance infrastructure.

Spending on patients with one or more chronic diseases now represents more than 75 percent of total spending on health care in the U.S., and even more in public programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Until we address the true causes of this crisis, we will never be able to slow spending or make health care more affordable. Nor we will have a workforce - or an economy - that can perform to its fullest potential.

The PFCD, a national and state-based coalition of hundreds of patient, provider, community, business and labor groups, is committed to raising awareness about this issue, while also providing commonsense, bipartisan solutions to help solve the problem. We believe that investing in prevention and disease management will save lives and money now and well into the future. Recognition of the opportunity to achieve the long-term benefits of investment in these areas would provide a positive framework for health policy decisions.

As our nation considers comprehensive health reform proposals, we hope that you will encourage the Congressional Budget Office to address barriers to recognizing the economic value of prevention and chronic disease management. There are three key points that lead to insufficient recognition of the opportunities offered by investments in prevention and disease management:

-- The current government scoring windows cannot sufficiently capture the
long-term value of population health improvement programs aimed at
wellness and prevention.
-- Health care expenditure estimates depend critically on the assumptions
made in the baseline, including projected changes in the current
health status of the population and the estimated impact of health
status trends. Currently, these assumptions are not transparent.
-- CBO scoring does not currently include analysis of the broader
economic impact a policy change will have through changes in
population health and productivity. Estimates of this societal cost
impact would be of great value to legislators.


Such a holistic and comprehensive approach to reform is the only way that we will truly help improve Americans' health, spend our limited health resources more wisely, and boost our economy.

Thank you, in advance, for your support.

Sincerely,

The undersigned Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease national and state partners and other concerned organizations (see full list below)

National partners and other concerned organizations:

AdvaMed (Advanced Medical Technology Association)
Alliance for Aging Research
Alzheimer's Foundation
American Academy of Nurse Practitioners
American Academy of Nursing
American College of Physicians
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Dietetic Association
American Osteopathic Association
American Pharmacists Association
American Society of Health-System Pharmacists
Arthritis Foundation
Cleveland Clinic
Community Health Charities of America
The COSHAR Foundation
DMAA: the Care Continuum Alliance
Easter Seals
Healthcare Leadership Council
Health Dialog
Healthways
Intercultural Cancer Caucus
IHRSA: International Health, Racquet & Sportsclub Association
Marshfield Clinic
Medical Fitness Association
Men's Health Network
Milken Institute
National Alliance for Caregiving
National Alliance on Mental Illness
National Association of Chronic Disease Directors
National Business Coalition on Health
National Changing Diabetes(R) Program
National Family Caregivers Association
National Health Foundation
National Latina Health Network
National Multiple Sclerosis Society
National Patient Advocate Foundation
Novo Nordisk
Park Nicollet Health Services
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America
Pharos Innovations Prevent Blindness America
SEIU
Self chec, Inc.
XLHealth
YMCA of the USA


State partners:

Arkansas
Arkansas Respiratory Health Association
Lupus Foundation of America, Arkansas Chapter

Colorado
Alliance of Health Disparities
Colorado Cross Disability Coalition
Colorado Gerontological Society
LiveWell
Lupus Foundation
Mission Medical Clinic
National Association of Hispanic Nurses
National Alliance on Mental Illness
Rocky Mountain Stroke Association
SEIU

Illinois
AFSCME Council 31
Arthritis Foundation of Greater Chicago
Community Health Charities Illinois
Mental Health Summit
Midwest Business Group on Health
Mount Prospect Chamber of Commerce
NAACP Lake County
Springfield YMCA
United Way of Lake County

Iowa
Arthritis Foundation
Community Health Charities of Iowa
Iowa Biotechnology Association

Maryland
Maryland Academy of Family Physicians

Minnesota
American Cancer Society of Minnesota
Arthritis Foundation, North Central Chapter
Minneapolis Urban League
Sabathani Community Center
United Cerebral Palsy of Minnesota

New Hampshire
Advanced Laser Therapy
AIDS Services for the Monadnock Region
Council for Children and Adolescents with Chronic Health Conditions
New Hampshire Association for Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine

New Jersey
Action Cystic Fibrosis
Carpenters Fund of New Jersey
HealthCare Institute of New Jersey
Juvenile Diabetes Awareness Council of New Jersey
Lung Cancer Circle of Hope
Mental Health Association in New Jersey
New Jersey Association of Mental Health Agencies
New Jersey Association of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons
New Jersey Hospital Association
Partners in Care
Steamfitters Local 475

North Carolina
Alliance of Disability Advocates
Arc of North Carolina
Autism Society of North Carolina
Children and Family Services Association of North Carolina
Easter Seals UCP North Carolina
National Alliance on Mental Illness-NC
National Association of Social Workers-NC
National Multiple Sclerosis Society, NC Chapters
North Carolina Mental Health Association
North Carolina Psychological Association

Ohio
The Academy of Medicine of Cleveland & Northeastern Ohio
Area Health Education Centers - Ohio
Statewide Program
Arthritis Foundation of Central Ohio
Chris Holland, Oregon City Schools, Ohio
CIGNA
Cleveland Clinic
Columbus Public Health
County Commissioners Association of Ohio
David C. Epstein M.D. MBA
Fairhill Partners
The Free Medical Clinic of Greater Cleveland
National Alliance on Mental Illness Ohio
Ohio Alliance of YMCAs
Ohio Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation & Dance
Ohio Association of Free Clinics
Ohio Association of School Nurses
Ohio Asthma Coalition
Ohio Dietetic Association
Ohio Nurses Association
Ohio Osteopathic Association
Ohio Public Health Association
Stark Prescription Assistance Network
Ohio State University Medical Center
Prevent Blindness Ohio
United Cerebral Palsy of Central Ohio
University of Toledo

South Carolina
Black Nurses Association of South Carolina
Chi Eta Phi, Delta Eta Chapter
South Carolina Diabetes Today Advisory Council
South Carolina Public Health Institute
United Way Association of South Carolina
YMCA of Greenville

Wisconsin
AIDS Resource Center of Wisconsin
Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce
Wisconsin Association of Health Underwriters
Wisconsin Dietetic Association
Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce


cc: Douglas Elmendorf, Director, Congressional Budget Office; Keith Fontenot, Associate Director for Health Programs, Office of Management and Budget; Bob Kocher, Special Assistant to the President for Health Care, National Economic Council; Nancy-Ann DeParle, Director, White House Office of Health Reform; Senate Health, Education, Labor, Pensions Committee; Senate Finance Committee; House Ways & Means Committee; House Energy & Commerce Committee; Kate Leone, Senior Health Counsel, Senator Reid's Office; Wendall Primus, Policy Advisor, Speaker Pelosi's Office

The Social Security Institute Launches Web Site, Inaugurates Campaign to Prevent Nationalization of Healthcare

/PRNewswire / -- Today, the Social Security Institute (SSI) launched its new Web Site in preparation for a full-scale effort to stop the raid on Social Security, cease the use of Social Security surpluses to bail out banks and insurance companies and prevent Congress and the Obama Administration from nationalizing healthcare and turning it over to the government to run. The site will offer a range of items of interest not only to seniors but to everyone, young and old, seeking to coalesce and affect public policy through citizen lobbying. The site offers a "Take Action" center, frequently updated Senior Alerts, complete interactive blogs, recent news articles and op-eds of particular interest to seniors, and a Senior Resource Center that helps direct senior citizens to an array of resources and interesting opportunities.

SSI president Dr. Lawrence A. Hunter described the Social Security Institute this way: "The Social Security Institute (SSI) is conceived in the proposition that seniority matters, not as a matter of right but as a matter of fact and experience. SSI believes dignity matters, security matters, prosperity matters and freedom matters to people of all ages but especially to senior citizens. SSI is dedicated to listening to America's seniors and speaking truth to power in Washington regardless of which political party holds power. SSI promotes conservative values and classically liberal ideals in its quest to advance the retirement security of today's seniors and the seniors of tomorrow. SSI seeks to be a Third Force in American Politics -- beyond liberal and conservative, beyond Republican and Democrat -- seniors allied for action."

Hunter also said, "SSI agrees with Thomas Jefferson that a little rebellion from time to time is a good thing. We hope to provide seniors a productive outlet for the rebel in them."

SSI's Mission Statement Reads: "The Social Security Institute (SSI) is a national, 501(c)(4) non-profit, non-partisan seniors' advocacy organization working to promote the retirement security of today's seniors and the seniors of tomorrow. SSI's top policy priorities are to stop the raid on the Social Security Trust Funds, prevent cuts to Social Security and Medicare benefits, and protect seniors from health care rationing and other limitations on their access to health care."

Pressure Grows for Accountability with Torture Memos' Release

/PRNewswire / -- Following the release yesterday of four key torture memos from the Bush administration and the concurrent statements by President Barack Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives who carried out interrogations of terrorism suspects will not be prosecuted, Amnesty International USA's (AIUSA) counterterrorism expert Tom Parker released the following statement:

"The continuing startling revelations about Bush administration detention and interrogation practices and the Obama administration's handling of them point unequivocally to the need for an independent investigation to expose the full scope of the practices and those involved.

"Attorney General Holder said yesterday that the Obama administration does not condone torture, but by refusing to investigate the coercive interrogation program used by the CIA that is precisely what the administration is doing.

"After 50 years of interviewing torture victims, Amnesty International has found that abuse, especially when sanctioned at the highest levels, inevitably escalates over time. If the now-public Bybee memo sets out such shocking scenarios, imagine what followed in practice.

"Americans will not know the truth until a comprehensive, independent investigation has been conducted.

"The Bush administration knew that what it wanted the CIA to do in the field was illegal, which is precisely why the administration, in essence, 'lawyered up' by calling in the Office of Legal Counsel. Jay Bybee, John Yoo and Steven Bradbury ignored decades of jurisprudence in drafting the now-infamous torture memos. This is not a 'good faith' misunderstanding or a difference of legal opinion; this was a calculated decision to torture prisoners in U.S. custody."

During President Obama's first 100 days, AIUSA activists have mobilized nationwide to press for an independent commission of inquiry into U.S. policies on detainee interrogation and treatment.

This week, more than 200 face-to-face meetings occurred with Members of Congress and AIUSA delegations. President Obama and the U.S. Senate have received more than 50,000 e-mails and letters and more than 700 people have hosted events in their communities -- all calling for accountability for abuse in the war on terror. On April 30 at 10 a.m., AIUSA and Witness Against Torture activists will make a last urgent call for action during Obama's first 100 days and march from the U.S. Capitol to the White House.

Americans United for Life Urges HHS to Retain Conscience Rule

/PRNewswire / -- Americans United for Life (AUL) today filed comments with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) supporting the retention of a December 2008 rule providing a much-needed enforcement mechanism for federal laws protecting healthcare freedom of conscience.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, AUL President & CEO stated, "Congress has a 36-year history of passing laws to protect healthcare freedom of conscience. This rule simply provides HHS and the Administration with the means to fulfill their sworn constitutional duty to properly enforce these laws."

On March 10, 2009, HHS announced its intention to rescind the rule enacted in the final months of the Bush Administration. The rule is opposed by pro-abortion groups, who included a demand for its repeal in a 55-page memorandum to the Obama Transition Team in December 2008--arguing it limits access to the full range of reproductive healthcare.

AUL Vice President of Legal Affairs Denise Burke remarked, "Comprehensive conscience protections and proper enforcement of existing federal laws will help ensure access to quality medical care for all Americans."

Burke continued, "While the majority of federal conscience laws are intended to protect those who decline to participate in abortions, some also protect those who choose to perform them. It is, therefore, incredibly short-sighted for abortion advocates to actively lobby against the enforcement of these protections."

The DREAM Act Illegal Alien Amnesty: A Bad Idea at the Worst Possible Time, Says FAIR

/PRNewswire/ -- Despite overwhelming opposition by the American public when it was first proposed in 2000, the House and the Senate have reintroduced a sweeping illegal alien amnesty bill known as the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act.

The legislation, introduced by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), is a broad amnesty measure disguised as an educational initiative that would allow millions of illegal aliens who meet a very loose definition of "student" to qualify for green cards. In addition, it provides in-state tuition benefits for illegal aliens that will displace legal residents competing for a fixed number of college admission slots and taxpayer subsidies.

The DREAM Act represents yet another attempt to enact an amnesty for illegal aliens, either in one comprehensive bill, or piecemeal. The DREAM Act would also place severe strains on state budgets and harm middle class families who are struggling to get their own kids through college.

Passage of the DREAM Act would:
-- Reward parents who violated immigration laws through their children,
and provide a powerful incentive for more illegal immigration.
-- Transfer seats and tuition subsidies to illegal aliens at a time when
state higher education budgets are being slashed, admissions
curtailed, and tuitions increased.
-- By broadly defining "student" it gives amnesty to large numbers of
illegal aliens who may be pursing any sort of education.

-- Accelerate chain migration and exponential population growth because
illegal aliens who are granted green cards will be able to petition
the Department of Homeland Security in the future to grant their
parents and relatives legal status too.


"Once again, Congress is ignoring the interests and concerns of hard-working, law-abiding Americans in order to reward illegal immigrants and pander to the illegal alien lobby," said Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). "Even as American families are struggling, and nearly every state is facing a budget crisis, Congress is prepared to mandate huge additional burdens in the form of a massive illegal alien amnesty."

"The American people have made it very clear that they reject amnesty for illegal aliens whether it's in one comprehensive bill, or piecemeal," Stein said. "The DREAM Act would not only allow millions of newly legalized illegal aliens to compete for their jobs, but allow them to compete for their own children's educational opportunities. With private university tuitions already out of reach for most middle class families, and tuitions at public universities rising three times faster than median family incomes, the DREAM Act would be more than a reward for illegal aliens. It would crush the hopes and dreams of countless American families trying to provide opportunities to their own children."

10,000 Join in Nationwide Protests at AIG and Major U.S. Banks Today

/PRNewswire/ -- More than 10,000 Americans will participate in demonstrations across the country throughout the day today at the offices of AIG, Bank of America, Citigroup, and other major banks to vent their anger over an era of corporate excess at the expense of broader prosperity that has crippled the U.S. economy.

"The bonus scandals at AIG and the big banks are the last straw," said SEIU President Andy Stern. "Americans have simply had it with an economy that keeps delivering for top executives while leaving working people falling behind.

"It's time now for Congress to step in and make sure that workers in America can have a chance for a voice at their companies, affordable health care, and a financial system that works for people, not lavish corporate lifestyles."

The first national action since the bailouts began is being sponsored by a range of organizations, including the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Change to Win, Rock the Vote, MoveOn.org, United Students Against Sweatshops, Coalition of Labor Union Women, Partnership for Working Families, Working Families Party, Brave New Films, Catholics United, and Jobs With Justice.

Demonstrations are planned at more than 100 locations in over 30 states, including:

Chicago: 3:30 p.m. CDT; Bank of America, 231 S. LaSalle, to AIG on Adams
Boston: Noon EDT; Bank of America, 100 Federal St. to AIG on High St.
Denver: Noon MDT; Wells Fargo, 1700 Lincoln St., to AIG, 1225 17th St.
Los Angeles: 4:45 p.m. PDT; AIG HQ, 1999 Ave of the Stars, Century City

New York: 4:00 p.m. EDT; Goldman Sachs, 85 Broad, to AIG, 70 Pine St., to Citi

Pittsburgh: 3:30 p.m. EDT; Spring Hill Suites, 223 Federal St.
Portland: 11:45 a.m. PDT; Salmon St. Fountain to Goldman Sachs
San Francisco: Noon PDT, Wells Fargo, 420 Montgomery, to AIG
Washington, DC: 12:30 p.m. EDT; AIG, 2020 K St. NW


The nationwide protests challenge Congress to take immediate steps to rebuild an economy that works for everyone by passing:

The Employee Free Choice Act so workers have the freedom to form unions for a voice to share in the economic progress they help create.

Affordable, quality health care for all where everyone, including big corporations, does their share and Americans no longer have to go without quality health care or face health costs that sink a family's budget.

Strong banking reform to make sure the financial services industry can never again bring our economy down by prioritizing huge profits and executive pay over responsible lending, or by preying on consumers, gambling with families' hard-earned money, and hiding their dealings.

For more information on actions happening across the country, please visit www.TakeBackTheEconomy.org.

With 2 million members in Canada, the United States and Puerto Rico, SEIU is the fastest-growing union in the Americas. Focused on uniting workers in healthcare, public services and property services, SEIU members are winning better wages, healthcare, and more secure jobs for our communities, while uniting their strength with their counterparts.

100,000 Americans Sign 'Freedom Not Fear' Petition While Congress Introduces Destructive 'Card Check' Bill

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- American Solutions announced today that more than 100,000 Americans have signed the "Freedom Not Fear" petition urging Congress to protect a worker's right to a secret ballot election when deciding whether to join a union. This comes on the day that the U.S. House and Senate introduced the so-called Employee Free Choice Act, or "Card Check," which would strip workers' of their private ballot rights.

The petition reads:

We, therefore, petition the U.S. Congress to ensure that every worker has the right to a secret ballot when deciding whether to organize a union, as well as the right to ratify the contract terms of their employment, rather than be forced to accept a contract through binding arbitration.

"Congress is stunningly out of touch with reality if they think the American people will support this destructive, job-killing bill. It is a deliberate attempt by big labor bosses to undermine one of our most fundamental first principles - the right to vote freely without coercion," said Saul Anuzis, Chairman of American Solutions' Save American Jobs Project. "These 100,000 Americans are the first of many more we will recruit on a state-by-state basis to bring constituent pressure to bear on their elected officials to defeat Card Check."

Introduction of the Card Check legislation comes at a particularly unstable economic time when we can't afford to lose more jobs. In fact, according to the new study by noted economist Dr. Anne Layne-Farrar, An Empirical Assessment of the Employee Free Choice Act: The Economic Implications, an increase of 1.5 million union members in year one would lead to the loss of 600,000 jobs by the following year.

"Small business owners are struggling to keep their doors open, and the last thing we need is more federally imposed work rules which will reduce competitiveness and kill more jobs," Anuzis said. "Instead of trying to pass this destructive bill, Congress should focus on positive solutions to create jobs and get our economy back on the right track."

To learn more about the "Freedom Not Fear" petition drive, visit www.AmericanSolutions.com/FreedomNotFear.

Agriculture Coalition Calls on Congress to Kill Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA)

/PRNewswire/ -- The newly minted Agriculture for a Democratic Workplace (ADW) is calling on Congress to join the more than 40-member agricultural coalition in opposing the Employee Free Choice Act.

We are opposed to the Employee Free Choice Act because it would strip American workers, including most workers in the agricultural industry, of the right to participate in federally supervised private ballot elections and replace it with a system where their choice of whether or not to join a union is no longer private, the coalition said in an open letter to Congress last week.

"This bill is bad policy. It is bad for employers and employees," said Western Growers President and CEO and ADW Co-Chair Tom Nassif. "It would have the opposite effect of economic stimulus. Card check is a job killer at a time when American businesses are struggling to keep their doors open and avoid further reductions of the workforce."

President Barack Obama has publicly supported the EFCA, but the ADW is hopeful Mr. Obama will recognize that this legislation would hurt the development of job growth in the U.S.

Barry Bedwell, president of the California Grape and Tree Fruit League and co-chair of the ADW, added, "With the binding arbitration tenant of the EFCA and the new costs that could be levied on employers, no wonder millions of employers and workers are rallying to fight it. This bill provides no means to stimulate our economy, hinders U.S. efforts to grow business, and will undoubtedly usher in more job losses."

American agriculture stands united in opposition to the EFCA and hopes the country's elected officials will stand with them.

"Congress should oppose legislation that takes rights away from American workers -- such as the right to cast a private vote on whether to certify a union or the right to vote on a union contract at all," said California Farm Bureau Federation President and ADW Co-Chair Doug Mosebar. "If our senators and members of Congress truly want to support America's work force, they will stand with farmers and agricultural business people and oppose the EFCA."

Last month, ADW, this new coalition of national, regional and local agricultural associations covering virtually every sector of the industry launched a campaign to oppose the EFCA. ADW unveiled its Web site (www.coalitionforagriculture.org) with information and tools for coalition members to fight the battle against the introduction and passage of the EFCA.

House Committee Vote Sets Congress on Course for Historic Regulation of Tobacco Products

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a statement by Matthew L. Myers, President, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids:

The House Energy and Commerce Committee today set Congress on a course to take truly historic action to reduce tobacco use by approving legislation granting the U.S. Food and Drug Administration authority over tobacco products. Today's 39-13 vote underscores the broad, bipartisan support for this legislation. Coming early in the new Congress, it sends a powerful signal that this year Congress will finally enact into law this long-overdue legislation to protect our children from tobacco addiction and save lives. Few actions would make a bigger difference for our nation's health than the regulation of tobacco products, the number one cause of preventable death in the United States.

We applaud House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Representative Todd Platts (R-PA) for their leadership in introducing this strong legislation and quickly moving it forward. Enactment of this legislation into law would represent a tremendous victory for America's health and a bipartisan achievement for the new Congress and President Obama, who co-sponsored the bill while a senator.

This legislation has strong, bipartisan support across the nation and in Congress. It has been endorsed by more than 950 public health, faith, medical and other organizations (see list at www.tobaccofreekids.org/reports/fda/organizations.pdf). A poll last year found that FDA regulation of tobacco products is supported by 70 percent of American voters (see details at www.tobaccofreekids.org/fdapoll/). It has been endorsed by scientific authorities including the Institute of Medicine and the President's Cancer Panel. The House of Representatives in July approved the legislation by an overwhelming vote of 326 to 102, and it had 60 Senate sponsors in the last Congress.

This legislation is urgently needed. Tobacco use kills more than 400,000 Americans and costs the nation $96 billion in health care bills each year. Every day, another 1,200 Americans die from tobacco use and another 1,000 children become new regular smokers. Yet tobacco products are virtually unregulated to protect public health. This lack of regulation allows tobacco companies to market their deadly and addictive products to children, deceive consumers about the harm their products cause, make changes to their products without disclosing them (such as manipulating nicotine levels in cigarettes) and resist any meaningful change to make their products less harmful.

This legislation would grant the FDA the authority and resources to effectively regulate the manufacturing, marketing and sale of tobacco products. Among other things, it would:

-- Restrict tobacco advertising and promotions, especially to children.
-- Stop illegal sales of tobacco products to children.
-- Require larger, more effective health warnings on tobacco packages and
advertising.
-- Ban misleading health claims such as "light" and "low-tar" and
strictly regulate all health claims about tobacco products to ensure
they are scientifically proven and do not discourage current tobacco
users from quitting or encourage new users to start.
-- Require tobacco companies to disclose the contents of tobacco
products, as well as changes in products and research about their
health effects.
-- Empower the FDA to require changes in tobacco products, such as the
removal or reduction of harmful ingredients or the reduction of
nicotine levels.


We urge both the House and the Senate to quickly enact this legislation into law and to resist all efforts to weaken it.

AAHSA Statement on Senate Special Committee on Aging Hearing, 'Health Reform in an Aging America'

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging (AAHSA) applauds the Senate Special Committee on Aging and its chair, Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), for focusing its hearing on how long-term services and support must be a part of health care reform this year. Long-term services and supports are the neglected grandparent of the healthcare crisis in America. The needs are great. The costs are high. Insurance coverage is nearly non-existent. This makes it simply unaffordable to care.

A consensus on the need for financing reform is emerging among many organizations that represent elders and people with disabilities. All agree that a program must promote consumer choice and personal responsibility while offering broad access. Recently, the Leadership Council of Aging Organizations (LCAO) and the Coordinating Council for Disabilities (CCD) jointly endorsed principles reflecting these beliefs. Together, the two coalitions represent more than 150 organizations of elders, people with disabilities and providers of health, housing and supportive services.

In the last two Congresses, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) introduced the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports, or CLASS Act. This legislation closely aligns with the principles endorsed by the LCAO and the CCD. We urge the inclusion of similar provisions in any health reform legislation this Congress considers.

Every family faces the potential costs of long-term services and supports, and every family needs a structure for personal planning with the protection of a public program as well. AAHSA and its members look forward to working with Congress and the Administration on a comprehensive and badly-needed reform of our entire health care system that will address long-term services and supports and make it affordable to care.

Rep. Boehner's Speech At CPAC

Boehner, House Republican Leaders Call for Federal Spending Freeze to Address Growing Budget Deficit

As Washington leaders gather for a White House summit on fiscal responsibility, House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and other House Republican leaders today wrote to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), calling for a federal spending freeze and urging Democratic congressional leaders to scrap a massive bill that contains the largest increase in non-entitlement spending since the Carter Administration. Congress should scrap the so-called “omnibus” bill, which has been kept hidden from public scrutiny by Democratic leaders, and instead pass clean legislation that holds the line on federal spending, Republican leaders said.

“President Obama has called for both parties to get serious about fiscal responsibility. With our budget deficit potentially reaching $3 trillion this year, Republicans stand ready to work with him, and we believe we should start right now,” Boehner said. “Democratic congressional leaders should abandon their plans to rush another giant spending increase through Congress without public scrutiny, and instead pass a clean bill that freezes spending at current levels. Republicans stand ready to work with our Democratic colleagues and the President to take this first step toward a new standard of fiscal discipline in Washington.”

“Weeks ago House Republicans asked Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer to put this giant spending bill online so the American people would have adequate time to review it. Unfortunately, they declined. And on Friday, it was revealed that the bill congressional Democrats have been withholding from public view contains the largest discretionary spending increase since the Carter Administration, at a time when the federal budget deficit is already ballooning to dangerous levels,” Boehner said. “Democratic congressional leaders are reportedly rushing this bill to a vote this week, just days after passing a trillion-dollar ‘stimulus’ spending bill that no Member of Congress had even read. This is not fiscal responsibility; it is fiscal negligence, paid for by our children and grandchildren. We must change course, and we must do it in a bipartisan manner.”

NOTE: The giant spending bill kept under wraps by Democratic leaders would fund the nine uncompleted Fiscal Year 2009 appropriations bills that the Democratic Congress did not send to the President last year. Many taxpayer advocates argue that instead of rolling the nine appropriations bills into one giant “omnibus” bill that increases federal spending on an array of programs and projects at a time of growing budget deficits, Congress should simply pass a resolution that holds government spending at current levels.

-----

Six Things You Should Know About the 'Stimulus'

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- As President Barack Obama signs into law the trillion dollar spending package promoted under the guise of economic "stimulus" and rushed through Congress by Friday, February 13th, Americans for Tax Reform has compiled a list of six things you should know about this package and the circumstances under which it passed:

1.) The House of Representatives has broken a commitment to posting the legislation online for no less than 48 hours before a vote.

Only a few hours after the U.S. House of Representatives passed a motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 1 mandating that the conference report be posted online in a searchable and downloadable form for no less than 48 hours before it may be voted on, negotiations began under the cover of night behind closed doors with no representatives of the Congressional minority present. Ultimately, the Democratic House leadership did not make the bill's language available until around 11:00 p.m. on Thursday, giving the public a mere 15 hours to scrutinize the bill (mostly overnight hours during which most Members of Congress were no doubt sleeping), of which only 5 hours were working hours. Congressional Record, page H1096.

2.) In signing this bill today, President Obama is violating his own transparency pledge.

Consider his campaign promise: "No more secrecy. ... when there's a bill that ends up on my desk as president, you, the American voter, will have five days to look online and find out what it is before I sign it, so that you know what your government's doing."(1) Manchester, New Hampshire, June 22, 2007 http://tinyurl.com/dl2wog (time: 20:20) Today, the bill will have been posted for only four days - not five.

3.) No Member of Congress voting for the bill confirmed prior to the vote that they had read the bill.

Americans for Tax Reform had asked all Members of Congress intending to vote for the conference report to sign and fax back/email to ATR the following form:

I, _____________________________, commit to the taxpayers of the (___________________ district of the) State of _______________________, that my vote in favor of the conference report on H.R. 1 will be an informed vote, because I will have read the full text of the bill and the conference report by the time I cast my vote.

All Members who voted for the package refused to make this commitment. http://atr.server278.com/even-one-democrat-read-bill-a2887

4.) No Member of Congress voting for the bill confirmed that they were not looking to personally benefit corruptly from the bill with their vote.

Americans for Tax Reform asked all Members of the U.S. House of Representatives who voted in favor of the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" and U.S. Senators planning to support the package to commit to their constituents in writing that they will not accept political contributions from any recipient of "stimulus" funds, nor will seek or accept employment with any recipient.

All Members who voted for the package refused to make this commitment. http://atr.server278.com/atr-challenge-pelosi-obama-reid-spending-a2858

5.) In signing the bill, President Obama also breaks his promise to enact net spending cuts

During a discussion about government spending in the second presidential debate on October 7, 2008, Obama said "So we're going to have to make some investments but we've also got to make spending cuts, and what I've proposed -- you'll hear Senator McCain say 'he's proposing a whole bunch of new spending' --but, actually, I'm cutting more than I'm spending. So that it will be a net spending cut."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM0Eri8VWiw

6.) The "Stimulus" package will undo much of the progress of the 1996 welfare reform.

The package contains language that would essentially abolish the accomplishments of the 1996 welfare reform which drastically reduced welfare rolls and child poverty. Further, it would add large amounts in new welfare spending over the next decade. http://tinyurl.com/dax6xf

Says ATR president Grover Norquist: "President Obama hasn't even been in office for a full month yet - but, aided by the Democratic majority in Congress, he has already managed to break a series of promises in an effort to burden taxpayers with a massive spending package that will do nothing to promote economic growth, but will permanently grow the size of government undo much of the progress made in the mid-1990s in the area of welfare reform. If this first month is a sign of what's to come, then taxpayers will be in for a rough ride."


(1) Conveniently, that pledge was later massaged to only extend to "non-emergency" bills, however even by that standard, the President has already twice violated that commitment with the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the S-CHIP reauthorization bill that contained a tax increase (and broke another one of his campaign promises not to raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000).

Economic Experts: Will the 2009 Stimulus Act Fizzle?

As a strangled credit market and record-breaking job cuts spur comparisons with the Great Depression of the 1930s, the Obama administration and Congress appear poised to agree on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, an $789 billion broad-based stimulus package designed to kick-start the economy.

But just as a predecessor initiative—the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) pumped money into banks by letting the U.S. Treasury buy equity stakes in financial institutions—appears to have done little to aid the larger economy, the latest taxpayer-funded program may stall out if it doesn’t pump more cash into businesses that can create jobs, say Emory University faculty and other experts.

Washington Tries to Thaw Credit Freeze

The big question, according to Charles F. Goetz, an adjunct professor of organization and management and a distinguished lecturer in entrepreneurship at Emory University's Goizueta Business School, is whether or not the new stimulus bill will truly thaw the capital freeze that is currently blocking business activity.

“Funding, not consumer spending, is the core issue for small businesses,” he says. “Right now lenders are hesitant to extend money to commercial borrowers even when they have a good track record, and in some cases are actually calling in loans that they have already funded.”

He acknowledges that a falloff in revenue is hurting small businesses and notes that the stimulus package could improve that, but says the bill will only fix a very small part of the problem.

“The freeze in funding is hurting small businesses much more than the shortfall in sales is hurting them,” Goetz says. “Without the necessary cash to grease the gears and keep the business going, companies have had no choice but to reduce costs. And that, unfortunately, results in a cutback on capital expenditures and a need to lay off workers. So cash, in the form of loans, is the mechanism that is most important, but the stimulus bill can do little to help in that regard."

So where will that help come from?

"It's going to have to come from the $350 billion still remaining in the TARP; or possibly even more from a future son-of-TARP,” Goetz says. “Whether the TARP is used for a Good Bank/Bad Bank strategy [similar to the Resolution Trust Corp. created after the Savings and Loan failures of the 1980s], or to put direct investment into troubled banks, the only vehicle that has any real chance of freeing up bank lending and truly helping small business is the TARP or some reincarnation of it.”

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner appeared to allude to a similar plan in his February 10 comments calling for a $500 billion, Public-Private Investment Fund “targeted to the legacy loans and assets that are now burdening many financial institutions.”

Meanwhile, says Goetz, “When consumers are worried about keeping their jobs, they spend less and save more, which results in lower sales for companies and exacerbates the whole cycle.”

Small businesses in particular are concerned that the stimulus package misses the boat. Small businesses are defined as companies with fewer than 10 employees, and they account for almost 80 percent of all U.S. companies, according to the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) lobbying group. Small businesses are credited with generating about 70 percent of all new jobs.

“By increasing the federally guaranteed portion of Small Business Administration (SBA) loans, and giving more power to the SBA to expedite loan approvals, we believe we can turn around the dramatic decline in SBA lending we have seen in recent months,” said Geithner.

But Goetz was not very impressed, since the package calls for only about $500 million for the Small Business Administration’s loan-guarantee programs, which he says "is a drop in the bucket" compared to the total drop-off in bank loans.

“Banks, particularly through the SBA guaranteed loan programs, have the potential to help both existing and new small businesses to expand and hire more employees,” he says.

In a February 6 message to the membership of NFIB, the organization’s chief executive officer Dan Danner asks, “Have you heard anything about what Congress is providing for small businesses in the current economic stimulus package being debated in Washington? Unfortunately, the answer is ‘No.’"

Did TARP Spring a Leak?

In fact, Goetz says, the remaining $350 billion in the federal TARP program could do a lot to spur business activity, if it is designed differently.

“Maybe TARP has not been used in the most effective way to date,” observes Goetz. “It was passed in a hurry, and apparently there were no direct requirements for banks to actually make more loans. Instead, many institutions have tightened lending standards and used the funds for things like purchasing other banks, instead of making more loans.”

Although the U.S. Treasury has invested about $350 billion into financial institutions under TARP, about 70 percent of U.S. banks reported they tightened standards on loans to small firms, according to the most recent Bank Lending Practices survey taken by the Federal Reserve Board.

“Perhaps the creation of a Good Bank/Bad Bank entity like the Resolution Trust Corp. (RTC) would have been a better use of the funds,” says Goetz, referring to a limited-life federal organization, created in the wake of the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s, which managed and resolved financial institutions placed under conservatorship or receivership from January 1, 1989, through August 9, 1992.

“If my memory is correct, the government actually made money on the RTC and put money back into the banking system that got individuals and business to start spending again,” he says. “And contrary to what most people think, this is actually a good time to start a new business and to expand if you already have a small business. This is because in a recession, competition often shrinks at a pace even faster than demand does.”

Competitors that grew “fat and happy” in an easier time are falling by the wayside as they are unable to adjust in a more difficult environment, Goetz says. “In addition, you can pick up some very good employees that you would not have been able to in a better market. And even if you're not interested in starting a new business, the difficult economic environment means you can often purchase a company that is up and running at a fraction of what it would have cost just six months earlier.”

Some Goizueta faculty members are even more disenchanted with the stimulus proposal.

“In my judgment, this is a very poorly designed package,” says Ray Hill, an adjunct professor of finance. “I believe that only a small portion of the huge debt we will incur will produce any stimulus within any reasonable time frame.”

First, he says, “A big part of the [proposed] package is temporary tax relief directed to individuals. Economic theory and repeated experience—including the tax rebates of the 2008 stimulus package under the Bush administration—tell us that consumers save or pay down debt most of any change in income they perceive to be temporary, including the so-called tax ‘refunds’ to people who don't pay taxes.”

Both versions of the stimulus packages call for billions of dollars to be spent on infrastructure and other “shovel ready” projects that are projected to create jobs. “Although spending on infrastructure is commendable, this spending will take time, even for so-called ‘shovel ready’ projects,” says Hill.

“I believe that the Congressional Budget Office's own projections forecast that most of these funds will be spent in 2010 or later,” he says. By then the economy may already be recovering and the spending will either be inflationary or will take resources from private sector investment.”

Hill also faults proposed investments in alternative energy, noting that “we already have a glut of solar panels so no one is going to start producing a lot more until whole projects are underway, which can take years. Of course, you hear venture capitalists supporting this part of the stimulus package, but that is pure self interest.”

The stimulus package being discussed by Congress may indeed help the economy in some ways, concedes Hill.

“It may provide funds to states and prompt them to maintain spending that would otherwise be cut,” he says. “But it may also have unintended consequences. I have in mind the extension and improvement in unemployment benefits.”

Extending benefits in the weak economy may be good policy, "but we have to recognize that the inevitable result will be a longer duration of high unemployment than would otherwise be the case,” Hill notes.

Some observers argue that permanent tax cuts will provide the most effective and immediate stimulus, Hill notes, adding that “I think experience shows that this probably is the case.”

Car Dealers Suffer as Sales Stall

Automobile dealers, which were hammered by high energy prices and the tight credit market, are one of the economic downturn’s latest casualties.

Based on falling sales, about 5,000 car dealers across the U.S., or nearly 25 percent of the estimated total, would have to close in 2009 to enable average sales per dealer to match 2007's results, according to a study released in January by the accounting firm Grant Thornton LLP.

At least one industry observer who attended a recent National Automobile Dealers Association convention is worried that the stimulus package won’t do much to help those at-risk dealers, many of which are family-owned businesses.

“Banks may be getting TARP financing, but they’re still skittish about providing floor financing [revolving loans that dealers use to finance their inventory],” says Richard Kotzen, a partner in the Dealership Services Group of Crowe Horwath LLP, a Florida-based CPA firm. “Further, some of the TARP money is being diverted to U.S. automobile manufacturers, which encourages them to build more cars and press dealers to take delivery and pay for even more units that may end up sitting on their lots.”

Kotzen says he believes the industry as a whole will eventually recover, but notes that so far, federal stimulus programs have not generated a “trickle down” effect.

“The ‘shovels in the dirt’ approach of the stimulus plan as it stands now will generate jobs down the road, but auto dealers and other retailers need money now,” he says. “Permanent tax relief for consumers and retailers might help. Tax rebates, the ability to depreciate assets faster, and the extension of loss carrybacks [offsetting prior-year profits with current year losses] to five years from the current two, could also help businesses to regain their footing.”

Increased SBA funding in the stimulus package could provide some rapid assistance to small businesses, says Andrea Hershatter, who teaches entrepreneurship and serves as associate dean and director of the BBA program at Goizueta.

“Typically, the propensity for risk taking goes down in a weak economy,” she says. “The typical rounds of early stage financing from friends and family and angel investors depends on excess capital. Reduced wealth means that these usual sources of early venture financing are unavailable to entrepreneurs. Additionally, in the current environment, many banks are not willing or able to provide loans or lines of credit, leaving very few options for entrepreneurs.”

Hershatter points out that the stimulus package must spur the economy on a wide scale basis in order to have a positive long-term impact for entrepreneurs. In the meantime, additional sources of credit for small businesses are needed to help them get off the ground, she adds.

But Hershatter cautions that federal assistance to new and fledgling businesses must employ the same criteria that the private sector would consider, funding only those businesses with the highest likelihood of success.

Additionally, it is crucial to consider the sectors most likely to thrive in the coming years, she says, noting that “funding that flows to businesses whose goals are consistent with the broader ambitions of the federal government have a higher probability of benefitting from the first wave of economic growth.”

The Obama administration “has committed itself to a number of segments, including improvements in healthcare, education and energy efficiency,” says Hershatter. “If economic stimulus funds help to set up or grow businesses that contribute to these agendas, there is good alignment. On the other hand, if the stimulus package simply provides a pool of funds that lend to businesses that are not viable in the long term, it could be a waste of taxpayer money.”

NADA Commends Congressional Leaders for Including Tax Relief for New Car Buyers in Stimulus Bill

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a statement by David Regan, Vice President of Legislative Affairs, National Automobile Dealers Association, in response to Congressional agreement on the Economic Stimulus Package:

"NADA is pleased that tax incentives on new-auto sales are included in the economic stimulus package. Allowing consumers to deduct sales and excise taxes paid on new vehicle purchases will help jump-start auto sales. While including interest deductibility on auto loans would have promoted even greater consumer interest in a new automobile, we applaud both House and Senate leadership -- and especially Senators Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) and Sam Brownback (R-Ks.) and Representatives Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) and Steve LaTourette (R-Ohio) -- for recognizing the importance of automotive retailing to the nation's economy. Anything that increases auto sales will also provide help for state and local budgets that rely on sales tax revenues, consumers, dealers and the auto industry. New-car dealers generate almost 20 percent of all retail sales in this country. Therefore, anything that can help get consumers back into dealership showrooms can also help stimulate an economic recovery."

BACKGROUND:

The Auto Ownership Tax Assistance bill, as introduced by Sen. Mikulski and Rep. Pascrell, would have allowed consumers to deduct auto loan interest as well as sales/excise taxes on new vehicles. The Senate passed the legislation, in its entirety, by a vote of 71-26. However, to reduce the costs of the overall package, the auto loan interest deduction provision was stripped out in House-Senate Conference negotiations.

To Stimulate Economy, Obama Should Revive Reagan-Era Initiative, Law Professor Says

The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA) offers a blueprint for fiscal stimulus that would be far more effective than the stimulus package currently before Congress, says Bill Brown, a visiting professor of the practice of law at Duke University.

“Simply pushing money into the economy via infrastructure projects, no matter how well intentioned, is not the answer,” says Brown who joined the Duke faculty after an extensive career on Wall Street at Goldman Sachs, AIG and, most recently, Morgan Stanley, where he was global co-head of listed derivatives.

At a time plagued by slow economic growth, high interest rates and high inflation, ERTA not only reduced tax rates, but established a powerful set of incentives to promote investment in income-producing “capital assets” -- plant, property, and equipment, according to Brown. It resuscitated the Kennedy-era investment tax credit (ITC), which gave business partial reimbursement for the purchase of every new income-producing asset they acquired. And it added to this subsidy by allowing all those assets to be depreciated extremely rapidly under the new Accelerated Cost Recovery System (ACRS).

“ERTA helped break us out of the economic quagmire of the 1970s,” Brown says. “Sure, it lowered tax rates for everybody, but its most important legacy was in getting this country investing in the economy again. The government essentially said to the private sector ‘you think of where our economy needs the money the most, and as long as you put your money there first, we will follow right behind you.’”

The effect was almost immediate, says Brown. “By 1983, the economy was going like gangbusters. And the best thing about it was that the private sector was allocating the money more efficiently than would have been possible had the government been directing the investments. This meant the money got to people who had no ability to lobby Washington to spend money on their businesses.

“President Obama and Congress should step back from the current spending bill and turn it into a stimulus bill. Identify the overriding strategic visions, invest in infrastructure for those visions and then bring back the ITC and ACRS deductions to get the private sector back in the game,” he says. “They could even provide two tiers of ITC and ACRS: one for old industry and a higher level for the most important parts of President Obama’s vision.”

NLPC Blasts Obama/Geithner Big Bank Bailout

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- According to Peter Flaherty, President of the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC):

"The trillion-dollar stimulus plan has not even passed Congress and the administration proposes to throw another trillion at Wall Street on top of the $750 billion already provided without a tangible benefit.

Buying toxic assets was supposed to be the purpose of the first TARP. After Henry Paulson and Timothy Geithner warned that our financial system would collapse if TARP were not passed, they spent the money on something else - bolstering the capital position of banks. Politically well-connected Citigroup has received $45 billion, more than the book value of the company, and it is still in trouble.

The burden is on President Obama and Timothy Geithner to explain why another Wall Street bailout will work when the first one did not. This latest plan would have the taxpayer finance the purchase of troubled assets, opening the door for unregulated, opaque entities like hedge funds to speculate with taxpayer funds.

The White House doesn't get it. To have Countrywide VIP Christopher Dodd introduce tax cheat Timothy Geithner to detail the second stage of an already-unpopular Wall Street bailout shows poor judgment."

NLPC promotes ethics in public life. On January 29, NLPC asked Neil M. Barofsky, the Special Inspector General for TARP, for an investigation of the sponsorship by Citigroup of a junket to the Caribbean by House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY) and five other members of Congress, a trip that violated House Rules.

Growing the Economy: Three Models of Failure, Three Models of Success

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following release was issued today by Americans for Tax Reform:

There's a debate raging in Washington over how to improve economic growth. On the one side, President Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and the liberal establishment wants to "stimulate" the economy by stealing money from taxpayers and giving it to unionized government make-work projects. On the other side, free market conservatives favor lower marginal tax rates, full business expensing, tax-free savings, free trade, sound money, and lower government spending. In the recent past, there have been three models of "stimulus" failure, and three models of free-market success.

Failed "Stimulus" Plans

1. In 1997, Argentina's economy began to worsen. In response, Argentine non-interest government spending grew from 23% of GDP in 1997 to 25% of GDP by 2001. The equivalent in the U.S. would be an immediate increase in government spending of nearly $300 billion. Despite this, average real GDP growth in the period was just 0.7%. (1)

2.In the 1990s, Japan tried to grow government to "prime the pump" of the economy. Government spending grew from 32% of GDP in 1991 to 38% of GDP in 2000. The equivalent in the U.S. would be an immediate increase in government spending of nearly $900 billion. After this experiment, Japan's per-capita national income fell from 86 percent of the U.S. level in 1991 to only 74 percent in 2000. The people of Japan became poorer after this massive government "stimulus." (2)

3. In 1929, the U.S. entered the Great Depression. In the decade following, a Republican failed president (Herbert Hoover) and a Democrat failed president (FDR) increased federal spending from 3.4% of GDP in 1930 to 10.3% of GDP in 1939. The equivalent today would be an immediate increase in government spending of $1 trillion. Despite all the spending of the New Deal, the U.S. economy actually shrank from $97.4 billion to $89.1 billion, or nearly 10 percent in 10 years. (3)

Successful Growth Models

1. In late 1963, Congress implemented the Kennedy tax cut, which lowered the top marginal personal income tax rate from 91% to 70%. Until LBJ raised taxes to pay for the Vietnam War and Great Society, average annual real GDP growth from 1964-1966 was 6.2%.

2. In 1983, the Reagan tax cuts were fully implemented. They reduced the top marginal income tax rate from 70% to 50%, and also cut the corporate income tax rate. The top personal rate was reduced to 28% in 1986. Average annual real GDP growth from 1983 to 1989 (the last year before the George H.W. Bush tax hike) was 4.3%.

3. In 2003, President George W. Bush cut the top personal rate from 38.1% to 35%, the dividend rate from 38.1% to 15%, and the capital gains rate from 20% to 15%. Until Democrats took over Congress in 2006 and announced the imminent end of these lower tax rates, real GDP growth averaged 3.0% per year.

There are two models at work here:

-- Keynesian Stimulus. The government spends taxpayer money on projects
to "create jobs." The only jobs that are created are in the sprawling
government bureaucracies. Because the government cannot spend any
money on the economy it did not first take from the economy, this
model cannot create economic growth. It failed in Japan and Argentina
in the 1990s, and right here in America in the 1930s. Economic growth
was stagnant or negative in all three cases. The government purely
and simply wasted taxpayers' money.

-- Growth Economics. When marginal tax rates on work, saving, and
investment are cut, incentives to produce more work, savings, and
investment go up. The Kennedy tax cuts worked. The Reagan tax cuts
worked. The Bush tax cuts worked. In all three cases, lowering
marginal tax rates caused economic growth to rise and for all
Americans to be better off.

How to Grow the Economy Now and Permanently

1. Cut the top personal income tax rate from 35% to 25%
2. Cut the corporate income tax rate from 35% to 25%
3. Cut the capital gains and dividends rate from 15% to 0%
4. Move to full business expensing of all business investments
5. Stop double-taxing U.S. employers on their income earned overseas
6. Kill the Death Tax
7. Kill the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)

8. Cut the payroll and self-employment tax rate in half, from 15.3% to 7.5%

9. Cap government spending to the pre-Bush level of 18% of GDP

10. Require full government transparency to ensure that taxpayer money is not wasted

Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) is a non-partisan coalition of taxpayers and taxpayer groups who oppose all federal, state and local tax increases. For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact John Kartch at (202) 785-0266 or at jkartch@atr.org.

Permalink: http://www.atr.org/content/html/2009/feb/020909pr-growing_the_economy_three_mo dels.html

Notes:
(1) http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2002/071702.htm
(2) http://www.heritage.org/research/economy/bg2222.cfm
(3) http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy09/sheets/hist01z2.xls

(4) All real GDP growth figures in the successful models taken from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, National Income and Product Accounts.

New Poll: Obama Voters Reject Big Labor's Card Check Agenda

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A new national survey of 1,000 likely voters released by The Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) shows strong opposition to The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) from the individuals who sent Barack Obama to the White House.

"Obama voters did not go to the polls last November to eliminate the secret ballot, and Congress should think twice about taking it away from millions of American workers," said Brian Worth with the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace. "This bill is opposed by Democrats, Republicans, Independents, rank and file union workers, and President Obama's voters by roughly the same margins. The only support card check has is among the leaders of Big Labor who are willing to sacrifice worker privacy and put our economy at further risk to boost their membership roles."

Key findings of the poll include:
-- 73% of Obama voters are opposed to EFCA.
-- 86% of Obama voters believe that a worker's vote should be kept
private in a union organizing election.

-- 81% of Obama voters believe that secret ballot elections are the best
way to protect the individual rights of workers.

-- 81% of Obama voters believe that Congress should focus on other issues
like jobs and health care before dealing with EFCA.

-- 68% of Obama voters believe the binding arbitration provisions in EFCA
are risky and unwise.

-- 61% of Obama voters would be less likely to vote for a Member of
Congress who voted to take away the secret ballot from workers.


The findings reinforce why Big Labor's top priority is losing momentum. Even while he announced several labor-friendly initiatives at the White House last Friday, with prominent labor leaders in attendance, President Obama did not mention EFCA. This lack of recognition speaks volumes about the growing unpopularity of the legislation and its negative impact on worker privacy and job creation.

Voters don't support EFCA, and they want President Obama and Congress to focus on other issues like jobs and health care. This is a major set-back for the nation's labor bosses who were hoping for a win on EFCA in the early days of the 111th Congress.

"It's becoming clear why President Obama wants to put card check on the sidelines. This bill will strip away worker privacy and undercut his efforts to jumpstart the economy. It also happens to be wildly unpopular with the American people," Worth concluded.

Methodology: This poll of 1,000 likely general election voters in the United States was conducted from January 7th - 11th, 2009 by McLaughlin & Associates. The poll included 477 individuals who voted for President Obama last November. All interviews were conducted via telephone by professional interviewers. Interview selection was random within predetermined election units - in this case, the fifty states. These units were structured to correlate with actual voter turnout in a general election. This poll of 1,000 likely general election voters has an accuracy of +/- 3.1% at a 95% confidence interval.

Economic Stimulus Package Would Place Social Security Trust Fund in Deficit for First Time Ever Next Year

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Congressional economic stimulus plan would place the Social Security Trust Fund into deficit for the first time ever next year, if the current economic stimulus package is passed by both Houses of Congress.

Social Security is funded by payroll taxes that employees and their employers pay into the system. Money that comes into the Social Security Trust Fund is used to pay the Social Security checks retirees receive each month, and since the creation of the Trust Fund in 1983, the program has always had more money coming in than going out.

However, that may change as soon as next year, due to a proposed refundable payroll tax credit which would offer workers a refund on their portion of Social Security taxes, meaning there would be insufficient cash to pay benefits. The $145.3 billion refundable payroll tax credit proposal would give individual workers up to $500 and couples up to $1,000.

According to the 2008 Social Security Trustees Report, the estimated surplus under "high cost," or bad economic conditions, is as follows:

Year Social Security Trust *Payroll Credit Costs,
Fund Projected Surplus Proposed Legislation
(Billions) (Billions)
2009 $54 $24
2010 $57 $80.8
2011 $43 $37
2012 $26
2013 $5

* Source: Joint Committee on Taxation


"A sufficiently funded Social Security Trust Fund is critical in ensuring that seniors don't have to endure benefits cuts," said Daniel O'Connell, chairman of The Senior Citizens League. "Although we recognize the economy is in bad shape, we don't think putting the Trust Fund into the red is a responsible response."

The Senior Citizens League is advocating for any decrease in payroll taxes to be taken from the general treasury, not the Social Security Trust Fund.