Obama's Latest Speech Dodges Campaign Promise to Small Businesses

/PRNewswire / -- Yesterday, President Barack Obama gave a 60-minute speech to the nation regarding the state of the economy. His speech discussed the Obama Administration's five pillars for addressing the economy, however President Obama's plans for helping America's biggest job creators, its small businesses, were conspicuously absent.

During the campaign, President Obama said he would create millions of jobs. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 98 percent of all U.S. firms have less than 100 employees, and those firms are responsible for over 98 percent of all new jobs in America. (www.asbl.com)

To date, President Obama has given 100 percent of the stimulus funds to the top 1 percent of American firms. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, those large firms have not created one net new job since 1977.

In his March 22, 2009 column in the New York Times, Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman wrote about President Obama's plan to save the economy and stated, "This is more than disappointing. In fact, it fills me with a sense of despair." In March, Krugman also stated that Obama's economic policies are almost certain to fail. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/opinion/23krugman.html?_r=1)

Since 2003, over 15 federal investigations have found that hundreds of billions of dollars in federal small business contracts have been diverted to Fortune 500 corporations and thousands of other large businesses in the United States and Europe. (http://www.asbl.com/documentlibrary.html)

Groups like the American Small Business League (ASBL) are angry with President Obama because of his refusal to make good on a February 2008 campaign promise in which he stated, "It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants." (http://www.barackobama.com/2008/02/26/the_american_small_business_le.php)

Small business owners around the country are angered and disappointed that President Obama has refused to make good on his campaign promise, and has allowed an estimated $2 billion a week in federal small business contracts to be diverted to some of the largest corporations in the world, including Fortune 500 firms.

"You don't have to be a Nobel Prize winning economist to figure this out. Small businesses create 98 percent of all new jobs. So far, not only has President Obama not given those companies a dime of the stimulus funding, but he is refusing to end blatant, widespread fraud and abuse in existing government economic stimulus programs for small businesses," ASBL President Lloyd Chapman said.

Boehner: Economy Will Improve Because of American Ingenuity, Not the President’s Reckless Washington Spending

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement after President Obama’s speech on the economy at Georgetown University:

“Our economy will improve – but it will be because of the ingenuity and hard work of American workers and small businesses, not because of the Washington Democrats’ misguided policies that rely on recklessly spending taxpayer dollars. This is money we don’t have, yet the President’s trillion-dollar ‘stimulus’ was loaded with wasteful spending that has nothing to do with job creation, his $410 billion ‘omnibus’ spending bill was chock full of 9,000 unscrutinized earmarks, and his $3.5 trillion budget paves the way for a bigger and costlier federal government that will not create new jobs, help rebuild Americans’ savings, and get our economy moving again. Instead of embracing tough decisions, Democrats have avoided them in favor of saddling our children and grandchildren with mountains of debt that we know they cannot afford.

“During this time of economic crisis, we must do better. Republicans are offering better solutions to spur economic growth now and in the future, including our plan to create twice as many jobs – 6.2 million total – at half the cost of the President’s ‘stimulus’ spending plan. It’s time for Democrats to stop paying lip-service to working across party lines to tackle our economic challenges and actually start doing it. The hard-working American families and small businesses that will lead our economy back to prosperity deserve no less.”

Boehner: President’s National Energy Tax Will Destroy Jobs, Wreck Family Budgets

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) yesterday issued the following statement on President Obama’s demand for Congress to pass a budget that includes a massive new national energy tax that will hit middle-class families and small businesses:

“It’s disturbing that the President is calling for a national energy tax that will destroy jobs and wreck family budgets, and even more disturbing that White House officials have identified this national energy tax as a non-negotiable presidential priority. We need a better solution, and Republicans will offer one.

“Middle-class families and small businesses face a slumping job market, rising costs of living, and evaporating savings. Unfortunately, President Obama’s budget is poised to make matters even worse forcing Americans to deal with a new national energy tax that will cost families up to $3,100 per year.

“From last week’s revelation that the President’s budget costs a staggering $2.3 trillion more than the White House claimed to today’s discussion of a new national energy tax, Washington Democrats are making all the wrong moves when it comes to getting our economy back on track. They should work with Republicans on a budget that will help rebuild savings, create jobs, and get the government’s fiscal house back in order. The President’s budget will harm our economy and destroy jobs by spending too much, taxing too much, and borrowing too much. Republicans will offer a better budget solution in the days to come, and we hope the President and his Democratic colleagues will give it the consideration it deserves.”

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.

FRC's Tony Perkins Responds to President Obama's Address to Congress

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Family Research Council (FRC) President Tony Perkins released the following statement in response to President Obama's address to Congress last evening:

"While the reaction to the President's speech was mixed, the reaction on Wall Street will be most telling of whether or not the President succeeded in infusing confidence into the nation's faltering economy.

"As President, it is incumbent upon Barack Obama to encourage the American people and help drive our nation's economy forward. That is, however, a difficult feat with one foot on the accelerator and the other on the brake. Despite the hopeful talk designed to nudge the nation forward, the reality of bigger and more costly government is stopping many Americans dead in their tracks on the road to economic recovery.

"The bottom line is bigger government is bigger government regardless of the patriotism that is wrapped around it. The President's pork barrel spending bills and his speech tonight reflect a philosophy that says only massive government spending will cure our economic troubles. The President's call for fiscal responsibility rings hallow when the actions that follow only pile on more massive debt and mortgage away the future of our children and their children.

"We do applaud the President for focusing on reducing the dropout rates in America, for there is little hope for those who cannot enter the workforce with the most basic of skills. However, the key is not doubling the size of the Department of Education it is in restoring parental involvement in education by allowing parents to make the fundamental decisions about their child's education, whether it be charter schools, private schools or home-schooling. All children in America should be treated equally."

Not All Spending Is Equal, Says CIRT

/PRNewswire/ -- The following Op-Ed was issued yesterday, February 19, by Mark A. Casso, Esq., President, Construction Industry Round Table:

On February 17, 2009 the nation's economy was saved, or at least that is what we are suppose to believe, given the fact the largest bill in U.S. history was signed into law by President Obama with the intended purpose of spurring consumer spending and creating millions of jobs.

Of course, if merely expending federal government funds - now at historic levels - are all it takes to insure a strong vivacious economy then the U.S. should never again expect to see a recession or even a down turn. Considering the annual federal budget is at nearly three trillion dollars, even without the stimulus package and the financial markets "bailout," economic expansion should be on everyone's lips.

But, all spending (and even more importantly what CBO marks as "costs") are not equal - they do not have equal impacts, timelines, or even returns - and that is at the heart of what went wrong with the stimulus package.

When the leaders of an industry like the design and construction community, represented by the Construction Industry Round Table (CIRT) can go from near universal support of the original stimulus package with its proposed targeting of timely infrastructure expenditures and some measure of tax relief - to a nearly universal concern (84% responding to a CIRT poll that the final package that passed into law is off target and not timely) - something drastic has occurred.

It can be explained in one phrase: "H.R.1" - the massive, unfocused, spend-fest that defines every dollar expended with the same broad brush of being job creating and stimulating to the economy. Such a claim is untenable and unprincipled just by merely perusing the over 1,000 pages of text in the bill. A focused, timely, and restricted expenditure of U.S. taxpayers' money would not require 1,000 pages to explain. Beyond the costs (both spending and tax relief) are the policy and program changes that seek to fundamentally alter aspects of the U.S. economy and life. These provisions are "slipped" into the massive act, which no one read in its entirety before passing (never mind understood) - so as to avoid the scrutiny of an American public that is not likely to be supportive of the drastic proposals and/or their consequences.

Notwithstanding the litany of H.R.1 supporters that like to point to the justifiable and defensible "infrastructure projects" that will be funded by the stimulus package (which even the fiscally conservative IBD editorial noted "almost everyone agrees a little timely infrastructure might help,") - in a best case scenario those dollars represent only about 19 percent of the overall $787 billion in cost for the bill (and about 30 percent of the spending side). A healthy amount for certain - however, only a fraction of it will be spent in a timely manner during the upcoming construction season in 2009. Given this lack of focus and timeliness the expenditures, while welcome, will not have nearly the positive impact hoped for in sopping-up excess capacity and putting people to work in the industry. [Construction industry studies vary as to the exact impact expenditures have on employment, but a USDOT 2008 update entitled: "Employment Impacts of Highway Infrastructure Investment" revising earlier reports puts the latest estimate at 34,779 jobs per billion dollars in new construction].

Initial design/construction industry support was very vocal and strong based on the favorable factors going into the debate. On November 11, 2008 the CIRT Board of Directors adopted a resolution expressing its strong support for a new stimulus package that focuses its expenditures on infrastructure needs across the country as a means to meet the twin goals of increasing economic activity as well as creating meaningful jobs. In addition, the Council voiced its concerns to the Obama transition team "that every effort should be made to constrain, if not eliminate, extraneous issues and provisions from being added-on to the package." Moreover, the Round Table expressed its "strong preference . . . for maximum flexibility and decentralized decision-making in order to move infrastructure related funds quickly into the system to achieve maximum economic activity and job creation."

In the end, what we saw pass was a typical Washington, DC bill - with special interest and inside deals to incorporate provisions and expenditures that would never be able to stand the "light of day" or the scrutiny of the American people. Contrary to this display, the design/construction community can stand tall: we were open in our requests, we were often cited for worthy expenditures, and in the end the portion of the money spent on infrastructure needs will be the most likely to bring true economic return to the nation. Would if they could say that about the rest of the package's costs!

Consumers Union Urges Obama Administration to Let States Take Greater Role in Overseeing Banks

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- States should be able to enforce consumer protections that apply to all banks that operate within their borders, according to Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports. The group urged Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to rescind Bush Administration era regulations that have prevented states from protecting consumers from many of the mortgage lending abuses that contributed to the current foreclosure crisis.

"While federal regulators were asleep at the switch, state agencies were blocked from taking more aggressive action to protect consumers," said Mark Savage, Senior Attorney with Consumers Union. "It's clear we need more cops on the beat. The Obama Administration should make sure states aren't prevented from addressing financial industry abuses that threaten American families and ultimately our economy."

In a letter to Geithner, Consumers Union called on the Treasury Secretary to repeal a set of regulations adopted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in 2004 that prevent states from enforcing state laws against national banks and their operating subsidiaries. The role of states in enforcing existing laws applying to national banks is a key issue in the debate over the effective regulation of the financial industry and is at the heart of a case now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

In Cuomo v. The Clearing House Association, L.L.C. and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Court will decide if the New York Attorney General has the right to investigate whether several national banks discriminated against African American and Latino borrowers by charging them significantly higher mortgage interest rates. New York was prevented from investigating the banks after the OCC sued the state and cited its preemption regulation to argue that the Attorney General did not have the authority to take such action.

After the Second Circuit Court sided with the OCC, the Attorneys General of all 50 states urged the Supreme Court to take up the case and reverse the appeals court decision. The Supreme Court agreed and, on February 25, the U.S. must file its brief in the case on behalf of the OCC, an agency under the Treasury Department.

For the past four years, the OCC has been championing deregulatory and minimal standards against states that have been trying to enact higher standards for banks and their operating subsidiaries. When states tried to monitor mortgage lending and protect consumers, the OCC invited national banks to contact the agency, which then wrote letters to banks and state banking agencies asserting that states had no authority to do so. The OCC also sided with national banks in the courts, writing amicus briefs arguing that state monitoring and enforcement in a variety of areas did not apply, and that only the OCC could investigate and enforce laws against nationally chartered banks.

This included the case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court last year against Michigan, in which the OCC sided with Wachovia Bank and argued that state mortgage lending laws and oversight could not apply to a national bank's operating subsidiary. Wachovia subsequently found itself on the brink of collapse because of risky mortgages and was forced to sell itself to Wells Fargo. Similarly, the OCC took action to block more aggressive mortgage lending oversight by regulators in California, Georgia, and Ohio - states that have been hit hard by the foreclosure crisis.

"Under the Bush Administration, the OCC repeatedly sided with the banks and against consumers and the states," said Savage. "If states had been allowed to act, consumers would have been better protected from unfair lending practices that led to the mortgage meltdown. Treasury Secretary Geithner should repeal the Bush era regulations and untie the hands of the states so they can protect consumers against financial industry abuses."

Green Jobs Are Not Always Good Jobs: New Report Finds Wide Variation in Quality of Jobs in Climate-Friendly Sectors

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- As the federal government prepares to spend billions of dollars promoting the creation of green jobs as part of the huge economy recovery bill, a new report warns that the jobs already being created in climate-friendly sectors of the economy do not always measure up in terms of wages and other terms of employment. The report, entitled High Road or Low Road: Job Quality in the New Green Economy, was produced by Good Jobs First, a non-profit resource center on economic development accountability. It was commissioned by Change to Win, the Sierra Club, and the Teamsters and Laborers unions. It is online at: http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/pdf/gjfgreenjobsrpt.pdf.

"Many proponents of green development assume that the result will be good jobs," said Good Jobs First Research Director Philip Mattera, principal author of the report. "We tested that assumption and found it is not always valid." The report looks at three sectors: manufacturing of components for wind and solar energy generation; green building; and recycling. "In each sector, we found examples of employers that compensate their workers decently and treat them with respect. Yet we also found examples of purportedly green employers paying substandard wages and not treating their workers well," Mattera added. "These include two wind energy manufacturing plants where workers initiated union organizing drives in response to issues such as poor safety conditions and then faced union-busting campaigns by management." Some U.S. wind and solar manufacturing firms are weakening the job security of their workers, the report notes, by opening parallel plants in foreign low-wage havens such as China and Mexico.

The report finds that many wind and solar manufacturing plants are receiving sizeable economic development subsidies from state and local governments. "This use of taxpayer money provides an opportunity to raise wages and other working conditions," said Good Jobs First Executive Director Greg LeRoy. "Many states and localities already apply job quality standards to companies receiving job subsidies or public contracts. In the report we urge wider and more aggressive use of such standards by federal as well as state and local agencies."

The report offers other public policy options and urges the private U.S. Green Building Council to consider adding labor criteria to its widely-used LEED standards for green construction.

Obama's 'Newer Deal' Likely to Raise Deficit

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- As President Barack Obama takes office, he is promising a bold stimulus plan for the declining economy. Some of his proposals mirror those of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. A new report from Casey Research, "Obama's Newer Deal," examines Obama's plan in comparison to Roosevelt's and concludes that it is even more risky.

The Obama plan relies on both spending and tax cuts to raise incomes and promote recovery. The Obama administration believes people need to have money to spend in order to get the economy moving.

Casey Research's analysis shows that what is needed is a "great deleveraging: using assets to pay down debts. Like a household with finite income and too many credit cards, there comes a time when the piper has to be paid. Getting more credit cards only temporarily makes the problem go away and surely makes it all worse."

There are other key differences between the New Deal and the Obama plan. In 1933, the federal debt was $360 billion in 2008 dollars and 40% of the GDP. In 2008, the federal debt was just under $11 trillion and 70% of the GDP.

The government is likely to add $3 trillion to the national debt in 2009 alone.

"The time will come and probably in 2009," concludes Casey Research, "that the only way the U.S. will be able to fund its deficits is to create money by printing it. The Treasury will have to sell bonds, and in the absence of foreign buyers, the Fed will have to print the money to buy them. The consequence will be runaway inflation, increasing interest rates, recession, and inevitable tax increases."

"The era of runaway U.S. consumerism is over. The economy's eventual turnaround will only occur after the debt that permeates the economy is substantially reduced. It's going to be a painful process," says Casey Research.

Casey Research is a team of highly experienced investors and trained economists who spend countless hours researching powerful economic trends and the very best ways to profit from same. Their clientele is made up of individual and institutional investors who share the costs - through subscription fees - in exchange for unbiased research and information they can use in managing their portfolios to produce above-average returns.

Congress Introduces Bill That Would Reinstate Downpayment Assistance: Nehemiah Responds

/PRNewswire/ -- The following statement was issued today by Scott Syphax, president and CEO of the Nehemiah Corporation of America in response to H.R. 600, a bill introduced in Congress that would reinstate seller-funded downpayment assistance (DPA). Prior to the October 1, 2008 ban on DPA, Nehemiah was the oldest and largest provider of downpayment assistance.

"With foreclosures on the rise and banks maintaining their stranglehold on credit, we commend Congressman Al Green for recognizing the important role downpayment assistance can play in the market's recovery. Through H.R. 600, DPA offers a simple solution that can empower thousands of worthy families to take advantage of depressed home prices therefore reducing the glut of homes on the market. Further, it does so without spending a single government or taxpayer dime according to the Congressional Budget Office. Creating opportunities for sustainable homeownership will be a cornerstone to strengthening a crumbling housing market and breathing life back into the economy. As the Obama Administration takes the reins tomorrow, we call on Congress to reach across the aisle and prioritize broadening opportunities for responsible homeownership in America by reinstating DPA."

-----

Obama Windfall Profits Tax on Oil and Gas Industry Could Fund Stimulus Plan

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a statement from American Small Business League President Lloyd Chapman:

Every day for more than two years President-elect Barack Obama promised voters that if he was elected president, he would enact a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry to fund a $1000 per household energy rebate. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJPo5IGTd0A)

Just two days after being elected on November 6, President-elect Obama rolled out his transition website, Change.gov, (http://www.asbl.com/documents/Economy_Change.pdf) which contained all of the policies he intended to implement. The top issue under the "Economy" section of the Obama-Biden Agenda was the enactment of a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry. Two days later on November 8, the windfall profits tax vanished from the website. To this day, President-elect Obama has never personally offered any justification or rationale for the disappearance of one of his biggest campaign promises.

Now, with America in the middle of a historic economic disaster, which could rival the Great Depression, President-elect Obama's windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry might be the perfect vehicle for funding an economic stimulus plan.

President-elect Obama is now proposing to spend up to one trillion tax dollars to stimulate the nation's failing economy. As opposed to spending approximately $300 billion in taxes to fund a $1000 per household tax rebate, now is the perfect time for President-elect Obama to reconsider the windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry to help fund an economic stimulus plan. There is no question the oil and gas industry actually did make windfall profits during the last eight years and will almost certainly continue to do so.

The oil and gas industry's windfall profits began early in the Bush Administration. The Associated Press began reporting on the windfall profits in the oil and gas industry in 2003, when the average price of oil was $30 a barrel.

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60862-2004Jan29_2.html)

Since the oil and gas industry has made windfall profits even when the price of oil was as low as $30 dollars a barrel, it is almost certain they will continue to make record profits no matter what the price of oil.

The greed and lack of regulation of the oil and gas industry was obviously a contributing factor to America's current economic crisis. Someone must pay higher taxes eventually to fund the Wall Street bailout, and President-elect Obama's one trillion dollar economic stimulus plan.

The oil and gas industry needs to be controlled in some way. The price of gas at the pump is on the rise again, and more windfall profits at the expense of working families struggling to cope are a virtual certainty.

President-elect Obama's windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry was a great idea; everyone that voted for him thought so. Now is the time for President-elect Obama to enact the windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry as he promised during his campaign. It will ensure energy prices stay low in relationship to the price of oil, and help fund the economic stimulus plan needed to save our nation's economy from what could be the worst economic disaster in American history.

Congressional Action Could Harm Physician Hospitals; Economic Impact Could Be Severe Warns PHA

/PRNewswire/ -- Special interests who tried to attack physician-owned hospitals in Congress last year by attaching harmful measures to the Farm Bill and War Supplemental Bill are at it again. Now, a handful of lawmakers are trying to use a children's health care bill to limit patients' access to some of the best hospitals in the country.

"We know that physician-owned hospitals are good for patients and good for the economy," said Molly Sandvig, Executive Director of Physician Hospitals of America (PHA), the national association representing the interests of physician hospitals. "It is completely counterintuitive that at a time when our country is experiencing an economic downturn, high rates of unemployment, and inadequate access to healthcare, Congress would consider killing an industry that provides over 55,000 jobs nationally and that provides patients access to the best quality healthcare available in America."

There are currently 199 physician-owned hospitals nationwide. Together, these facilities employ thousands of doctors, nurses, and support staff. They also provide a local economic engine through property taxes, higher wage jobs, and greater health care choices for local residents.

A recent study of the economic impact of physician-owned hospitals in Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas conducted by the Health Economics Consulting Group found that:

"Physician-owned hospitals add considerable value to state economies, ranging from a net effect of $117.8 million in Pennsylvania to $2.3 billion in Texas. The combined impact across all eight states is $2.9 billion. This implies that physician-owned hospitals, through their employment and capital expenditures, generate a total of $3.9 billion in economic activity in these eight states alone."

The proposed language being added to the children's health care bill (SCHIP) would not allow hospitals to grow and would essentially cause these hospitals to whither on the vine since they could not adjust to marketplace demand. Also, there would be no protection offered for hospitals under development and no physician hospitals built after January 1, 2009 would be allowed to take Medicare or Medicaid patients. Closure of physician-owned hospitals would eliminate $2.4 billion in total payroll, $509 million in federal taxes, $1.9 billion in trade payables, and will put 55,000 full- and part-time employees out of work.

There are also 85 hospitals currently under development nationally. On these hospitals, an estimated $1,830,909,350 has been expended with $574,358,090 still outstanding, ready to be spent. The addition of these 85 hospitals would also equate to an estimated 23,000 more jobs.

"HR 2 is punitive legislation and the physician hospital piece is an insignificant offset to the costs of SCHIP. It is hard to understand how Congress can propose an important increase in medical services to children while simultaneously cutting back on hospitals that provide services to this population, among others," said Sandvig.

Taxpayer Watchdogs Offer List of 'Ax-Ready' Programs as Alternative to Mayors' Pork Projects

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The U.S. Conference of Mayors has sent Congress a $96.6 billion wish list of "shovel-ready" projects to allegedly create jobs and improve the nation's infrastructure, but the National Taxpayers Union (NTU) and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) are offering a different solution to stimulate the economy: an updated list of "ax-ready" programs and legislation that would reduce wasteful spending. Last October, NTU and CCAGW sent a letter to then-Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama outlining ways to reduce federal outlays.

"Before Election Day, NTU and CCAGW answered the Presidential hopefuls' calls for going through the budget 'line by line' to root out waste and inefficiency," NTU President Duane Parde said. "Now, we're highlighting more 'ready-to-cut' areas of the federal government for Congress to act on instead of stuffing states full of pork." CCAGW President Tom Schatz added, "Congress must cut wasteful spending now, at the same time the stimulus package is being considered. Promising to address the mounting fiscal burden on taxpayers at a later date means that nothing will ever happen."

Among the mayors' "'Ready to Go' Jobs and Infrastructure Projects" are well over $1 billion in projects involving sidewalks; $1 million for annual sewer rehabilitation in Casper, WY; $6.1 million for corporate hangars, parking lots, and a business apron at the Fayetteville, AR airport; 28 projects with the term "stadium" in them; and 117 projects mentioning landscaping and/or beautification efforts. The taxpayers should be most teed off at the 20 golf courses included in the list.

Some alternatives to the mayors' list could be found through NTU's research arm, the National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF), which through its BillTally program has compiled a list of legislation that would reduce federal spending. NTUF also maintains a roster of 2,150 spending-cut bills introduced in the last nine Congresses that totaled over $9.5 trillion, only 69 of which were eventually signed into law (for a savings of $89.6 billion). Finally, NTU reviews data from the Bush Administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool, which found nearly 220 programs in 2007 that were ineffective or did not demonstrate results.

CCAGW's research arm, Citizens Against Government Waste, has just issued the "2009 Prime Cuts," which has 700 cut recommendations totaling $1.9 trillion over five years. It includes the elimination of duplicative and inefficient programs such as the Market Access Program, which costs $231 million over five years to help large and profitable American companies advertise abroad.

"The mayors have billed their projects as 'shovel-ready,' but the only shoveling going on would be out of taxpayers' pockets," Parde concluded. Schatz added, "The best way to stimulate the economy and create jobs is to cut wasteful spending and keep money in the private sector."

Obama's Latest Speech Continues to Ignore Small Businesses

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- In his latest speech on the economy, President-elect Barack Obama has once again failed to make even a single mention of America's small businesses, which create nearly 80 percent of net new jobs, and employ 50.4 percent of private sector workers.

With regards to the economy, Obama held true to his campaign pattern of significantly downplaying the role small businesses play in driving our national economy. Even one of his top economic advisors, Dr. Laura Tyson acknowledged that the best way to simulate the economy is to direct federal infrastructure funds to small businesses. Tyson is the former Chair of the U.S. President's Council of Economic Advisers during the Clinton Administration and is currently an economic adviser to President-elect Obama.

On February 26, 2008, President-elect Obama stated, "Over half of all Americans work for a small business. Small businesses are the backbone of our nation's economy and we must protect this great resource. It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants." (http://www.barackobama.com/2008/02/26/the_american_small_business_le.php)

The statement was made in response to a series of more than 15 federal investigations, which have found fraud, abuse, loopholes and a blatant lack of oversight in federal small business contracting programs; and have uncovered the diversion of billions of dollars in federal small business contracts to Fortune 500 firms. (http://www.asbl.com/documentlibrary.html)

Within days of making the statement Obama began to distance himself from it. During the final months of the campaign Obama failed to mention small business issues in campaign speeches, modified his statement regarding the diversion of small business contracts to large corporations on his campaign website, and gave small business issues virtually no priority in his campaign agenda.

When President-elect Obama's Transition Team website, www.change.gov was launched, any mention of Obama's statement to stop the flow of federal small business contracts to large corporations had been removed.

Small business advocates are concerned that President-elect Obama may enact policy and legislation that could be harmful to the nation's nearly 27 million small businesses. Additionally, advocates point to the fact that the Obama-Biden Transition Agenda which is housed on change.gov, contains no new provisions that would significantly impact our nation's small business community.

"I am extremely concerned that President-elect Obama doesn't seem to understand that most Americans work for companies with less than 100 employees and that these are the companies that are going to lead our country out of the recession and create a vast majority of all new jobs," President of the American Small Business League Lloyd Chapman said. "So far, he has refused to offer even the most basic proposal to redirect federal infrastructure funds to these companies. It appears that he has no intention of stopping the flow of up to $100 billion in government small business contracts to large corporations. We are concerned that during his first days in office he may try to create loopholes for venture capitalists that will divert even more federal funds away from small businesses. It is going to take a lot more than tax cuts to stimulate this economy. President-elect Obama keeps talking about how important it is that we act immediately, and I couldn't agree more. We would like to see him propose policies next week that would, as he promised on February 26, 2008, stop the flow of federal small business contracts to corporate giants."