Advertisements
Home

Records: Soros Fund Execs Funded Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, John McCain, John Kasich, Lindsey Graham in 2016

Leave a comment

H/T Breitbarts Big Government.

This revelation does not surprise me in the least.

These people are vile and they are DemocRats in reality.

MRC

MRC

Employees of a hedge fund founded by the king of the Institutional Left, billionaire and Democratic Party mega-donor George Soros, donated tens of thousands of dollars to top Republicans who fought against President Donald Trump in 2016, donation records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show.

Soros Fund Management, a former hedge fund that serves now as an investment management firm, was founded by progressive billionaire George Soros in 1969. It has risen to become one of the most profitable hedge funds in the industry. Employees of the firm are heavily involved in backing political candidates giving millions upon millions to groups that were supporting failed 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton for the presidency.

But more importantly, perhaps, than the unsurprising giant lump sums of cash funneled into Democratic Party and Clinton coffers is the revelation thanks to the Center for Responsive Politics that employees of the Soros firm—now run by his son Robert Soros—pumped tens of thousands of dollars into the campaigns of top anti-Trump Republicans over the course of 2016.

In total, executives with the Soros-founded company pushed $36,800 into the coffers of these GOP candidates just this past cycle. That does not include Super PACs or campaign committees, which saw tens of thousands of dollars more. While these numbers for Republicans pale in comparison to the millions upon millions poured into Democratic groups, causes, and candidates, it is significant that Soros executives are making a play inside the GOP. Perhaps even more significant is the type of Republican they aim to prop up: pro-amnesty, pro-open borders on trade, and generally speaking anti-Trump. A pattern emerges when looking at the policies of the Republicans that these Soros Fund Management executives support financially.

The biggest recipient of Soros-connected cash in the GOP was none other than House Speaker Paul Ryan, who repeatedly attempted to undermine Trump over the course of the election. According to the records available online, the Soros firm’s workers gave $10,800 to Ryan. Included in that are two separate May 2, 2016, donations from David Rogers, a then-employee of Soros Fund Management who lives in New York City. Rogers left the Soros Fund Management firm right around that time.

Bloomberg reported in late April 2016, just before these two separate donations to Ryan;

David Rogers and Joshua Donfeld, two portfolio managers at billionaire George Soros’s family office, are leaving the firm over disagreements with its new chief investment officer about the direction of global markets, according to people with knowledge of the matter. Rogers, a protege of Soros’s former chief investment strategist Stan Druckenmiller, managed a portfolio of about $3 billion at the $28 billion Soros Fund Management, said the people, who asked not to be named because the matter is private. Rogers, 38, made his name as a commodities trader, while Donfeld, 40, focuses on stock investing, said the people, adding that both men are expected to leave the family office next month.

Another two separate donations to Ryan came from Donfeld, both on May 2, 2016 and totaling $2,700 each. In total, that adds up to $10,800—between both Rogers and Donfeld, who were working for Soros Fund Management at the time—that they gave to Paul Ryan.

Ryan’s chief spokesman, Brendan Buck, has not responded to a Breitbart News’s inquiry about the donations from the Soros firm’s employees. But Ryan’s support for open borders when it comes to immigration and trade, and his backing of so-called “criminal justice reform” legislation, is in line with Soros’ worldview—and he regularly bashed Trump over the course of the 2016 election.

But he was hardly the only anti-Trump Republican who received cash from Soros Fund Management employees over the course of 2016. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a failed presidential candidate, received $3,500 from the firm’s employees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics data. That includes a $1,500 donation from Soros Fund Management executive Scott Bessent. Bessent has since left the firm to work at a different hedge fund, but “oversaw George Soros’s $30 billion fortune for the last four years” according to an early January 2016 article in Bloomberg. The other two donations to Graham from the firm’s employees—both worth $1,000, with one on March 17, 2015, and the other on July 29, 2015—came from Alexander Cohen, an executive with Soros Fund Management.

Graham spokesman Kevin Bishop argues that since Soros himself didn’t give Graham money that this is not controversial.

“George Soros has never given a penny to Lindsey Graham,” Bishop said in an email. “George Soros Fund Management has never given a penny to Lindsey Graham. These are donations from individuals who are employed by Soros Fund Management.”

Bishop compared this to an employee for Amway or for the Trump Organization making a donation to Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign in 2016, something that would mean that employee–not Amway owners like the DeVos family or President Trump or his family–is the one making the donation. But Bishop does not deny that Graham did take a donation from Soros Fund Management employees.

Fellow failed presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) raked in $2,700, while other failed GOP presidential candidates Ohio Gov. John Kasich and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush also received $2,700 apiece from employees of the Soros firm.

Rubio’s $2,700 donation came from the aforementioned Los Angeles-based Donfeld on Jan. 22, 2016, a few months before, as Bloomberg reported, he and Rogers left the firm. Kasich’s $2,700 donation came from Bessent on Oct. 24, 2015. Bush’s $2,700 donation came on July 24, 2015, from David Murphy of Soros Fund Management. Murphy, according to his LinkedIN page, is a current “portfolio manager” at the firm.

Kasich’s spokesman Chris Schrimpf did not respond to a request for comment, nor did Bush’s spokeswoman Kristy Campbell.

A spokesman for Rubio, Matt Wolking, vociferously defended the senator, calling this story in Breitbart News—without having read it because it wasn’t written until long after he responded to inquiries about this matter—a “fake” story since Rubio didn’t get donations directly from George Soros himself and since hedge funds as companies cannot make donations to federal candidates. Breitbart News never alleged that Rubio did get donations directly from George Soros himself, but was inquiring with Rubio’s staff if the senator had a comment on why he did take donations from an executive at George Soros’s hedge fund. That fact, that Rubio did take cash from a Soros Fund Management executive—and that that fund was founded by George Soros—is not something Wolking, on Rubio’s behalf, challenges. So what his team is doing is creating a straw man argument to falsely claim this story is “fake.”

“This story is a fake,” Wolking told Breitbart News. “Senator Rubio has never received any contribution from George Soros. And he has never received any contribution from the Soros company because, among other things, companies can’t donate to federal candidates.”

But more importantly, a Rubio spokesman did admit that the FEC filing is correct—that Rubio took a $2,700 donation from Donfeld. The Rubio spokesman argues that Donfeld donated “almost exclusively” to GOP candidates over the years—which is mostly true, as Donfeld has given to people like Ryan, Rubio, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT), and 2012 GOP Ohio Senate nominee Josh Mandel, among others. But Donfeld, whom the Rubio spokesman points out and as Breitbart News mentioned earlier in this piece, left the Soros firm after making this donation to Rubio, has donated to Democrats like Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), and a failed Democratic congressional candidate in Arizona’s 9th congressional district in 2012, Andrei Cherny.

Anti-Trump Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), a failed one-time GOP presidential nominee from 2008, got $2,500 from an executive at the Soros firm, while Boehner—who resigned amid a coup from conservatives—raked in $2,600 from an executive at the Soros firm.

McCain’s $2,500 this cycle came from Donfeld of Soros Fund Management on Sept. 23, 2015. In previous cycles, McCain has taken cash directly from George Soros himself—a $1,000 donation on June 2, 1999—and from others with the firm, including a $1,000 donation from Bessent on March 13, 2000, a $2,300 donation from Soros Fund Management’s Michael Au on Dec. 27, 2007, a $1,000 donation from Duncan Hennes of Soros Fund Management on March 13, 2000, and a $2,300 donation from Soros Fund Management’s Joshua Berkowitz on Jan. 15, 2008. McCain’s spokeswoman, Julie Tarallo, has not responded to multiple requests for comment from Breitbart News.

Boehner’s $2,600 donation this cycle came from Bessent of Soros Fund Management on Feb. 12, 2015. The media relations department at Reynolds American, the tobacco company of which Boehner joined the board after resigning from Congress in 2015, has not responded to a request for comment on his behalf.

Now former Rep. Joe Heck (R-NV), the 2016 Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Nevada who lost his election after he withdrew his endorsement of Trump in the general election, also received $2,500 from an executive at Soros Fund Management, while Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL)—a “Never Trump” congressman who voted for a third-party candidate because he refused to support the GOP nominee for president—received $1,000 from an executive at the Soros family firm.

Heck’s $2,500 donation on Sept. 29, 2016, came from Soros Fund Management’s Sender Cohen. According to the Israel on Campus Coalition, another organization for which Sender Cohen serves as director, he is a “Portfolio Manager, the Director of Research and member of the Management Committee at Soros Fund Management.” Heck’s spokesman from the campaign has not responded to a request for comment on Monday.

Curbelo’s $1,000 donation came on June 5, 2015, from Paul Sohn, a former executive with Soros Fund Management. Sohn had already left the firm earlier in the year, as it was reported on CNBC in January 2015 that Sohn had left Soros Fund Management after his involvement in a controversial investment. That is months before he reported on this June 2015 Federal Election Commission (FEC) filing for this Curbelo donation that his employer was Soros Fund Management. A Curbelo spokeswoman has not responded to a request for comment.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), the House GOP conference chairwoman, got $1,000 from an official with Soros Fund Management. She is responsible for unleashing the independent and wildly unsuccessful general election candidate Evan McMullin—whom Trump has called “McMuffin” in jest after his failure—upon the world. McMullin, who turned out to fail fantastically on election day despite media fanfare about his candidacy, was previously a McMorris Rodgers staffer as chief policy director for nearly two years in the House GOP conference before his whimsical bid at the presidency that went nowhere and had essentially zero impact on the race. Rodgers’ $1,000 donation this cycle came from Alexander Cohen of Soros Fund Management on March 13, 2015. A spokesman for McMorris Rodgers has not responded to a request for comment on this matter.

The only few Republicans who received Soros Fund Management cash but did support Trump were Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Rep. Dan Donovan (R-NY), and Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA). Royce received $2,500 from the firm, Johnson and Grassley each received $1,000, and Donovan received $300. Johnson’s $1,000 donation came on April 15, 2016, from Alexander Cohen of Soros Fund Management, as did Grassley’s, which came on Oct. 13, 2015. Donovan’s $300 donation came from Christopher Rich of Soros Fund Management on April 20, 2015. Royce’s $2,500 donation came from Sender Cohen of Soros Fund Management on March 31, 2016. Spokespersons for Johnson, Donovan and Royce have not responded to Breitbart News’s requests for comment. A spokesperson for Grassley did not have a comment.

Advertisements

Why is this Anti-Gun, “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” Candidate still Running for President?

1 Comment

This is from Constitution.com.

John Kasich is a Bill Clinton flunky and a George Soros puppet. 

Tim Macy, Chairman of Gun Owners of America, wrote an open letter to Second Amendment supporters exposing Republican presidential candidate John Kasich’s real anti-gun agenda.

Labeling Kasich the “wolf in sheep’s clothing” still in the presidential race, Macy points to Kasich’s close relationship with Leftist, Communist, billionaire George Soros. In fact, the Soros Fund Management is one of John Kasich’s top financial contributors.

“This can hardly be a surprise,” Macy writes. His full letter can be read here. An abbreviated version is below.

 

Kasich and Soros share two important traits:  (1) their desire to mess up the Republican selection process for devious motives, and (2) their absolute hatred for the Second Amendment. 

Kasich’s antipathy towards gun rights is no secret to anyone who’s watched his career.

He famously joined a gaggle of fellow-RINO’s and cast the deciding vote to impose a ban on semi-auto firearms.  For this, he received a personal letter of thanks from a gun-hating Bill Clinton.

Kasich voted for background checks in 1993, a system where roughly95% of denials are “false positives.” Loretta Lynch’s Justice Department has, since November, shifted FBI employees to insure that, if you’re illegally blocked by NICS from purchasing a firearm, you can never get your record corrected.

In 1999, Kasich voted to retain restrictive gun ban in Washington, D.C. Not only that, Kasich joined the effort to pass 90% of Clinton’s anti-gun agenda as a form of “gun control lite.”

Elements of the Kasich/Clinton agenda included:

(1) Provisions making it virtually impossible to legally teach kids how to use firearms;

(2) A gun show ban (masquerading as a gun show Instant Check); and

(3) Mandates to require you to “lock up your guns.”

Had Clinton been successful in passing his post-Columbine anti-gun agenda, it would have provided a legislative platform, which easily could have eviscerated the Second Amendment over the last decade-and-a-half.

But Kasich’s efforts to outlaw guns — drip-by-drip — continues to this day.

Kasich continues to be a chief advocate of actual or de facto amnesty,claiming that enforcing our immigration laws would be “inhumane.”

Of course, if Kasich gets his way, the legalization of 11 million illegals will have the same effect on the American electorate that the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty had on California. The country as a whole would become deep “anti-gun blue.”

And, of course, Kasich was one of the first RINO’s to legitimize the anti-gun ObamaCare program by bringing its massive Medicaid segment into his state.

Now, all it will take is for Obama to implement a computer search of Kasich’s Medicaid beneficiaries for “PTSD,” “Alzheimer’s,” and other “mental defectives,” and the gun rights of tens of thousands of law-abiding Ohioans could be jeopardized.

And all of this was done by Kasich’s particularly nasty form of politics which he is now trying to morph, incredibly, into his “Mr. Nice” act. 

These actions, of course, reflect the hatred for guns by Kasich’s patron, George Soros.

You may remember that when Soros launched his campaign of “exposes” designed to destroy the conservative movement piece-by-piece, his first target was Gun Owners of America — which Soros viewed as even more dangerous than the Koch brothers.

But perhaps as bad as Kasich’s anti-gun record is his determination to destroy the GOP selection process for personal gain.

Surely, even the vainglorious Kasich understands that, the longer he stays is the race, the longer the “divided field” makes it easier for an establishment candidate to hijack the process at the convention.

By becoming the REAL “chaos candidate,” Kasich helps destroy the Republican Party by throwing the nomination to someone who is despised by the grassroots. In so doing, Kasich does the bidding of his master, George Soros.

Op-ed: Fractured GOP’s uniter? Mitt Romney is still in the wings

1 Comment

This is from The Salt Lake Tribune.

I voted for Romney in 2012, I sure as Hell will not vote for him again.

It would not be much of a surprise if the Establishment Republicans try to put in Mitt.

The author of this article is wrong  George Washington was born in 1732 and not 1753.

It was George Washington’s 284th birthday.

Plan B seemed simple enough.

Before George Washington’s 263rd birthday the field of Republican presidential candidates would dwindle down to a precious two — most likely moderates John Kasich and Jeb Bush. Marco Rubio would be the outlier. Donald Trump and his triple comb-over would be but a comic reminder of just how ridiculous things could have become. The mainstream would be firmly in control. Popular vote, not party bosses and brass knuckle dickering, would have shown the door to all the one-trick conservatives and sputtering demagogues.

Instead, the primary in South Carolina leaves the GOP awash in fears that the anti-establishment tsunami sweeping through both parties could carry Trump to the nomination and into the White House.

Such anxieties are premature. The numbers are on plan. Voters are collectively confirming that moderates are the base of the party of Rockefeller and Reagan. The rub is no announced candidate can win the nomination outright, which means the nominee will come by way of negotiation at the party’s convention in July. The process could trigger internecine warfare the likes of which the GOP has not experienced since 1964, when doctrinaire conservatives seized control and propelled the party to its worst defeat ever.

As troubling, none of them can beat Hillary Clinton in November. She is smart, remarkably resilient, and vetted under fire at home and abroad. She has even politely endured the flailing arms and frantic rhetoric of Bernie Sanders.

This is not what Plan B anticipated.

The 2016 election was said to belong to the GOP, never mind the fact that the party has been routinely blowing them since 2008, when Sen. John McCain selected absurd Sarah Palin as his running mate. Trump is this cycle’s Palin. While angry party members and independents love him (like they “Feel The Bern”), the mainstream resists. A recent poll in Utah, the most reliably Republican state in the nation, revealed that a Clinton v. Trump general election would likely be a dead heat. Presciently “Other,” Utah’s faceless third choice, fared just as well.

In Utah, “Other” is a placeholder for their new neighbor Willard Mitt Romney. These dreamers are not alone. In November, a Boston Globe poll claimed Romney would win New Hampshire with 36 percent of the vote were he a candidate, relegating Trump a very distant second place at 14 percent.

Will the Republican muddle persuade Romney (or attract a fresh face like the billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg)? Most likely, party leaders are already turning to the vetted, reasonably well-liked but always coquettish Romney.

Fully aware that some party faithful believe he is too rich, too disingenuous, too good-looking, and too Mormon likely convinced him to avoid running a third time. Yet, he coyly admits that his wife Ann favors it, despite her ongoing struggle with multiple sclerosis. Their five sons are evenly divided — two approve, two oppose and one is undecided.

The record shows that Mitt Romney craves being needed almost as much as he yearns for redemption.  He was the congenial and focused young leader the founders of Bain & Company drafted to right their off-kilter partnership. Later he mounted an impressive attempt to dislodge the iconic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. He rebounded, by rescuing squeaky clean Salt Lake City from the taint of corruption brought on by the 2002 Winter Olympic Games and graft at the highest levels of the International Olympic Committee. Then he rushed home to Boston to be redeemed by the liberal Commonwealth that had rejected him just eight years earlier.

Perhaps his newest neighbors in leafy Cottonwood and his summer friends around Lake Winnipesaukee foresaw another Romney opportunity as they sensed disarray in the party. But at this point, don’t expect him to mount a floor fight at the convention. In 2008, he ducked a battle that would have secured him the vice presidential nomination that, instead, went to Palin.

Favorable polling numbers a year ago almost drew him in. His eyebrows raised again in November when the Boston Globe poll showed him trouncing everyone in New Hampshire. And he’s been thinking about it ever since. His chief fund-raiser Spencer Zwick, whom Mitt regards as a sixth son, has long insisted that Romney would answer a call to unite the party. Begging and pleading could do the trick.

If redeemed, the stage will be arranged as he likes it, and just in time for the authentic moderate Romney to emerge. From the outset, that was Mitt’s Plan A.

9 Uncomfortable Questions For Hillary Clinton

Leave a comment

This is from The Daily Caller.

If you ever got to ask these questions you would end up dead in Fort Marcy Park like Vince Foster.

 

The media have a new favorite question for Republican presidential aspirants.

“You believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman, but if someone in your family or in your office happens to be gay and they invite you to their wedding, would you go?” Univision’s Jorge Ramos asked 2016 GOP contender Marco Rubio Wednesday.

Since then, the question has spread like ISIS, replacing “do you believe in evolution” as the hot query for media types trying to make Republicans look like neanderthals. So far, Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, Scott Walker and John Kasich have all been asked variations of the question. (For those keeping score, like Rubio, Kasich and Walker said they would attend — in fact, Walker said he has attended a gay marriage ceremony — while Santorum said he would not. Cruz crafted his answer to say nothing at all.)

You might complain that Ramos posed a “gotcha” question with no relevance, but if you run for president, you should be prepared to answer just about anything. Almost nothing is or should be out of bounds. The real problem is similar questions are not often asked of Democratic contenders.

When Rand Paul was recently asked about whether he believed there should be any exceptions to his anti-abortion stance, like in cases such as rape or incest, he fired back at the media for failing to ask Democrats comparable questions on social issues like abortion.

“Here’s the deal — we always seem to have the debate way over here on what are the exact details of exemptions, or when it starts,” he complained. “Why don’t we ask the DNC: Is it OK to kill a seven-pound baby in the uterus? You go back and you ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz if she’s OK with killing a seven-pound baby that is not born yet. Ask her when life begins, and you ask Debbie when it’s okay to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, get back to me.”

In that spirit, here are 9 uncomfortable questions for reporters to ask Hillary Clinton — that is, if she ever gets around to submitting to an interview:

1.) What would you say if your daughter came out of the closet as a born again Christian who opposes gay marriage?
2.) Should a Christian baker be forced under penalty of law to bake a cake for a Satanist wedding ceremony?

3.) Do you oppose male only golf clubs? If so, do you also oppose female only gyms, like Curves? If not, why not?

4.) What is the appropriate pay ratio for CEOs compared to their workers? Should that ratio also apply to the Hollywood actors who have donated to your campaign compared to the crew that produce their movies?

5.) Speaking of greedy CEOs, is there a level of speaking fee which we should consider rapacious? If so, is it more or less than your speaking fee of $300,000?

6.) Would you accept the endorsement of someone who helped spark an anti-Semitic riot like, say, Al Sharpton? Or do you confine your association with him just to friendly correspondence on his birthday?

7.) Do you believe that global warming is, as John Kerry has said and as you’ve intimated in the past, the greatest threat to mankind? If so, explain in detail how you sought to curb greenhouse gas emissions in your own life? Also, while president, will you set an example by grounding Air Force One?

8.) Do you think a candidate should be disqualified from running for president if they consider a former Ku Klux Klan leader as their mentor? If so, how do you justify your continued presence in the race considering you called the late Sen. Robert Byrd, who once served as a KKK recruiter, a “mentor” of yours?

9.) Do you believe that women should have the right to choose a cosmetic or sex-selective abortion?

 

Atheist group opposes Holocaust memorial on Ohio statehouse grounds

1 Comment

This is from Fox News.

Where in any of our founding documents does the term Separation

of Church and State appear?

I have never been able to locate this term.

Another example of atheist bullying.

statehouse.jpg

An atheist group believes the Holocaust memorial depicted above violates the separation of church and state. (daniel-libeskind.com)

A Wisconsin-based atheist group has expressed its opposition to a Holocaust memorial set to be built on the ground of the Ohio statehouse, arguing that its location violates the separation of church and state and calling the Star of David “exclusionary” in memorializing victims of the Nazis.

But Ohio Gov. John Kasich and proponents of the memorial say it will teach people about man’s inhumanity to man and that, contrary to the atheists’ claim, it will include all those killed by the Nazis — including U.S. soldiers, ethnic and religious minorities, homosexuals and the mentally ill.

Joyce Garver Keller, executive director of Jewish Communities, an organization that represents Jewish groups across the state, said the memorial is intended “mostly to honor those who had survived and who had come to Ohio to build a life.”

Keller said it is appropriate to build the structure on state grounds because it will “remind lawmakers and those who work in and around government of the important role and responsibility they have in speaking out in the face of  hatred, anti-Semetism and genocide.”

“The Holocaust did not begin in concentration camps in the ovens with smoke stacks and mass graves,” Keller told FoxNews.com. “It began in the halls of government with the passage of laws that targeted Jews, taking their properties, their businesses, their home, their freedom and ultimately their lives.

Kasich first proposed the idea of a memorial during a May 4, 2011, annual Holocaust commemoration at the statehouse.

“We need to have remembrance in this statehouse,” Kasich said at the time. “I’d call on the Jewish community, along with our brothers in faith, to develop some sort of a memorial that members of our legislature and members of the public, as they pass through this great rotunda, will be able to understand not just the history of a time when people wouldn’t stand, but the fact that it’s today we must stand against evil.”

“Let’s construct something in this rotunda that can teach people about man’s inhumanity to man, best exemplified by what happened in the Holocaust,” he said.

The inscription planned for the memorial will read: “Inspired by the Ohio soldiers who were part of the American liberation and survivors who made Ohio their home. If you save one life, it is as if you have saved the world.”

“In remembrance the six million Jews who perished in the Holocaust and millions more including prisoners of war, ethnic and religious minorities, homosexuals, the mentally ill, the disabled, and political dissidents were suffered under Nazi Germany.”

The Jewish Star of David will be prominently featured at the site.

Kellers and others call such a memorial “inclusive,” while the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) claims the memorial is discriminatory and has no place on government grounds.

“The Star of David is a religious symbol that is exclusionary,” Dan Barker, a spokesman for the group, told FoxNews.com. “We’re not opposed to the memorial and we have sympathy for all the victims. We would probably give money to it if it were not on state grounds.”

“A secular government is not supposed to have a religious endorsement,” Barker continued. “I have Jewish heritage myself, but just because we like the religion and we’re sympathetic to Holocaust survivors, doesn’t mean we should violate the precious American principle of separation between church and state.”

Barker said the group expressed its opposition in a letter to the state, but has no plans to sue.

Approximately 11 million people perished in the Holocaust. Historians say at least 6 million Jews died at the hands of the Nazis, as did 1.9 million Polish civilians, mostly Christians. More than three million Soviet prisoners of war died and more than two million Soviet civilians, mostly Christians, were killed. More than one million Yugoslav civilians died and between 22,000 and 500,000 Gypsies were the victims of genocide, according to historical accounts. Approximately 70,000 men, women and children with mental and physical handicaps were murdered as well as an unknown number of political prisoners, resistance fighters, homosexuals and deportees.

According to Kasich’s office, the memorial will sit 84 yards from a bronze inscription in front of the statehouse that reads: “With God, all things are possible.” The American Civil Liberties Union had previously sued over that inscription and lost.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/25/atheist-group-opposes-holocaust-memorial-on-ohio-statehouse-grounds/#ixzz2a7Djf5k2

The Return of State Surpluses Could Point to More Growth to Come

1 Comment

This is from The Daily Beast.

Maybe the rest of the nation should follow the example set

the state of Texas.

My home state of Indian is not doing bad budget wise.

Hey Barack this is how to grow the nation’s economy.

This spring, budget surpluses are blossoming across America. We’ve noted that the combination of employment growth and tax increases is boosting federal revenues significantly—13 percent in the first five months of the current fiscal year. Combined with a bit of fiscal discipline, the higher revenues are helping to reduce the (still massive) federal budget deficit.

123522049
Matthew Borkoski/Getty

But America’s 50 states aren’t permitted to run deficits. So each year, state legislatures pass, and governors sign, budgets for the next fiscal year in which expenditure are supposed to align with expected revenues. Then, they wait and hope that the revenues actually materialize.

That’s happening—and more. In the current fiscal year (fiscal 2013, which started last spring or summer in most states), the level of spending rose just 2.2 percent from fiscal 2012, according to the National Association of State Budget Officers (NASBO). That’s far below the historical average of 5.6 percent growth per year. But state revenues are growing more rapidly than spending. In the fourth quarter of 2012, according to the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, state tax receipts were up 5.7 percent from the fourth quarter of 2011. For the full year, revenues probably rose about 4 percent. Now, late 2012 tax receipts were boosted in part because so many companies rushed dividend payments out the door to avoid the prospect of higher taxes.

Still, with revenues rising more rapidly than spending, deficits are evaporating in state capitals. “It’s likely most states will end the year with a slight surplus,” said Brian Sigritz, director of state fiscal studies at NASBO.

Surpluses are showing up in places you’d expect. North Dakota, currently enjoying an energy and agricultural boom, is projecting a $1.6 billion surplus over its two-year budgeting cycle. Texas, another resource-rich state, foresees an $8.8 billion surplus over its current two-year budget cycle.

But the Rust Belt is also regaining some of its fiscal shine. Ohio is expecting a $1 billion surplus for the current fiscal year. Wisconsin is looking at $484 million in black ink. Other states with surpluses include Iowa ($800 million) and Tennessee ($580 million). West Virginia completed its 2011–12 fiscal year with a surplus of about $88 million.

Some of the coastal states whose finances were hit hardest by collapsing housing markets and persistently high unemployment are also making a comeback. For the past several years, California’s massive, recurring deficits have made life miserable for politicians and inspired comparisons to Greece. Thanks to tough spending cuts, higher taxes, and a general recovery, California’s finances are on the mend. “California expects to take in $2.4 billion more in revenue than it will spend this fiscal year, which ends June 30,” Tami Luhby of CNN Money reported. “After paying off a shortfall from last year and setting aside funds for upcoming obligations, it’s on track to end the year with a $36 million surplus.” Florida, another state that has had to deal with harsh cuts to rein in deficits, is also now in the black. The current projection is for a surplus of $437 million.

Now, this doesn’t mean the state and local financial problems are over. States in New England and the Northeast ravaged by slow growth and weather-related destruction—New York, New Jersey, Connecticut—must still cut their way to balance. In real terms—i.e., adjusted for inflation—state revenues are still below the their pre-recession peak, notes Liz McNichol, an analyst at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. Most states have long-term problems with underfunded pensions. Cities, which have far less flexibility in raising revenues, continue to suffer. On Monday, Stockton, California, declared a rare Chapter 9 bankruptcy.

But in states with surpluses, life is becoming more fun for governors. Governors like John Kasich (Ohio), Mike Pence (Indiana), and Terry Branstad (Iowa) are pushing for tax cuts. Others are essentially pocketing the cash, stowing it in rainy-day funds or using it to cope with higher spending requirements. Tennessee is looking to use cash to spend more on health care and its prison system. Florida Gov. Rick Scott, up for reelection in 2014, is seeking to raise pay for teachers. Looking ahead to fiscal 2014, which starts for most states later this year, NASBO says almost every state is projecting a spending increase, and up to a dozen are cutting income taxes. (Here’s a state-by-state summary of next year’s budgets.)

Analysts are holding out hope that the return of surpluses will help reverse one of the most devastating results of the last several years. Governors and legislatures have frequently sought to balance their budgets by firing employees—including teachers and police officers. Since January 2009, state and local governments have reduced employment by 746,000—or about 4 percent. It’s likely that some of the increased tax revenues will be used to recall laid-off employees.

Sustained growth is the miracle cure for deficits. And when it comes to state finances, surpluses can help spur further growth.

 

%d bloggers like this: