Behind the scenes it appears the Republican leadership could be splintering. Most see Boehner and McConnell's compromise as a sell-out? Or was it the only choice to drink out of the same cup as Obama, Reid and Pelosi? Read for yourself the cloakroom whisperings:
Hmmmmmm.... From The Guardian:
"House speakers typically don't even vote at all unless it is necessary to break a tie. So it may have been a clarifying moment when speaker of the House John Boehner and House majority leader Eric Cantor parted ways on the deal that ended the long national nightmare known as the fiscal cliff. Boehner voted for the bipartisan agreement negotiated between Vice-President Joe Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell; Cantor breathed the final moments of life into the opposition.
In fact, the House Republican leadership team split right down the middle on the legislation. House majority whip Kevin McCarthy voted against; House Republican conference chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers sided with Boehner and voted in favor.
House conservatives have increasingly chafed under Boehner's leadership. Four independent-minded fiscal conservatives – Justin Amash of Michigan, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, Walter Jones of North Carolina, and David Schweikert of Arizona – were purged from their preferred committee assignments for their unpredictable voting behavior. Secret "scorecards" were allegedly used in making the decision, though this has been denied publicly. Conservatives helped defeat Boehner's "Plan B" compromise on the fiscal cliff before Christmas.
The problem is that House Republicans are stifled by a Democratic Senate and president. Many of them hail from safe, conservative districts. A critical mass were elected in 2010 with high hopes for cutting government spending. Boehner's efforts to work within these constraints have not endeared him to some restless Republicans.
Enter Eric Cantor. In closed-door meetings of the House Republican conference, he expressed his opposition to the Senate bill before Boehner had taken a stand. He expressed the sense of most Republicans that it raised taxes without getting any meaningful spending cuts in return, that it added to the deficit, and that it created the precedent that any cuts must be paired with tax hikes.
President Obama's team released a statement that morning suggesting they agreed with that last point, practically singing, "Ding-dong, Grover Norquist's dead."
Cantor had tried to establish himself as the right flank of the debt ceiling negotiations in the summer of 2011, famously irritating the president. But many conservatives regarded this as ambition talking more than principle. When the majority leader said out loud what most Republicans were thinking about the fiscal cliff bill, however, there was admiration.
As reports of the meeting leaked out, observers began to wonder if a Cantor coup against Boehner was brewing. Cantor's spokesman, Doug Heye, took to Twitter to quell the rumors:
"Majority Leader Cantor stands with @SpeakerBoehner. Speculation otherwise is silly, non-productive and untrue." Doug Heye
Six hours later, Boehner and Cantor took opposite positions in the roll call vote."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/02/eric-cantor-no-vote-fiscal-cliff
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Netflix to share your viewing history
Get ready for your Netflix history to be shared with all your friends and online acquaintances. A new bill has been passed that makes it possible for Facebook to share your entire Netflix viewing history – including those guilty pleasures you thought no one would know about.
Netflix will give customers the option to turn off this feature, so those that do not wish for their collection to be shared will have the ability to do so.
Netflix and Facebook plan to roll out the new history sharing option in 2013, once a bill allowing the use of video history to be shared without written consent is signed off on by the President.
Netflix will give customers the option to turn off this feature, so those that do not wish for their collection to be shared will have the ability to do so.
Netflix and Facebook plan to roll out the new history sharing option in 2013, once a bill allowing the use of video history to be shared without written consent is signed off on by the President.
Taxes Going Up For 77% of Americans
Taxes for most Americans will still go up this year despite declarations from President Obama and others touting Tuesday night's fiscal crisis deal as a victory for middle-class workers.
At the same time, tax relief that was included in the package comes at a cost -- contributing, along with new spending, nearly $4 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years, adding to the nation's more than $16 trillion debt.
But there will be federal tax hikes in 2013. That's because the legislation pushed through the Senate and House on Jan. 1 does nothing to prevent a temporary cut in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. That means, under the agreement brokered by the White House and Senate Republicans, 77 percent of American households will be forced to fork over higher federal taxes in 2013.
Households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will face an average tax increase of $579 in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center's analysis. Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will face an average tax increase of $822.
For most families, the increase will end there. But for top earners, taxes will get considerably higher this year.
The package passed by both chambers extends most the Bush-era tax rates for individuals making less than $400,000 and married couples making less than $450,000 -- but lets them lapse for income above those thresholds.
The new tax package would increase the top income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. Investment taxes would also increase for people who fall in the new top tax bracket, from a rate of 15 percent to 20 percent.
High-income families will also pay higher taxes this year as part of Obama's 2010 health care law. As part of that law, a new 3.8 percent tax is being imposed on investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.
Together, the new tax package and Obama's health care law will produce significant tax increases for many high-income families.
For 2013, households making between $500,000 and $1 million would get an average tax increase of $14,812, according to the Tax Policy Center analysis. Households making more than $1 million would get an average tax increase of $170,341.
"If you're rich, you're almost certain to get a big tax increase," Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.
Obama pushed hard to enact the payroll tax cut for 2011 and to extend it through 2012. But it was never fully embraced by either party, and this time around, there was general agreement to let it expire.
Social Security is financed by a 12.4 percent tax on wages up to $113,700, with employers paying half and workers paying the other half. Obama and Congress reduced the share paid by workers from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent for 2011 and 2012, saving a typical family about $1,000 a year.
The deal passed Tuesday night only tees up a new round of congressional battles in a matter of weeks over the debt ceiling and automatic spending cuts that would largely hit the Pentagon -- the latter provision was delayed by two months as part of the deal. Democrats are likely to continue pushing for tax hikes as part of those debates, while Republicans are demanding spending cuts and entitlement reform.
At the same time, tax relief that was included in the package comes at a cost -- contributing, along with new spending, nearly $4 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years, adding to the nation's more than $16 trillion debt.
But there will be federal tax hikes in 2013. That's because the legislation pushed through the Senate and House on Jan. 1 does nothing to prevent a temporary cut in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. That means, under the agreement brokered by the White House and Senate Republicans, 77 percent of American households will be forced to fork over higher federal taxes in 2013.
Households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will face an average tax increase of $579 in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center's analysis. Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will face an average tax increase of $822.
For most families, the increase will end there. But for top earners, taxes will get considerably higher this year.
The package passed by both chambers extends most the Bush-era tax rates for individuals making less than $400,000 and married couples making less than $450,000 -- but lets them lapse for income above those thresholds.
The new tax package would increase the top income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. Investment taxes would also increase for people who fall in the new top tax bracket, from a rate of 15 percent to 20 percent.
High-income families will also pay higher taxes this year as part of Obama's 2010 health care law. As part of that law, a new 3.8 percent tax is being imposed on investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.
Together, the new tax package and Obama's health care law will produce significant tax increases for many high-income families.
For 2013, households making between $500,000 and $1 million would get an average tax increase of $14,812, according to the Tax Policy Center analysis. Households making more than $1 million would get an average tax increase of $170,341.
"If you're rich, you're almost certain to get a big tax increase," Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.
Obama pushed hard to enact the payroll tax cut for 2011 and to extend it through 2012. But it was never fully embraced by either party, and this time around, there was general agreement to let it expire.
Social Security is financed by a 12.4 percent tax on wages up to $113,700, with employers paying half and workers paying the other half. Obama and Congress reduced the share paid by workers from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent for 2011 and 2012, saving a typical family about $1,000 a year.
The deal passed Tuesday night only tees up a new round of congressional battles in a matter of weeks over the debt ceiling and automatic spending cuts that would largely hit the Pentagon -- the latter provision was delayed by two months as part of the deal. Democrats are likely to continue pushing for tax hikes as part of those debates, while Republicans are demanding spending cuts and entitlement reform.
Medicare Taxes Increasing In 2013
2013 Medicare Tax Increase: The Medicare tax is currently being withheld at the rate of 1.45% from all employees. However, beginning in 2013, an additional 0.9% will be added to the income in excess of the threshold; the threshold amount for 2013 is $200,000 for single filers and $250,000 for joint filers. As a result, the tax rate will be 1.45% for wages up to the threshold amount and 2.35% for wages above the threshold amount. For self-employed taxpayers, the tax rate will be 2.9% for income up to the threshold amount and 3.8% for income above the threshold amount.
Should sperm donors be responsible for child support?
Should sperm donors be responsible for child support? Why not egg donors? The real answer should be women should not be impregnated with donor sperm if hey are unable to care for the child. TOPEKA, Kan. - A sperm donor in Kansas is fighting a state effort to force him to pay child support for a child conceived through artificial insemination by a lesbian couple.
William Marotta, 46, of Topeka said he is "a little scared about where this is going to go, primarily for financial reasons," The Topeka Capital-Journal (http://bit.ly/132b7Ji) reported Monday.
When he donated sperm to Angela Bauer and Jennifer Schreiner in 2009, Marotta relinquished all parental rights, including financial responsibility to the child. When Bauer and Schreiner filed for state assistance this year, the state demanded the donor's name so it could collect child support for the now 3-year-old girl. Bauer and Schreiner broke up in 2010 but co-parent their eight children, who range in age from 3 months to 25 years.
"In the long run, I think this will be a good thing, but I'm the one getting squashed," Marotta said. "I can't even believe it's gone this far at this point, and there's not a damn thing I can do about it."
Though his attorneys, Benoit Swinnen and Hannah Schroller, are charging him reduced rates, Marotta said he expects the legal fees to eventually be more than he can afford. He is predominantly a mechanic but said he is currently working in a different field. He and his wife, Kimberly, have no biological children but care for foster children.
"I've already paid more than 10 percent of my yearly salary, and I don't know many folks who are willing to give up more than 10 percent of their yearly income," he said.
The state contends the agreement between Marotta and the women is not valid because Kansas law requires a licensed physician to perform artificial insemination.
"Speaking generally, all individuals who apply for taxpayer-funded benefits through DCF are asked to cooperate with child support enforcement efforts," Angela de Rocha, a spokeswoman for the Kansas Department for Children and Families, said in a statement. "If a sperm donor makes his contribution through a licensed physician and a child is conceived, the donor is held harmless under state statue. In cases where the parties do not go through a physician or a clinic, there remains the question of who actually is the father of a child or children.
"DCF is required by statute to establish paternity and then pursue child support from the non-custodial parent," she wrote.
A hearing on a motion by Marotta's attorneys to dismiss the case is scheduled for Jan. 8 in Shawnee County District Court.
Bauer and Schreiner have said they fully support Marotta's efforts to fight the state's request. When Bauer was diagnosed in March with what she calls "a significant illness" that prevents her from working, Schreiner sought health insurance for their daughter from the state. The DCF told Schreiner if she didn't provide the sperm donor's name, it would deny any health benefits because she was withholding information.
Marotta said Monday he doesn't resent Schreiner for giving the state his name.
"I resent the fact that Jennifer was pressured into doing that in the first place," he said. "That was wrong - wrong by the state."
___
Information from: The Topeka (Kan.) Capital-Journal, http://www.cjonline.com
William Marotta, 46, of Topeka said he is "a little scared about where this is going to go, primarily for financial reasons," The Topeka Capital-Journal (http://bit.ly/132b7Ji) reported Monday.
When he donated sperm to Angela Bauer and Jennifer Schreiner in 2009, Marotta relinquished all parental rights, including financial responsibility to the child. When Bauer and Schreiner filed for state assistance this year, the state demanded the donor's name so it could collect child support for the now 3-year-old girl. Bauer and Schreiner broke up in 2010 but co-parent their eight children, who range in age from 3 months to 25 years.
"In the long run, I think this will be a good thing, but I'm the one getting squashed," Marotta said. "I can't even believe it's gone this far at this point, and there's not a damn thing I can do about it."
Though his attorneys, Benoit Swinnen and Hannah Schroller, are charging him reduced rates, Marotta said he expects the legal fees to eventually be more than he can afford. He is predominantly a mechanic but said he is currently working in a different field. He and his wife, Kimberly, have no biological children but care for foster children.
"I've already paid more than 10 percent of my yearly salary, and I don't know many folks who are willing to give up more than 10 percent of their yearly income," he said.
The state contends the agreement between Marotta and the women is not valid because Kansas law requires a licensed physician to perform artificial insemination.
"Speaking generally, all individuals who apply for taxpayer-funded benefits through DCF are asked to cooperate with child support enforcement efforts," Angela de Rocha, a spokeswoman for the Kansas Department for Children and Families, said in a statement. "If a sperm donor makes his contribution through a licensed physician and a child is conceived, the donor is held harmless under state statue. In cases where the parties do not go through a physician or a clinic, there remains the question of who actually is the father of a child or children.
"DCF is required by statute to establish paternity and then pursue child support from the non-custodial parent," she wrote.
A hearing on a motion by Marotta's attorneys to dismiss the case is scheduled for Jan. 8 in Shawnee County District Court.
Bauer and Schreiner have said they fully support Marotta's efforts to fight the state's request. When Bauer was diagnosed in March with what she calls "a significant illness" that prevents her from working, Schreiner sought health insurance for their daughter from the state. The DCF told Schreiner if she didn't provide the sperm donor's name, it would deny any health benefits because she was withholding information.
Marotta said Monday he doesn't resent Schreiner for giving the state his name.
"I resent the fact that Jennifer was pressured into doing that in the first place," he said. "That was wrong - wrong by the state."
___
Information from: The Topeka (Kan.) Capital-Journal, http://www.cjonline.com
News Paper Columnist Writes Gun Owners Should Be Tied And Dragged Down the Road
DES MOINES, Iowa – For 50 years, the left-leaning columnist Donald Kaul has raged against guns, but after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, he says, it’s time for “anger,” killing gun owners and dragging legislators who disagree with gun control behind pickup trucks until they get the message.
The Pulitzer Prize-nominated columnist penned an alarming screed published in the Des Moines Register in which he further suggested the Second Amendment be repealed and the National Rifle Association be declared a terrorist organization.
The fact that the Des Moines Register would even publish something like this leaves me stunned. However, after a little investigation.....
The Des Moines Register is owned by Gannett, the same company that owns the paper (the Journal News) that published the interactive maps of gun licenses in upstate New York, and has just vowed to publish more information.
Anyone seeing a pattern here?
Gannett owns:
Print media:
USA Today of Tysons Corner, Virginia (1,830,594, 2nd overall)
The Arizona Republic of Phoenix, Arizona (308,973, 14th)
Detroit Free Press of Detroit, Michigan (245,326, 20th)
The Indianapolis Star of Indianapolis, Indiana (182,933, 32nd)
The Courier-Journal of Louisville, Kentucky (159,275, 42nd)
The Cincinnati Enquirer of Cincinnati, Ohio (157,574, 43rd)
The Tennessean of Nashville, Tennessee (127,538, 61st)
Democrat and Chronicle of Rochester, New York (119,399, 65th)
Asbury Park Press of Neptune City, New Jersey (112,683, 68th)
The Des Moines Register of Des Moines, Iowa (109,095, 73rd)
The News Journal of Wilmington, Delaware (87,138, 89th)
The Journal News of White Plains, New York (79,525, 96th)
Pacific Daily News of Guam
Broadcast media:
WBIR-TV (NBC) in Knoxville, Tennessee
WXIA-TV (NBC) and WATL (MyNetworkTV) in Atlanta (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
WUSA (CBS) in Washington, D.C.
KPNX (NBC) in Phoenix
WTSP (CBS) in Tampa-St. Petersburg (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
KARE (NBC) in Minneapolis-Saint Paul
KUSA-TV (NBC) and KTVD (MyNetworkTV) in Denver
WKYC-TV (NBC) in Cleveland
KXTV (ABC) in Sacramento, California
KSDK (NBC) in St. Louis
WZZM-TV (ABC) in Grand Rapids, Michigan
WFMY-TV (CBS) in Greensboro, North Carolina
WJXX (ABC) and WTLV (NBC) in Jacksonville, Florida
WGRZ-TV (NBC) in Buffalo, New York
KTHV-TV (CBS) in Little Rock, Arkansas
WLTX (CBS) in Columbia, South Carolina (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
WMAZ-TV (CBS) in Macon, Georgia (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
WCSH-TV (NBC) in Portland, Maine (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
WLBZ-TV (NBC) in Bangor, Maine
Gannett Digital:
Captivate Network
CareerBuilder (50.8%)
Classified Ventures (20%)
DealChicken
eHarmony
GannettLocal
HighSchoolSports.net
Metromix
PointRoll
ShopLocal
Cars.com
Reviewed.com
The Pulitzer Prize-nominated columnist penned an alarming screed published in the Des Moines Register in which he further suggested the Second Amendment be repealed and the National Rifle Association be declared a terrorist organization.
The fact that the Des Moines Register would even publish something like this leaves me stunned. However, after a little investigation.....
The Des Moines Register is owned by Gannett, the same company that owns the paper (the Journal News) that published the interactive maps of gun licenses in upstate New York, and has just vowed to publish more information.
Anyone seeing a pattern here?
Gannett owns:
Print media:
USA Today of Tysons Corner, Virginia (1,830,594, 2nd overall)
The Arizona Republic of Phoenix, Arizona (308,973, 14th)
Detroit Free Press of Detroit, Michigan (245,326, 20th)
The Indianapolis Star of Indianapolis, Indiana (182,933, 32nd)
The Courier-Journal of Louisville, Kentucky (159,275, 42nd)
The Cincinnati Enquirer of Cincinnati, Ohio (157,574, 43rd)
The Tennessean of Nashville, Tennessee (127,538, 61st)
Democrat and Chronicle of Rochester, New York (119,399, 65th)
Asbury Park Press of Neptune City, New Jersey (112,683, 68th)
The Des Moines Register of Des Moines, Iowa (109,095, 73rd)
The News Journal of Wilmington, Delaware (87,138, 89th)
The Journal News of White Plains, New York (79,525, 96th)
Pacific Daily News of Guam
Broadcast media:
WBIR-TV (NBC) in Knoxville, Tennessee
WXIA-TV (NBC) and WATL (MyNetworkTV) in Atlanta (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
WUSA (CBS) in Washington, D.C.
KPNX (NBC) in Phoenix
WTSP (CBS) in Tampa-St. Petersburg (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
KARE (NBC) in Minneapolis-Saint Paul
KUSA-TV (NBC) and KTVD (MyNetworkTV) in Denver
WKYC-TV (NBC) in Cleveland
KXTV (ABC) in Sacramento, California
KSDK (NBC) in St. Louis
WZZM-TV (ABC) in Grand Rapids, Michigan
WFMY-TV (CBS) in Greensboro, North Carolina
WJXX (ABC) and WTLV (NBC) in Jacksonville, Florida
WGRZ-TV (NBC) in Buffalo, New York
KTHV-TV (CBS) in Little Rock, Arkansas
WLTX (CBS) in Columbia, South Carolina (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
WMAZ-TV (CBS) in Macon, Georgia (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
WCSH-TV (NBC) in Portland, Maine (Pacific and Southern Company, Inc.)
WLBZ-TV (NBC) in Bangor, Maine
Gannett Digital:
Captivate Network
CareerBuilder (50.8%)
Classified Ventures (20%)
DealChicken
eHarmony
GannettLocal
HighSchoolSports.net
Metromix
PointRoll
ShopLocal
Cars.com
Reviewed.com
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
On New Years Day Late In Night Congress Passes Fiscal Cliff Bill
Unbelievable and sickening! Congress has passed the Fiscal Cliff Deal! What is the difference between Republicans and Democrats??? None! New Congressman Dave Camp urged his fellow congressman to support the fiscal cliff deal! Deal What Deal? $41 in tax increases for every $1 in spending cuts! You call this a deal???
WASHINGTON (AP) - Legislation to block the "fiscal cliff" is headed to the White House for President Barack Obama's signature. The bill will avoid, for now, the major tax increases and government spending cuts that had been scheduled to take effect with the new year. Final approval came in the House on New Year's Night. The vote was 257 to 167. The Senate passed the bill less than 24 hours earlier. The measure raises tax rates on incomes over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples, a victory for Obama. It also extends expiring unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless, prevents a cut in fees for doctors who treat Medicare patients and cancels a $900 pay increase due to lawmakers in March. Another provision is designed to prevent a spike in milk prices.
WASHINGTON (AP) - Legislation to block the "fiscal cliff" is headed to the White House for President Barack Obama's signature. The bill will avoid, for now, the major tax increases and government spending cuts that had been scheduled to take effect with the new year. Final approval came in the House on New Year's Night. The vote was 257 to 167. The Senate passed the bill less than 24 hours earlier. The measure raises tax rates on incomes over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples, a victory for Obama. It also extends expiring unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless, prevents a cut in fees for doctors who treat Medicare patients and cancels a $900 pay increase due to lawmakers in March. Another provision is designed to prevent a spike in milk prices.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)