How liberals can really make a difference

On Thanksgiving Day I had the misfortune of reading a "My Turn" article published in the Nov. 27, 2013 Press by Jimmy Pappas. The article caught my attention when I read the charge he made about a "cut and slash agenda" when referring to spending on food stamps, Meals on Wheels, Head Start, Social Security, etc. all federal programs. Mr. Pappas is apparently not aware of how Baseline budgeting for federal programs work. As a tax person, I have to deal in law and facts. Here are the facts that clarify what "cut or slashed spending" really means.

The author at Wikipedia explains it better than I can: "Baseline budgeting is an accounting method the United States Federal Government uses to develop a budget for future years."

"Baseline budgeting uses current spending levels as the 'baseline' for establishing future funding requirements and assumes future budgets will equal the current budget; times the inflation rate; times the population growth rate. Other technical changes, annual increase of now approximately 3 percent plus inflation, to the definition of the baseline were enacted in 1990, 1993, and 1997. Presently, the (automatic annual) Baseline budgeting increase is about 7 percent. Changes that merely slow the growth of federal spending programs have often been described as cuts in spending, when in reality they are actually reductions in the rate of spending growth."

In plain English, a 1, 3 or 5 percent increase in spending (instead of 7 percent) Mr. Pappas, is still an increase even if you, a bureaucrat, politician, or a writer calls it a "cut" or "slashed spending."

While writing this response I decided to do a little research. Can you imagine my surprise when I discovered an opinion article by Mr. Pappas that exposes him as a bigger hypocrite than his diatribe about Republicans and conservatives being hypocrites? Let me quote from his previous article published May 2, 2012 where he attacked the decision of the Coeur d'Alene City Council.

Mr. Pappas wrote: "The McEuen Field controversy seriously offended many Cd'A citizens when several members of the Cd'A City Council and the mayor decided to approve a huge project that we really don't need at a gigantic cost to taxpayers. The stinker is that they also took it upon themselves to deny the taxpayers the respect of a vote. They simply applied the tried and true 'Representative Government' concept and shoved it right down our throats."

I substituted the opposition point of view to the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act "Obamacare" for some portions of Mr. Pappas' article voicing his opposition to the McEuen Field plan that was "shoved ... right down our throats." This illustrates the total hypocrisy this man demonstrates to anyone who is opposed to his opinions.

"The Obamacare controversy seriously offended many American citizens when the congress and the president decided to approve a huge project that we really don't need at a gigantic cost to taxpayers. The stinker is that they also took it upon themselves to deny the taxpayers the respect of a vote. They simply applied the tried and true 'Representative Government' concept and shoved it right down our throats."

Pappas goes on to argue, "That decision did not go down well. These individuals denied us a public vote which just so happens to be the very instrument that they were so in honor of when it put them in office. The appreciation wore off. Apparently, we were wise (fooled) enough to vote them in, but too dumb to make an informed decision as to the health care future of America. Is there a Zen riddle in their somewhere?"

"Now why do you think they really did that so boldly? You have to assume that they were very aware of the possibility that they chanced being voted out at the next election. I assure you that they were convinced that it would be unsuccessful, and I hope they are wrong. As you read this, the insurance companies, pharmaceuticals and powers that be in benefiting from Obamacare will profit from this 'vision for America' are lining up to defend their preferred congress members and the president."

Mr. Pappas has "all but branded us (those opposed to Obamacare) as heretics and blasphemers. Here come the dark ages all over again, along with exaggerations and distortions of the truth."

"There is no riddle here; these profiteers are the true beneficiaries of 'The future vision for America.' This is how these private business alliances generate privatized profit, and then socialize the cost (we pay, they profit)."

"Lastly, it deeply offends me to witness people in America demonized for exercising and protecting their constitutional rights by standing up against people only representing their self serving interests. This is the very reason we have these rights in the first place. Those that are attacking the people opposed to Obamacare should be proud to know that their actions would be profoundly honored in China and the Soviet Union. (FYI, the Soviet Union formally dissolved on 26 December 1991)."

In my opinion, substituting opposition to Obamacare for McEuen Park eloquently expresses why the passage of the Obamacare law is a travesty to the American republic. Thank you, Mr. Pappas.

The administration, to pass Obamacare, used every tactic possible on congressional members to coerce, intimidate, and bestow political favors and a bunch of other techniques (I won't publicly state because the NSA will also read this).

American politics are emotionally complicated. Political promises and spin are used to sell people on every new entitlement program or law. The content in the actual laws passed often includes drastic hidden intended and unintended consequences and financial costs. Obamacare is no exception. The law is over 2,200 pages in length, with over 20,000 pages of regulations already written. Nancy Pelosi, then speaker of the House, arrogantly stated, "We have to pass the Bill (Obamacare) so that you can find out what is in it." Well, we are finding out what is in it.

Obamacare is a mandate to buy insurance from an insurance company. As Pappas stated, "This is how these private business alliances generate privatized profit, and then socialize the cost (we pay, they profit)."

Obamacare will be administered by the IRS. What can you say to that?

The average taxpayer between 100 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level will be responsible for a number of additional informational forms and calculations in 2014. A more complex tax form, just what we need.

Out of pocket cost sharing ranges from 40 percent down to 10 percent. Many people will get a government subsidy to lower the premiums for costly insurance. For other people their costs for insurance premiums will increase.

The IRS will have access to all your financial and personal information you submit on the market place website. If you miscalculate your credit amount the IRS will have the ability to withhold any refund until the credit is repaid. You will be audited by computer and get a letter telling you what you owe.

Remember the income tax rates started out at 1 to 7 percent. When the tax was started the politicians promised it was only going to affect the rich. The total hidden tax rate is between 30 and 55 percent for working people. How is that working out?

I find it difficult to listen to political rhetoric and ranting. I started to develop this position after I watched President Clinton and Newt Gingrich form an alliance to pass NAFTA, North American Free Trade Agreement. As I learned from that experience, the name of the law (and most laws after that) are deceptively named. The original law was 900 pages. Ross Perot made the prediction that industry would leave America and we would lose manufacturing jobs. History proved these predictions to be correct. At the time, Perot was demonized in the press the same way Mr. Pappas demonized a number of people and groups that he disagrees with in his November 27, 2013 opinion article.

I checked statistics for one entitlement program, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP formerly referred to as food stamps) from 2000 until 2013. Under President Bush 14.7 million were added to SNAP. Does Mr. Pappas define that as a slashing cut? Under President Obama 15.8 million people have been added to SNAP. As of June 2013, 47,760,285 people are receiving SNAP. The Depression-era "soup lines" have been replaced with grocery store lines with people using their SNAP cards to buy food.

I had two reactions to these SNAP numbers. First, the trend is very disturbing. I do not believe most of these people would choose SNAP if they could find a job that would support them. Jobs have been leaving the US and Idaho since Clinton and Gingrich shoved NAFTA down our throats. Second, the SNAP program grew substantially under both political parties. I failed to detect any recognition on the part of Mr. Pappas that this is an alarming trend; he proposed no solution, only more expansion and demonized a lot of other people who think there is a problem.

I admire Mr. Pappas for his stand and action on McEuen Park. We hold similar philosophical views on how the politicians shoved that "donkey" down our throats.

I want to make a suggestion for Mr. Pappas and his like-minded thinkers. I invite you to take action and donate to the government to offset the "cuts and slashing" to these programs. Such contributions are tax deductible if you itemize your deductions.

You can make a contribution online either by credit card, or checking or savings account at Pay.gov or you can write a check payable to the Bureau of the Public Debt, and in the memo section, note that it's a Gift to reduce the Debt Held by the Public. Mail your check to:

Attn: Dept. G, Bureau of the Public Debt, P. O. Box 2188, Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188

Richard Fiscus is a Hayden resident.