Government Watchdogs Are Being Muzzled

The Inspector General is supposed to be a watchdog, pure and simple. Their role is watch and inspect what is going on, and if they see anything questionable, start barking like crazy. They are there to ensure that the tax payers money is being spent the way it is supposed to be spent. In essence, they are there to keep the tax payer from getting robbed.

But it looks like there's a new trend to muzzle the old watchdog. And if they somehow get the muzzle off and manage to bark out a warning, then they're going to get put down.

The most recent watchdog to get put down is Inspector General Fred Weiderhold of Amtrack. To be clear, he was not fired for what he said, he was "retired". Amtrack is our government run train system that is heavily subsidized by government funds. It was IG Weiderhold's job to ensure that our money was spent wisely. And bark loud and long if it wasn't. But he had been pretty effectively muzzled. He was forbidden by the Amtrack leaders from communicating with Congress without their approval, and any written communication had to go through them. Um, OK. So the people robbing us blind demand the right to edit the documents that tell Congress that they're robbing us blind. That's a great way to ensure that things are working effectively. And keep in mind, Amtrack got $1.3 billion in stimulus money. The office of the inspector General got money in that stimulus package as well. On paper. The leadership of Amtrack actually appropriated the money for the IG. Weiderhold did manage to get the muzzle off long enough to get somebody's attention, and now he no longer has a job.

But Wiederhold was not the first, and he won't be the last. There was also Gerald Walpin, Inspector General of AmeriCorps. And why was Walpin fired? Because the powers that be didn't like his investigation into the misappropriations of AmericCorps funds. They fired him for doing his job. This is not an enviable job to have. The Inspectors General are whistle blowers as their main job function. They are there to protect us against waste in our government, but how can they protect us when the government retains the right to fire them. And how can our government work if the people designated to speak out are silenced.

Then there is EPA employee Alan Carlin who did his job but his conclusions weren't what the administration wanted to hear. As a result his report that CO2 emissions are not impacting climate change, and that the climate may not, in fact, be getting warmer, was suppressed and he was instructed to work on something else. The memo to him actually said that his report did not support their policy or legal stance. OK, silly me. I thought the EPA was there to report the conclusions dictated by the data, not by the President. To be fair, Carlin is still employed. For now. But he has been speaking out. He has slipped his muzzle and is sharing the findings of his report.

We need our watchdogs unmuzzled. The average American doesn't have access to the files of all of the government organizations so we have these watchdogs in place. How can we have any faith at all that our government is acting in our best interests when our watchdogs fear getting kicked if they bark. Our once vicious watchdogs protecting our interests will lay down and whimper as the thieves rob us blind.

The big question is whether or not we're going to let this happen, or if the American people have become a bunch of whimpering lap dogs as well.

Congress Taxes Air

Well they've finally done it. Congress has finally found a way to tax air. By taxing "carbon emissions" in the Waxman-Markey (cap and trade) bill they are taxing how much carbon dioxide is put into the air. Guess what you exhale when you breathe? Carbon dioxide.

Our leadership has made no secret that is just the first step in their plans to regulate everything we do it and call it climate change legislation. This is simply another example of Congress using punishment through taxation in order to modify the behavior of the American people. Where is our individual freedom when the government thinks they should have control over everything we do? Why don't they just come right out and make it illegal? After all, to most of them burning coal is on the same par with murder.

So why is the bill called cap and trade you ask? It's quite simple really. The government is going to put a cap on how much carbon can be emitted, and if you don't use all of your allotment you can trade it for something else. Well, actually you can sell it to somebody else. The Washington Post described it this way; "The government would set a cap on the amount of carbon dioxide that could be emitted and would issue allowances to polluting sectors that could buy and sell those rights." So if you are in an industry that necessarily emits carbon, you're going to have to pay off the government in order to stay in business.

People have been duped into believing that this is a bill to create jobs, it's just the opposite. By levying huge taxes on companies who emit carbon, those companies will risk closing their doors because they can't bear the cost of the new taxes. Not only that, but the companies in other areas of the world, making the same product, will be able to sell it cheaper because they won't be subject to the same legislation. And those other companies are probably already emitting more carbon that the companies here. So what are we actually going to end up doing? Increasing a demand and therefore productivity for the companies that are less clean by punishing our cleaner companies here.

This is nothing more than one giant pay to play bill. A bill that so many people opposed initially that most of the 1,500 page legislation is a pay off to get votes. The Washington Post said this as well; "The result is a 1,201-page measure filled with political compromises, directives, subsidies and selections of winners and losers that most members won't be able to analyze before the vote and that leaves us wondering how effective it will be. " And this was before the last minute 300 page amendment. Winners and losers have already been selected by our Government. How does that work in a free market system? It doesn't. This will be giving the government control over every product produced, how it's produced, and what options we as consumers have. This is step one in the process of the government eliminating our right to choose and the consumer's control of the market. Their plan is to have the government control the market. Does that sound like the USA that you know?

I am all for being environmentally responsible. And if this bill were actually an attempt to find alternative fuel sources and /or to make those already discovered more cost effective and financially competitive, I'd be all for it. But it's not. It's a behavior modification tax. The government is going with their simple logic that if they don't want us to do something make it so expensive we can't afford to do it. According to them we use too much energy so they are slapping a huge energy tax on us. And this is a tax. A tax on ALL Americans. And weren't we promised that 95% of Americans would not have a tax increase? That only those making over $250K would be impacted by a tax increase? Well this is a tax that is expected to cause your energy bill to increase by at least 40%. So for those already struggling, already living paycheck to paycheck, one of your bills is going to increase dramatically. My senator, in a response to an e-mail I sent her, has already acknowledged that this is going to drive costs up and put our businesses at a disadvantage, so if you don't believe me, just ask your Congressmen.

This bill passed the house by a narrow margin because 8 Republicans voted for it. Had they stood by the principles of the Republican party this would not have happened. If you want to know who the "Republican 8" as we now refer to them are, you can find out about them by clicking on the link to the left for Left Coast Rebel. He has written a blog with a list of who they are and where they are from.

Please contact your Senator and urge them to vote no on this legislation. We cannot have this bill which taxes air and encourages corruption become law.

And all of this is to address an issue that scientists are still debating. The climate is changing, as it always has and always will, but man's impact on the climate is still contested by many scientists, and yet we're levying a huge tax under the guise of mitigating a problem we're not even sure exists.