Last week the “financial Reform” bill passed Congress … but there was no mention of the 2 complicit GSE’s, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. They have cost $160B so far and will likely cost $1 TRILLION to clean up.
And the people that wrote this new bill? The same people who DENIED over and over again that the GSE’s were just fine:
Rep Richard Baker (R-LA) asked in 2003 for more regulation of these corrupt giants. Watch Rep Maxine Waters (D-CA) say “We do not have a criss at Freddie Mac, and particular at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin Raines” [later convicted of fraud, a current Obama advisor] .
Watch Rep Gregory Meeks (D-NY) say “there is nothing wrong”, “we don’t need it [regulation]“. Rep Lacy Clay (D-MO) called the hearings a “political lynching of Franklin Raines” (who happens to be an African American). Rep Barney Frank (D-MA) says “I don’t see anything in this report that raises safety and soundness problems.”
Watch this if you can stomach the lies!
These same blockers received campaign donations (Obama was #1) from these GSE’s. How can we believe anything will change? I don’t
Related Posts - The Most Dangerous Man in America - Andy Stern (Why Obama desperately wants to pass healthcare, and the help he gets from this guy.) The number 1 visitor to the White House, according to...
- Increasingly Unpopular Obama "Using Political Capital" to Push Socialist Agenda Every month, Rasmussen does a summary showing the Presidential Approval Index. Obama continues to slip. His approval is down a whopping 38 points from January...
Today we take a detailed look at a recent FTC proposal that effectively regulates the news. You can get it here.
Hold onto your copy of the US constitution, which states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The FTC, packed with Obama socialists, has just published a Discussion Draft on “Potential Policy Recommendations to Support the Reinvention of Journalism“. These proposals seek to regulate the Internet — not just access speeds and bandwidth, but the information itself!
Proposal 1: Control the Utterance of Facts
The FTC deplores the fact that copyright does not protect “facts” in news stories, that other organizations can “free-ride” by repeating the facts gathered by newspapers.
Advocates argue “the copyright act allows parasitic aggregators to ‘free ride’ on others’ substantial journalistic investments,” by protecting only expression and not the underlying facts, which are often gathered at great expense. They define parasitic aggregators as those that, without permission, post enough material to render the original news stories redundant. This free-riding undercuts revenue for those who make investments in journalism and undermines their incentive to do so, according to advocates. They suggest that federal hot news legislation could help address revenue problems facing newspapers by preventing this free-riding.
So the first point is : why does the FTC think they have to intervene to help one type of competitor in the media?
They go on to discuss what the moratorium period might be under federalized “hot news” rules — rules that would prohibit, it would seem, you from tweeting information published by, say, the White House news team. While they discuss a “2 hour” ban — what would stop politicians and liberal courts from a 2-month ban?? … making the only facts available from White House trusted sources.
Proposal 2: Limit Search Engine Fair Use of News
To be fair, this argument is balanced, but consider this — that obscure blog that breaks embarrassing news might not be indexed by the search engine, ensuring that popular sites (Time, Newsweek, New York Time and other left-leaning sites) are the only ones with the “facts”.
Proposal 3: License News
Getting a chill yet. They go on to say:
governments have considered how to provide adequate incentives and funding for the news and are exploring, for example, the creation of government-fostered pilot programs to investigate new business models for IP [Intellectual Property] and discourage free-riding.
The notion: If you want to tweet a story, you pay a “micro-payment” back to the originator: the NYT, the White House news machine, etc.
They acknowledge:
A compulsory license places an effective tax on certain conduct.
So yes, the FTC proposes we tax the dissemination of FACTS, clearly abridging the freedom of speech and the free press.
Proposal 4: Drop Anti-Trust Rule for Newspapers So They Can Collude to Force Consumers to Pay for News
Another chilling concept. So let me count it up so far (and I am only on page 13 of the 47 page report) … you can’t repeat facts, you can’t search news, and you have to pay to find news facts … all under government licence. Now, big news can syndicate their news and prevent anyone from uttering the facts they find!!!
Proposal 5: Provide Government Subsidies to Some News Organizations
Yikes! The FTC comments:
Many people, including journalists, recoil at the thought of government assistance to sustain journalism.
(Me too!) Yet it justifies subsidies with a comment that it has been done and:
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has received direct support for over 40 years.
The FTC report waxes on for pages on the glories and success of Public Broadcasting.
“the fundamental purpose of public service media is to provide programs and services that inform, enlighten and enrich the public… CPB invests in programs and services that are educational, innovative, locally relevant and reflect America’s common values and cultural diversity.”
Can you hear the choirs singing the praises to the glories of PBS, comrade? The FTC moans on …
The U.S. government’s support for public broadcasting is very small compared to other democratic countries. For example, “if the United States spent at the same per capita level as Canada, our federal commitment would be $7.5 billion.” Per capita spending by Finland and Denmark is approximately 75 times greater.
So the proposal is to provide subsidies (i.e. Place more news organizations under government funding = control).
Subsidies
- Fund AmeriCorps Journalism Division. Can anyone say “Socialism youth camp and ministry of information”?
- Direct more funds to Public Broadcasting.
- Directly fund local news. Now who would hand out the money? Would a non-government supporting blog get funded?
- Provide tax credits for hiring reporters.
- Provide citizens with a voucher to buy non-profit news! You have to read the entire text to grasp the Orwellian nature of this proposal.
- Establish Citizenship News Vouchers. Citizenship news vouchers would allow every American tax payer to allocate some amount of government funds to the non-profit media organization of their choice. People could indicate on their tax return whether and to which nonprofit organization they want a specific amount (perhaps up to $200) to be donated, but they would not be required to designate a donation. They could split their “federal funds” donation among several different qualifying nonprofit media . Proponents of this approach suggest it would create a funding mechanism to encourage viable independent Internet journalism while avoiding government control or the creation of a bureaucracy that could influence the recipients of the money based on politics. This proposal also could give foundations a role to play. Foundations could provide start-up funding for 3 to 5 years to help new ventures, “and then see if there is popular support for the venture in the form of Citizenship News Vouchers.” If desired, this proposal could be structured to apply to commercial, as well as non-profit, news entities.
- Provide grants to universities to conduct investigative journalism. Has anyone seen a journalism school in America that is not far left-of-center?
- Provide SBA funds to nonprofit journalism organizations. Can you spell “ACORN”?
- Point the Voice Of America at America.
- Increase postal subsidies for newspapers.
New Taxes
The FTC paper then rambles into a long discussion of how to tax to pay for “better news”.
- 7% tax on radio and TV revenues! (Watch your cable bill folks!)
- 5% tax on TVs and radios!
- Tax on spectrum auction prices.
- 2% tax on all advertising!
- Another federal 3% tax on cell phone bills!
A Better Society for All
The FTC then waxes on about the best organization structure for news so that it serves
social purposes, such as economic redevelopment or environmental protection.
Some news entities may wish to explore hybrid organizational structures that integrate the pursuit of social purposes with business activities. These organizational designs include, among others, “Flexible Purpose” and “Benefit” corporations and low-profit limited liability companies (L3Cs). These hybrid designs may make sense for news entities, because journalism can fit a “social purpose” paradigm – that is, good journalism improves social welfare by educating the public through truthful and insightful reporting.
The report suggests government make Freedom of Information Act data (and most government information) more readily available, indexable and available (to select new organizations) for a reduced-fee.
Summary
In a nutshell, the FTC proposal suggests we:
- Abridge the freedom of speech and the press by restricting the utterance of facts reported in the news.
- Limit the ability of search engines to search news.
- License news so you pay when you repeat a fact.
- Allow news organizations to collude.
- Subsidize some news organizations, and promote non-profit news organizations for good social purposes.
- Provide you with a voucher so you can buy non-profit news.
- Tax TV, radio, TVs, radios, spectrum, advertising and cell phones.
CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW. If any one of these proposals gets into any bill, it is a clear and blatant abridgment of the First Amendment.
Citizens: beware!
News Reaction:
Even the Huffington Post says to the FTC: Get off our lawn!
The LA Times ridicules it in a story: Obama’s FTC plan to reinvent America’s news media.
The Washington Examiner asks: Will journalists wake up in time to save journalism from Obama’s FTC?
Related Posts - How Long Do You Have To Wait for A New Knee in Canada? With the debate swirling in the USA about government "involvement" in health provisioning, let's take a look back to the case I wrote about...
- The Most Dangerous Man in America - Andy Stern (Why Obama desperately wants to pass healthcare, and the help he gets from this guy.) The number 1 visitor to the White House, according to...
I just spent the last few weeks in France, watching the local Progressive politicians argue over who should pay for what failure.
I was stunned by a report in the International Tribune that described Germany’s dilemma: Thrifty German citizens are being asked to bailed out profligate spending Greeks … or bailout the German banks that invested in Greek bonds.
What about a third option? LET THEM FAIL AND LET THE BANKS AND THE GREEKS PAY FOR THE DECISIONS THEY MADE?
This bailout mentality has gripped the (once) civilized world. I’m depressed about the future and I am personally look for ways to protect myself from the insanity going on.
Related Posts - Financial Reform Does Not Reform Freddie and Fannie Last week the "financial Reform" bill passed Congress ... but there was no mention of the 2 complicit GSE's, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. They...
- The Solution to Overspending on Credit? More Credit, of Course! When I was very young and was learning about money, I would scratch my head when I passed by roadside signs: "Bad Credit, No Credit...
- CNN: Andersen Cooper invented the gay-sexual-label “tea-bagger” to describe the tea party movement.
- Time Magazine: has accused Glenn Beck of spreading sedition for not liking Obama.
- NBC: Kelly O’Donnell asked a black man at a tea party if he felt comfortable.
- Barack Obama: Last weekend scorned the tea party protesters, saying they should be “thankful”.
- SEIU: who set up anti-teaparty websites. What does a union have to do with taxpayer concerns? And isn’t SEUI head Andy Stern on the Presidential costs panel … while he backs anti-citizens rhetoric?
These and many are following the Alinsky Rules for Radicals .
“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)
The good news is, that in the long run, evil always loses to goodness. And that may start as soon as this November.
Related Posts - Well -- It Seems the AARP is Listening to its Membership! The AARP has been widely viewed as bring the in the bag for Obama's health care "reform" plans. Maybe not so! Today, Newsmax reports: At...
- THIS is What a Socialist Take-Over Feels Like The world, and especially the USA, is lurching, sliding and falling into the social morass called socialism. This slide is pushed and lauded by The...
Thanks to nopc.info for the summary:
Summary Timeline for Major Items in Senate Health Care Bill
Provisions that take effect immediately upon enactment:
Insurance Regulations
• Prohibition on pre-existing condition exclusions for private insurance on the individual market.
• Prohibition on revoking insurance for patients who falsify applications to fraudulently obtain private insurance coverage (however, penalties for fraud against federal health programs are increased).
Taxes
• “Annual Fee” tax on prescription drugs of $2.3 billion, allocated according to market share.
• New 10% tax on indoor tanning services effective July 1, 2010.
Other
• New restrictions on not-for-profit hospitals.
Special Favors
• Special tax benefit for BCBS organizations that maintain medical loss ratios of at least 85%.
Medicare
• Physician payments decrease 21% effective March 1, 2010.
Provisions that take effect six months after enactment:
Insurance Regulations
• Group and Individual policies issued after this date may not contain lifetime coverage limits, must provide first-dollar coverage for preventive care as defined by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, and must cover “children” of primary policyholders up to age 26.
Taxes
• FSA plans limited to $2,500 per year (currently no limit).
• New limits on what health care can be paid for with FSA, HSA, and HRA funds.
• Deduction for Part D eliminated.
• “Annual Fee” tax on medical devices of $2.0 billion, allocated according to market share (rises to $3.0 billion after 2017).
• “Annual Fee” tax on health insurance, allocated according to share of total premiums. Begins at $2 billion in 2011, then increases to $4 billion in 2012, $7 billion in 2013, $9 billion in the years 2014, 2015, and 2016, and eventually $10 billion for 2017 and every year thereafter. Two insurers in Nebraska and one in Michigan are exempt from this tax.
Medicare
• 10% Bonus for primary care physicians and general surgeons.
• Restrictions and substantial cuts to Medicare Advantage plans.
Medicaid
• Allows states to expand eligibility to 133% of the federal poverty line (FPL) for childless adults.
Other
• Private health plans must maintain a “medical loss ratio” of at least 85%. Failing that, they may rebate policyholders or increase medical expenditures. “Annual fee” tax does not count toward this ratio.
• First phase of small business tax credit for certain qualified small employers.
Taxes
• “Annual Fee” tax on health insurance increases to $4 billion.
Medicare
• Payment penalties for hospitals with the highest readmission rates for selected conditions.
Other
• Health insurance company employees may not be paid more than $500,000 per year.
Tax Increases
• “Annual Fee” tax on health insurance increases to $7 billion (does not count toward the required 85% medical loss ratio).
• 40% excise tax on health insurance premiums above $8,500 (individual plans) or $23,000 (family plans). Higher thresholds apply to the 17 highest-cost states until 2015, and indefinitely to retirees over age 55, and employer-provided plans for certain professions. This tax does not count toward the required 85% medical loss ratio.
• Itemized deduction for out-of-pocket medical expenses is limited to expenses over 10% of AGI (currently 7.5%); those over age 65 can use the 7.5% rate until 2016.
• Medicare tax increased from 2.9% to 3.8% for incomes over $250,000 (joint filers) or $200,000 (all others). (This is stated as an increase of 0.9 percentage points, to only the employee’s share of the FICA tax.)
Primary health reform takes effect:
Tax Increases
• “Annual Fee” tax on health insurance increases to $9 billion (does not count toward the required 85% medical loss ratio).
• Individual mandate begins: Tax penalties for not having insurance begin at $95 or 0.5% of income, whichever is higher, rising to $495 or 1% of income in 2015 and $750 or 2% of income thereafter (indexed for inflation after 2016). These penalties are per adult, half that amount per child, to a maximum of three times the per-adult amount per family. The penalty is capped at the national average premium for the “bronze” plan.
• Employer mandate begins:
– Provide “qualified” insurance or pay $750 tax per employee.
– Even if qualified insurance is provided, pay $3,000 tax per employee who qualifies for “affordability credit” (premium subsidy) based on family income and size, and opts to accept it.
Other
• Strict federal regulation of health plan benefit packages, premiums, and rating rules for both Exchange-participating and employer-sponsored group health plans.
• Imposition of actuarial value restrictions (in addition to restriction on medical loss ratio in effect since 2011).
• Health Insurance Exchanges.
• OPM-managed plans for the general public (in lieu of public option).
• “Affordability Credits” to those with family income under four times FPL who do not qualify for Medicaid in their state.
Medicaid
• Medicaid eligibility expanded to 133% of FPL for everyone under age 65 in participating states (such as Nebraska).
• All states except Nebraska must pay a share of the cost or drop Medicaid.
Tax Increases
• Individual mandate penalty rises to $495 per adult ($247.50 per child), maximum $1,485 per family, or 1% of family income, whichever is higher (capped at the national average premium for the “bronze” plan).
Insurance Regulations
• Limits on deductibles and co-payments imposed on Exchange-participating and employer-sponsored group health plans ($2,000 for single plans, $4,000 for family plans, indexed for inflation in health insurance premiums).
Medicare • Establishment of Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB) to recommend cuts in Medicare benefits; these cuts will go into effect automatically unless Congress passes, and the President signs, an override bill.
Other
• Second phase of small business tax credit for certain qualified small employers.
Tax Increases
• 40% excise tax on health insurance premiums above $8,500 (individual plans) or $23,000 (family plans) applied to remaining 17 states.
• Individual mandate penalty rises to $750 per adult ($375 per child), maximum $2,250 per family, or 2% of family income, whichever is higher (capped at the national average premium for the “bronze” plan). After 2016, the penalty will be increased each year to adjust for inflation.
• “Annual Fee” tax on health insurance increases to $10 billion (does not count toward the required 85% medical loss ratio).
• Itemized deduction for out-of-pocket medical expenses is limited to expenses over 10% of AGI for those over age 65.
Related Posts - Is this Reform? or a Blantant Power Grab? An excellent article in IBD this week bullet points the extra powers our legislators want to hand over to government control. Among the powers given...
- Have Your Read the Proposed Health Care Bill? Here are excerpts, thanks to Jeff Jacobs and Alan Peters: Sec. 113, Pg. 21-22 of the Health Care (HC) Bill MANDATES a government audit of...
