Rubio opposes Stop-Gap government funding bill — unless it defunds Obamacare

Rubio: “Senator Cruz from Texas is offering this amendment to defund ObamaCare. If that gets onto the bill, in essence if they get a continuing resolution and we vote on that and we can pass it onto a bill, I will vote for a continuing resolution, even if it’s temporary, because it does something permanent and that is defund this health care bill, this ObamaCare bill that is going to be an absolute disaster for the American economy.”

Excerpts of Interview with Hugh Hewitt – Full interview available here.

Senator Marco Rubio: “Well first of all, I don’t think anyone is in favor of shutting down the government, but I think that is where we are headed ultimately here, unfortunately, if we don’t fix our debt problem. And I’m talking about down the road long term – long term meaning five, six, three years. We don’t know when a debt crisis will happen. So look, about a year and a half ago, I voted for the first continuing resolution and then I announced, ‘This is the last continuing resolution, the last stop-gap measure that I am going to vote for. I will only vote, from here on, on something serious.’ And so far we haven’t seen that. All we see is this ‘kicking the can down the road’, these manufactured crises. As if the people back home don’t have enough to worry about with all the problems we have today, now Washington every month seems to be creating a new crisis for them to worry about and for the media to freak out about. But here is what I’ve said about this continuing resolution, you know Senator Cruz from Texas is offering this amendment to defund ObamaCare. If that gets onto the bill, in essence if they get a continuing resolution and we vote on that and we can pass it onto a bill, I will vote for a continuing resolution, even if it’s temporary, because it does something permanent and that is de-fund this health care bill, this ObamaCare bill that is going to be an absolute disaster for the American economy. You are already starting to feel the outer edges of that. In all these debates that we have been having, we have lost sight of how truly bad the health care law is.  I understand the Supreme Court ruled the way they did. It doesn’t make a good public policy, and you’re already starting to hear about it. I am already running into businesses that are planning next year on not hiring next year or laying some people off so they don’t have to meet these mandates. Others are going to push their employees off of their private plans that they offer and onto these exchanges, driving up the cost for the public. So, this is going to be an implementation disaster. It’s going to hurt our economy severely, and we aren’t spending enough time talking about that.”

***

Rubio: “Right, I don’t know if that alone will be enough, but I would certainly support that amendment. I would certainly support that measure because it’s going to hurt patients. What’s going to happen now is that it’s going to become less of an incentive to get into that business and the accessibility of these innovations is going to become less. This is one of the arguments that people were using, and that I echoed. I wasn’t in the Senate when ObamaCare came up, but we don’t just want affordable health insurance market place – that is very important – we want the highest quality healthcare. We want the latest, greatest innovations. That is what Americans have come to expect. You start taxing innovation, people are going to stop innovating here in this country.”

***

Rubio: “I think it’s coming next week. That is what Senator Reid has announced. That is one of the reasons he wanted to have the Brennan vote this week is because he wants to get on it next week. So, I think you can anticipate this argument next week, and I think it is the perfect opportunity for us to have a debate once again on ObamaCare. I don’t think there has been enough attention paid to it.  It has been a while. We have moved on to these other issues, but there is right now out there probably nothing more damaging to our economy in the short term than this implementation of ObamaCare.”

Florida Senate Judiciary Committee approves anti-Sharia bill

Jihad Watch, winner of the CPAC best blog award, reports:

Hamas-linked CAIR and other Islamic supremacist groups have consistently and successfully argued that anti-Sharia laws would infringe upon Muslims’ religious rights. They still make headway using that argument with judges and lawmakers who are ignorant of the nature of Sharia.

In reality, no one cares about individual Muslim religious practice or wants to restrict it. The purpose of anti-Sharia laws is not to stop Muslims from getting married in Islamic religious ceremonies or to restrict their religious practice in other ways, but to stop the political and supremacist aspects of Islam that infringe upon the rights and freedoms of non-Muslims, denying the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law. This is the case that must be made, but it still hasn’t been. This bill is certain to be challenged on the same grounds.

“‘Anti-Sharia’ law is back,” from the Miami Herald, March 6:

A renewed attempt to pass a controversial “foreign law” bill proposed by Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla, and Rep. Larry Metz, R-Yahala, was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, after more than an hour of sometimes emotional public testimony. The bill, SB 58, bans courts or other legal authorities from using religious or foreign law as a part of a legal decision or contract relating to family law. Florida law would supersede foreign law regarding divorce, alimony, the division of marital assets, child support and child custody. The bill is ready to be heard on the House floor but it has more committee stops in the Senate. Last year, the bill passed the House but died in the Senate.

Supporters say the proposal isn’t targeting religious groups, but the bill has been criticized as anti-Sharia, a Koran-based code followed in some Islamic countries, by Islamic groups as well as Jewish organizations and the American Civil Liberties Union.

“It should raise some eyebrows for you, the fact that there’s a rabbi speaking out against the bill who’s from Israel and a Arab Muslim, that’s me, also speaking out against the bill,” said Ahmed Bedier, president of the United Voices for America. “We may disagree what is happening in the Middle East, but we agree on this bill — that it discriminates and targets our communities.”

Not really. Bedier, of course, is a former rep of Hamas-linked CAIR.

The Florida Family Association in an email stated:

The Florida Senate Judiciary Committee voted on SB 58 – Application of Foreign Law in Certain Cases during the scheduled March 6, 2013 2:00 to 4:00 pm meeting.  The vote was 6 – 3 in favor of the bill. SB 58 now moves to the Committee on Governmental Oversight and Accountability.

Application of Foreign Law in Certain Cases: Clarifies that public policies expressed in act apply to violations of natural person’s fundamental liberties, rights, & privileges guaranteed by State Constitution or U.S. Constitution; provides that act does not apply to corporation, partnership, or other form of business association, except when necessary to provide effective relief in proceedings under or relating to chs. 61 & 88, F.S.; specifies public policy of this state in applying choice of foreign law, legal code, or system in proceedings brought under or relating to chs. 61 & 88, F.S., which relate to dissolution of marriage, support, time-sharing, Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction & Enforcement Act, & Uniform Interstate Family Support Act; declares that certain decisions under such laws, codes, or systems & certain choice of venue or forum provisions in contract are void; provides for construction of waiver by natural person of person’s fundamental liberties, rights, & privileges guaranteed by State Constitution or U.S. Constitution; declares that claims of forum non conveniens or related claims must be denied; limits construction of provisions in certain circumstances.

Florida House rejects Obamacare Medicaid expansion

John Hayward from Human Events reports:

On the eve of convening of the 2013 session, the House Select Committee on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act rejected the expansion. A Senate counterpart committee postponed consideration of the issue, which is sure to be one of the biggest controversies of the session.

Scott, a Republican who bitterly fought President Barack Obama’s national healthcare plan as a candidate and in his first two years as governor, stunned conservative supporters on February 20 when he endorsed a three-year expansion of Medicaid, provided the federal government picks up the full cost for the first three years as promised.

“There’s definitely a fight between the governor and the (state) legislature over this. The Republicans in the legislature are much more fiscally conservative than his actions have shown him to be,” said Susan MacManus, a Tampa-based political scientist at the University of South Florida.

Republican legislative leaders have been openly hostile toward the plan, emphasizing that state lawmakers will make the final decision in drawing up a budget for next fiscal year.

The Florida based James Madison institute released the following statement:

The House made the right decision today to not draft a committee bill expanding Medicaid under PPACA provisions. Many Members expressed valid concerns that this could hurt the people that it is aimed at helping. State leaders should focus on providing more access to quality care — expanding a program that is inefficient in this effort is not a way to do that.

Additionally, in our recent poll of 600 registered Florida voters more than 63 percent said they are wary that the federal government would keep the funding level promises made, and clearly many House Members share this worry. If history is any indicator, costs of such programs are often underestimated and there has been examples of the federal government going back on their promise before. These issues cannot be ignored.

Florida student suspended for disarming gunman?

Matt Grant from Fox News Channel 4 in Naples, Florida reports, “A 16-year-old Cypress Lake High School student, who wrestled a loaded revolver away from a teen threatening to shoot, is being punished.”

“The student grappled the gun away from the 15-year-old suspect on the bus ride home Tuesday after witnesses say he aimed the weapon point blank at another student and threatened to shoot him,” notes Grant.

“The student, who Fox 4 has agreed not to identify and distort his voice because he fears for his safety, says there’s ‘no doubt’ he saved a life by disarming the gunman. And for that he was suspended for three days,” according to Fox News.

Tracy Perkins, Principal of Cypress Lake High School

Principal Tracy Perkins suspended the student because “Florida law allows the principal to suspend a student immediately pending a hearing” according to Lee County District spokesman Alberto Rodriguez.

Lee County citizens are scratching their heads at this suspension of a student who to many is a hero. What message does this send? Step in and save a fellow student from grievous bodily harm and get suspended.

Grant states, “Authorities were unable to watch the school bus surveillance video because the cameras weren’t working. The 15-year-old suspect was arrested and charged with possession of a firearm on school property and assault with a deadly weapon without intent to kill.”

The Lee County School District issued the following statement:

“The District has completed its investigation regarding an incident that took place on February 26, 2013, regarding multiple Cypress Lake High School students. The District is unable to comment regarding the specific disciplinary measures taken against specific students. However, it must be noted that during the initial investigation conducted by the administration of Cypress Lake High School the students involved refused to cooperate with school authorities regarding the events that occurred. As a result, appropriate disciplinary actions were taken at that time. Subsequently, law enforcement along with school officials have acquired additional information that has provided the complete picture of what occurred that day. Certain students involved have been and will be disciplined in accordance with that additional information consistent with the Code of Student Conduct and Florida law. The District will be making no further comment regarding this matter.”

Ann Coulter: “Your little friend Marco Rubio better be paying attention”

National and international attention is now focusing on Marco Rubio. Elected as a TEA Party favorite to the US Senate from Florida many are now questioning his bona fides as a conservative.

BizPac Review reports:

“After calling the liberal media “hothouse flowers” because of their reaction to one of their own,  Bob Woodward’s war with the White House, Coulter ripped into Marco Rubio, reminding him of the perceived flaws in his immigration plan.

“Your little friend Marco Rubio better be paying attention here because his plan of legalization first and then we are going to trust the Obama administration,” is a problem,  Coulter said after expressing shock at the recent release of criminal illegals by Obama and the administration. Coulter was particularly disgusted by the potential future crimes that could occur because of Obama’s political move and suggested conservatives track the released criminals.

The Shark Tank’s Javier Manjarres in a column titled, “Who Will Lead The GOP, Cruz or Rubio?” reports, “Some conservatives and tea party-types within the Republican party are painting Cruz as the ‘anti-Rubio,’ as some feel that Rubio is trying position himself as more of a ‘maverick’ on certain issues like immigration reform and has been seen cozying up to moderate-establishment Republicans such as Senators Lindsay Graham and John McCain in advance of a potential 2016 presidential run.”

Manjarres asks  “Rubio’s tip-toeing around certain issues and recent political posturing with Republican moderates and Democrats have left many wondering if he will remain on the proverbial ‘straight and narrow’ and continue to espouse conservative principles- will it be Cruz or Rubio who takes the conservative mantle and runs with it to the head of the party?”

Senator Rubio is coming to Sarasota, FL on March 15, 2013 for a fundraising dinner Benefiting Reclaim America PAC and The Leadership PAC with local supporters. According to sources he will be presenting his “vision for a  new Republican Party”.

As Slade O’Brien, Executive Director of Americans for Prosperity in Florida, has stated, “Compromise is the art of losing slowly”. Will Senator Rubio compromise to become “electable” or stand by his conservative bona fides?

Stay tuned!

Marco Rubio’s 2011 comments on a TEA Party Caucus courtesy of The Shark Tank YouTube Video Channel:

New Study Finds 21 States Have More Non-Teaching Staff than Teachers

INDIANAPOLIS — Twenty-one states employ more bus drivers, librarians, cafeteria workers, deputy superintendents, accountants, coaches, nurses, assistant principals, and other non-teaching personnel than they do classroom teachers, according to a new analysis of state education employees by the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice.

In Florida there has been a 36% increase in the number of students and a 41% increase in administrators and other non-teaching Staff from FY 1992 to FY 2009.

The report, a sequel to last fall’s “The School Staffing Surge: Decades of Employment Growth in America’s Public Schools,” examines states’ hiring patterns between 1992 and 2009.

It found that, in 2009, administrators and other non-teaching staff outnumbered teachers in Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Colorado, Oregon, Maine, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Louisiana, Wyoming, Vermont, Utah, Georgia, Alaska, New Hampshire, Iowa, and the District of Columbia, which is treated as a state in the report.

“Taxpayers should be outraged public schools hired so many non-teaching personnel with such little academic improvement among students to show for it,” said Robert Enlow, president and CEO of the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice. “This money could have been better invested in areas that have proved to benefit children.”

Virginia far outpaced other states with the number of excessive personnel outside the classroom with 60,737 more non-teaching staff than teachers, followed by Ohio with 19,040 more non-teaching personnel than teachers.

The report also compared the growth rate among administrators and non-teaching staff with student enrollment changes from 1992 to 2009. It found that 48 states could be saving $24 billion annually if the hiring of non-teaching staff had not exceeded the growth of students between 1992 and 2009.

In Texas, taxpayers would have saved almost $6.4 billion annually if public schools’ non-teaching personnel had not outpaced students. Virginia, Ohio, New York, California, and Pennsylvania each would have annual, recurring savings in the billions. Other states’ savings are in the millions; however, Nevada and Arizona actually saved money, as both its administrative and non-teaching personnel did not outpace student growth. Data were not available for South Carolina.

“States could do much more constructive things with those kinds of dollars,” Enlow said. “State leaders could be permitting salary increases for great teachers, offering children in failing schools the option of attending a private school, or directing savings toward other worthy purposes. Instead states have allowed these enormous bureaucracies to grow.”

The report also shows the salary increases states could provide teachers annually if administrators and non-teaching personnel kept pace with the student population from 1992 to 2009. At the top was Virginia, which could provide teachers an annual salary increase of $29,007. Maine was second at $25,505.

The report was compiled with data from the National Center for Education Statistics and prepared by Ben Scafidi, an economist at Georgia College & State University and a senior fellow at the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice.

To read the report, visit www.edchoice.org/StaffSurge2. That link also provides a map in which readers can download each state’s findings.

About the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice:

The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and nonpartisan organization, solely dedicated to advancing Milton and Rose Friedman’s vision of school choice for all children. First established as the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation in 1996, the Foundation continues to promote school choice as the most effective and equitable way to improve the quality of K-12 education in America. The Foundation is dedicated to research, education, and outreach on the vital issues and implications related to choice and competition in K-12 education.

Florida Rep. Steube files bill “to arm school personnel”

On February 27th , Florida Representative W. Gregory “Greg” Steube,  filed HB 1097 – School Safety, which takes a hard look at safety in Florida’s schools. Rep. Steube, an Army paratrooper and Iraq War combat veteran, states, “The safety of our school children and the dedicated teachers and personnel who educate them is a paramount concern to all communities.”

“We are all deeply concerned about the well-being of our children and we must come to a consensus on how to prevent violent crimes from occurring on school grounds. As a father and a son of a teacher, I feel a responsibility to my community and my state to address the safety of our students and teaching personnel. With this bill, schools will be better equipped to protect their faculty and students,” notes Rep. Steube.

HB 1097 would allow a school principal to designate one or more members of school personnel to carry a concealed firearm or weapon while performing his or her official duties. 

The bill requires that “designated personnel must complete additional training and coursework that covers emergency procedures, life safety, methods of prevention, terrorism awareness and firearm proficiency to ensure they are prepared to respond appropriately in the event that a threat arises on campus. Also, the bill would require each school to have a school safety officer present on campus, unless the principal has already designated a member of school personnel to carry a weapon or firearm on that campus.”

Below, you can find more information regarding HB 1097, as well as important tools that may help you advocate for your concerns.

HB 1097

HB 1097 Press Release

Legislative Tracking System

EDITORS NOTE:

Greg Ridgeway, Ph.D., Deputy Director National Institute of Justice, in a recently released document states, “On average there are about 11,000 firearm homicides every year. While there are deaths resulting from accidental discharges and suicides, this document will focus on intentional firearm homicides. Fatalities from mass shootings (those with 4 or more victims in a particular place and time) account on average for 35 fatalities per year. Policies that address the larger firearm homicide issue will have a far greater impact even if they do not address the particular issues of mass shootings.”

This document provides a cursory summary of select initiatives to reduce firearm violence and an assessment of the evidence for the initiative. To read the document click here.

Watch this video statement by Christian Ziegler, State Committeeman from Sarasota, FL:

Palm Beach GOP Chair: Don’t talk about Allen West

Jack Furnari in his BizPac Review column “GOP boss: Don’t talk about Allen West voter fraud or other ‘oddball issues’” reports, “[Palm Beach County Republican Party Chair Ira] Sabin told me he doesn’t want his board members to publicly discuss ‘voter fraud, birtherism, the St. Lucie County voter fraud suit’ or any other ‘oddball issues’ he deems off message.”

Furnari notes this can lead to conflict as his vice-Chair is part of the St. Lucie County law suit. Furnari notes, “[Vice-Chairman Michael] Barnett is one of the lawyers litigating the True the Vote lawsuit against St. Lucie County Elections Supervisor Gertrude Walker over the irregularities in Allen West’s loss to Patrick Murphy, and that’s one of the banned topics.

True the Vote is a non-partisan grassroots organization that focuses on election fraud. Lou Ann Anderson from Watchdog Wire – Texas reported, “Former Florida Congressman Allen West narrowly lost his November re-election bid and St. Lucie County was a standout locale in terms of alleged voting irregularities.  To protect future election integrity, Houston-based True The Vote is suing the St. Lucie supervisor of elections. In a recent video announcement, True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht emphasized the importance of learning the truth.  “The sanctity of our elections is too important to let this slide,” she said.

Watch True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht’s video announcement of the lawsuit:

Anderson reports Engelbrecht additionally noted, “We the people have a right and a responsibility to demand answers when our election process fails.  And that’s what we’re doing.  Demanding answers.”

Florida has the most schools offering the International Baccalaureate but is it worth it?

In 1971, the United Nations International School (UNIS) became the first school authorized “to offer the International Baccalaureate (IB) and awarded the first IB degree in the world.”

As of February 21, 2013 there are 1,403 International Baccalaureate (IB) World Schools in the U.S. which offer one or more IB programs. Florida leads the way in schools offering IB Programs with 144 or over 10% of U.S. IB World Schools.

Debra K. Niwa has issued her annual update on IB World Schools in the U.S. With 91% of IB programs funded by public dollars, Niwa notes, “Public financing of IB World Schools begs the attention of anyone who values education and cares about how taxpayer money is spent in the public school system. Local, state, and federal taxpayer dollars are covering public school costs for programs offered by the International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO) — an entity under Swiss law that claims non-profit status. IBO is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland; a regional office opened in Bethesda, Maryland in 2010.

Niwa presents in her annual update the following red-flag issues surrounding IB programs:

IB programs add unnecessary costs to school operations (these vary with each IB program). IB school fees, new staff positions (non-teaching and teaching), student registration and subject fees, student assessment fees, and periodic program evaluation visit fees, to name a few, Plus, IB requires training (that incurs participant fees, travel, meals, and lodging expenses) at destinations that are out-of-state or out-of-country for most attendees. “It costs an average of about $8,000 to train a staff member.” Thereafter, re-training comes every few years as IBO changes curriculum.

The “pre-university” two-year IB Diploma Program (DP) is not cost effective (nor are the other IB programs). IB DP “candidates” are often a tiny portion of a high school’s total enrollment. In 2009, a proponent in Virginia “shared statistics that indicate 72% of IB Programs have less than 10 diploma candidates each year and that was the norm.”6 Nevertheless, substantial six-digit amounts accommodate the IB DP. In July 2011, Tucson Unified School District revealed its annual costs for the Diploma Program at one high school. For the first two IB graduating classes, TUSD spent more than $1 million the first year (2009-2010) and $800,000 the second year (2010-2011). Five students received the IB Diploma in that period.

The IB Middle Years Program (MYP) — for ages 11 to 15 — is poor preparation for the DP. IB teachers criticize that “MYP suddenly stops in Grade 10. There is no articulation between MYP and IB Diploma” and “The MYP . . . doesn’t really provide the opportunity to hone the skills needed to be successful DP students.” What about the many MYP graduates who don’t qualify for the Diploma Program? In 2012 the IBO will allow IB DP schools to offer an IB “Career-related Certificate” for students ages 16 to 19 years old.

The IB Primary Years Program (PYP) – for 3 to 12-year-olds — is bad for academic support. As staff at PYP schools have remarked: “. . . the IB program has NO place in elementary school. It takes too much emphasis off learning the basics, it takes the teachers out of the classroom for too many meetings, and it takes our administrators on expensive cross-country business trips.” “ . . . there was so much time spent on the IB stuff and time taken away from the true academics — very frustrating when you have . . . students that you need to help on academics but can’t.”

IB changes education’s purpose, content, and teaching methods — predictably supporting the agendas of the IBO which, since 1970, has been an official NGO of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Strip away the IB marketing puffery and suddenly the IB drivel about “rigor”, “international mindedness” and “quality education for a better world” become nothing more than phrases that obscure the integration of non-academic goals that support United Nations* issues, such as Agenda 21 sustainable development.

Niwa asks parents, Florida taxpayers and Florida’s political leadership this question: How deeply does IB reach into the public school system in your state?

In the case of Florida it runs deeply starting in 2005 with the first IB program created under former Governor Jeb Bush.

ABOUT DEBRA K. NIWA

Debra K. Niwa

Debbie Niwa began researching education issues five years ago when she started questioning the policies and changes occurring in the school district in Tucson, Arizona that her son was enrolled in. She has devoted thousands of hours researching local, state, federal, and global school reform issues, as well as actively advocating for academic quality in education. Since 1980, she has worked professionally on the design and production of publications as well as the gamut of other graphic design projects.

Bondi versus Scott on expanding Medicaid in Florida

The Sarasota Herald-Tribune editorial board is all in support of Governor Rick Scott’s decision to expand Medicaid in Florida. In an opinion column titled “Medicaid numbers add up: Legislature should join Scott in recognizing the benefits of expansion” the editorial board states, “Federal aid hard to pass up.”

That statement sums  up the issue. The question is does Florida want more citizens on federal aid? What benefit is that to Florida taxpayers?

The opinion column states, “The Legislature — which convenes its annual session March 5 — will ultimately decide whether to expand eligibility for the program to cover all Floridians under age 65 who earn up to 138 percent of the poverty rate. That’s $29,700 for a family of four; currently, coverage in Florida is limited to 100 percent of the poverty level, a shockingly low income of $22,350 for a family of four.”

What the Sarasota Herald-Tribune fails to say is why salaries in Florida are so low. The reason is because Florida jobs are low paying.

According to the South Florida Business Journal, “The average annual salary for Floridians ranks No. 32 nationwide, according to a new On Numbers analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Floridians have an average annual salary of $40,750, or an hourly wage of $19.59, as of May 2011. A rather low ranking considering the Sunshine State ranks fourth for the highest number of employees at about 7.2 million.”

The Sunshine Review reports, “According to 2008 Census data, the state of Florida and local governments in the state employed a total of 1,049,028 people. Of those employees, 832,252 were full-time employees receiving a net pay of $3,302,955,436 per month and 216,776 were part-time employees paid $213,151,877 per month. More than 51% of those employees, or 539,321 employees, were in education or higher education.”

The average annual net pay of government employees in Florida is just over $47,624.

Working for government, at the expense of Florida taxpayers, and expanding Medicaid benefits, thereby expanding number of government employees, is considered by many a mistake.

Among those coming out in opposition include Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. According to BizPac Review, “Bondi said she ‘firmly disagrees’ with Scott’s decision to expand Medicaid coverage under the Obamacare legislation, but the final outcome will go before the Florida Legislature and she feels they will make the right call. “This could really devastate our state,” said Bondi. “And cost a tremendous amount of money.”

The numbers do not add up. As the Sarasota Herald-Tribune notes, “During the first three years of the expansion, the federal government would pay 100 percent of the state’s cost of broadening coverage.”

According to the federal Affordable Care Act, the federal contribution would be about 90 percent after those three years. The Agency for Health Care Administration found that Florida would save $3.9 million in the next fiscal year by rejecting Medicaid expansion — but it would pass up $2.1 billion in federal funding. While the state’s share would increase over time, by the 2020-2021 budget year Florida’s cost would be $487 million, compared with a federal contribution of $4.2 billion.”

So, Florida loses money as time drags on, assuming of course that Congress keeps its word and funds Medicaid according to the law.

Stealth Gay Marriage Bill stopped in committee but is it dead?

According to the Florida Family Policy Council (FFPC), “On February 20, 2013 at approximately 3:25 p.m. in the Florida Senate Children and Families committee, a deceptive and highly controversial bill died. The bill, SB 196, was labeled as a domestic partnership but actually attempted to create a full blown civil union and a form of homosexual marriage in direct violation of the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment passed by Floridians in 2008 by 62%.”

Several pro-family leaders spoke during the committee meeting in opposition to the bill.  Those speakers in opposition included John Stemberger President of Florida Family Action, Michael B. Sheedy, Director for Public Policy for the Florida Family Catholic Conference of Bishops and Bill Bunkley President of Florida Voices.

John Stemberger, Florida Family Action president, pointed out that the bill was unconstitutional because it violated the Florida Defense of Marriage Act.  Stemberger told the committee that  unlike the language used by cities and counties across Florida that adopted Domestic Partnership Registries, SB 196 was much broader.  This broader language violated the “substantial equivalent to marriage” prohibition in the Florida Defense of Marriage Act.

The bill died as a result of the sponsor Committee Chairman Senator Eleanor Sobel (D-FL District 33) temporarily postponing a vote on the bill because she knew she did not have the votes to pass it after two and a half hours of debate. This also prevented the Senators on the committee from voting on the record which is an increasing challenge in trying to hold legislators accountable.

“This bill would have further undermined the institution of marriage by creating an alternate union which would have competed with, diluted, and therefore devalued natural marriage as the ideal arrangement for society,” notes FFPC.

FFPC states in an email to supporters:

Republican Senator Nancy Detert (FL District 28) made it clear  after hearing from the public that she  should would not support the bill as written but would support a Domestic Partnership bill if it were modeled similar to the one adopted by the City of Sarasota.  If Sobel rewrites the bill to Detert’s liking the bill will most likely pass this committee since Detert is the swing vote.

The committee rejected SB 196 by voice vote.  The language proposed at the committee meeting lost by one vote.  Committee Chair and sponsor of SB 196 Eleanor Sobel said after the voice vote that she wanted to “TP” (temporarily postpone) the action taken on the bill.  Therefore, the bill will most likely be back with narrower language and could pass this committee because of Senator Detert’s support for leaner wording.

Senator Detert’s district includes Sarasota County, FL. The City of Sarasota has created a domestic partnership registry promoted by former Sarasota City Commissioner Ken Shelin, who is gay. According to Florida Agenda:

Thanks in part to an opinion from [Pam Bondi] Florida’s attorney general that permits them, the Sunshine State now boasts nine cities and five counties with domestic partner registries, seven of them established in the last year. “In Florida, it’s almost like a wildfire,” says Ken Shelin, a former Sarasota city commissioner who supports establishing a registry, and who lobbied current commissioners in May about considering one. “I know that some people think that there’s a hidden agenda here—that there’s a gay agenda,” said Shelin. “But 90 percent of domestic partners are opposite sex.”

Shelin is lobbying the North Port City Commission to establish a domestic registry. Domestic partnerships are considered by opponents as a weakening of the institution of marriage.

Florida Task Force: All persons have a fundamental right to stand their ground

Tallahassee, FL – Today the Task Force on Citizen Safety and Protection, delivered their final report to the Office of the Florida Senate President, Office of the Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives and the Executive Office of the Governor.

The Task Force concluded that Florida Statute 776 is a good law and should not be overturned. On page five of their final report the Task Force’s top recommendations states:

The Task Force concurs with the core belief that all persons, regardless of citizenship status, have a right to feel safe and secure in our state. To that end, all persons who are conducting themselves in a lawful manner have a fundamental right to stand their ground and defend themselves from attack with proportionate force in every place they have a lawful right to be.

Governor Rick Scott said, “I want to commend the 19 members of the Citizen Safety Task Force and Lt. Governor Jennifer Carroll for their thorough and thoughtful consideration of Florida Statute 776. This diverse Task Force listened to the people of Florida and provided a platform for different viewpoints to be shared on the important issue of citizen safety. I met with Trayvon Martin’s parents and our hearts go out to the entire family for their loss, especially as we approach the anniversary of his death. We look forward to reviewing this final report as we approach the beginning of the legislative session.”

The final Citizen Safety Task Force report, video links to all of the task force meetings, correspondence and public input considered is located on the Task Force website.

Link to Task Force website and final report: http://www.flgov.com/citizensafety/.

The Task Force on Citizen Safety and Protection, led by Lt. Governor Jennifer Carroll, held public meetings in seven cities across Florida and listened to subject matter experts and citizens. They concluded that Floridians have the right to defend themselves and the right to stand their ground when attacked. They concur that Floridians have the right to arm and protect themselves and their families from violence.

AFP Releases 112th Congress Scorecard, Rubio Maintains A+

AFP ranks Members of Congress on their votes of defending economic freedom

Tallahassee, Florida – Americans for Prosperity-Florida, the state’s premier free market grassroots organization committed to smaller government and economic freedom, today released its scorecard for the 112th Congress.  AFP also launched an interactive online version of its congressional key vote scorecard, which includes AFP key votes from the past three congresses and will be the scorecard’s online home moving forward.  AFP ranks members of Congress on their votes for economic freedom.  A copy of scores is below.

“In order to hold their elected officials accountable, Florida constituents need to know how their Representative or Senator voted,” said AFP-FL State Director Slade O’Brien. “The AFP Scorecard is the best way for our activists to keep a close eye on Washington, and confront them when they don’t vote responsibly.  We are pleased to announce Senator Rubio is the only US Senator to receive a lifetime rating of A+.”

The 112th Congress Scorecard includes critical votes on such issues as the repeal of President Obama’s new health care law, preempting EPA’s purported authority to regulate greenhouse gases, Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget, ending ethanol subsidies, several Congressional Review Act resolutions to overturn new regulations, and the fiscal year 2012 appropriations bills.

AFP’s new scorecard website is online at: http://www.americansforprosperity.org/scorecard.

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best way to safeguard individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth and returning government to its constitutional limits. AFP has more than 2,000,000 members, including members in all 50 states, and 34 state chapters and affiliates. More than 90,000 Americans in all 50 states have made a financial investment in AFP or AFP Foundation. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org.

Killing charitable deductions slowly – the sunset of PEP and Pease

Roberta Flack’s 1973 hit tune “Killing Me Softly with His Song” comes to mind when writing about how the tax codes have dramatically changed effective January 1, 2013. Two of the major changes are charitable deductions under the Personal Exemption Phase-out (PEP) and the Pease deduction cap under 26 US Code § 68.

According to the Indiana University Foundation:

As of January 1, 2013, itemized deductions will be limited in several ways:

The Pease limitations will reduce the amount of certain itemized deductions high-income taxpayers can claim: either 3% of the taxpayer’s income over the modified adjusted gross income limit, or up to 80% of certain deductions (whichever amount is less).

The taxpayer threshold for claiming medical expenses as an itemized deduction will be increased from 7.5% of AGI to 10% (though individuals age 65 and older will continue to use the 7.5% threshold from 2013 to 2016).

As was the case in 2012, the option to deduct state and local sales taxes rather than income taxes will not be available.

Kelsey Snell from Politico wrote in December, 2012, “Tax rate increases aren’t the only way in which Democrats are aiming to collect more tax dollars from the rich — they’re also looking to resurrect a dormant pair of oddly named laws that targeted the wealthy for decades.”

Snell states:

Known as PEP and Pease, they’re a little bit like the original “Buffett rule.”

The Personal Exemption Phase-out, or PEP, and the “Pease” deduction cap — named for the late Rep. Don Pease (D-Ohio) — were introduced in the 1990s to try to help balance the budget by getting the rich to chip in more. PEP reduced the value of exemptions for high-income earners by as much as 2 percent for every $2,500 earned over a set amount. Pease limited itemized deductions for the wealthy.

Read more.

According to Barbara E. Little, an associate with New Jersey based Schnader Attorneys at Law in their Tax and Wealth Management Department and the Trust and Estates, Nonprofit and Higher Education Practice Groups.:

On January 2, 2013, President Obama signed into law the “American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012” (ATRA). In this Alert, we explore the good news and the bad news that charitably minded individuals received with the passage of ATRA.

Bad News

Let’s start by getting the bad news out of the way. ATRA revived the itemized deduction limitations, also known as the “Pease Amendment” (named after Congressman Donald Pease, the amendment’s proposer in the 1990s). Under Pease, total itemized deductions are reduced by 3 percent not to exceed 80 percent, of the amount the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income exceeds the threshold amount – $250,000 for single filers, $275,000 for heads of household and $300,000 for married filing jointly (indexed for inflation). Charitable deductions are included in the limitation equation.

Depending on the taxpayer’s income level and other deductions, this limitation could adversely affect charitable contributions. For example, consider a married couple with $60,000 of itemized deductions ($25,000 mortgage interest, $10,000 state taxes and $25,000 charitable deduction) and an adjusted gross income of $450,000. The couple’s adjusted gross income exceeds the threshold by $150,000. The couple must reduce their total itemized deductions by 3 percent of $150,000 or $4,500.

The other bad news is that two charitable deductions were not extended: 1) contributions of book inventories to public schools; and 2) corporate contributions of computer inventory.

Good News

One piece of good news is that under ATRA, once again, individuals 70½ years of age or older may make tax-free IRA distributions to charitable organizations. The maximum distribution amount is $100,000 per individual, per tax year.

Speaking with a Florida donor to local charitable organizations he bemoans the fact that under ATRA his personal exemptions are eaten up by other, primarily tax deductions, thus limiting his charitable giving. He is concerned that ATRA is written so that non-profit organizations, many of which are faith based, will be irreparably harmed. With the passage of ATRA the new charity will be government and its ability to redistribute tax revenues to those non-profits it see as fit for public donations.

The new normal is “government charity” at every level.

Listen to Roberta Flack singing Killing Me Softly:

[youtube_sc url=”http://youtu.be/4mpqXu0z3wU”]

Global Climate Status Report sent to Senator Reid and Speaker Boehner

The Orlando, Florida based Space and Science Research Corporation (SSRC) announced the public release of the Executive Summary for its Global Climate Status Report for 2013. This scientific data based document provides political leaders, business executives, educators and the general public with a concise overview of the actual climate trends now present and an analysis of the Earth’s climate future based on these trends.

In the Executive Summary, the SSRC report authors show convincing evidence that the Earth’s atmospheric and oceanic temperatures are on a long term temperature cool down as a result of the just started reduction in the Sun’s energy output. Called a “solar hibernation,” this rare and powerful natural cycle of the Sun has been shown to bring long and potentially dangerous cold climate eras to the planet.

Using data form numerous researchers and science organizations, in addition to the SSRC’s own research, the Executive Summary spells out with detailed charts of climate trends, what is actually happening with the climate.

According to SSRC President, Mr. John L. Casey, “This report was planned for some time. Clearly though, its release at this time is intended to put some reality into the ongoing Congressional debates about to begin on the administration’s proposed new carbon taxes and other regulations supposedly designed to stop man-made global warming.”

“The government’s release of its own draft climate assessment report continues to show our government is on the wrong track for addressing climate change and is still shackled to the disproved greenhouse gas theory of climate change. As is well known, however, past predictions about the climate using that theory have been all wrong, global warming ended years ago, and now a new cold climate has arrived. The general public and our leaders need the truth about climate change at their disposal before making long term decisions about climate change for government policy and managing their day-to-day lives. This next climate change to a potentially dangerous cold climate needs to be well understood by all so they can best prepare for what is coming,” notes Casey.

“I am sending letters and copies of the report to Senate President Harry Reid and Speaker of the House John Boehner as well as other leaders at the federal and state level,” states Casey.

The Executive Summary is now posted for public download from the SSRC web site. The full Global Climate Status Report, will be available for a fee when published on March 4, 2013.