Crystal Coast Tea Party

Dear Mr. Broyles:

Thank you for your recent email regarding federal employees and tax delinquency.  I appreciate you taking the time to contact me and I’m grateful for the opportunity to respond.

You are right.  This is a serious matter and should be addressed immediately.  Companion bills have been introduced in the House (H.R. 828) and Senate (S. 376) to deal with it.  The House bill was referred to the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which approved the bill last June.  However, as of this date, the House Leadership has yet to schedule the bill for floor action.

Thanks again for taking the time to reach out to me about this issue.  If you have further questions about other federal matters, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

 
Sincerely,

Walter B. Jones
Member of Congress

This email was sent to Congressman Jones re. IRS Harassment of the Tea Party…

Dear Congressman Jones:

For the second time this week, I’ve seen articles describing what amounts to harassment of Tea Party groups by the IRS. The first one was concerning a group in OH, and the second was in Richmond, VA. The article on the latter is at this link http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/claim-irs-won-t-grant-richmond-tea-party-tax-exempt-status_629931.html

The Executive Branch continues to exceed it authority under the Constitution. The administration is attacking the freedom of average Americans using the Federal institutions that should be protecting our freedoms. I would appreciate it if you and your colleagues would find out what is going on, and take some action to prevent this abuse of power by the Executive Branch.

This is Congressman Jones’ response…

Dear Mr. Lang:

Thank you for your recent email regarding a Weekly Standard article on Internal Revenue Service (IRS) treatment of certain Tea Party groups.  I appreciate you taking the time to contact me and I’m grateful for the opportunity to respond.

I am troubled by allegations that the IRS may be engaging in inequitable treatment of groups seeking registration as tax-exempt entities.  If any resident of North Carolina’s 3 rd District believes the IRS is treating them unfairly, I am always happy to help, as the law must be applied equally to all citizens.  I would encourage the individuals associated with the groups mentioned in the article to contact their own members of Congress and Senators to request that they weigh in with the IRS on their behalf.

Thanks again for taking the time to contact me about this issue.  If you have further questions about other federal matters, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Walter B. Jones
Member of Congress

NOW ISN’T THAT REASSURING?

For the second time this week, I’ve seen articles describing what amounts to harassment of Tea Party groups by the IRS. The first one was concerning a group in OH, and the second was in Richmond, VA. The article on the latter is at this link http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/claim-irs-won-t-grant-richmond-tea-party-tax-exempt-status_629931.html

The Executive Branch continues to exceed it authority under the Constitution. The administration is attacking the freedom of average Americans using the Federal institutions that should be protecting our freedoms. I would appreciate it if you and your colleagues would find out what is going on, and take some action to prevent this abuse of power by the Executive Branch.
Kenneth Lang

President Obama has asked the defense Dept to reduce our Nuclear weapon stockpile by 80%. That would take our current level per our treaty with Russia (who by the way have threatened to walk away from our agreement on numerous occasion) from 2550 to 510. Pakistan has 300. Russia has 4550. The President took an oath to protect and defend this country. He is bound to do so by the U. S. Constitution. So far, each time the President has flaunted the Constitution (e.g. recess appointment while Congress is in session) our Congress has stood by and done nothing! It is way past time for Congress to act. What will it take for you to act?

Kenneth Lang

2/14/2012

In the radio interview below, Jerri Jameson sets the stage for Senator Richard Burr to feigns his outrage that the Congress would even consider passing a bill that Senator Burr says is unnecessary because Congress is already subject to the same law forbidding insider trading that everyone else is subject. Of course Senator Burr is among the few Republicans who voted against the Stock bill. However, Fox News, CBS (story), and Red State (story) contradict Senator Burr’s version of the truth. Members of Congress are in fact exempt from the insider trading law that every other citizen can be fined and jailed for violating. Another example of Senator Burr’s “I’m better than the rest of you” attitude? Senator Burr should be ashamed of himself once again, just as he should have been for his sponsorship of the Big Government growth plan of the Food Safety Act. Read the radio interview transcript below:

In case you missed it this morning, be sure to listen to Senator Richard Burr’s (R-NC) interview with Jerri Jameson on News Radio 570 WWNC.

Listen Here: http://bit.ly/yHqHWC
FULL TRANSCRIPT
JAMESON: On the phone with me, I believe in Washington, is Senator Richard Burr.  Senator, how are you this morning?
BURR: Jerri, doing great, and I am in Washington.
JAMESON: I thought you might be.  There’s a lot going on, isn’t there?
BURR: Oh, another productive week.  I think the United States Senate has had one vote, and we’re going to be embattled in legislation all week, and probably next week, which does no more than codify what existing law says. 
JAMESON:  Now let me guess, you’ve got to be talking about the STOCK Act.
BURR:  I am.
JAMESON:  You know, I’ve asked some listeners for questions, and then I am mixing them in with some I have on my own, but that actually is something that somebody said, “Is it really necessary to pass law to make lawmakers follow laws that are already on the books?
BURR: It’s ludicrous.  That’s why Dr. Tom Coburn and I were the two brave souls that walked up and said we shouldn’t be doing this. We should be focused on jobs, the economy.  We should be taking up real legislation.  It’s like me saying to you, “Jerri, before you come to work this morning and you’re going to drive your car, I’m going to pass a law that says you have to have a driver’s license.”
JAMESON: Right.
BURR: I mean, it’s insane.
JAMESON: They just need to enforce laws that are already on the books.
BURR:  The laws that are currently on the books apply to all members of Congress and all staff, not limited staff.
JAMESON: Right, it prohibits government workers period from engaging in these financial transactions.
BURR:  So we’re going to have political theater this week as to whether it applies to the executive branch, whether it doesn’t.  The fact is SEC law applies to every person who trades in America.
JAMESON: You know, you pointed out that you were one of two who voted against it.  Of course now that’s being turned around that you two were the partisan ones.  But I agree with you that it’s kind of
ludicrous that we have a law on the books that does apply, as you said, to everybody who trades, and they have to codify it even more.  I want to get to unemployment, though, if we may.  North Carolina’s unemployment in December went up in 93 of 100 counties.  American Airlines, the third largest airline, announcing they are going to be laying off 13,000 employees in the next couple weeks.  Simple question, not so simple answer.  What needs to be done to get Americans back to work?
BURR: Very simply, Jerri, we need our policies to reflect the willingness of people with capital to invest in job creation.  Right now businesses are frozen because they don’t know what tax rate is going to be applied to them in the future.  They don’t know what regulatory architecture they’re going to have to live under.  Therefore, they can’t figure out whether it’s worth investing based upon what the return might be.  As long as we’ve got capital in that situation, then you will freeze private capital, and the only place, the only place, to create jobs will be in the public sector.  What we don’t need are more public sector jobs.  We actually need the reduction of the federal workforce.  We need to replace those and increase them with new jobs, new employment, in the private sector.
JAMESON:  Some are saying we need to obviously offer incentives for people of insource rather than outsource, with outsourcing of course being kind of the trend. 
BURR: Well, but Jerri, I think what we need to ask is what’s the reason for outsourcing?  The reason for outsourcing is that it’s cheaper to do business in other areas.  Every economist in the world and every review of the United States system today says that if we would do comprehensive, corporate tax reform  in the United States, get the corporate rate down to 25%, we wouldn’t have to have a debate about dividends or capital gains at a different rate.  We would be so competitive in the rest of the world that we would actually see insourcing, not by U.S. companies but by foreign companies coming here, and we would stop the outsourcing of U.S. companies. 
JAMESON:  That would be nice, wouldn’t it?
BURR: Well, I think it’s an easy fix.  But let’s face it, this is an election year, and the President would rather use corporations as the boogeyman for the election than he would as the secret to turning our economy around and creating jobs.
JAMESON: Well, speaking of the economy, obviously foreclosures, homeowners are struggling, the President this week expanding on his plan to allow homeowners, even those who owe more than their home is worth, to be able to refinance their homes, to take advantage of the low interest rates.  His plan calls for it to be paid for with an assessment on big banks.  I want to separate the plan and the funding of it, because I know Congress has not gone for bank assessments before.  But do you think giving homeowners more access to refinancing at the lower rates would be good for the housing market?  
BURR:  Jerri, I call it loan modification, and we ought to have been doing loan modification on any mortgages that the federal government, that the American taxpayer, was obligated for.  That’s all the Freddie & Fannie inventory, that’s all the FHA inventory.  But I don’t think it’s appropriate for the federal government to go into the private marketplace and tell private risk-takers, “Okay, we’re going to charge you a fee and you’re going to modify these loans.”  Smart financial institutions have already re-worked the loans that they think people have the capabilities of paying off.  The ones they haven’t re-worked are the ones where the individual probably never should have gotten the loan to begin with or the property was over-valued from the start.  It will, in their estimation over the life of the loan, never see revaluation.  That’s what the President’s attacking.  I think his own Administration has admitted out of the modifications that have already been made, almost 50% have gone back into foreclosure.  So this is not a panacea.  But I think what we need to try to do is re-structure the re-payments to where people have got 30 years versus 10 or 12 or 14.  None of us know when prices will re-inflate, but we all can agree to this.  The debt problem that we’re in in this country, as a country, as states, as localities, and as individuals, is going to take decades for us to work out from under.
JAMESON:  Well, you mention Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and I know there’s legislation under consideration that would stop the executives from getting their bonuses, the bonuses worth millions.  The measure would take the unpaid bonus money and go to paying the outstanding debt still from the 2008 taxpayer bailout.  Where do you stand on that?
BURR:  Listen, I don’t think that any corporate executive ought to be rewarded for bad performance.  In Freddie & Fannie’s case, that’s exactly what they’re doing.  Those that run it now argue that if they don’t
offer bonuses they don’t get talented people.  We’ve got a lot of talented people unemployed today that would love to be at Freddie & Fannie helping to turn it around, and a lot of them, if not all of them, come right out of the financial services industry.  So to suggest that they can’t attract the talent with the salary that’s already on the job without the bonus is just ludicrous.
JAMESON:  We’ve got just a couple more minutes, but there are two stories that are in the news today that I really do want to touch on.  One is the Arab League resolution calling on Syrian President Bashar al-
Assad to leave power.  Of course, the United States pushing for that, Russia opposing that.  Where do you see this going?  Is there concern of possible intervention by NATO and therefore the U.S.?
BURR:  It may be talked about in international circles, but I don’t think there’s concern within Syria or the Bashar al-Assad government.  They’ve got a firm handle on things.  They are running Syria just like his dad did when they had a genocide of 30,000 people.  Not 300 but 30,000 in one swoop.  I think that until we apply the correct amount of international pressure, until we really get aggressive on sanctions, until we cut them off from the rest of the world, than we’re going to see the Bashar al-Assad   government  try to hang on through the use of their military.
JAMESON: Lastly on my end, and then whatever you want to speak about of course we’ll open to you, but Defense Secretary Leon Panetta saying that U.S. and its NATO partners will be ending their combat role in Afghanistan next year, switching from combat to training and advising of the Afghan forces.  So, a little earlier than originally planned or announced.  Is this a good strategy to be setting that kind of deadline?  I know there’s pros and cons to it, but or pulling it in sooner?
BURR: Jerri, yesterday I would have told you no, today I still tell you no.  I’m not sure what lead to the Secretary’s announcement late in the afternoon.  There was certainly no warning on Capitol Hill that I’m
aware of.  I think that all of the military plans have been developed based upon a date in 2014, and I was supportive of that.  But I think to accelerate that by a year may fit in the Secretary’s need for the budget constraints of the Department of Defense.  If we’ve got men and women that we’ve asked to go into a combat theater, I don’t want to run the war in that theater based upon what the budget says we can do.  I want to do it based upon whether we intend to win and if so, what we need to do to win.  
JAMESON: Alright, Senator Burr.  Thank you so much.  Anything else that you would like to touch on maybe for your constituents or listeners that we may not know is going on there in Washington?
BURR: Well, Jerri, there’s not a whole lot going on there right now.  We have seen Presidential politics start in an earlier period than ever in the 18 years that I have been involved in service.  I think it will continue to dominate the direction of the legislative debate up here.  I believe that means very little gets done this year, and that’s sad based on the financial condition of the United States.
JAMESON:  With that, Senator Burr, we thank you for your time.  We look forward to speaking with you regularly.

I have a couple of comments on your recent email survey.

Question #1 I checked other. That is because the most important thing to me is to reestablish the balance of powers between Congress, the courts and the Executive Branch. For too many years, especially during the current administration, Congress has willfully permitted the President to violate his Oath of Office and the US Constitution. I view this as Congressional malfeasance based on individual congressman selfish desire to get reelected at the expense of the US Constitution and the freedom of the people of the United States. When the President does anything that exceeds his authority under the Constitution, Congress should challenge that action in court and pass further laws as needed to prevent these excesses in the future. But Congress has done NOTHING when the current President tramples on the US Constitution.

Question #8: Didn’t have a choice that I could pick. The Defense Department should operate more efficiently, and they should not cut critical programs whatever they may be (your selection #1 in part). All Defense spending should be on the table (your selection #2) but not bases in the US or new weapons based on need not politics, but certainly foreign bases in countries like Germany should be on the table for cuts and elimination including NATO. Your choices were too politically creative to make address defense spending in a comprehensive approach.

Kenneth Lang

February 2, 2012

Dear Fellow Eastern North Carolinian,

This is a critical time for Eastern North Carolina, our nation, and our armed forces.  As we begin this new session of the 112^th Congress, I wanted to quickly brief you on what President Barack Obama is proposing, why I think he is badly off the mark, and ways that I believe we can responsibly address the deficit while still preserving and modernizing our military strength.

I don’t need to remind you that America is $15 trillion in debt and running annual deficits of over $1 trillion.  Last week the Obama Administration rolled out a new budget proposal to cut military spending by $487 billion over 10 years.  Meanwhile, last year’s compromise bill to raise the debt ceiling – which I strongly opposed and voted against – requires an additional $500 billion in military “sequestration” cuts over 10 years starting in 2013.

While there is no doubt that there are billions of dollars of wasteful spending in the Defense Department (DOD), and that taxpayers’ money must be spent much more efficiently, I oppose both the President’s defense cut proposal and the ‘military’ sequestration cuts, and I’d like you to know the reasons why.

I make no apologies for being a leader in the fight to cut wasteful federal spending and eliminate the debt.  Among other things, I have been a champion of and always voted for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution; I voted against the President’s $1 trillion ‘stimulus’; I voted against the bailouts for Wall Street and Detroit; I voted against every foreign aid bill in the last 16 years; I was one of only 8 members to vote against the pork-filled Highway Bill that included the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere”; I voted against Obamacare; and I am proud to be the only member of the House of Representatives to have voted against every single increase in the debt limit in the past 8 years.

Going forward, I believe there are many steps we should be taking to eradicate deficit spending and the debt.  Those steps include eliminating foreign aid, the Department of Education, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the taxpayer bailouts of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and profligate European governments; repealing Obamacare; and downsizing many other federal agencies.  But attempting to balance the budget through devastating, disproportionate cuts to our military is not the way to go.

Before the Obama Administration even thinks about proposing to take jobs, services and benefits away from our troops and veterans, or about slashing crucial programs like the F-35B fighter jet – two cost reduction proposals which I have strongly opposed throughout my career in Congress – they need to eliminate the waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars in the Pentagon.

For instance, did you know that DOD has never audited its own books even though it was statutorily required to do so over 20 years ago?  As a result, a recent DOD Inspector General (IG) report demonstrated that wasteful spending at the Pentagon is out of control.  In some cases taxpayers are paying nearly $1700 for items that cost $7.  That’s ridiculous!  Finalizing the audit of DOD and reforming the defense procurement process to cut wasteful spending and give taxpayers more bang for their buck should be this Administration’s top priority – reducing pay, benefits and services for our troops and veterans and making major cuts to the F-35B should be off the table.

I also oppose the Administration’s request for another round of domestic military base closures (BRAC).  Amazingly, right now,  President Obama is opening a new base in Australia and increasing our military presence in the Philippines – while at the same time threatening to close bases in the United States.  The fact is that DOD already has 622 overseas sites.  Before anyone talks about closing bases here at home, we need to evaluate and eliminate any overseas sites that are no longer in our national security interest. 

Finally, it is no secret that I disagree with President Obama’s decision to keep our troops in Afghanistan through 2014.  America is borrowing $10 billion a month from the Chinese and other foreigners – over $120 billion a year – and then sending that money back overseas to spend on that operation.  At a time when this nation is over $15 trillion in debt, we simply can’t afford it.  The reality is that if the President weren’t spending that money in Afghanistan, military spending reductions of any kind would be much, much less necessary.

Since being elected to Congress in 1994, I have taken my responsibility to represent Eastern North Carolina’s values seriously.  As one of the most senior members of the House Armed Services Committee, I fully understand how critical our military facilities are to our economy and way of life.  During the last BRAC round in 2005, I was able to use that seniority to successfully protect Camp Lejeune Marine Base, Cherry Point Marine Air Station, the Naval Air Depot at Cherry Point (NADEP) and Seymour Johnson Air Force Base.  And with this seniority I will have significant input into how the recent defense cut proposals play out.  Please rest assured that I will use my position to continue to do everything in my power to fight for Eastern North Carolina’s military installations and for the courageous men and women – past, present and future – who protect our freedom. 

Please know that I will never forget what an honor it is to represent you.  If I can be of service to you and your family, please don’t hesitate to contact me at any time.  Thanks for all you do to make America the greatest nation the world has ever known.

Sincerely,

Walter B. Jones
Member of Congress (NC-03)

February 2, 2012

Yesterday was a small victory for taxpayers in the House of Representatives.  My Republican colleagues and I voted to pass three bills that will help reduce the wasteful spending that is drowning this nation.  Now it’s time for Majority Leader Harry Reid and the U.S. Senate to act on these important measures.

The first bill passed yesterday was H.R. 1173, the Fiscal Responsibility and Retirement Security Act.  This bill would repeal the CLASS Act, a major Obamacare provision that ‘in theory’ would provide long term care.  Although the program was totally unworkable it was included in Obamacare for two simple reasons.  First, it fit with the Obama Administration’s desire to get the government as deeply involved in health care as possible.  And secondly, it was included as a budget gimmick.  The program would collect for many years before it began paying out benefits.  This made the cost of the program appear to be a winner in the short term, but any honest assessment made it obvious that this provision would be a major drain over the long term.  The Obama Administration announced last year that this program would not work and would be abandoned, but many of my colleagues and I remain concerned that it could be revived.  That is why the CLASS Act needs to be repealed now.

The House also voted on H.R. 3835, a bill that would freeze pay for Members of Congress and bureaucrats.  It’s no secret that America is broke and that the spending spree must stop.  Freezing the pay of Congressmen and bureaucrats is a great place to start.

The final bill approved last night would add a common sense reform to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) welfare block grant program.  H.R. 3567, the Welfare Integrity Now (WIN) Act would restrict welfare funds from being used at strip clubs, liquor stores and casinos.  It is outrageous to think that hard working Americans’ tax dollars are being spent at these facilities.  This practice is unacceptable and must stop.

Taxpayers need their elected representatives to deliver a lot more days on Capitol Hill like yesterday.  I’m doing what I can to make that goal a reality.  A little help from the Senate would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Walter

January 30, 2012

In 1980, President Ronald Reagan asked the American people if they were better off after nearly four years of President Jimmy Carter.  The answer was an obvious NO! If you listen to President Obama you might think all is well in America.  We all know better.  The chart below shows just how bad things are.  I encourage you to review and share with others.

Thanks,

Walter

America Then and Now – Obama Policies Have Put America at Risk

 America Before President Obama Took Office and Now

¹ Number of unemployed in January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
² “Long-term unemployed” means for over 26 weeks; data for January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
³ Unemployment rates in January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
⁴ “High unemployment” means having a 3-month average unemployment rate of 6% or higher.  From the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ “Extended Benefits Trigger Notice” for January 18, 2009 and January 22, 2012. http://www.ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/trigger/2009/trig_011809.html and http://ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/euc_trigger/2012/euc_012212.html.
⁵ The “Misery Index” equals unemployment plus inflation.  For January 2009 and December 2012.  http://www.miseryindex.us/indexbymonth.asp.
⁶ Average retail price per gallon, January 2009 week 3 and January 2012 week 4. http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMM_EPMR_PTE_NUS_DPG&f=W.
⁷ U.S. Department of Agriculture, values represent monthly “moderate” cost per family of four for January 2009 and November 2011. http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/USDAFoodCost-Home.htm.
⁸ U.S. median sales price of existing single-family homes for metropolitan areas for 2008 and 2011 Q3. http://www.realtor.org/research/research/metroprice.
⁹ Residential mortgage delinquencies (real estate loans) for 2008 Q4 and 2011 Q3. http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/chargeoff/default.htm.
¹⁰ Values for January 21, 2009 and January 23, 2012.  http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np.

January 27, 2012

 
I don’t have to tell you that deficit spending is crippling our nation. American needs its elected leaders to level with them about our fiscal crisis, but this President and many of my colleagues in Congress continue to kick the can down the road. That’s just wrong.

It was very disappointing to watch President Obama fail to use his State of the Union address to come clean about our nation’s dire financial situation. Ignoring the problem won’t make it go away.

The infographic below was prepared by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO). It shows the true state of America’s fiscal emergency. I encourage you to check it out and share with your friends.

Thanks,

Walter

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/125xx/doc12577/budgetinfographic.png