Should Presidential candidates be psychologically tested?

Donald Trump mocking handicapped

Maybe it goes without saying that Americans would prefer their President to be psychologically healthy.  But how do we know if our nominees are sane for sure?


One could postulate that anyone running for President is by definition psychologically healthy.  After all, being in front of the public exposes all of your abilities and frailties. It should be easy to spot someone who lives in a fantasy world or by their actions has other psychological problems deserving of a trip to the insane asylum.  How could a psychologically unfit candidate ever get by that scrutiny?

Perhaps there is a type of person who can pass that scrutiny even though they are not truly psychologically healthy.  If there is one such type of person in this election year, my guess is that is Donald Trump.  Now, I am not a psychologist or mental health worker, so my observations are based on my own bias on what I think normal is.

But it is also based on the findings of a group of seventy Republicans who have petitioned the RNC to discontinue funding for their Presidential nominee.  The members of this group have worked with Republicans throughout previous administrations and they enumerate a number of observations they have made about the statements of the candidate that seem to give credence to the questionable state of his psychological health.

Their letter includes the observations below:

• Attacking Gold Star families of soldiers who died serving their country. 
• Urging a hostile country to intervene in a U.S. election.
• Suggesting that gun owners take action against his opponent if she is elected.
• Repudiating our NATO treaty obligations to protect our allies.
• Reportedly expressing interest in the preemptive use of nuclear weapons.
• Exposing his total ignorance of basic foreign policy matters.
• Stating his admiration for violent foreign autocrats.
• Refusing to release any of his past income taxes including those not under audit.
• Deliberately and repeatedly lying about scores of issues, large and small
• His campaign is built on anger and exclusion where he has mocked and offended millions of voters including the disabled, women, Muslims, immigrants and minorities.
• He has shown dangerous authoritative tendencies including threats to ban an entire religion from the country, ordering the military to break the law by torturing prisoners, killing families of suspected terrorists, tracking law abiding Muslim citizens in a database, and using executive orders to commit other illegal and unconstitutional acts.
• Waging battle with other Republicans with his own super PAC and openly refusing to support Republican candidates.

It is also based on the opinion of 50 former Republican administration security experts that say Donald Trump is a clear and present danger to the safety and security of Americans.

If you believe that Donald Trump would be a good President, ask yourself why you are supporting him.  Could it be that he appeals to the skeletons in your own closet?  Perhaps he appeals to your secretly hidden worst nature.  Many of his supporters say he is just like one of them.  Does this mean that you are OK with the above list?  If not, then perhaps you are supporting the wrong candidate.

But I digress.  Perhaps it is time for Congress to enact legislation that requires all Presidential candidates to pass a psychological test before we allow them to run for office.  It appears that in this election, if we leave it up to the people to decide, it is quite possible that a person who should be in a mental hospital could wind up being President.

Then again, maybe we should just not vote for Republicans for any office.

Living in the past, Trump reincarnates Reagan trickle down plan as most forward looking policy for America

Trump speaking in Detroit

Today, Donald Trump gave some specifics about his Tax plan, among other subjects, if he were elected President.  I review here what the major features of his plan includes.

Trump believes that taxes are the biggest differentiation between him and Hillary.  He repeated his campaign's rhetoric and false claim that Hillary says she will increase taxes on the middle class.

Overall, his approach to taxes is to reduce them for most people, but especially for the wealthy and Corporate America.  Although he stated that he is the future thinking of American taxes, his tax plan is to reactivate the 1980's Reagan trickle down economic policy, which many argue does not increase the number of jobs, or give wage increases to workers.  What it does do is pad the bank accounts of the extremely rich.  He spoke nothing about minimum wage increases.

The "trickle down" policy is cited as one of the major reasons for the redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the rich which caused today's income inequality.  Most of his recommendations would reduce revenue to run the Federal government and likely increase the deficit unless severe cuts are made to the social safety net or other programs thought unworthy by a Republican Congress.

For example,  Donald Trump admits that the tax code is extremely complicated but does not mention how the tax code would change, other than by reducing the number of tax brackets from seven down to three.  The three brackets would be 12%, 25% and 33%.

Donald believes that taxes and regulation on Corporate America have had the most adverse impact on reducing the GDP.  Further, he believes that reducing the already highest business tax rate of all western countries from 35% to 15% will improve the economy and spur on business investments and job growth.  The problem with that statement is that 2/3 of all businesses pay no taxes and those that do, have their taxes reduced through exemptions, deductions and off-shore tax havens to about 12.6%.  If reduction in Corporate taxes had any long term impact on increasing jobs or increasing wages, we should have already seen it.  We have not.

Not stopping there to improve the lives of the wealthy, Mr. Trump also advocates elimination of estate taxes.  This was received by a large round of applause from the audience, who apparently either are very rich themselves or do not understand that estate taxes are not paid by any family having less than a $10.8 million estate.

Mr. Trump indicates that the rich will pay their fair share of taxes, but this is very subjective.  Mr. Trump did not get into details on what constitutes a fair share.  For example, if a Corporate CEO who enjoys a $15 million annual income shelters $14 million of it in offshore tax shelters, does he pay tax on the $15 million or $1 million?  Even if he finds legal ways to protect most of that income, what constitutes a fair share?

One tax advantage offered that could favor working women is elimination of all child care expenses from taxes.  Again no specifics but on the surface, it appears that provided you have a job and a child in day care, your child care costs might be deductible from your gross income and not be subject to a tax.  The average cost of child care for working women is about $200 per week, so this has the potential to save over $10,000 from being taxed.  We'll have to see how a Republican Congress would find this proposal, but if history is any indicator, Republicans are not very generous appropriating money for such social reasons.

For example, on the subject of equal pay, if Republicans in Congress passed equal pay legislation, women's wages would be increased by about 30%, potentially increasing the take home pay by much more than $10,000.  That has been rejected by Republicans more than once.  My guess is that Trump's child care deduction will be solidly rejected if Republicans stay in control of Congress.

Donald indicates that more about his tax policies can be found on his website.

The economy is great...so why don't I feel it?

Led by Donald Trump, a familiar claim of the Republican party is that Obama has made the economy far worse than ever. However, the economy has actually improved, especially after the Bush financial crisis was resolved by the Obama administration. But this fact does not ring true with many workers in the middle class.  

And therein lies the strength of the Republican strategy to convince people of their false statements about the economy.  As a whole, the middle class has truly not participated in the economic improvements and large cash in-flows enjoyed by the financially top 1% of society.

The reason for this is simple to explain and has nothing to do with the Obama Administration or the new Democratic platform.

If you are a middle class worker, you have a job.  The salary you got when you took that job was between you and your boss.  The government currently has no control over the wages that you are paid by your employer, except if you are a minimum wage worker.  State legislatures set the minimum wage that your employer cannot legally go below.  But there is no governmental requirement for an employer to increase your pay at any time.  Whether you get a pay increase at all, depends on the policies of the executives running your employer's company.  In the distant past, employers used to treat employees to annual raises, the amount of which depended on how well you met your job objectives.  Today however, regardless of how well you do your job, your employer may still not increase your pay.

Prior to the Reagan administration, some middle class workers enjoyed protections on living wages by their union membership.  Labor unions were started under a Democratic administration at a time when business executives put profits before people in the worst way.  

Before labor unions, many company executives treated workers with contempt and disrespect.  Hours were long.  Safe working conditions were not a consideration.  Weekend work was expected. If you got a vacation it was not paid.  Children were put to work in factories as executives of manufacturing companies took advantage of families that could not afford to eat during the depression unless their children worked. Some workers were killed during strikes against unfair labor practices.

As soon as they gained back the Presidency, the Republicans worked hard to reverse workers gains received from labor unions.  This effort continues even today and has resulted in the demise of union membership.  Today, less than 25% of workers belong to unions and the Republicans are still trying to get rid of unions altogether.  Their "Right to Work" legislation is being promoted as a positive measure to help workers, but in reality it is just another Republican lie to reduce current Union membership and reduce workers rights and wages.   Republican legislators have argued that the National Labor Relations Board, the agency that is the only help workers have with grievances against their boss, be dissolved from the federal government.  Republican legislators have refused to increase the federally mandated minimum wage.  They have legislated for increased work visas for lower paid foreigners to take American jobs.  Working for their true constituents, the Republican party has assisted the wealthy by devaluing workers and ensuring that workers wages do not impact the corporate bottom line.

Labor to an executive is an expense.  It costs the company money and reduces the profits.  The profits are for the executives and the owners and not something shared with workers in most companies.  A large part of business management's responsibility is to reduce costs so there is always downward pressure on wages. In a society that found slavery as a viable alternative to more expensive labor, it is fairly apparent that in a capitalistic society the powerful value profits over people.

Your employer has enjoyed the benefits of the economic progress made by the Obama administration, but has not shared the profits with you.  Your wages could be increased since there is plenty of cash in the coffers of Corporate America, but your employers have decided against it.  That is why you have not been feeling the benefits of economic gains being realized by the rich.  

For the last thirty years, the share of the economic gains received by the top 1% of society have exceeded those that most workers have received by nearly 300 times.  If you have been employed for more than 20 years, you may remember a time when annual raises were a thing.  Today, most corporations have eliminated annual raises and increased the competition between fellow workers in order to keep their workers more productive and content with having a job with no increase in wages.  With foreign workers visas being increased yearly, American workers today are always fearful that their company may have another lay-off, in which they might lose their job to lesser paid foreigners unless they out-work their fellow employees and don't complain about their wages.

Ultimately, you are not feeling the improvement in the economy because of the greed of your bosses.  They have received the benefits, which one could say are the result of your labor, since no company is made profitable by its non-human elements.   

Nearly 75% of the economy is from consumer purchases.  The other 25% is from government spending. The Republicans want to keep your wages low and reduce the federal government.  Both tactics will reduce the economy for all socio-economic classes.  The Republicans are married to the "trickle-down" theory where you give the economic benefits to the rich and they will create more jobs.  This is a total farce that has hurt the middle class for over the last 35 years.  The only thing their economic theory has caused is a redistribution of wealth to the top 1%.  Jobs don't get created if demand does not warrant it and simply giving tax breaks and exemptions to the rich does not increase demand.

The Democrats want to improve the economy from the middle class out, which will improve the economy from the consumer side.  This will ultimately benefit the rich as well since consumers with more money can buy more things.

When you vote this November, remember that Donald Trump is not an island to himself, but rather the culmination of historic Republican obstruction and erroneous economic policies that contributes to your inability to make gains from the improvement in the economy.  If you are middle class, you should not want Republicans in state or federal office.

Vote for Democrats for all political offices to eliminate the obstruction in Washington and give America back to the middle class.  Only then will workers make progress against the powers that otherwise would hold them down.

Trump: Ironic outcome of establishment Republican obstruction

Donald J. Drumpf

Throughout the Obama Presidency, establishment Republicans in Congress did their very best to obstruct the normal functioning of the Federal Government.  They were convinced that obstruction was a winning strategy to ensure that the GOP would become victorious in the 2012 Presidential election.  Although they were somewhat victorious in the mid-term elections, the GOP lost the  2012 Presidency to a second Obama term.  They continued their obstruction of government with even more intensity in preparing for the 2016 Presidential election, all the while ignoring the impact of their obstruction on the American people and especially on the voting base of their own party.

Republican leaders ignored the data that their own post Romney party "autopsy" showed them.  That they were losing their constituents to old age.  That they were not appealing to the diverse ethnicity of America.  That they were on the wrong side of women's issues.  That they were being seen as a party of the rich and not a party of the ordinary person.  Yet they did nothing positive to improve their image.

Instead they took to underhanded and un-American actions to cheat American Democracy such as voter suppression actions, reducing voting precincts and changing voting privileges for students so they could not vote at their own campuses.  All attempts to reduce the number of Democrats who might vote.

They used their power in government committees to create artificial controversies around the Obama administration and the future most-likely to be nominee for President, Hillary Clinton.  They openly disrespected the Office of the President, calling President Obama names and falsely accusing him of not being a leader.  According to many of them in office, Russian President Putin is a better leader than our American President.  Their intentions were to make Democrats seem ineffective as leaders or untrustworthy by using insults, insinuation and disrespect.  To them, it was just another tactic to win votes in future elections.  This tactic worked on their own constituents.  It also served as a lesson to Donald Trump.  Appealing to Republican's worst nature wins their support.  If we were paying attention, we would see how closely Trump would follow this tactic in the Republican Primaries.

In this 2016 Presidential nomination process we are now seeing the decaying fruits of those actions for the GOP as a party.  Republican voters now see vitriolic rhetoric like their party's leaders used on the Obama Administration as a characteristic of a good leader.  Republican leaders led them down this path.  Voters are voting by overwhelming margins in primary elections for a narcissistic sociopathic con-man.

Donald Drumpf is riding the tides of victory in primary elections, not because he is the best person for the job.  Not because his policies ring clearly as the correct approach to governing.  Not because he will make America great again.  He is not the best person to be President and nothing good would come of his winning the Presidency.  He is simply winning because of the anger that Republican voters have.  He is now the Republican nominee for President.

Republicans are angry because they see themselves as ordinary citizens who have not benefitted from the improvement in the economy.  They believe current government policies will make them fall further.  They know things are better for some people, but not for them.  They do not understand why and need to blame someone for their situation. The confusing explanations they get from their Republican leaders are intentionally meant to mislead them.  They know Republicans in Congress are not getting anything accomplished to benefit society and are beginning to doubt them.

There is now a state of utter confusion in GOP politics.  Establishment Republicans agree that Donald Trump is not a true Republican.  But that is not the worst of his characteristics.  Secretly they believe he is not a stable individual either.  Not someone you would want in control of the nuclear codes.  How should they react to Trump's overwhelming win margins?  The GOP base obviously wants him as their new President.  Did the establishment create a monster?  If they get behind this monster, will GOP policies be advocated?

At this point, Donald is the Presidential nominee.  Republicans now must decide whether they will support him or not.  They do have some things to gain if he becomes President, such as Supreme Court appointments.  He will carry out his threats to eliminate "Obama-care," which Republican leadership has stated is the worst thing since Obama himself.

The dilemma they are faced with is whether they will give up more than they gain.  We will see in the upcoming months whether Republicans will stand behind Trump and save their party or do the right thing and save the country instead.

The Near Treasonous Acts of a Party Gone Mad

Newest GOP moniker

What does it take for American voters to understand that the intentions of the maladjusted party of the right are dangerously close to treason?

When John Boehner went behind the President's back and secretly asked Benjamin Netanyahu to address both houses of Congress so that he could drum up support for undermining the Iranian nuclear talks, he did it in direct opposition to the leader of the free world's wishes.

When forty-seven Republican Senators conspired and sent a letter to Iranian leaders intending to undermine the nuclear negotiations between the United States and Iran, we heard comparatively little discussion around those actions.  There was no official condemnation and no one was held responsible or made amends or apologies to the American people, the Secretary of State or the administration.

And now we have evidence from the Central Intelligence Agency that Israel shared American secrets obtained from spying on the Iranian talks with America's own GOP Congressional leadership.  Now it all fits together nicely.

Perhaps this information sharing was done well before John Boehner decided to ask Netanyahu to speak to Congress.  Perhaps the knowledge obtained from Israel's spying was the reason John Boehner decided to ask Netanyahu to speak.  Rather than going to the President with the information as a true patriot would, Boehner decided to stand up to the President and withhold evidence.

At the time of Netanyahu's speech to Congress, many observers thought that some of his points describing how the President's plan was going to facilitate Iran's race to a nuclear bomb were exaggerations since the plan itself was not released to the public yet.  It appears now that whatever information Israel learned from their spying, whether it did or not, Netanyahu believed it would expedite achievement of an Iranian nuclear arsenal.  With the proven tendency to be Obama administration conspiracy theorist experts, our senseless GOP leaders fell for it hook, line and sinker. They may have actually been played by Netanyahu.

The next move may be the thing that proves these Republican Congressmen are deserving of condemnation, legal penalties or loss of their jobs.  They acted upon the stolen information that the Israeli spies shared with them when they sent that letter to the Iranian leaders.  To any thinking American Congressman, it would seem that this act is risky, injurious to the discussions and potentially destabilizing to the region.  But we are talking about Republicans.  The only thoughts they have is how to make Obama seem ineffective as a leader.  This one fit right in to their modus operandi.  

House Leader John Boehner, R-OH

Soon John Boehner will be traveling to Israel to speak with Netanyahu.  I wouldn't doubt that Boehner's goal is to gather more secret intelligence to plan phase two of the GOP attack against the American President.

Republicans were outraged over Hillary Clinton's email, yet not one of them thinks anything is wrong with these peculiar, near treasonous actions taken by their own Party members.

Wake up America before it's too late.

Puckett says good-bye to Virginia Democrats and Medicaid expansion

Virginia state politics has entered a new era in stymying aspects of the affordable care law.  Virginia Republicans have enlisted a self-serving Democratic Senator to spoil the chances that medicaid will be expanded in Virginia.

Democrats in Virginia's legislature have been preparing to expand medicaid and were working on a budget which included it.  That budget was moving forward and expected to pass with medicaid expansion in it.  The balance of power in the Virginia Senate was tied at 20 to 20 but that is now about to change.

Democrat senator Phillip Puckett will resign from the Virginia legislature and leaves a balance of power in the hands of Republicans running Virginia.  The GOP will now take over the chairmanships

Phillip Puckett (D-VA)

and leadership of the Virginia legislature, thus ending newly elected Governor Terry McAuliff's campaign pledge to expand medicaid.  Some 400,000 people now have no possibility of gaining access to healthcare in the near future.

The circumstances surrounding Senator Puckett's resignation is very suspicious.  Reportedly, Puckett's resignation was done on the promise that he would be given a position on the state tobacco commission while his daughter would get a state judicial appointment compliments of Virginia Republican leadership.  Because of the public outrage over this attempted bribe, Puckett has refused to accept the deal, however with Puckett's resignation, the Republicans still get their part of the bargain and gain the control they needed to allow hundreds of thousands of poor people to die of their health issues.

If you are Republican, you should be ashamed of your party.  If you are a Puckett, you should be ashamed of your family.  If you are a Virginia voter, you have your chance to rectify this in the fall.

Why GOP means Genuinely Odd Person and Georgia governor Deal turns from Dr. Jekyll into Mr. Hyde

Since President Obama was elected, the nature of the Republican party has been changing.  Some would say the change is not for the better.  Like Dr. Jekyll of the 1931 novella, the GOP is taking on more of a Mr. Hyde persona.  This change is occurring more and more frequently in many of our Republican leaders as we see Republican governors of many states with their "Mr. Hyde" showing.

Take for example scandals or questionable activities involving current or former Republican  governors McDonnell, Christie, Walker, McCrory, Corker, Scott, Snyder, and LaPaige.

We also see some Republican led state congressmen acting in unison to create legislation that causes voting restrictions while some go as far as to pass legislation that allows business to discriminate against certain classes of citizens.  Governors and legislators in many Republican run states have refused to allow medical care to the poorest people by denying medicaid expansion.

Now perhaps these actions were always part of the GOP psyche or policies, but for many governors, it is the first time the public is seeing this side of their character.  Now it seems clear that these apparently repressed behaviors in Republican politicians can no longer be hidden.  The dam of GOP malevolence is bursting.

One of the most malevolent actions that has ever been proposed by a Republican governor has

Gov Deal (R-GA)

occurred this past week.  That governor is Georgia governor Deal, whose "Mr Hyde" is starting to show.

Many Georgia hospitals located in the poorer parts of the state have been forced to close their doors because of financial losses.  Much of these losses come from lack of revenue by uninsured people who cannot afford to pay for their health care.  Governor Deal has a solution.

Governor Deal still refuses to extend medicaid to the poorest in his state.  That is not his solution.  He fails to realize that rejecting medicaid expansion is a big part of the problem for Georgia hospitals.   In fact, if he expanded medicaid, the root cause of the problem, uninsured poor people who cannot pay for hospital services, would be resolved.  Instead governor Deal wants to repeal the 1986 law signed by Republican President Reagan called the "Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act."

This law is designed to prevent uninsured people from being turned away by hospital emergency rooms when they have an emergency medical condition that requires immediate treatment they cannot afford to pay for.  Prior to 1986, hospitals had the right to refuse patients if they could not afford to pay for medical care or if they did not have insurance.  The Reagan GOP had empathy for people in such dire need of care and readily realized that the law was necessary.  But not Governor Deal.  His "Mr. Hyde" is gaining more control over his personality.

By calling for a repeal of the law, governor Deal is effectively asking to eliminate poor people from health services altogether.  He's made sure that they can't get health insurance from expanded medicaid in his state and now he wants to eliminate them from any hospital care at all.  "Heartless" is a kind word to explain governor Deal's thinking.

When a person has no empathy for others, we usually think that they have a psychological problem.  Depending on the degree, this lack of empathy can range from narcissistic personality disorder to psychopathic personality disorder.  More and more, I am seeing these disorders appearing within  GOP leadership.  Perhaps you may agree.

As a voter, I would like to know that the choices I have in politicians, present me with psychologically healthy people.  I believe we are beginning to see that the GOP does not offer this kind of choice.

Perhaps we can make psychological testing a mandatory requirement in order to allow a politician to run for office.

Or maybe we should just not vote for Republicans.

GOP deceptive tweet reminds us that they are the stupid party

Speaker Boehner's tweet

Today, House Speaker John Boehner found a new opportunity to demonize the Affordable Care Act and mislead his constituents.  His tweets proclaim that "Obama administration says 11 million will pay higher premium costs for their health care under ObamaCare."

Boehner's tweet derives its conclusion from a GOP  requested study from the Office of the Actuary, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which was released last Friday, the 21st of February.

The first thing that I should mention is that the population of people considered by the study is individuals who receive their health insurance through their small business employer and not through the ACA state health insurance exchanges.  So this is not about ObamaCare causing people financial harm even though Boehner interpreted it that way.

When the Affordable Care Act was created, it added requirements known as sections 2701, 2702 and 2703 to the Public Health Services Act.  These sections are intended to end discrimination by insurers on the patient population.

Section 2701 is titled "Fair Health Insurance Premium" and changes a practice called "community rating" where insurance companies used to be able to discriminate by charging higher prices for women of child bearing age; those having more health claims; or the elderly.  Now premium prices can only vary between individuals because of individual versus family enrollment; geographic area; age (but the ratio of higher premiums for the elderly is reduced from 5:1 down to 3:1); and tobacco use.

Section 2702 requires insurers to accept all applicants and is designed to prevent insurance company discrimination due to pre-existing conditions.

Section 2703 requires that group and individual health insurance must be renewable.

So, Boehner's tweet is actually attacking that part of the ACA that protects consumers from discrimination, probably because he didn't read it or perhaps because he didn't understand it.  The obvious fact is that he just read the lines in the study that supported his unreasonable view that "ObamaCare is bad" and tweeted.  This is unfortunate because there are important aspects of the study that place their own conclusions into serious doubt.  Some of this is self revealed, such as the admission that there are other studies that have found insignificant change in premiums.  Also, some parts of the study text indicate that the results are highly suspect and subject to large variations.

The study also found that the employer sponsored health insurance premium price changes would only affect small employers (100 employees or less) and the premium changes would only come from section 2701 requirements.  This is because they speculate that smaller and younger companies have younger employees who have been able to take advantage of the greater old to young ratio in premium prices allowed before ObamaCare and section 2701 requirements.  This would make those employers (only if they provide insurance for their employees) more likely to have increased premium prices after January 1, 2014.  The study also only speculates that any increase in the employers insurance costs would be passed on to their employees.

Additionally, these new requirements are only effective for employer health policies that are not grandfathered.  Grandfathered policies are any that existed on or before March 23, 2010.  So only new small businesses who provide employer sponsored health insurance and were created after March 23, 2010 should have been considered in the study.

However, the study indicates that 17 million individuals would be in this population.  This can be shown to be inaccurate by using the Business Dynamics Statistics data from the census.gov website.  One can see there that the maximum number of employees in new small businesses, using the largest employee population cited in a range for the category of small business created through all of 2010 and 2011 is about 2.3 million each year.  This calculates to 4.6 million employees.  Estimating a 20% increase year over year through 2013 adds another 6.2 million employees for a total population of 10.8 million.  This is a very high estimate since it would mean that nearly all of the increase in employment in the USA since 2010 has been from small business.   Prior government estimates of jobs created by small business is closer to 45% of the total.   A more reasonable population would be 5 million affected.  Still not a small number, but much smaller than the estimate of 17 million cited in the study.  (Even less than GOP led states have refused to provide expanded medicaid for.)

The study also speculates that about 35% of the population would receive reductions from their pre-ACA insurance premium costs.  The other 65% would receive increases that would put their 2014 premiums at about the average cost for health insurance prior to the ACA.

Additionally, the number affected is further trimmed down by the number of individuals who purchase health insurance from the ACA exchanges in their state.  The benefit is that many who earn less than 400% of the federal poverty level will receive federal tax reductions.  Hopefully, many of those people will take advantage of that and stop listening to misleading GOP rhetoric instructing them to avoid buying from the insurance exchanges.

Further the study stipulates that small businesses who currently provide health insurance may find it more advantageous for themselves and their employees to discontinue providing insurance and telling their employees to get their health insurance from the ACA state exchanges.  Again, Republican deception has made a large portion of America uncomfortable with ObamaCare, so it is not clear that employees would readily accept this idea.

The small business employer also has the option to utilize the small business health insurance exchange established by ObamaCare.  This option would allow the employer to continue providing insurance to its employees and be exempt from the section 2701 requirements.

Another option for the small business employer would be to self insure.  This would also allow them to provide insurance to their employees and be exempt from the section 2701 requirements.

The total number of employees affected by minor premium increases is likely to be less than 3 million and even that number depends on a lot of the variables mentioned which could make the number much smaller.  My suggestion for small business employees is to get your health insurance from the state exchanges.

Ultimately, if our Republican leaders would stop spreading misinformation and start to support ObamaCare, more people would benefit.  The federal government can be a valuable partner to business and individuals despite what radical GOP-ers want you to believe.

GOP austerity program for the unemployed

In 1995 I lost my managerial level job after loyally working for the same company for twenty-one years.  At the time, the unemployment rate was about 5.6%.  It took me eleven months to find a new job that paid about twenty percent less.  I was lucky because I did not need unemployment assistance to survive during that time.  My former employer maintained our then current pay rate during our termination for a time derived from the number of years we were employed.  Many of us were long time employees and like myself found work before our termination salaries ran out.

Today, the unemployment rate is closer to 8% and unemployed people looking for new jobs have a number of new  obstacles in their way.  Most current-day companies would never continue to pay a person after they are terminated.  Many manufacturing and technical jobs have been moved to China or India and other American jobs are being given daily to lower paid foreigners working in America.  Federal Republicans are calling for more American jobs to be given to foreigners as they legislate for large increases in the number of H1-B visas offered annually.  The job market is diminished since 1995, competition for jobs is greater and now unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed, who have been out of work for twenty-seven or more weeks is ended.

President Obama has called for Congress to extend long term unemployed benefits as a priority when they return from holiday break and Senator Reid has indicated he will put it on the Senate docket as a priority, but federal Republicans appear to be characteristically nonchalant about unemployment.

Contrary to the number one Republican concern spoken about by John Boehner of "jobs, jobs, jobs", federal Republicans are  insisting that extending unemployment benefits be either tied to big Democrat social program cuts or, as Eric Cantor has indicated, just won't be an issue of concern when the GOP House returns in January.

With Cantor's voting record against extending unemployment benefits in the past, it seems likely that the House will not even bring the Senate bill up for a vote.

It was laughable to hear the absurd explanation by the Republican's most promising future nominee for President, Rand Paul, that he was against extending unemployment benefits because "it does a disservice to these workers."  Paul believes that receiving unemployment insurance benefits makes a person less likely to look for a job and therefore perpetuates the time he or she is unemployed.  How likely is this to be true?

The unemployment insurance program does not provide unemployed workers with a full paycheck. The weekly amount varies by the state's insurance program rules but one estimate is about 25 percent of the weekly take-home pay.  How can a family who has a life-style that is adjusted to a home budget based on full wages be comfortable to continue to exist on 25% of that amount?  They can't.  Paul's explanation is a ruse.

With about 1.4 million unemployed about to lose financial assistance, Rand Paul explains that he would rather find a way to create jobs first, which is why the idiom "putting the cart before the horse" was invented.  Republican logic simply defies logic.

Analysts have estimated that it would cost about twenty-six billion dollars to extend unemployment insurance benefits.  Ironically, it cost about that same amount when Republicans forced the shut-down of the government last year.  If nothing else, that should make you angry.

If you are Republican and middle class or have ever lost a job due to no fault of your own, these Republican actions once again show that they are not worried about you and are not empathetic to you. They can't imagine what it is like to be living from paycheck to paycheck and what a negative impact a lay-off can have on your life.  They do not care that your children cannot eat well.  They do not even think about the family problems that develop during this stressful time.

Some GOP politicians can't think things through to their logical conclusion and can only learn from the hardships of bad personal experience.  I suggest we give them a chance to learn by personal experience and vote Democrat in all future elections.

Ayn Rand would be proud of her Republican minions

Ayn Rand

Republicans in the House of Representatives have shown America yet again how they worship the teachings of Ayn Rand.  On Thursday this week, they introduced a bill to cut $40 billion from the food stamp program.

Although Ayn Rand is dead, her philosophies and narrow understanding of life are promoted today by organizations that target the youth of America.

Taking lessons from the Nazi party, the Ayn Rand Institute and Objective Academic Center, both mass media organizations that spread Ayn Rand's ideas, attempt to plant the seed of societal discontent into the malleable minds of children.  Their intention is to create an army of brain-washed individuals who will give credence to Ayn Rand's teachings and may one day influence American society to accept and conform to Ayn Rand's teachings.

We saw an example of how effective this method is when Congressman Paul Ryan, who himself was introduced to Ayn Rand's philosophy as a child, mentioned her teachings as the guidance he used to

Paul Ryan's Budget

create the Ryan budget.  The Ryan budget strips funding for social welfare programs and instead funds  corporate welfare.  This is in line with Ayn Rand's teachings of survival of the fittest, where the rich deserve entitlements while the poor must be punished for their poverty.  

Republicans had the opportunity to introduce this food stamp bill because they separated it from the Farm Bill, which has historically been paired with the food stamp program.  The farm part of the farm bill was passed and offered $80 billion in government subsidies and insurance protections to wealthy farmers.  The food stamp program was separated from the farm bill because Republicans were not satisfied with the $4 billion in food stamp cuts the Democrats offered.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) assists people in poverty temporarily by providing food stamps which are used for groceries.  Thursday's vote, which had no Democrat supporters, would strip $40 billion over ten years from the food stamp program.  It is estimated that this would cut up to 3.8 million people from the program.    About 75% of SNAP benefits are received by families with  children.  Sixteen percent of recipients are disabled.  Nine percent of recipients are the elderly.  It is estimated that only about 67% of the people eligible for food stamps actually participate in the program, so it is possible that even more food stamps might be needed if some families were placed into a little more financial stress.  This is not the time to be reducing SNAP benefits.

Republicans only publicly admitted reason they needed this huge cut was to eliminate fraud from the

Eric Cantor

program.  The "welfare queen" concept invented by an exaggeration of Ronald Reagan over 30 years ago is still a large part of the Republican mind set.  Eric Cantor explained in typical "out-of-touch" Republican style, that no one would be denied food stamps if they got a job.  This really missed the point.  Not only is there already a work requirement to the food stamp program which most families receiving aid are already compliant with, but the largest number of food stamp recipients are children, the handicapped and the elderly.  And this doesn't even consider that there is only 1 job for every three job seekers in today's economy.

It has been estimated that there may be about $750 million or 1% of operating costs in food stamp fraud each year.  So why would Republicans want to cut $4 billion a year out of the program?   Because the poor do not vote Republican.  Why would Republicans continue to give wealthy corporate farmers government assistance when they take it away from the really needy?  My guess is because Ayn Rand taught them that people are only as valuable and deserving as they are rich.

It is remarkable how closely Republican actions mimic the teaching of Ayn Rand.  From hating government to hating the poor, it appears that the Hitler youth of the Ayn Rand generation have grown up and infiltrated American government.  Ayn Rand's socially unjust philosophies hide beneath the idea of capitalism.  She is advocating anti-Christian and hateful actions by giving permission and excuses for them if you believe in capitalism.

While there is nothing wrong with capitalism as an economic policy, there is certainly something wrong when you partner it with hate, lack of compassion, unjust rewards and unjust punishments.  That is what is wrong with Ayn Rand's teachings and appears to also be what is wrong with Republicanism today.

It is unlikely that this SNAP bill will be approved by the Senate since Democrats are in the majority there, but once again it gives evidence of the true nature of Republicans in Congress.   Hopefully you are beginning to see the sense of voting these demons out of office.

How Republicans will give Obama carte-blanche in his last two years as President

United we stand.  Divided we fall.

The absurdity that is running amuck in Congress is destined to stop soon.  This is not just wishful thinking.  I say this with  complete confidence.   Republicans in Congress will take the lead in ending their own misery with two last desperate actions to win favor with their wealthy constituents while betraying the rest of us, and this will signal the end.

Within the Republican party, members of the Tea Party caucus are deliberately choosing to end our government.  They have shown that they do not have a desire to compromise, do not want to create useful legislation and are even willing to cause an economic crisis if they don't get their way.  They have split their own party.  Tea Party leaders such as Canadian born Ted Cruz and his Cuban born father are leading simple-minded Tea Party members astray.

Ted Cruz

They claim that the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) is the single most injurious program in the history of the world and must be stopped.  They blame the actions of unethical business owners, such as reducing full time employee hiring and cutting hours to avoid having to provide insurance to their employees, on Obama.  They asked for concessions to allow one more year for business owners to conform to healthcare regulations and requested exemption from the business mandated penalties and got them from Obama.  Now they claim that Obama is helping big business but denies the same exemption for individuals.  Politics and truth seem to be unfamiliar partners in Republican circles.

The first desperate action that Republicans will take is to offer a much monetarily reduced continuing resolution to keep the government running but will attach an amendment to defund ObamaCare.  This will pass the House but fail in the Senate.  After this useless legislation delay, Republicans will allow the government to shut down long enough to make the debt ceiling the next issue they can use as leverage to defund Obama Care.  Typically, they take actions that will hurt many Americans with the

aloof disregard of sociopaths.  

When it becomes painfully obvious that Republicans are hurting their own constituents with the government shut down, they will eventually pass a continuing resolution to fund the government.  You can bet that it will continue to contain articles to attack some aspect of Obama Care which Democrats may allow in order to continue governing.  My guess is that they will first propose a year exemption from the individual mandate penalty that will not be approved.  Then they will attach a demand for reduced employer contributions to the employee insurance premium.  That or something like it will probably pass.

With the government back in operation, a week or so later, Republicans will use the threat of not passing the debt ceiling as another attack on defunding ObamaCare.  Most members of Congress know that increasing the debt ceiling is needed in order to pay for debt obligations already made by Congress.  The last time increasing the debt ceiling was rejected by Republicans, America's credit rating dropped and the interest rate charged increased.  Increasing the interest on trillions of dollars in loans makes for a huge increase in our deficit.  Republicans never seem to remember how much they are personally responsible for "Obama's" deficit.

This time there will be no compromise and America will go into default on its loans for some period of time.  Then it will be a race to see which side will give in first.  Because of our already tight monetary policy, the economic health of America is sure to be hurt.  Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke has described this as a recession inducing action.  

If it appears that there is no compromise in sight, stocks will be affected and Americans 401K's will

Crash of 2013?

lose tremendous value.  Retirees can expect that their incomes from investments will be slashed and their standard of living will be drastically reduced.  The wealthy will remove their cash from the stock market and place it into tax sheltered off-shore accounts.  This will pull the market down even more.  A middle-class financial crisis could become the most severe in history and will signal the end of the middle-class in America.  When the middle-class is gone, business will be affected and the entire economic structure of the United States could undergo the greatest depression in our history.

Because of the potential economic damage to America and the world, I have to believe that Republicans will give up on their insistence to defund ObamaCare and pass the increase in the debt ceiling, especially when they realize that the world will see them as the cause of a world-wide depression.

But some damage will be done to the economy because Republicans won't give up their senseless acts of desperation in short order.  Because this will hurt their own wealthy Wall Street constituents, the Tea Party Republicans will be stifled and healthier Republican minds will prevail.

The future may bring civility back to governing.

Remember the next month when you are voting for your Congressmen in the 2014 mid-term elections.  Let's hope righteousness is a powerful enough ideal and pervasive enough in our voting public to overcome the evil that seems to have invaded Republican politics.

Your vote is the key.

Legal action against Congressional Republicans is overdue

They wanted to make him a one term President.  In a clandestine  meeting they conspired to block every piece of legislation that supported his policies so he would be ineffective as a President.  They lied about his intentions during the 2012 Presidential campaign.  They continually lie about the Affordable Care Act and have voted to repeal it 37 times.  They have even voted against their own legislation when it is clear that Obama supports it.

The obstruction happening in Congress is solely due to Republicans who hate Obama more than they love America.  The most frustrating thing is that not all of America is as angry at Republicans as Republicans in Congress are with President Obama.

Because this Republican obstruction is a conspiracy that is intentionally designed to be destructive to America, Republicans in Congress are guilty of the crimes of "Conspiracy to Obstruct"  and "Conspiracy to Defraud."

The following is the legal explanation of "Conspiracy to Obstruct" (18 U.S.C. 371).

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

The following is the legal explanation of "Conspiracy to Defraud" 

Section 371 contains both a general conspiracy prohibition and a specific obstruction conspiracy prohibition in the form of a conspiracy to defraud proscription. The elements of conspiracy to defraud the United States are: (1) an agreement of two more individuals; (2) to defraud the United States; and (3) an overt act by one of conspirators in furtherance of the scheme.  The "fraud covered by the statute ‘reaches any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful functions of any department of Government” by “deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest.” The scheme may be designed to deprive the United States of money or property, but it need not be so; a plot calculated to frustrate the functions of a governmental entity will suffice.

Debt ceiling discussions are coming up again in the fall.  Raising the debt ceiling is necessary to allow America to pay debts that Congress has already made.  Republicans have already threatened to use the debt ceiling as leverage to get the administration to repeal the Affordable Care Act.  Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke and other financial experts have indicated to Congress, that blocking the debt ceiling increase will lead to a serious recession.

If Republicans go ahead with this threat it will do severe damage to the United States economy with their full approval.  This is more than ordinary politics.  It is akin to a terrorist threat that means to do harm to America.

If Republicans block debt ceiling increases, Attorney General Eric Holder would be correct to bring them up on criminal charges.  Republicans in Congress have so far escaped legal action for their conspiracy against the United States, but they are no longer legitimate politicians.  If they place America into default on its debts they have entered into the realm of disobedience to law and deserve to be held accountable.  

The chances of legal action against them are slim but you can do something about them.  Write them, call them and tell others how you feel about their actions.  Doing this now may help avoid disaster.  Don't wait until it's too late and you are personally affected by their actions.

At the very least, please vote them out of office in the 2014 mid-term elections and help get government working for all the people and not against them.

The straw that breaks the elephants back?

President Obama taught Americans about demand side economics today in a speech designed to kick-start action in Congress and allow Republicans to show they are serious about John Boehner's so far empty slogan "...Republicans most important action is to create jobs, jobs, jobs."  His presentation was inspiring and showed his sincere concern for America's middle class as well as his understanding about real solutions to initiating economic prosperity for all Americans.

Specifically he spoke about and elaborated on the cornerstones of improving the economy.  These are:

1. Good Jobs with decent wages and benefits.  His efforts will be towards recognizing companies that keep jobs in America and treat their employees fairly.

2. Education programs to prepare children for global competition.  He spoke about the need for pre-school for all 4 year olds; improving school infrastructures; reversing the student loan rate increase and making college affordable for all Americans.

3. Home ownership.  He wants to encourage ownership based on solid foundation of fair and clear rules and asked Congress to take action to encourage families to refinance at low rates.

4. Secure retirement.  He believes America has an upside down system where the wealthy get generous tax exceptions to save but the lower classes do not get the same breaks.  He wants to allow the middle class to save money and belay fears of poverty in retirement.  He reminded Congress that passing immigration reform makes undocumented workers pay their taxes and shores up social security.

5. Health Care focus.  He wants Americans to have security in knowing neither accident nor illness will cause you to lose your savings.  The affordable care act means a better deal for people.  Private insurers will compete for your business.  Pre-existing conditions will have to be covered.  Health care costs are being driven down.  Some states are finding that premiums will  be 50% lower.  The Affordable care act ensures health insurance coverage for 26 year olds under their parents plan.  He does not know why Republicans want to repeal such a benefit for people.

6. Rebuild opportunity for those who have not made it.  The President believes that too many are still in poverty.  He recognizes that America does not guarantee success and people need to be self-reliant.  But he wants there to be a quality of opportunity and upward mobility available for everyone.  The American idea is that you can make it if you work hard, but opportunity is harder to find over the last 30 years.  We must do more to give every American the chance to make it to the middle class.
He wants to rebuild run down neighborhoods.  He again calls for raising the minimum wage.  He believes economic growth will benefit everyone when it comes from the middle class out and not top down.  Even without Congress he says he will do whatever is in his power to focus on that philosophy.  He is calling on the private sector to step up and for Democrats to redesign or get rid of non-workable programs.

7. Republicans must work with the President to find common ground.  President Obama thinks there are Republicans who privately agree with his policies in Congress now but they are afraid of retribution from their party.  He identifies Republicans in Congress as the greatest obstruction that hampers economic growth.  Republicans must now lay out their ideas.  He reminds them that you can't just be against something.  He insists they must be for something.  He is ready to work with Republicans if they have any ideas.  He says if Republicans have any better  ideas then they should stop taking ludicrous repeal votes and share their ideas with the country.  The President will not accept deals that do not meet the test of strengthening hard working families.

Still focused on the Republican obstruction in Congress,  the President says that doing nothing will lose a part of the character of America.  The American dream will be lost and the position of the middle class will erode further.  Money politics will destroy our country more.  Fundamental optimism will give way to cynicism.  He warns "that's not the vision of America we should settle for."

The President appeals to the moral compass of Republicans to stop the fighting in order to think about the American way of life.  Making America special is not to focus on making the few wealthy.  It's about making America benefit.  It's an American dream; not Obama's dream or Sally's dream or John's dream.

Unfortunately, demand side economics flies in the face of Congressional Republicans view of the

pathway for economic success.  According to Republicans since Ronald Reagan, supply side economics is the way to trickle down prosperity to the lower levels of society.  This means bolstering the wealthy with tax cuts and government money while reducing government spending on the public infrastructure and reducing government spending that benefits the weakest in society.

One must remember that Republican majority leader John Boehner assigned Paul Ryan to create their proposed budget.  Paul Ryan is a firm believer in Ayn Rand's anti-Christian policies of survival of the fittest.  As such his proposed budget slashes government programs that benefit the general public and the poorest in society in favor of tax cuts and government subsidy entitlements for the wealthiest Americans.  Even though Republicans will stand fervently united in their faith of supply side economics, economists have identified the undeniable fact that only the wealthy benefit from it.

From demand comes business profits.  Without demand, businesses will hold onto their cash reserves, remove jobs to be more in line with decreased demand and find cheaper ways to produce their products.

This is exactly what we have seen in the rush to manufacture in foreign countries, finding cheaper foreign workers, suppressing unions, hiring temporary and part-time workers instead of higher paid full time employees and keeping wages for Americans low.  Without demand, any business would not survive.  American workers who are the product consumers provide businesses with that demand.  Bolstering the working class would benefit businesses and improve the economy for everyone.

So will Republicans rally around President Obama's vision of economic prosperity?  My opinion is that they would rather ruin our economy by disallowing debt ceiling increases than changing this basic misunderstanding that they have about economics.

So what will the President's speech accomplish if our government is still obstructed by Republicans?  Perhaps I give more credit to the American voter than is due, but I believe this speech will setup the failure of Republicans in the 2014 mid-term elections.  Any thinking American voter will understand the concept and should be fed up with Republican obstruction.

This speech may be the straw that breaks the elephants back.

Harry Reid is giving Senate Republicans one more chance before launching the nuclear option

Senator Harry Reid

Senate majority leader Harry Reid entered closed door session Monday evening with Minority leader Mitch McConnell and other Senators interested in avoiding the "nuclear option" being threatened by Reid which would likely change Senate filibuster rules solely by Democratic votes.  

Because Republicans in the Senate have caused an unprecedented number of filibusters, some of which are directed toward obstruction of President Obama's appointments to key federal agencies, Reid has hinted that the rules around Presidential appointments might be changed to allow a simple majority vote for approval.  Currently, appointments must be approved by 2/3 of the Senate, or 67 Senators.  Additionally, the rules change could also reduce the number of votes necessary to overcome a filibuster.

Reid's urgency to adopt a rules change is the result of the Republican disruption of government affairs.  There are a good number of federal agencies that cannot function properly without the appointees who are being blocked.  Republicans have publicly announced that they do not have a problem with the appointees, but they are opposing the appointments because they are trying to change the mandates of and prevent affected agencies from being effective.  To paraphrase, Republicans believe this conspiracy to obstruct government affairs is necessary in order to mold government into one that would better serve their constituents.

What has been disclosed about the meeting thus far indicates that no agreement has been reached that will prevent the nuclear option.   Senator Reid will test the stubborn determination of the Republicans in blocking President Obama's appointees by calling for a vote to approve some critical bureau appointees in Tuesday's Senate session.

Among these appointees is Richard Cordray, acting head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  If Republicans block this appointment, Reid will go ballistic and initiate the nuclear option.  It is not clear if Reid will still go nuclear if all of the previously blocked appointees are still blocked by Republicans.   See the details about the CFPB here.

During the meeting, some Republican Senators were still expecting to get the advantages they have been fighting for by offering empty compromises.  For example, they offered approving Richard Cordray provided the CFPB could be changed the way that Republicans wanted it.  

Reid has said that if the rules change is enacted, only Presidential appointments would be affected by the simple majority rule and not all Senate business.  Some are concerned that such a change could be used against Democratic  introduced legislation, such as ObamaCare if Republicans take the Senate majority after the 2014 elections.

Opinion is that the chance for the nuclear option is high, particularly because of the blockage of the appointees to the National Labor Relations board.  Republicans want to eliminate that agency and approving the appointees is the furthest thing from their minds.

Senator McCain is trying to strike up a deal with other Republicans and Senator Reid to stave off the nuclear option and is leaning toward approving the appointees.  Senator McCain was not sure what the outcome would be.

So we wait.  The one thing that seems most certain is this: if an agreement does not happen before tomorrow's vote and Republicans still block the appointments, the nuclear option will be used.

A Republican to English dictionary

Although born and raised in the United States, my father, who passed away in his old age a few years ago, was not really good with the English language.  Sometimes he used words that he made up in conversation that sounded like words that they really weren't.  My kids were often confused by their "Papa", as they used to call him, and I would joke with them that maybe we needed to get a Papa- to-English dictionary.

Because of their support for policies which Republicans stand for, most of which go against their best interest, middle-class Republicans may be well served if they had a Republican-to-English dictionary.  Perhaps that way they could better understand that their welfare is not of concern when it comes to modern Republican politics.

Here are a few examples of statements we have heard our Republican leaders talk about.  I have given some assistance to the American voter by attempting to identify the true meaning of these words in plain English.

"Jobs, Jobs Jobs": Cheap foreign labor for America's Corporations.  

"Support for our troops": Increasing government funding of defense contractors.

"Reducing the deficit":  Protecting the 1% by taking revenue off the table, increasing military budgets to protect defense contractors and only calling for government spending reductions in programs for the poor, women, children, the elderly, students, the handicapped, military veterans and the unemployed.

"Smaller Government": 1. Eliminating government protections of it citizens in regards to regulations on business so that big business can operate with a free hand to decrease costs involved with making a safe product, protecting the environment, giving fair wages, creating a safe work environment, treating workers fairly and otherwise operating responsibly.  2. Reducing government spending by eliminating public service jobs such as teachers, police, fire-fighters and government workers and rejecting the American Jobs Act that would have improved the infrastructure of roads, bridges, schools, etc. 

"2nd Amendment rights": Returning the favor for NRA lobbyist money and preserving the market and demand for weapon manufacturers regardless of the wishes of the majority of Americans for stronger gun laws.

"Obama-Care": Originally a Republican introduced derogatory term for the Affordable Care Act which later became adopted as a catch-phrase by President Obama.  Republican intent is to put fear into American citizens and protect big insurance corporations from the effects of treating American citizens with fairer insurance rules and charging costs that would benefit the citizen.  Most of the effort of the Republicans in the 113th Congress has been in attempting to repeal Obama-Care law 37 times as of this date.

"Sequester": A Republican plan since 2010 to reduce the size of government in a way that would protect the wealthy and would otherwise never be possible by normal legislative proceedings.

"Filibuster": The cornerstone of Republican obstructionism used to prevent problem resolution, slow down progress on legislation and block President Obama's appointees and ideas that support middle-class Americans.

"Balanced Budget": A financial plan that reduces spending on useful government programs such as medicare, medicaid, the social safety net and social security which must not be balanced by any increase in revenue, especially by increased taxes on the wealthy or corporations. 

"501(c)4": Republican worked loophole in the IRS regulations that permits a political action committee to receive donations that are exempt from federal taxes and then to complain when the IRS workers request information that may prove they are political action committees.  The 501(c)4 is supposed to be for non-political social organizations.

"Stimulus package": Another name for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.  An act carried out by the Democrats and President Obama that saved the country from financial collapse.  Republicans voted against the stimulus package.

"Voter ID": An attempt to reduce access to voting by members of the citizenry who would not vote Republican in elections.  This action as well as closing down voting precincts and voting hours were used by Republican state legislatures as a strategy in the 2012 elections.

Republicans have proven that they do not represent the middle-class or the poor.  If you are in one of these groups and you vote Republican, I would be interested in knowing why you would vote that way.

If you have any other definitions, please feel free to add a comment.  I'll add the best one's to my collection.