COMMONWEALTH PARTY
OF AMERICA


Flag of the American Commonwealth Republics





Gauge For Change








Obama ran on change and has promised the same. He said he was going to shake up D.C. What did el Distrito de Columbia say to that in their popular vote for president?

OBAMA 92.46%
McCAIN 6.53%

So if Obama was really a reformer who was going to change the way things are done in Washington then why did the D.C. establishment welcome him so enthusiastically in the vote? Shouldn't they have feared someone who was going to substantially alter the status quo? Their vote seems to be along the usual party lines of the bipoller system which in their case shows intense favoritism to the party that gives more control of our lives and wealth to D.C.

There's been talk about how many of Obama's appointees are Clinton veterans. He's appointed some Republicans and wants bipartisan cooperation from them on his agenda. Are there any government outsiders who have been selected as appointees? How many wholly private-sector types occupy places in his machine? Aren't his appointments mostly DC-resumed or the DC-friendly types? At best, maybe he's put in some state or municipal backgrounds here and there. Wouldn't substantial change have demanded the appointment of more independents and third-party proponents who reside outside the current government structure? Did the K Street lobbyists in D.C. make any appreciable show against Obama overall? If they did not then maybe that is because Obama's policies are geared at giving more power to Washington instead of actually changing Washington. Washington wants more power and Obama talks about how government action is the solution to our problems and that's what D.C. has wanted all along!!!! All this is is the same old Democrat-Republican establishment in one of its peak cycles towards a more government-centralized business and social structure.

Promising a tax cut for 95% of the populace where 1/3 of filers or near 40% of the population already have no federal income tax liability is just more of the same old D.C. treachery. Portraying the mythos of a greatly limited lobbyist influence on his administration while surfing a wave of lobbyist vilification and then making notable exceptions to lobby limitations on his appointees is playing Washington games. Promising a more transparent administration and assuring that it will have high ethics all the while appointing those who owe near ten thousand to over a hundred thousand dollars to the IRS is politics as usual. Since he promised bills free of earmarks, shouldn't he have vetoed the Omnibus Budget bill when it was weighed down with near 8.5K earmarks? Doesn't Obama owe it to his base to have pointed at the attached earmarks as an example of Congress' lack of discipline and of their practice of fiscal irresponsibility and demanded passage of the bill without the baggage? Couldn't he have implicated the Republicans' share of earmarks on this?

Where's the change?

Oh well, the Pelosi/Obama stimulus plan and the Omnibus Budget itself are much worse in total spending than just those earmarks in sheer size. Both bills' content are horrendous such as the stimulus plan's funding of corrupt groups like ACORN.








Sources:





Presidential election results state-by-state.

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/





Roster of cabinet appointees showing years in D.C., background.

http://www.slate.com/id/2205007/





List and background of some Obama advisors.

http://advanced.jhu.edu/academic/government/new-president/presidential-advisors/





Obama and McCain had mutual pool constructed of Republican and Democrat appointees.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/11/scoop_mccain_an/





Encompassing list and background of Obama cabinet and senior administration of the Obama White House. Hardly any if at all are wholly private sector types. Most are Clinton veterans, veterans of DC or some federal office and if none of those they are veterans of state or municipal governments with a few whose background is in academia or in policy think-tanks.

http://advanced.jhu.edu/academic/government/new-president/transition-team-and-obama-biden-administration/





Notable number and list of lobbyists in the Obama administration despite lobby-lite promise.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/03/the-list-of-lobbyists-in-the-obama-administration/





Post about the Obama lobbyist restrictions and the subsequent violations of that promise.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/01/28/an-exception-or-the-rule/





List of 30 Obama appointee's lobbyist background within the last 5 years (11% of total appointees) .

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/sl_20090321_4967.php





'National Journal's Political Insiders from both parties believe that the president's tougher rules won't curb the clout of special interests.'

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/sl_20090321_6799.php





Some lobbies offer logistical support to Obama instead of money. Obama was gaining momentum from K Street despite lobby donor ban. Obama's lobby support as large as Clinton's despite no outright cash donors. Essentially a shadow lobby support for Obama. Alleged incident of Obama fundraiser courting financial support from spouse of lobbyist as opposed from the lobby itself.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obamas-k-street-project-2007-03-28.html





Lobby support list for Clinton & Obama prior to June 6th '08.

http://www.rollcall.com/politics/kstendorsements.html





Lobbyist complex will expand as Obama grows government. Myths that lobbying is anti-democratic and that it only favors the wealthy challenged.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/14/AR2008121401811.html





K Street will adapt to the Obama victory. More Democrats to be hired at lobby firms.

http://thehill.com/business--lobby/obama-win-means-change-for-k-street-2008-11-05.html





'...roughly 120 million Americans - 40 percent of the U.S. population - are outside of the federal income tax system. '

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/542.html





' The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year.' Certain low and middle income families would have less desire to work overtime. Once they do, they begin to lose tax credits. Thus, it is really a disincentive trap to keep people from moving up from the lower rungs of the ladder. Argument for tax credits to counter payroll tax for the low wage earners is less applicable now that these tax credits are in addition to the Earned Income Tax Credit which is itself sufficient to compensate for payroll taxes. Under plan, tax share of GDP actually increases. By calling income payments 'tax credits', those expenditures are cloaked.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122385651698727257.html?mod=djemEditorialPage





Obama nominees owing back taxes. Allegations of Senate Finance Committee being harsher on Obama nominees countered by laying blame on Obama White House selections and nominees' refusals to withdraw. Violations from near $10K to over $100K in back taxes.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Why-tax-problems-have-plagued-Team-Obama-nominees-41336037.html#





Obama signs $410 billion bill to fund government operations despite its $8 billion in earmarks.

http://www.portfolio.com/business-news/reuters/2009/03/12/obama-signs-big-spending-bill-despite-earmarks





$410 billion omnibus bill Obama signed contained near 8,500 earmarks.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/President44/story?id=7057350&page=1





4000 of the 8,500 earmarks in $410 billion Omnibus Spending Bill are from Senate Republicans. 'ONLY Republican Senators Coburn, DeMint & McCain are free of earmarks with Feingold & McCaskill on Democrat side joining them.'

http://roaringrepublican.com/2009/03/04/republican-earmarks-in-the-2009-senate-omnibus-spending-bill/





Stimulus Bill: ' $2 billion for “neighborhood stabilization” to radical groups like ACORN '.

http://www.nostimulus.com/?q=facts





'Congress also awarded itself a 10 percent increase in its own budget, bringing it to $4.4 billion.' Plus some other notable increases since last year's omnibus bill.

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090311/NEWS14/903110369





House passes omnibus bill to up domestic spending by 8%. 'The budget for the House of Representatives itself would increase by 10 percent while funding for Senate operations would grow by 8 percent. ' Government deficit over $1.2 trillion.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aGcZFK6kDeQo&refer=us












Commonwealth Party
Gauge For Change