A press release from Congressman Don Manzullo:
Chairman Manzullo: Foreign Aid to China is Wasteful, Works Against American Manufacturers
Don Manzullo
[WASHINGTON] Congressman Don Manzullo (R-IL), Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia & the Pacific, today said a plan to spend U.S. taxpayer dollars to advance clean energy initiatives in China is wasteful and can harm American manufacturers.
Manzullo, who chaired a subcommittee hearing today entitled “Feeding the Dragon: Reevaluating U.S. Development Assistance to China,” vowed to stop the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) from spending $3.95 million in U.S. taxpayer funds to encourage China to adopt clean energy technologies and policies, protect wildlife, and establish law school courses.
Each year, the United States spends more than $39 billion in taxpayer funds to support America’s foreign policy objectives abroad. In the Asia region alone, the President’s request for Fiscal Year 2012 amounts to more than $800 million.
“This type of spending is yet another example of how Washington bureaucrats waste taxpayer funds without full consideration of the damage this project can have on American jobs.
“At a time when America’s debt is close to $15 trillion, USAID is proposing that we borrow more money from China to give back to China to encourage the Chinese government to fix a mess they created,” Manzullo said.
“China already dominates the clean technology manufacturing sector through a combination of illegal government subsidies, artificially low currency, and theft of intellectual property.
“The problem is so rampant that the U.S. Trade Representative launched an official complaint against China at the World Trade Organization.
“Now, USAID says U.S. taxpayer funding is needed to help China build capacity in this area. This makes no sense.”
America’s debt is close to $15 trillion!
How did we get here?
Let’s take a look at federal revenues, expenditures, annual deficits, and accumulated debt over time.
According to Wikipedia (admittedly not the definitive source):
2012 Budget of the United States federal government
Fiscal year 2012: (October 2011–September 2012) – Barack Obama
Total revenue $2.627 trillion (estimated)
Total expenditures $3.729 trillion (estimated)
Deficit $1.101 trillion (estimated)
Fiscal year 2011 (October 2010–September 2011) – Barack Obama
Total revenue $2.17 trillion (estimated)
Total expenditures $3.82 trillion (estimated)
Deficit $1.65 trillion (estimated)
Fiscal year 2010 (October 2009-September 2010) – Barack Obama
Total revenue $2.381 trillion (estimated)
Total expenditures $3.552 trillion (estimated)
Deficit $1.171 trillion (estimated)
Debt $14.078 trillion (estimated)
Fiscal year 2009 (October 2008-September 2009) – George W. Bush
Total revenue $2.7 trillion (estimated)
Total expenditures $3.107 trillion (estimated)
Deficit $407 billion (estimated), $1.4 trillion (actual)
Debt $12.867455 trillion (estimated)
Fiscal year 2008 (October 2007-September 2008) – George W. Bush
Total revenue $2.7 trillion (estimated)
Total expenditures $2.9 trillion (estimated)
Deficit $239 billion (estimated), $454.8 billion (actual)
Debt $9.985 trillion (estimated)
Fiscal year 2007 (October 2006-September 2007) – George W. Bush
Total revenue $2.57 trillion
Total expenditures $2.73 trillion
Deficit $161 billion
Debt $8.95 trillion
Fiscal year 2006 (October 2005 – September 2006) – George W. Bush
Total revenue $2.41 trillion
Total expenditures $2.66 trillion
Tax cuts Yes Debt payment No
Deficit $248.2 billion
Debt $ 8.45 trillion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_United_States_federal_budget
Here are some resources for further analysis.
US Government Printing Office – Access
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/
US Government Printing Office – Federal Digital System
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys
White House – Office of Management and Budget
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals
Now that’s just the federal government.
What about the State?
What about the taxing districts on your property tax bill?
County, County Health, Township, Township Road, City, Library, School, Park District, Forest Preserve, Community College, Fire, Mosquito District, airport, and water commission. Not to mention the pension funds for County, County Health, Forest Preserve, Village, Library, Park District, Fire, and school district.
Who keeps track of the health of those budgets funded with taxpayer dollars? Who attends their board meetings? Newspapers often rely on press releases from those taxing districts.
How are those taxing districts spending taxpayer money?
– Pension contributions (teachers contribute little to nothing in many districts!).
– Teacher 6% end of career salary increases.
– Travel, hotels, dinners, and registration fees to conferences.
– College tuition reimbursement
– Healthcare: low deductibles, low co-pays, generous healthcare benefits,
– Salary increases larger than private enterprise, etc.
It’s like giving your child an allowance and allowing them to spend it as they please.
One of the taxfighters few recourses is to attend board meetings. All taxing districts have a board of directors, commissioners, or trustees that are elected or appointed.
It boils down to the taxeaters being more organized and well funded than the taxfighters.
Have you heard of the series, Diary of a Wimpy Kid?
How about, Diary of a Wimpy Taxfighter.
Wimps, unite!
The latest rhetoric from the schools. Budgets are tight. How about using PTA funds for technology, or having a “fun run” where the kids run laps around a track, so much per mile, to raise the money for technology. All while the teachers get 6% end or career salary increases and retired assistant superintendents get their 100% of their healthcare paid for 5 years.
It’s actually 64% of school districts in IL, teachers contribute little to nothing to the pensions. It’s called, “pension pick-up” or “board paid.”
It,s really called ,stick it to the taxpayers however the union still lies er says the teachers pay 9.4%
The design:
Teachers: 9.4%
District: .58%
State: 9.4%+
Total: 19.38%+
Reality:
Teachers 0% or close to 0% in 64% of IL school districts
District: 9.98% or close to 9.98%
State: 9.4%+
Total: 19.38%+
The State contribution is “on-behalf” of the employer.
Seriously. Does the State contribute 9.4%+ to your retirement “on-behalf” of your employer?
Of course not. You don’t get it, but teachers do.
Why do they get it and not you? Because they have more campaign contributions and votes than you do. Because teaching is the largest or close to largest profession in the State of IL, and so therefore teachers provide lots of campaign contributions and votes.
Wonder why teacher pensions are so high? Many receive larger salary increases than other employees, and they receive large contributions from the employer (district) and state (“on-behalf” of the district).
Once again, does the State of IL contribute 9.4% to your retirement. That State of IL contribution comes from revenue such as Income Taxes. And yes, your income taxes were increased in 2011 to pay for teacher pensions.
The State of IL can’t afford to contribute 9.4% to you and I, and they can’t afford to contribute 9.4%+ to teachers either. They State never could afford it, they can’t afford it, and they never will be able to afford it. It’s a pyramid scam. Just because the legislature passed it, doesn’t mean it was affordable. Especially with the large salary increases teachers and administrators have received. Especially with 6% end of career salary increases. The state can’t afford those pensions and fund its other operations.
It gets better. The 9.4% State “on-behalf of the employer” contribution pads teacher pensions, at the expense of educating your children. Your taxpayer dollars are being used to pay $75,000 teacher pensions (average pension now for a teacher in suburban Chicago whom has worked 35 years). You taxpayer dollars are being used for retired teachers fat pensions, not for teaching Johnny how to read and write.
That’s the way it works in Illinois.