While I agree that we need to cut some of the spending in the military industrial complex, I do not agree with higher taxes. Unless people are vigilant, the government will impose more defense spending and higher taxes.
Showing posts with label Jane Harman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jane Harman. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Rep. Jane Harman Discusses U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) (Iran May Have Nuclear Bomb Within 3-5 Years)
At least Rep. Harman didn't say nookular. Click through to the entire article to read about Iran potentially getting a nuclear bomb within 3-5 years. I have not seen the intelligence, but I would bet that Rep. Harman is pounding the war drums like the Bush administration did back in 2002-2003. More war equals more profit for the military industrial complex.
Source: Malaysia Star
U.S. intelligence agencies believe Iran won't be capable of producing nuclear weapons for at least a year but that it probably would be technically able to do so if it chooses within 3-to-5 years, U.S. officials said on Tuesday.
Jane Harman, chairwoman of the U.S. House of Representatives Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, told Reuters on Tuesday that a revised U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran was "essentially complete" but that it was unclear if any of it would be made public after going to the president.
Source: Malaysia Star
Monday, April 05, 2010
Rep. Jane Harman Co-Sponsors Constitutional Amendment to Balance Federal Budget
I agree with you on this one Rep. Harman, but what about your support of warrantless wiretapping?
###
HARMAN CO-SPONSORS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO BALANCE FEDERAL BUDGET Lawmaker says, "...recovery cannot happen and will not be long lasting if we don't follow it with responsible federal budgets."
March 2, 2010 6:54 PM
Washington, D.C. – Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-Venice) today joined 34 members of the Blue Dog Coalition in introducing legislation calling for a Constitutional amendment to balance the federal budget. She co-sponsored previous Balanced Budget Amendment efforts in the 103rd, 104th, 105th, 107th, 109th, and 110th Congresses.
“The nation’s economy is struggling back after an enormous blow. The recovery cannot happen and will not be long lasting if we don’t follow it with responsible federal budgets. California families balance their budgets every day, and they should expect the same from Washington.
“The current trajectory of debt and deficits is unsustainable. I refuse to burden my grandchildren -- all of our grandchildren -- with the trillions in debt racked up by Congress when Bush controlled the White House and Republicans controlled Capitol Hill.
“I want to put everything on the table. We have to end defense practices and programs that don’t improve our national security – like sole-source contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. And we must let the misguided Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire. I opposed them in 2001, and I oppose them now.
“It will take political courage from both Democrats and Republicans. I cast career-risking votes for the 1993 Clinton budget and for Penny-Kasich, and for the 1997 balanced budget. The result of those tough votes was a huge surplus.”
Specifically, the “Balanced Budget Amendment” legislation would:
March 2, 2010 6:54 PM
Washington, D.C. – Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-Venice) today joined 34 members of the Blue Dog Coalition in introducing legislation calling for a Constitutional amendment to balance the federal budget. She co-sponsored previous Balanced Budget Amendment efforts in the 103rd, 104th, 105th, 107th, 109th, and 110th Congresses.
“The nation’s economy is struggling back after an enormous blow. The recovery cannot happen and will not be long lasting if we don’t follow it with responsible federal budgets. California families balance their budgets every day, and they should expect the same from Washington.
“The current trajectory of debt and deficits is unsustainable. I refuse to burden my grandchildren -- all of our grandchildren -- with the trillions in debt racked up by Congress when Bush controlled the White House and Republicans controlled Capitol Hill.
“I want to put everything on the table. We have to end defense practices and programs that don’t improve our national security – like sole-source contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. And we must let the misguided Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire. I opposed them in 2001, and I oppose them now.
“It will take political courage from both Democrats and Republicans. I cast career-risking votes for the 1993 Clinton budget and for Penny-Kasich, and for the 1997 balanced budget. The result of those tough votes was a huge surplus.”
Specifically, the “Balanced Budget Amendment” legislation would:
- Require Congress to produce a balanced budget every fiscal year.
- Require the President to submit a balanced budget in his or her annual transmission to Congress.
- Prohibit outlays for a fiscal year from exceeding total receipts for that fiscal year unless Congress, by a three-fifths roll call vote of each House, authorizes a specific excess of outlays over receipts.
- Provide seven years for three-fourths of the states to ratify the constitutional amendment.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
FLASHBACK: Speaker Nancy Pelosi Says End of Rep. Jane Harman's Chairmanship Had Nothing Do with Eavesdropping & Wiretapping Allegations
I always thought that Rep. Harman was an ally of Speaker Pelosi, but I now have my doubts. Nevertheless, Speaker Pelosi still gave the public no hint of any inside rivalries when she pointed out the "reason" why Rep. Harman was not given a prestigious chairmanship back in 2009. I do not normally agree with Speaker Pelosi, but in this rare case, I do, because there is no way I would want to see Rep. Harman as the House Intelligence Committee chair in 2009, 2010 and potentially beyond.
Source: U.S. News & World Report
Speaker Nancy Pelosi quashed theories today about why Rep. Jane Harman wasn't given that House Intelligence Committee chairmanship that's become the focus of so many news reports. "The only reason why Jane is not the chairman is because she already served her two terms. It had nothing to do with her position on Iraq; it had nothing to do with donors; it had nothing to do with eavesdropping, wiretapping; it had nothing to do with anything,"
Source: U.S. News & World Report
Friday, March 26, 2010
FLASHBACK: Rep. Jane Harman's Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (H.R. 1955) Referred to Senate Committee
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (H.R.1955)
As I continue my analysis and discussion of my representative Jane Harman, I flashback to Rep. Jane Harman's previous term beginning in 2007 and ending in 2008 when she introduced H.R. 1955 to passage. H.R. 1955 is also known as The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. I read the bill and while it does not have any impose any penalty in the case of homegrown terrorism, the bill establishes various Homeland Security protocols for dealing with the matter in the near future.
The bill has been read twice by the Senate and is currently referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Lately, the government and media are certainly hyping up the domestic and homegrown terrorists as being the country's biggest threats. The bad guys are no longer allegedly in Afghanistan's caves. Instead, the media tells us the the violence may come from that guy in the next door office cubicle who's a loner, protests the government at rallies on the weekends and doesn't take the vaccines. This guy is a potentially bigger threat to America than Al-Qaeda - especially under this H.R. 1955, because he's a potential homegrown terrorist.
Violent radicalization? An extremist belief system? Facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious or social change? What the h*ll do those terms mean? This bill's language appears to be quite specific, but it is actually quite vague and ambiguous. Anyone protesting anything related to the government could be considered a homegrown terrorist. If some type of domestic false flag happens in the next few weeks that can be pinned on the truth movement and infowarriors, you can bet that this bill will be passed with the quickness of the PATRIOT Act's passage.
Here's a summary of the bill:
SUMMARY AS OF:
October 23, 2007 -- Passed House amended.
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add a new section concerning the prevention of violent radicalization (an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change) and homegrown terrorism (violence by a group or individual within the United States to coerce the U.S. government, the civilian population, or a segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives).
Establishes within the legislative branch the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism to: (1) examine and report on facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States; and (2) build upon, bring together, and avoid unnecessary duplication of related work done by other entities toward such goal. Requires: (1) interim reports and a final report from the Commission to the President and Congress on its findings and recommendations; (2) the public availability of such reports; and (3) Commission termination 30 days after its final report.
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States to assist federal, state, local, and tribal homeland security officials, through training, education, and research, in preventing violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States. Requires the Secretary to: (1) conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism; and (2) report to Congress on lessons learned from survey results.
Prohibits Department of Homeland Security (DHS) efforts to prevent ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism from violating the constitutional and civil rights or civil liberties of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. Directs the: (1) Secretary to ensure that activities and operations are in compliance with DHS's commitment to racial neutrality; and (2) DHS Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer to develop and implement an auditing system to ensure that compliance does not violate the constitutional and civil rights or civil liberties of any racial, ethnic, or religious group, and to include audit results in its annual report to Congress.
The bill has been read twice by the Senate and is currently referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Lately, the government and media are certainly hyping up the domestic and homegrown terrorists as being the country's biggest threats. The bad guys are no longer allegedly in Afghanistan's caves. Instead, the media tells us the the violence may come from that guy in the next door office cubicle who's a loner, protests the government at rallies on the weekends and doesn't take the vaccines. This guy is a potentially bigger threat to America than Al-Qaeda - especially under this H.R. 1955, because he's a potential homegrown terrorist.
Violent radicalization? An extremist belief system? Facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious or social change? What the h*ll do those terms mean? This bill's language appears to be quite specific, but it is actually quite vague and ambiguous. Anyone protesting anything related to the government could be considered a homegrown terrorist. If some type of domestic false flag happens in the next few weeks that can be pinned on the truth movement and infowarriors, you can bet that this bill will be passed with the quickness of the PATRIOT Act's passage.
Here's a summary of the bill:
SUMMARY AS OF:
October 23, 2007 -- Passed House amended.
Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add a new section concerning the prevention of violent radicalization (an extremist belief system for facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change) and homegrown terrorism (violence by a group or individual within the United States to coerce the U.S. government, the civilian population, or a segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives).
Establishes within the legislative branch the National Commission on the Prevention of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism to: (1) examine and report on facts and causes of violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States; and (2) build upon, bring together, and avoid unnecessary duplication of related work done by other entities toward such goal. Requires: (1) interim reports and a final report from the Commission to the President and Congress on its findings and recommendations; (2) the public availability of such reports; and (3) Commission termination 30 days after its final report.
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States to assist federal, state, local, and tribal homeland security officials, through training, education, and research, in preventing violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States. Requires the Secretary to: (1) conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent violent radicalization and homegrown terrorism; and (2) report to Congress on lessons learned from survey results.
Prohibits Department of Homeland Security (DHS) efforts to prevent ideologically based violence and homegrown terrorism from violating the constitutional and civil rights or civil liberties of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. Directs the: (1) Secretary to ensure that activities and operations are in compliance with DHS's commitment to racial neutrality; and (2) DHS Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer to develop and implement an auditing system to ensure that compliance does not violate the constitutional and civil rights or civil liberties of any racial, ethnic, or religious group, and to include audit results in its annual report to Congress.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
FLASHBACK: Rep. Jane Harman: Why I'm Voting For Health Care Reform (H.R. 3590)
Here is what Representative Jane Harman said about why she voted for health care reform. This was originally posted in the March 19, 2010 edition of The Daily Breeze.
Please note that I was against the health care reform legislation, so Harman's decision to vote for it may prevent me from voting for her in the upcoming election(s).
###
Why I'm voting for health care reform
By Jane Harman
Posted: 03/20/2010 08:13:26 PM PDT
Later today, I will make the most historic vote in my eight terms in the House.
Thousands of constituents have contacted me. The Capitol grounds are a public square, full of early spring flowers, placards and noisy expressions of views on the biggest health care revision in 70 years. My favorite new friend is an activist in yellow shorts and a pointy blue hat who calls me "Babycakes."
The legislative process has been gritty and endless. The result could have been much better. The bill should have been shorter, simpler and included a robust public option to compete with insurance companies and keep costs down. The language on abortion coverage is convoluted and unnecessary. Current law already forbids using federal funds.
But, on balance, what matters is the bill's real effect on real people in the South Bay.
If you have health insurance - and 63 percent of 36th District residents do - you can keep the same policy, insurer and doctor that you have now. But this bill will improve your current policy by prohibiting lifetime and annual limits on coverage; by making it illegal for your insurer to drop you if you get ill; and by reducing your out-of-pocket costs for preventive care. It also will enable states to roll back the stunning and arbitrary rate hikes like the 39 percent increase Anthem Blue Cross recently announced in California.
The bill cuts the number of uninsured district residents in half by extending coverage to 67,000 people. It will provide tax cuts to 130,000 local middle-income families and more than 15,000 small businesses to make buying private insurance affordable. Many will be covered for the first time in their lives.
And for the approximately 13,500 residents with pre-existing conditions, this legislation will ensure that you cannot be denied coverage - as my 27-year-old son was last summer.
Skyrocketing health care expenses caused 1,100 local bankruptcies in 2008. This bill caps out-of-pocket expenses at about $1,000 per month for families who purchase insurance or who are insured by small businesses. These reforms ensure that no family will have to face financial ruin because of medical bills.
This bill also closes the notorious "doughnut hole" on Medicare prescription drugs. The 2003 Medicare Modernization Act - which I vigorously opposed - capped the amount that the government would pay for drugs until catastrophic federal coverage kicked in. That gap in payments has forced nearly 10,000 local Medicare patients to choose between needed medications or food or shelter. The bill closes the "doughnut hole" completely in 2020, offers a $250 rebate this year and huge discounts on brand-name drugs thereafter.
Kids will be allowed to stay on their parents' coverage until they are 26 - a real boon to 49,000 young adults who otherwise would have a hard time affording insurance.
Four local community health care centers will receive an additional $5.2 million to provide services to the poor and medically underserved. Local hospitals that struggle to cover costs because of the large number of people without insurance they treat will get $12 million in relief annually.
As a Blue Dog Democrat, I'm pleased that the legislation is fully paid for by cuts to bloated federal payments to Medicare Advantage - that will save $400 billion - and a less than 1 percent tax on wealthy wage earners. That will raise $500 billion. In addition, it will reduce federal expenditures by $130billion in the first 10 years and $1.2 trillion in the second decade, making it the largest deficit-reduction measure ever.
Failing to act now on health care reform won't preserve the status quo, it will make things worse. Premiums will climb, as will the number of uninsured, threatening our fragile economic recovery.
When I enter the House chamber for the vote, I will think of the many times presidents and Congresses failed to do what we will likely achieve today. The list includes Presidents Harry Truman, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.
When I cast my yes vote I will also think of my friend Sen. Edward Kennedy, who didn't live to see his signature issues become law.
This one's for you, Ted.
Rep. Jane Harman, D-El Segundo, represents the 36th Congressional District.
Please note that I was against the health care reform legislation, so Harman's decision to vote for it may prevent me from voting for her in the upcoming election(s).
###
Why I'm voting for health care reform
By Jane Harman
Posted: 03/20/2010 08:13:26 PM PDT
Later today, I will make the most historic vote in my eight terms in the House.
Thousands of constituents have contacted me. The Capitol grounds are a public square, full of early spring flowers, placards and noisy expressions of views on the biggest health care revision in 70 years. My favorite new friend is an activist in yellow shorts and a pointy blue hat who calls me "Babycakes."
The legislative process has been gritty and endless. The result could have been much better. The bill should have been shorter, simpler and included a robust public option to compete with insurance companies and keep costs down. The language on abortion coverage is convoluted and unnecessary. Current law already forbids using federal funds.
But, on balance, what matters is the bill's real effect on real people in the South Bay.
If you have health insurance - and 63 percent of 36th District residents do - you can keep the same policy, insurer and doctor that you have now. But this bill will improve your current policy by prohibiting lifetime and annual limits on coverage; by making it illegal for your insurer to drop you if you get ill; and by reducing your out-of-pocket costs for preventive care. It also will enable states to roll back the stunning and arbitrary rate hikes like the 39 percent increase Anthem Blue Cross recently announced in California.
The bill cuts the number of uninsured district residents in half by extending coverage to 67,000 people. It will provide tax cuts to 130,000 local middle-income families and more than 15,000 small businesses to make buying private insurance affordable. Many will be covered for the first time in their lives.
And for the approximately 13,500 residents with pre-existing conditions, this legislation will ensure that you cannot be denied coverage - as my 27-year-old son was last summer.
Skyrocketing health care expenses caused 1,100 local bankruptcies in 2008. This bill caps out-of-pocket expenses at about $1,000 per month for families who purchase insurance or who are insured by small businesses. These reforms ensure that no family will have to face financial ruin because of medical bills.
This bill also closes the notorious "doughnut hole" on Medicare prescription drugs. The 2003 Medicare Modernization Act - which I vigorously opposed - capped the amount that the government would pay for drugs until catastrophic federal coverage kicked in. That gap in payments has forced nearly 10,000 local Medicare patients to choose between needed medications or food or shelter. The bill closes the "doughnut hole" completely in 2020, offers a $250 rebate this year and huge discounts on brand-name drugs thereafter.
Kids will be allowed to stay on their parents' coverage until they are 26 - a real boon to 49,000 young adults who otherwise would have a hard time affording insurance.
Four local community health care centers will receive an additional $5.2 million to provide services to the poor and medically underserved. Local hospitals that struggle to cover costs because of the large number of people without insurance they treat will get $12 million in relief annually.
As a Blue Dog Democrat, I'm pleased that the legislation is fully paid for by cuts to bloated federal payments to Medicare Advantage - that will save $400 billion - and a less than 1 percent tax on wealthy wage earners. That will raise $500 billion. In addition, it will reduce federal expenditures by $130billion in the first 10 years and $1.2 trillion in the second decade, making it the largest deficit-reduction measure ever.
Failing to act now on health care reform won't preserve the status quo, it will make things worse. Premiums will climb, as will the number of uninsured, threatening our fragile economic recovery.
When I enter the House chamber for the vote, I will think of the many times presidents and Congresses failed to do what we will likely achieve today. The list includes Presidents Harry Truman, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.
When I cast my yes vote I will also think of my friend Sen. Edward Kennedy, who didn't live to see his signature issues become law.
This one's for you, Ted.
Rep. Jane Harman, D-El Segundo, represents the 36th Congressional District.
Representative Jane Harman Ready to Kick Off 2010 Congressional Re-Election Campaign in Los Angeles
Representative Jane Harman is my current representative in the House, and as the election season begins, I will be following her exploits and adventures on this blog. While I did not vote for Ms. Harman in the last election cycle, I will still aggregate any interesting articles about as a way to foster a discussion about whether she has been a good representative in the last term and whether she should be retained.This blog gets a lot of national and international readers, so hopefully these local articles about Rep. Harman will not alienate those readers.
###
(From NewsBlaze.com)
Harman Gears Up for Re-Election Campaign
LOS ANGELES, March 23, 2010 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Fresh from participating in the historic vote supporting President Obama's healthcare reform legislation, Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-36) has begun the communications and outreach phase of her re-election campaign.
As Representative Harman was working towards Congressional support of the legislation, the Democratic Party of Los Angeles showed its support with 72% of the delegates backing her re-election as the Officially Endorsed candidate of the Democratic Party.
Harman adds this endorsement to other recent endorsements by the Sierra Club, EMILY's List, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and the Human Rights Campaign.
Harman also announced that she has retained Harvey Englander, managing partner of Englander Knabe & Allen to serve as lead consultant for her re-election campaign.
"Harvey Englander and his team have a consistent record of running effective political campaigns using a combination of tried and true strategies and tactics along with new, cutting edge techniques. We look forward to running a positive campaign focusing on job creation and economic growth; strong support for the environment; a robust national defense and aerospace industrial base; protecting the rights of women and seniors; and ensuring educational opportunities for every child in the 36th Congressional District," Harman stated.
"I am excited about the upcoming campaign. I love being home in the District and meeting with voters," she concluded.
CONTACT: Englander Knabe & Allen
Harvey Englander
213.741.1500
Harvey@englanderpr.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)