February 8, 2017 (Mainichi Japan)

The United States Air Force provided funds totaling at least 800 million yen to a total of 128 university researchers and others in Japan over six years from fiscal 2010, a Mainichi Shimbun investigation has found.

Furthermore, 11 professors from Kyoto University and Osaka University and others had received a combined total of about 200 million yen as research funds from the U.S. Air Force and Navy from fiscal 2010 to fiscal 2016, the Mainichi learned through filing freedom-of-information requests with the universities.

Receiving funds from the U.S. military constitutes no legal problem. But in 1967, the Science Council of Japan (SCJ), an organization representing scientists, issued a statement banning military research after revelations that some researchers and academic societies had received funds from the U.S. military. Those professors and others who are found to have received funds from the U.S. military have explained that their research was conducted for peaceful purposes and that it was not military research. But there is a possibility of the U.S. military using their research results for military purposes.

According to documents the U.S. Air Force released to the Mainichi, the force provided about 750 million yen as research funds to a total of 128 researchers in Japan between fiscal 2010 and 2015 (U.S. accounting year). In addition, the U.S. Air Force extended a total of at least 50 million yen in financial aid in a total of 125 instances to cover expenses for international conferences and researchers' trips to the United States. The U.S. military did not disclose the names of the researchers and universities as well as the nature of individual research. A U.S. Air Force spokesperson said the force had provided the funds in order to obtain precious knowledge that could not be secured by the U.S. alone.

Meanwhile, the 11 researchers who were found to have received funds include one male professor at Kyoto University's Graduate School of Informatics, one male professor at Osaka University's Graduate School of Engineering, as well as nine researchers (including those who have since moved to other universities) at these universities. They received about 1.5 million to 45 million yen each after filling applications through the U.S. Air Force's Asian Office of Aerospace Research and Development (AOARD) and the U.S. Navy's Office of Naval Research (ONR).

The fields of research conducted by the professors and other researchers included artificial intelligence (AI) and laser technology. In its technological strategy released in 2014, the U.S. Department of Defense said it would attach importance to autonomous systems that would lead to unmanned weapons equipped with AI. The laser technology on which the Japanese researchers conducted research overlaps with the fields to which the U.S. military attaches importance as technology for weapons of the future as it leads to the development of new weapons to replace bombshells and missiles, among other uses.

Both Kyoto University and Osaka University said that they had approved of their receipts of the funds from the U.S. military after going through proper internal procedures.

Read this article:

U.S. Air Force extended some 800 million yen in funds to 128 ... - The Mainichi

Billy Aouste Billy Aouste is the new media specialist for The Heartland Institute. He is responsible for many projects at Heartland, including producing and managing social media outreach; pitching op-eds to print and digital publications; producing Heartland's weekly email; editing Heartlands blog, the Freedom Pub; and tracking Heartland experts media hits.

Aouste is a graduate from DePaul University with a BA in Political Science. While studying he participated in the Fund for American Studies program in Washington D.C. Prior to joining Heartland in 2015, he was a staff intern on Bruce Rauners successful Illinois gubernatorial campaign. Aouste resides in Hainseville, Illinois.

By: Barry Poulson

For a half-century, conservatives have watched Congress incur deficits and accumulate debt, making ours one of the most indebted countries in the world. There is little doubt this debt is unsustainable or that the federal government must enact reforms to constrain spending, especially entitlement spending, which is one of the major sources of U.S. debt today.

Republicans in Congress promised to address our fiscal crisis with fundamental reform of entitlements and other programs. They promised to constrain spending, balance the budget, and reduce debt over the next decade. So far, they have not been able to do this, at first because of gridlock with Democrats in the Senate and then because of President Barack Obamas promise to veto any legislation introducing real reform. But with the election of Donald Trump and control of both houses of Congress, Republicans can finally break through the budget gridlock.

The most recent salvo in this budget battle is a continuing resolution for fiscal year 2017. This resolution proposes to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA) with no change in other parts of the budget. The resolution exempts future health care legislation replacing the ACA from certain budget rules meant to impose fiscal discipline.

It also requires committees with jurisdiction over spending and revenue in the ACA to craft new legislation achieving $1 billion in deficit reduction over the next 10 years and to report that to Congress. The expectation is these committees will repeal parts of the ACA with budgetary effects, which will allow the repeal legislation to be considered under special reconciliation procedures in Congress. This tactic will allow Republicans to enact the legislation with a majority vote, rather than the 60 votes required to prevent a filibuster.

The resolution also provides for two reserve funds to accommodate new legislation repealing ACA. Replacement legislation could use all but $2 billion of the net savings from ACA repeal for new spending or tax breaks for health care coverage. This is quite a shift from previous Republican proposals promising more than $2 trillion in savings, which was promised to go toward deficit reduction, from an ACA repeal. An analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) identifies a number of reforms in health care that could be enacted with significant cost savings. The savings proposed in this resolution to repeal ACA are a drop in the bucket compared to CBOs analysis of potential savings.

Replacement legislation that costs no more than the savings from ACA repeal, minus $2 billion, would be exempt from the Senate PAYGO rules and also from Senate point-of-order rules. The inclusion of these exemptions suggests the replacement legislation could exceed the savings from repeal by more than $10 billion in some years over the next decade and beyond.

With government expenditures for health care absorbing a larger share of the federal budget, this carve-out means less spending will be constrained by the statutory rules in place. Setting aside reserve funds to finance new health care legislation means more federal money will be off-budget and earmarked for specific spending programs. We should expect less congressional oversight for these funds, and if the new health care legislation is given special funding status, this will erode the opportunities for priority budgeting.

We will not know the full impact of policies to reform and replace ACA until Congress passes a resolution bill repealing ACA and additional legislation implementing replacement policies. But the first salvo in this budget battle is not promising, Republicans seem to have capitulated before the battle has begun. If there is any savings in an ACA repeal, most of those savings would be set aside in reserve funds to finance new spending or tax breaks for health care. The proposed budget reserves just $2 billion of the savings from an ACA repeal for deficit reduction.

Further, in the resolution, discretionary spending for fiscal year 2017 is set at the spending cap level for that year. All other spending and revenue is at baseline levels. Using baseline projections, total spending would increase from $3.2 trillion to $4.9 trillion over the next decade. This increase in spending would be accompanied by a doubling (roughly) of annual deficits to more than $1 trillion by the end of the decade.

Republicans can claim victory in this first budget battle in fiscal year 2017, without the Democrats firing a shot, but what a pyrrhic victory. Not only will this legislation fail to significantly reduce the growth in health care spending, it could lead to a higher trajectory of spending over the next decade and beyond. This legislation reveals Congress has no desire to fundamentally reform health care or other entitlements that would significantly reduce spending or debt linked to these programs.

Capitulation by Republicans in this budget battle reflects a more fundamental flaw in federal fiscal policies. Congress continues to pursue expansionary fiscal policies to stimulate output and employment in the short run, allowing deficits and debt to accumulate in the long run. For a half-century Congress has pursued Keynesian fiscal policies and abandoned the unwritten balanced budget rule that governed fiscal policy for two centuries.

With this most recent failure, conservatives must look to alternative solutions to the federal fiscal crisis. The most promising approach is to enact new fiscal rules, like those enacted in some other OECD countries, combining a balanced budget rule with expenditure limits.

We certainly cant sit back and watch the debt increase from $20 trillion to $29 trillion over the next decade the debt projected under this continuing resolution.

Barry W. Poulson (think@heartland.org) is a professor emeritus of economics at the University of Colorado-Boulder.

[Originally Published at American Thinker]

Guest Article: Capitulation before the First Shots Are Fired was last modified: February 6th, 2017 by Billy Aouste

Read more:

Guest Article: Capitulation before the First Shots Are Fired - Somewhat Reasonable - Heartland Institute (blog)

5466109

FBI officials are making it harder for Americans to request public records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Beginning March 1, the FBI will no longer accept FOIA requests via email, according to FBI notifications to requesters, forcing the public to use more archaic methods like snail mail and fax. The change copies other agencies, like the IRS and CIA.

Its hard to see this move by the FBI as anything other than an attempt to make it more difficult for the public to access information about the agency, as is our legal right under the Freedom of Information Act, Elizabeth Hempowicz, policy counsel for the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The FBI will continue accepting requests through its online portal, but that method only allows users to submit one request per day, a limitation found nowhere in the text of the FOIA. Hempowicz said the change is curious because the FBI launched its web-based FOIA system in 2015 in the name of openness.

The agency points to it (the FOIA portal) as proof it cares about transparency and efficiency, but if the FBI were truly committed to improving public access to information, the last thing it would do is shut down email requests, Hempowicz added.

The FBI said the move will streamline its FOIA process. The FBI had 2,614 backlogged FOIA requests at the end of fiscal year 2015, according to the Department of Justices (DOJ) most recent annual report on agency FOIAs.

The FBIs eFOIA portal was designed and developed to be the FBIs primary means for receiving FOIA and Privacy Act requests, FBI spokeswoman Jillian Stickels told TheDCNF.

The portal provides the FBI with an automated process for the receipt and opening of requests, replacing the current manual process and substantially reducing the time it takes to receive and open each electronic request received. Given the FBIs high volume of requests, this will significantly increase efficiency.

Former President Barack Obama promised to have the most transparent administration in history, but his White House intercepted and vetted agency FOIA requestsand prompted a record number of FOIA lawsuits against a presidential administration.(RELATED: Agency Takes 5 Years To Respond To FOIA Request)

President Donald Trump has spoken little of government transparency and public access to records.

Congress passed, and then-President Lyndon Johnson signed, FOIA into law in 1966, making all government documents subject to public access except those covered by one or more of nine specific exemptions for considerations such as privacy, law enforcement and commercial secrets.

Follow Kathryn on Twitter

Send tips to katie@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Original post:

Making A FOIA Request Is About To Get Tougher At FBI - Daily Caller

A member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence Committee is calling for a $26 billion addition to this years emergency defense spending bill to rebuild readiness starting with increased flying and training times and increasing the end-strength of the Army and Marine Corps.

Most [of the immediate spending agenda] comes from the service chiefs unfunded priority lists, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), said during his remarks at AEI on Monday.

We need more of just about everything, including modernized nuclear forces. Nuclear strategy can no longer be bilateral [between Washington and Moscow] because China and North Korea, both potential adversaries, are nuclear powers.

He added he also was backing a 15 percent increase in defense spending for the upcoming fiscal year.

Our defense budget is not responsible for our national debt, he said in answer to an audience question.

I think we can find the money for the supplemental increase and for the upcoming fiscal year and not upset the Freedom Caucus deficit hawks. In part, Cotton said this would come from having a new administration and a majority in Congress both saying that each dollar increase in defense spending does not have to be matched on domestic programs.

Cotton also warned allies and partners that no alliance should be a one-way street, and they need to spend two percent of their gross domestic product on their own security, not military pensions.

Right now we have to strengthen the bilateral alliances the United States has with Japan and South Korea and work for better ties with India and countries, such as Myanmar [Burma] that dont want to be vassal states of China. We have to give them more incentives to stay with us and that includes the Philippines and Thailand, two allies who have been distancing themselves from the United States in recent months.

The United States itself and all its partners need to understand they are engaged in global geo-political competition, particularly with Russia in Eastern Europe and China in the East and South China seas.

The Big Stick is important, Cotton said, not only recalling President Theodore Roosevelt, who first used the term in 1901 as a corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, but also President Ronald Reagans position on rebuilding the military and meeting the challenge from the Soviet Union when he took office in 1981.

In dealing with Moscow and Beijing, we have to negotiate with them in a position of strength.

Cotton said President Donald Trumps policy to the Russia is yet to be determined and should not be judged on a few comments he made. He cited Ambassador to the United Nations Nicki Haleys recent remarks condemning Russia on renewed fighting in eastern Ukraine as showing what the administrations policy will be.

In answer to a question, he said, We should not recognize a single inch of soil where Russian troops stand in Ukraine as belonging to Moscow. He added he doubted that Russia would have seized Crimea and backed separatists in eastern Ukraine if Kiev retained the nuclear arsenal on its soil when the Soviet Union collapsed.

As for the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin is KGB, always will be. Cotton was skeptical about working with Moscow in Syria, a country where the United States now find its allies fighting each other [Kurds fighting Turks]. He said other partners in the region are leery of involvement in the Syrian civil war. They are not going to install a [Muslim] Brotherhood or Quds Force government in Damascus to replace President Bashar al-Assad.

The Muslim Brotherhood briefly governed Egypt following the Arab Spring. The Quds Force is a special forces unit of Irans Revolutionary Guard and is operating in Syria in support of Assad

In his remarks, Cotton said Trumps America First rhetoric resonates with most of the public. He termed it plain spoken nationalism in the manner of President Andrew Jackson.

The rest is here:

Cotton Calls for a $26B Uptick in Planned Defense Supplemental - USNI News

With the government now delivering on the anticipated direction of fiscal adjustment for FY18, the markets have now turned their attention towards the upcoming monetary policy review on 8 February. After the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) stayed pat against the consensus expectation of a 25 basis point (bps) cut in its December policy review, the rate cut expectation got immediately repositioned for the next policy review in February. With signs of prudence, rectitude and discipline displayed by the FY18 Union budget, such expectations of monetary policy easing have gained further currency.

However, if one were to extrapolate the Monetary Policy Committees (MPCs) December policy stance, then it leaves a sense of disquiet. Two factors that weighed on the policy decision in favour of status quo were:

increase in global commodity prices

tightening of global financial conditions

ALSO READ: Is RBI better placed now?

Both these factors continue to receive much policy attention. Market forecasts for crude oil in 2017 have inched closer to $60 per barrel levels from an average price of $44 per barrel in 2016. The US Federal Reserve, after raising the policy rate by 25 bps in December, projected a higher-than-anticipated trajectory of a 75 bps cumulative hike for 2017. These could raise external sector risks, leading to a potential build-up of imported inflation. However, these risks are likely to be moderate, with oil price increase contributing about 20 bps to retail inflation and strength in foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows ensuring stable financing of the current account deficit.

Moreover, with FY17 approaching its end, a few MPC members have highlighted the need to start focusing on the mid-point of the governments notified medium-term inflation target of 4% (plus or minus 2%). This could significantly reduce the degree of freedom with respect to policy discretion on incremental monetary easing.

Could the RBI then endorse consensus?

Despite the above mentioned risks, there could still be room to ease monetary policy. Consider the following:

1. Lets look at the policy anchor, consumer price index (CPI) inflation. From an average level of 4.9% in FY16, CPI inflation is now poised to moderate towards 4.6% in FY17. Although the central bank projected March 2017 CPI inflation at 5%, the same as its target for the current financial year, there is a strong likelihood of actual inflation undershooting the target by a significant margin of 60-80 bps.

The story behind moderating CPI inflation is not just restricted to food. In fact, demand side pressures have also been moderating as reflected in the core-core inflation trend (4.8% during Apr-Dec FY17 vis--vis 5.4% in the corresponding period in FY16).

2. While there could be some near-term upside pressure on inflation from implementation of the 7th Central Pay Commission (CPC) allowances and goods and services tax (GST) in FY18, the policymakers should, in my opinion, be ignoring them as both can be construed as technical impacts. Moreover, the former is unlikely to result in second-order impact via spillovers, especially post demonetization and the drive towards better tax compliance. The latter is a structural reform, which, post adjustment effects in FY18, is widely expected to lower inflationary pressures in the medium term.

3. According to the recently presented Economic Survey, the impact of demonetization on FY17 gross domestic product (GDP) growth is likely to be around 25-50 bps, greater than RBIs estimate of 15-20 bps provided in the December policy review. This could continue to keep pricing power at subdued levels in the near future.

4. There are many fascinating aspects about the fiscal policy (for both FY17 and FY18). Despite the burden of one rank one pay (OROP) and the 7th CPC, the government has been able to tighten the headline fiscal balance by 0.7% of GDP over the two year period. Considering that past pay commissions had willy-nilly led to deterioration in the governments fiscal health, this stands out as an impressive achievement. This could serve as a model for replication in fiscal management for state governments who would be implementing their pay commissions over the next one to two years. However, this is not where the story ends.

ALSO READ: Will a rate cut be a wasted action by RBI?

(i)The government has been mindful of the need to preserve the quality of fiscal adjustment. According to revised estimates, capital expenditure for FY17 is now expected to be higher (10.6% growth) than what was budgeted initially (3.9% growth). For FY18, capital expenditure is expected to follow a similar trend of 10.7% growth. This would be greater than the budgeted revenue expenditure growth of 5.9% for FY18.

(ii) Allocation for subsidies at 1.6% of GDP would be the lowest in nine years.

(iii) For FY18, by budgeting for a revenue deficit of 1.9% of GDP, the government will outperform its Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) target of 2%.

(iv) Primary deficit is now on the verge of getting eliminated. The FY18 target of 0.1% of GDP for primary deficit would be the lowest in a decade.

5. There has been significant acceleration in monetary policy transmission, with most banks reducing their marginal cost of funds-based lending rate (MCLR) by 75-100 bps since the beginning of demonetization. This is expected to be viewed favourably by RBI.

With global financial and commodity markets now stabilizing, on balance, I believe there is a prima facie case for a 25 bps rate cut in February. With inflation remaining benign, delaying monetary accommodation at this stage could disproportionately increase the sacrifice ratio for the economy.

Shubhada Rao is chief economist at Yes Bank Ltd.

First Published: Tue, Feb 07 2017. 01 06 AM IST

Continue reading here:

Making the case for an RBI rate cut - Livemint

By: PTI | New Delhi | Updated: February 4, 2017 1:05 pm Shaktikanta Das, Economic Affairs Secretary. (Source: File photo)

Stepping up the growth pitch, Economic Affairs Secretary Shaktikanta Das on Saturday expressed confidence that the economy will grow upwards of 7 per cent next fiscal. For this years GDP growth, we have to wait till March-end. But next year, it will be upwards of 7 per cent, he said. Drawing on Finance Minister Arun Jaitleys statements, the secretary said there will be transient impact of demonetisation on the economy, but it will not spill over to the next fiscal.

Watch What Else Is Making News:

A large part of economy is moving towards digital transactions, he noted. Despite the global headwinds, Das said Indias growth remains much stronger. It has stayed afloat. Not only stayed afloat, but also doing well. Our commitment is to push growth momentum, he explained.

Listing various reforms measures as announced in the Budget, Das spoke of gains for farmers from integration of spot and derivative market in commodity. He also dubbed announcement on contract farming and UGC as very big reforms.

Speaking at the seminar, Finance Secretary Ashok Lavasa said the government has already implemented 54 per cent of the recommendations of the Expenditure Management Commission. There are many more which are in the process of being addressed, he said. We are in the process of revising our General Financial Rules (GFR). These are the rules by which all government expenditure is controlled and regulated.

GFR is a compendium of general provisions to be followed by all offices of the central government while dealing with matters of financial nature.

These were first issued in 1947 and last amended in 2010. However, it is felt that many of the rules have become redundant in view of rapid growth of alternative service delivery systems, developments in information technology, outsourcing of services and liberalisation of the system of procurement.

He said it was sometimes felt by the private sector that these rules have been constraining the freedom of decision making. So, we are in the process of amending the GFR and before March 31. It is our endeavour to produce a revamped document which recognises the modern ways of management, he said.

Lavasa also said there will be efforts to increase the number of goods and services which can be procured through e-marketplace. On centrally sponsored schemes (CSS), he said the CSS were reviewed and their number has been brought down to 28. Similarly, central sector schemes have been rationalised and the exercise is not completed. We will continue to rationalise these schemes. The objective being that the government should focus on doing a few critical things and utilise resources to derive benefit of people, he added.

The rest is here:

Economy to grow more than 7 per cent next fiscal: Shaktikanta Das - The Indian Express

No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are No. 1 and No. 2. Whatever is No. 3 is far behind. Thomas SowellThe Indiana General Assembly opened its session in January. It is now the fifth straight year Republicans have had a Democrat-proof supermajority in both House and Senate. You would think by now they would have enacted into law every one of the core beliefs in the GOP Platform (limited government, federalism, freedom from government interference, sanctity of life, second amendment, fiscal responsibility and so forth).Plenty of bills were introduced supporting these beliefs but few saw the light of day. Instead, we have spending increases and new government programs. And this year, House Speaker Brian Bosma is proposing a tax increase. What happened?For the answer you need to know how a bill really becomes a law. I dont mean the School House Rock Im Just a Bill version, Im talking about the follow-the-money version. At its center is the House Republican Campaign Committee (HRCC), a group unaccountable to and outside of the democratic process. This committee nonetheless is the most powerful political organization in Indiana. Most House GOP legislators have surrendered control of their election campaign - fundraising, planning, spending to the HRCC with the promise that the HRCC (and political consultant Mark It Red) will protect incumbent Republicans if they face a challenger in the next election.And thats how they keep getting re-elected. Today, when a legislator gets campaign donations you can bet they turn over the lions share to the HRCC, often $10,000 or more at a time. The HRCC brought in over $2.3 million in 2016 alone. And this gives its chairman, Brian Bosma, incredible leverage.Bosma already has huge influence as Speaker. He alone decides which bill is assigned to which committee. He alone appoints every member of those committees ,including chairmen. In turn, a chairman has absolute power to decide if a bill gets a hearing or dies in committee. Its probably no coincidence that most chairmen make huge donations to Bosmas HRCC.In the end, a bill is passed because Mr. Bosma wants it to, because it was just easier for the other Republicans to go-along-to-get-along and not risk their HRCC protection money that and loyalty could mean a chairmanship one day. Bucking the system could mean losing campaign funding and (gasp) losing the next election. Principle quickly takes a back seat.What influences Bosma and his legislative agenda each year? If campaign finance reports are any indication, its the political action committees (PACs) and those who fund him.In the last four years his personal campaign accepted $2.2 million, his biggest contributors being Indiana Merit Construction PAC, Indiana Multi Family Housing PAC, Zink Properties LLC, Build Indiana PAC, and billionaire Dean White also plopped down $500,000.But because committee chairmen are bringing in so much money to the HRCC, Bosma is influenced by their donors as well. And it should come as no surprise that Build Indiana PAC (lobbying for road construction companies) made big donations to most of his committee chairmen, most notably Ed Soliday (Roads and Transportation) and Tim Brown (Ways and Means) who each got $12,000. People looking to buy influence know who has influence. Bosma, Brown and Soliday received more campaign contributions than anyone in the House in 2016 (January-October).So how does a bill become law? The PACs give Bosma his marching orders, Bosma (with his HRCC carrot) gives legislators theirs, and the HRCC kills deliberation.John Pickerill, former chairman of the Montgomery County Republican Party, wrote this for the Indiana Policy Review Foundation.

See original here:

To see how a bill becomes law, follow the money - News Sentinel

{ Live, work, play in York. }

As promised in our 2012 State of the City Address, this is an initiative by the Bracey Administration to stabilize property taxes by making adjustments in all city departments that will create savings to reduce the burden on tax paying citizens. We are also urging our county delegation and General Assembly to advance and approve recommendations focusing on reform of outdated binding arbitration and pension laws that exacerbate fiscal distress in Pennsylvanias cities. These uncontrolled costs lead to layoffs, service cuts and tax increasesand they harm the very works, residents and businesses that are needed to sustain and grow a community. Our state legislators must step forward and support legislation to correct inequities so the municipalities have the freedom to create more tax fairness and stabilize the future of our municipalities and cities, especially our county seat the City of York.

As your Mayor and a lifelong resident of the City of York, I share your deep concern about stabilizing property taxes and keeping city residents in their homes. Doing so is the responsible thing to do and I take this challenge very seriously. Please familiarize yourself with the background information provided and take action today.

As a concerned citizen, you have the ability to share your concerns with our delegation of state elected representatives and senators. Use your voice and your vote to tell them they need to hear our cries for help. We are depending on our local legislators to understand the challenges of those who live in and pay taxes to the City. They need to hear from you and your neighbors about the seriousness of this dilemma. Our tax structure needs reform before more drastic measures fall upon the place we call "home." The state government has the ability to enact such reform.

Please take action by using this simple form to communicate with the elected officials. Tell your friends and others who live and work here to do the same. It will take a few minutes, but if you take action, youve helped yourself and others.

Thank you once again for your comments, concerns and action. If my team or I can be of further assistance, please let us know, and please keep in touch.

SEND YOUR LETTER TODAY!

Continued here:

Fiscal Freedom and Financial Literacy Campaign :: City of ...

America is at a tipping point. For far too long, politicians have kicked the can down the road without regard for future generations. Our country can no longer afford such reckless leadership. Today, America is over 15.6 trillion dollars in debt with deficits as far as the eye can see. Taxes are going up, the dollar is losing value and unemployment continues to worsen. All of this is happening while politicians in Washington continue to recklessly spend taxpayer dollars. As Patriots, we have a duty to stop the dangerous politics as usual!

When the dollar loses its status as the world's reserve currency, will you get involved? When interest rates soar and inflation is running rampant, will you get involved? When taxes are raised to the sky high rates of Europe to fund the entitlement crisis, will you get involved? Or maybe you will get involved when unemployment is worse than anytime in history?

There is still a chance to restore liberty and freedom in America. By sending principled fiscal conservatives to Washington, we can change policy. Together, we can defeat the problematic politicians that violate their Constitutional obligations and grow government. With a grassroots army and a message that resonates with mainstream Americans, Patriots for Economic Freedom can force politicians to listen.

No longer will politicians carelessly cave into special interests without fearing repercussions. Citizens are uniting and becoming a potent lobbying force. While big labor, Wall Street and other special interests have dominated the debate for years, Patriots for Economic Freedom serves as the "citizen lobbyist" for mainstream Americans fed up with out of control spending. We may not have billions of dollars on our side but we do have a powerful army of people. Together, our presence is stronger than any lobbyist or special interest. We can do this! We can take our country back!

Read the original post:

Patriots For Economic Freedom