You Cut - Did you Vote this Week?

If you didn't vote yet this week, you still can. Go to:
http://republicanwhip.house.gov/YouCut/

I voted to Eliminate the "Dodd Clinic" Earmark From Obamacare
Savings of $100 million over ten years.

There were bigger savings, but this one hits me between the eyes. Chris Dodd (D-Connecticut) along with his butt pirate pal Barney "Bumbling, Mumbling and Stumbling" Frank are responsible for the catalyst which sparked this recession and economic crunch with their conspiracy with Frannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And now he wants an earmark for a clinic which will undoubtedly be named after him? Only appropriate if the clinic is an STD clinic.

Section 10502(a) of the over 2,000 page recently enacted Obamacare government healthcare bill provides $100 million for construction at an unnamed "health care facility." However, the language in health bill is tailored in such a way as to ensure the funding is earmarked for the University of Connecticut. By eliminating this special interest funding, we can protect taxpayers while we work to repeal the entire health care law.

This Week's You Cut

This is this week's You Cut I voted for:

Federal Land Purchases
Saves $266 million next year and $2.66 billion over ten years
Last year Congress spent $266 million acquiring additional federal lands at the Departments of Interior and Agriculture. This is a 138% increase over the comparable amount of funding just four years ago. Given that the federal government already owns 29% of the land in America and has a multi-billion dollar maintenance backlog to maintain current land holdings, suspending new federal land purchases would permit the government to focus on maintaining existing property while also saving taxpayers millions of dollars a year.

Go here and vote: http://republicanwhip.house.gov/YouCut/

You Cut Update

YouCut – a first-of-its-kind project - is designed to defeat the permissive culture of runaway spending in Congress. It allows you to vote, both online and on your cell phone, on spending cuts that you want to see the House enact. Vote on this page today for your priorities and together we can begin to change Washington's culture of spending into a culture of savings.

The message is simple: STOP SPENDING AND START CUTTING!

Please go to: http://republicanwhip.house.gov/YouCut/
to participate in this great endeavor with near to 300,000 Americans.

There should be a link to see how your Representative Voted on the proposed cuts.

Previous Cuts Chosen By the Public

Each week, the public votes on which items should be brough to the House Floor. Here is a list of previous winning items.

Week One: Cut the New Non-Reformed Welfare Program ($2.5 Billion Savings)

Week Two: Eliminate Federal Employee Pay Raise ($30 Billion Savings)

Week Three: Reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ($30 Billion Savings)

Week Four: Sell Excess Federal Property ($15 Billion Savings)

You Cut - Week of 20 May 2010

Here's are the second week of You Cut swill to vote on. Go to: http://republicanwhip.house.gov/YouCut/

Once you vote, you will be the e-mail list and each Thursday you will receive a notification of new cuts needing your Vote. So Vote!

As much as I dislike Robert Byrd, and as much as I'd like to see everyone sharing the pain of cuts, including government workers not getting pay raises, I voted for the cut of fundiung for the Government to buy land. The U.S. Government is much too big as it is. They don't need to ruin families by buying land, much if it land used by ranchers to graze their cattle under a BLM contract for which they pay a fee.


Byrd Honors Scholarships
$42 Million in Savings in the First Year
($420 Million Over Ten Years)


Eliminate the Proposed Federal Employee Pay Raise
Approximately $2 Billion in the First Year
(Approximately $30 Billion Over Ten Years)


Suspend Federal Land Purchases
$266 Million in Savings in the First Year
($2.66 Billion Over Ten Years)


Terminate Funding for UNESCO
$81 Million in Savings in the First Year
($810 Million Over Ten Years)


Eliminate Mohair Subsidies
Approximately $1 Million in Savings in the First Year
($10 Million Over Ten Years)

Congressman Eric Cantor (R-VA) Introduces "You Cut"

House Minority Whip, Republican Congressman Eric Cantor introduces "YouCut" – a first-of-its-kind project - is designed to defeat the permissive culture of runaway spending in Congress. It allows you to vote, both online and on your cell phone, on spending cuts that you want to see the House enact. Vote on this page today for your priorities and together we can begin to change Washington's culture of spending into a culture of savings. Go to: http://republicanwhip.house.gov/YouCut/
to see the video from Congressman Cantor, who along with Mike Roger (R-MI) are giving me more hope than a warm camp fire that thee Conservatives have some leaders. Please go to this site each week and vote - lets force the Democrats to go on record for bigger spending and pork barrel politics.


Each week there will five candidates to vote to cut. This week's candidates are the five programs below. I voted to cut the Taxpayer Subsidized Union Activities even though money wise it is not the biggest waste of money - it's just I hate Unions, especially the brown shirts in blue, SEIU, which is a front for Obama and his radical agenda.

Presidential Election Fund
$260 million in savings
This federal program provides matching funds to political candidates during Presidential primaries, certain third-party candidates, and funds for political conventions. In the 2008 presidential election, the candidates raised over $1.3 billion from individuals and PACs, do they really need to supplement that with taxpayer money? This proposal has been estimated to save $260 million over five years. (Also proposed as part of the RSC Sunset Caucus.)

Taxpayer Subsidized Union Activities
$600 million in savings
Currently, some federal employees spend up to 100% of their workweek, paid by taxpayers, doing work for their union. Federal employees unions collect millions in revenue each year and spend significant amounts on political activities and lobbying, should they also be subsidized by the taxpayer for their official functions? In 2008 the Federal government spent $120 million paying employees for their time spent working on union activities (over five years this would total a minimum of $600 million.) (Also proposed as part of the RSC Sunset Caucus.)


HUD Program for Doctoral Dissertations
$1 million in savings
Recently, taxpayers have financed research on media strategies for housing policy and the use of eminent domain for urban redevelopment. Why should families who are struggling to pay for their children’s college also being asked to fund stipends from the government for those who want to write their dissertation on certain government-preferred policies? At approximately $200,000 in grants per year, terminating this program would save $1 million over five years.


New Non-Reformed Welfare Program
$2.5 billion in savings
The program was recently created to incentivize states to increase their welfare caseloads without requiring able-bodied adults to work, get job training, or otherwise prepare to move off of taxpayer assistance. Reforming the welfare program was one of the great achievements of the mid 1990s, saving taxpayers billions of dollars and ending the cycle of dependency on welfare. This new program, created in 2009 is a backdoor way to undo those reforms. The program currently costs approximately $2.5 billion a year. (Also proposed as part of the RSC Sunset Caucus.)


Eliminate Wealthier Communities from CDBG
$2.6 billion in savings
This cut will focus federal economic development assistance to needy communities. The Community Development Block Grant program currently funds a wide range of local economic development activities, while it is advertised as a way to help low-income communities, funds are also dispersed to communities with income well-above the national average. A recent study found that the community of Newton, Massachusetts with a per capita income over twice the national average was receiving $28 per person in CDBG funds. At the same time, other communities with income 25% below the national average were receiving $10 per person. Restricting this program to only communities with income at or below 110% of national average income would save $2.6 billion over five years.