There's a lot of talk out there about ACORN being stripped of their federal funding, and restricted from receiving federal funds in the future. Sadly, this couldn't be further from the truth.

Here's what really happened:

On October 1, 2009, the President signed a Continuing Resolution (CR) to keep government programs running at their current spending levels for one month.  This was necessary because Congress has not yet passed the annual appropriations bills which fund all government programs into the new fiscal year, which began October 1st.

In the Conference Report accompanying that bill, Congress included the following provision in Division B which prohibited ACORN from accessing federal funding:  

Sec. 163. None of the funds made available by this joint resolution or any prior Act may be provided to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, or allied organizations.

However, the CR expires on October 31, 2009:

DIVISION B--CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION, 2010

Division B provides continuing appropriations for all agencies and activities that would be covered by the regular fiscal year 2010 appropriations bills, until enactment of the applicable regular appropriations bill, or until October 31, 2009, whichever occurs first.

Congress can pass another CR if it hasn’t finished passing the spending bills.  That CR would also have an expiration date of a matter of days or weeks or maybe months.  But, unless that CR includes the same language as Sec. 163, money will flow right back to ACORN on November 1st.

Even if Congress passes its appropriations bills before November 1st, unless they include that language, ACORN will be eligible for funding again.  And, remember in that case, the language has to be in all of the bills.  There are 12 appropriations bills, each funding different government agencies and programs.  Adding the prohibition language to, say, the Transportation funding bill doesn’t stop ACORN from accessing Housing funds.

And, even if Congress were to include that language in all 12 appropriations bills, that ACORN-prohibition language would expire on September 30th – the final day of Fiscal Year 2010.

The only way to ensure that ACORN is barred from federal funds across the board and for more than a brief time is for the White House to suspend and bar ACORN from federal funds.  It doesn’t have to take an act of Congress.

Late last week we got word from Speaker Pelosi that more stimulus funding is being considered to get the economy back on track. Seems that the $787 billion ($1.1 trillion with interest) that you ponied up earlier this year just isn't getting the job done. But, honestly, we shouldn’t be surprised by this response – not when tax-and-spend-and-borrow liberals are in charge of everything from the White House to the Capitol.

More government spending and borrowing to boost our economy is like trying to dig ourselves out of a hole in the sand. When all is said and done, not only have we made no progress, but we’re further from our objective then when we first started. And, with a greater debt for our kids to boot.

Instead of spending hundreds of billions of dollars on government giveaways in Stimulus, Part 1, the government should have focused on giving private business - big and small – a helping hand to create jobs. Jobs are what we need now to turn our economy around - and you don't do that by creating new government programs. You do that by allowing businesses to bring on more employees and grow the economy. But, sadly, it seems this Congress has yet to learn its lesson and is barreling toward Stimulus, Part 2.

Pretend for a second you work for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and you have a certain amount of federal grant money to distribute to fire departments and first responders throughout the country to enhance fire prevention and fire safety. In Louisiana, you have several fire departments applying for funding --in fact, more than you have money to disburse. You would think actual first responders would have precedent over, say, ACORN?  Wouldn’t you?

Well, apparently, that makes too much sense for the federal government when it comes to fire prevention in Louisiana.

According to the Washington Times, "nearly $1 million in Homeland Security funding typically earmarked for fire departments has been awarded to ACORN."  The Times goes on to say, "It was one of only three such grants issued to the state and made up almost 80 percent of the firefighting money earmarked for Louisiana...."

Thankfully, U.S. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) is all over this and has already requested that the grant be rescinded and given to someone with "expertise in this area."

It's not like there was a shortage of fire departments applying for the funding.  As the Times reports:

"One such group might have been the St. Tammany Parish Fire District No. 3, which applied for a $120,000 grant to purchase smoke alarms for low-income families after a January fire killed four children in a home that had no working detectors.

“’We wanted to buy smoke detectors to spread to homes all over the community to prevent that from happening again,' Chief Charles Flynn said in an interview Tuesday.

"'I have no problem with not getting a grant, I've lost grants before,' said Chief Flynn, one of the fire officials who complained to Mr. Vitter in a letter.

"'My issue is ACORN in New Orleans. Their mission statement says nothing about fire safety or fire prevention. It bothered me that ACORN got $1 million and there are so many smaller and bigger departments that have a need for that money.'

"The Monroe Fire Department was the only squad in Louisiana to receive a grant and will be awarded $192,000. The Louisiana State Fire Marshal's Office will receive $62,000.

"ACORN received $997,402, slightly less than the maximum allowable grant of $1 million. A total of $35 million was available for the grants project to fire districts across the country this year."

The announcement of this grant came after House and Senate votes to cut ACORN off.  But, it just goes to show you, the House and Senate voting to cut off funding to ACORN is nothing but a show until the President either signs it into law or he uses his authority to bar ACORN from federal programs and funds. The money is still flowing … and apparently it’s flowing from even the most unusual of sources.

Despite Congress’ mere lip service to defunding ACORN, the organization remains under intense scrutiny, and more and more entities are distancing themselves from this tarnished group. The latest:  In the latest round of allocations from the National Foreclosure Mitigation Counseling program, ACORN Housing Corp. received no federal funding.

The Wall Street Journal reports that last year, ACORN “was allocated federal funds that could total as much as about $25 million under the program.…”  This year, however, it appears that NeighborWorks America which allocates the money is waiting to see what happens, if anything, given the current scrutiny ACORN faces.

If only Congress could take such meaningful action.  While both the Senate and House did take votes to strip ACORN of its funding, having two votes on two entirely different bills in two different chambers against ACORN looks good, but accomplishes nothing when all is said and done.  It’s good PR, but little more than that.

This is all the more reason why President Obama must immediately use his authority to suspend all federal agencies from doing business with ACORN. The evidence is ample, but it seems the motivation is lacking on the President’s part to do so. This group should not be allowed its continued use of our hard-earned tax dollars to perpetuate their scandalous work. It’s just common sense.

One year ago today, Congress smartly allowed the ban on off-shore drilling to expire. After months of urging Congress to take every action at its disposal to increase the supply of American-made energy, I was thrilled to celebrate Energy Independence Day 2008. 
 
However, one year later, we have made no progress.  First, the Obama Administration put an abrupt halt to plans already in place to open up the outer continental shelf and public lands in Utah to energy exploration.  And, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has announced it could be 2012 before the administration even decides whether it will consider moving forward.
 
Washington is not only not making progress; it is, in fact, sending us further from achieving energy independence than even before.
 
Instead of increasing the supply of American made energy, Congress is pushing a national energy tax, Cap and Trade, that would increase the cost of energy and kill jobs.  In fact, a study by the George C. Marshall Institute, which reviewed a wide range of studies and analyses of the cap and trade legislation, found that the price of energy paid by the American consumer would jump:  5-15% for electricity, 12-50% for natural gas, and 9-145% for gasoline.  The White House’s own numbers show that cap and trade would cost the average American family an additional $1761.
 
The American people shouldn’t have to wait for another summer of $4-gas for the Administration and the majority in Congress to do the right thing.  Energy independence is a matter of fiscal prudence and national security.  And, an all-of-the-above energy strategy – which includes exploration of off-shore oil and natural gas and shale oil deposits in the Mountain West – is the way to achieve real energy independence.

Just in case you didn’t realize it, Washington has a spending problem. And this problem paves the way for a myriad of dismal scenarios. Last month, the White House released updated budget numbers that are downright scary. The Obama Administration is projecting a federal deficit of $1.6 trillion this year and his budget would create $9 trillion in budget deficits over the next decade--more debt than America accumulated from the Presidencies of George Washington to George W. Bush combined (1789 through 2008). And this is using President Obama’s own estimates.

Others like the Heritage Foundation find that the President’s budget will likely produce $13 trillion in deficit spending over the next 10 years--nearly $4 trillion more than the Administration forecast. Why is that? Well, according to Heritage, “the White House figures are based on unrealistic estimates of discretionary spending, interest payments, and interest rates. The White House also used budget gimmicks to hide the full cost of certain entitlements and failed to account for the full costs of cap-and-trade energy legislation and health care reform.”  

But regardless of whether it is $9 trillion or $13 trillion, it’s a heck of a lot of money we don’t have. And our nation’s debt now sits at well over $11 trillion, closer to $12 trillion, actually, the highest it’s ever been in our nation’s history.

I’ve made an update to my congressional website and have posted a debt clock so you can see for yourself the way our government is recklessly spending so much of your hard-earned money. If our federal government doesn’t kick its spending addiction, our nation will be in a world of trouble. And its future generations that will pay the price.

It's amazing to watch the Democrat power players in Washington turning a blind eye to the ACORN controversy, hoping that it disappears in the next news cycle. Unfortunately for them, this ACORN scandal isn't going away, nor should it. When an organization with such a checkered past of nefarious activity is eligible to receive $10 billion dollars in taxpayer funding, and has already received tens of millions, you would think that all legislators, regardless of political party, would want to shut off the funding faucet once and for all.

But, here's what we're hearing from the Democrat majority:
 
    * President Obama told ABC's "This Week" in an interview broadcast Sunday, "Frankly, it's not really something I've followed closely. I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money."

    * According to the Hill newspaper, Senate Majority Reader Harry Reid "dismissed a suggestion...that he sanction a probe into the organization's business practices."

    * Yesterday, Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank and Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers wrote a letter to Daniel Mullholland, Director of the Congressional Research Service (CRS), to ask them to investigate ACORN’s recent activities, specifically to "research and report on the federal and state laws that could apply to such videotaping and distribution of conversations without the consent of all parties." So, when ACORN workers are caught on film giving legal advice on setting up an underage prostitution ring as a legitimate business, Chairmen Frank and Conyers think we should be investigating the investigators who broke the story?

While both the Senate and House recently took votes to strip ACORN of its funding, having two votes on two entirely different bills in two different chambers against ACORN looks good, but accomplishes nothing when all is said and done.  In fact, these votes haven’t stopped one dime from flowing to ACORN.

Rather than wait and hope the House and Senate come together and pass identical language, President Obama should immediately suspend all federal agencies from doing business with ACORN and using our hard-earned tax dollars to perpetuate their scandalous work.

Washington is on notice: The American people won’t be fooled.  They want ACORN off the government payroll.

If you didn't believe that the President planned on paying for his health care overhaul in part by cutting Medicare, more than $100 billion in cuts, wait until you hear this.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which runs Medicare, has engaged in what can be argued as government intimidation, plain and simple. Remember when the EPA suppressed an internal report that raised questions about global warming, including whether carbon dioxide must be strictly regulated by the federal government? They couldn't let a little thing like facts get in the way of passing their cap-and-trade national energy tax.

Well, gangster government is at it again.

According to the House Ways and Means Committee, "the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) initiated an investigation into at least one provider of a Medicare Advantage (MA) health care plan for informing its enrollees that Medicare cuts proposed by the President and congressional Democrats could alter their benefits.  In addition to this investigation, CMS has since banned all MA health plans from providing similar information to beneficiaries."

Congressman Dave Camp, ranking Republican member of the Committee has taken CMS to task for this gag order. Yesterday, he sent a letter to CMS Acting Administrator Charlene Frizzera, noting that, “no such pressure has been applied to those supportive of the President’s Medicare cuts.” 

In fact, the Committee notes, "AARP, which boasts the largest MA plan, for example, has directly communicated with its members via email, a website and letters.  However, AARP’s pro-Medicare cut stance has apparently received no such scrutiny from the Administration.  CMS’ selective use of its regulatory authority, 'threatens the integrity of the agency and of our democracy.'"

Again, another clear example of the government silencing its critics while letting its allies carry on with their business.  About 11 million seniors use Medicare Advantage for their health coverage.  They deserve to know that the burden of paying for the President’s health plan will be on their shoulders.  They deserve some answers, and so do the taxpayers.

Recently, efforts to audit the Federal Reserve have been gathering steam on both sides of the political aisle, as both Republicans and Democrats are expressing their frustrations with the nearly complete lack of transparency and accountability during an unprecedented time of activity from the Fed. Congressman Ron Paul has been calling for this for years, and his Federal Reserve Transparency Act, of which I'm a cosponsor, is expected to be examined during a full committee hearing of the Financial Services Committee this Friday.

Coincidentally, that same night, Dr. Paul is holding a student town hall at the University of Minnesota to discuss issues like this one.  And, I’m honored to have the opportunity to speak at it as well.  Congress is spending away these students’ future, and they need to be a part of this dialogue.

As a precursor to that hearing and that town hall, we get word today that the Federal Reserve has "rejected a request by Treasury Secretary Geithner for a public review of the central bank’s structure and governance."

Our government's spending and printing money like it’s being used for a board game, and we're bailing out Wall Street and Detroit to the tune of billions of dollars, the least the Federal Reserve can do is open up their doors a crack so taxpayers can take a peek at what they're doing with our money.

As it stands now, the Federal Reserve has very little, if any, accountability to the taxpayer. In the wake of Enron, Congress required corporate America to open its books to their shareholders, yet the Federal Reserve keeps the taxpayers in the dark. They need to be held to the same standard. It's simply common sense.

By having the government take over all federal student loan organizations, it would involve one of the largest expansions of a government program in recent memory. It would dismantle a system that has successfully served generations of Americans. Within a decade the Federal Direct Loan Program would be a trillion dollar operation, making it one of the biggest banks in the world. It would ultimately have responsibility for tens of millions of borrowers...
                       -- America's Student Loan Providers (July 21, 2009)

Another month, and another attempt by the Obama Administration to take over a successful portion of the private sector. Banks, cars, and now student loans. I'm beginning to see a trend here.

Today, the House will complete consideration of the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009, otherwise known as the public option for higher education (not to be confused with the public option for health care -- but the similarities can't be overlooked). Advocates like the President maintain that if passed, this bill will bring a "level playing field"  between government and private options. Sound familiar?

However, history tells us that when it's all said and done, the only one left standing on the "level" playing field tends to be the government.

Ending private sector competition in the student loan industry and making the Direct Loan program the sole provider will kill jobs, and greatly expand the control of the federal government. The Federal Family Education Loans (FFEL) program has been the overwhelming choice for student and parents for the past 40 years. In fact, 78% of all new federal student loans from 2007-2008 were administered through this program. Yet, the government wants to end it. It doesn't make any sense.

If nothing else, this bill tells us one thing -- if the government can't succeed on its own merits, they'll eliminate the competition. That should concern us all.

According to a new poll released this week by Investors Business Daily, 45% of doctors would consider quitting the practice of medicine if Congress passed the health care overhaul currently in its sights. Furthermore, more than 70% of responding physicians do not believe that the White House hype that “the government can cover 47 million more people and that it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better."
 

"Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found.

"The poll contradicts the claims of not only the White House, but also doctors' own lobby — the powerful American Medical Association — both of which suggest the medical profession is behind the proposed overhaul.

"It also calls into question whether an overhaul is even doable; 72% of the doctors polled disagree with the administration's claim that the government can cover 47 million more people with better-quality care at lower cost.

"The IBD/TIPP Poll was conducted by mail the past two weeks, with 1,376 practicing physicians chosen randomly throughout the country taking part. Responses are still coming in, and doctors' positions on related topics — including the impact of an overhaul on senior care, medical school applications and drug development — will be covered later in this series."

Click here to see more major findings and read the entire piece.

I’ll certainly be watching this series to see what doctors really think about health care reform.

Kudos to my colleague Ed Royce (R-CA) for sounding the alarm on the international battle to downgrade the dollar. I've said for months now that our penchant for massive spending and our sky-rocketing debt will come back to bite us and Congressman Royce provides evidence seconding that notion.

As he mentions in his recent post, the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development has issued a report calling for the U.S. dollar to be replaced as the global reserve currency. This isn't the first we've heard of this.  Other nations, such as China, Russia, India, and Brazil, have been beating this drum for several months now. But this marks the first time the U.N. has jumped on board.

Unfortunately, our government is giving them their best rationalization for these ludicrous proposals. After all, our nation's debt, which is the money owed by our government, currently sits at the highest it's been in our nation's history, at $11.7 trillion. Couple that with our rising deficit which has well exceeded $1 trillion (another record) and is on its way to $2 trillion fast, and our debt becomes a far less attractive purchase to other nations.  China’s even voiced those concerns publicly.  Higher interest rates will be necessary to sell our debt abroad.   And we will soon be confronted with the growing threat of rising inflation - a devastating sign that our nation's economic fortunes are heading in the wrong direction.

This is real money we're talking about here, and your future. Fiscal responsibility must not be a campaign slogan.  It must be a fundamental tenant of our governing philosophy and economic well-being. The welfare of our children and grandchildren depends on it.

In his remarks to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night, President Obama was certainly trying his best to present an image of bipartisanship in working towards health care legislation. Unfortunately, his actions don’t match his words.

It’s been months since he has met with Republican leaders in the House to discuss the commonsense reforms we have brought to the debate.  It’s hard to imagine how this behavior matches his suggestion that he has been working with us to forge bipartisan legislation. In his speech, he said his door will be open to hear our ideas. I hope that’s truly the case because today I am sending a letter to President Obama asking him to consider my Health Care Freedom of Choice Act, among other Republican alternatives such as the Empowering Patients First Act, as part of a solution to our nation’s health care problems.

My legislation puts patients in charge of their health decisions by tweaking the tax code. Under current law, businesses are allowed to deduct the cost of employee health care from their taxes, while individuals and families cannot. This bias in favor of employer-provided coverage leads to higher costs overall and reduces accessibility to care. My legislation would erase this bias and extend the same tax incentives to businesses and individuals alike. From co-pays and premiums to long-term care, vision and dental, your high out-of-pocket costs would no longer be a barrier to care.

Are you really concerned with reaching across the aisle Mr. President, or was it nothing but rhetoric? The American people deserve to know.

We need to give credit where credit is due. Today, the AP reports that acting under a tip from ACORN, authorities in Florida have arrested 11 individuals accused of falsifying hundreds of voter applications during a registration drive last year. According to the press report, "the suspects collectively turned in about 1,400 registration cards, of which 888 were later found to be faked."

While this was certainly a smart move on ACORN’s part to assist in this criminal investigation, this controversial organization is far too often implicated in these falsified voter registration activities.

In fact, over the years, ACORN and its employees have been the subject of investigations, indictments, and consent decrees in states all across the nation for election-related activities that run afoul of the law. Yet, since 1994, Congress has given it $53 million.  And, legislation passed this year alone will make billions potentially available to this organization.  Could Washington find no more worthy way to spend your money?

I put this to a vote by the House of Representatives with an amendment that said that organizations that have been indicted for voter registration fraud or who employee people who have been so indicted shouldn’t be eligible for taxpayer funding.  On a nearly party-line vote, my amendment failed.  Coincidently, that very week the vote took place, ACORN was hauled into court in two states for voter registration fraud.  If Congress cannot draw the line here, where will it draw the line on how it spends your money?

To add insult to injury, the U.S. Census Bureau has chosen to partner with ACORN for the 2010 census.  Their partnership program is meant to build confidence and trust in the census.  How can partnering with ACORN further these goals?  I am about to introduce the Census Improvement Act, which in part would prohibit ACORN or any organization which has been indicted for election law violations – or who employ individuals who have – from participating in the Planning Partnership Program for the 2010 Census. 

When your government gives out your money, the recipient must be trustworthy. Clearly, ACORN has a lot of work to do before they fit the bill.

While we debate the pros and cons of a trillion-dollar-plus health care overhaul here in the House, it's important to come to terms with the rising financial commitment already facing our nation and future generations.

For instance, according to a report just released by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Social Security is broke.

The CBO now projects that Social Security’s costs will exceed tax income in 2010 (next year!) and 2011, with cash surpluses returning over the 2012-2015 period and becoming negative again beginning in 2016 and later.  In their March 2009 estimates, the CBO projected that the cash surplus would be positive through 2016.  Keep in mind that these projections are based on what many economists of all stripes believe are far-too-rosy White House budget numbers.  It's a very real possibility that a positive cash surplus may not occur at all.

What's worse is what the CBO report reveals about our nation's long-term budget outlook:

"Over the long term (beyond the 10-year baseline projection period), the budget remains on an unsustainable path. Unless changes are made to current policies, the nation will face a growing demand for budgetary resources caused by rising health care costs and the aging of the population. Continued large deficits and the resulting increases in federal debt over time would reduce long-term economic growth by lowering national saving and investment relative to what would otherwise occur, causing productivity and wage growth to gradually slow.

"Last year, outlays for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid combined accounted for about 9 percent of GDP. Outstripping the growth of GDP, spending for those programs is expected to rise rapidly over the next 10 years, totaling nearly 12 percent of GDP by 2019. Under long term projections recently published by CBO, such spending would continue to rise under current laws and policies and could total 17 percent of GDP by 2035.

"If outlays for those programs reached that level, federal spending would be well above its historical percentage of GDP. Unless revenues were increased correspondingly, annual deficits would climb and federal debt would grow significantly, posing a threat to the economy. Alternatively, if taxes were raised to finance the rising spending, tax rates would have to reach levels never seen in the United States. Some combination of significant changes in benefit programs and other spending and tax policies will be necessary in order to attain long-term fiscal balance."

These are very real numbers we're talking about, and it's about time Washington account for its finances rather than pushing them off to our children and grandchildren through continued borrowing and higher taxes.