WWMC--What Would Marco Charge?

Marco Rubio wants to be the next U.S. Senator from Florida (or should I say the next Senator from American Express)?


You see, on the one hand, Marco is being lauded as "the next great Conservative." On the other hand, the partial release of his credit card expenditures on his Florida GOP American Express Card (while Marco served as Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives) demonstrates anything but conservatism.


Marco's questionable spending habits and his comments regarding them give us some insight into his mindset when it comes to public service. He just loves spending other people's money on himself.


Let's explore the snipets revealed in the St. Petersburg Times' article on February 25, 2010.

"I was as diligent as possible to ensure the party did not pay for items that were unrelated to party business," Marco said when questioned about his expenditures of more than $100,000.00 from November 2006-November 2008.

So, let's look at the charges and see what Marco thinks "diligence" is and what he thinks are things that are "related to party business."

$765 at Apple's online store for "computer supplies;" $25.76 from Everglades Lumber for "supplies;" $53.49 at Winn-Dixie for "food;" $68.33 at Happy Wine in Miami for "beverages" and "meal;" $78.10 for two purchases at Farm Stores groceries in suburban Miami; $412 at All Fusion Electronics, a music equipment store in Miami, for "supplies." Plane tickets for Marco's wife. Deductibles on his car insurance and rental car expenses while his personal automobile was in the shop. Payments totalling $1,024 to a Tallahassee property management firm (which Marco admitted were personal expenses, but according to the St. Petersburg Times article, were not repaid to the GOP). Oh yea, and don't forget the reported $7.09 charge at Chick-fil-A.

Really, Marco, Chick-fil-A?

So what can we learn from these things?

Well, for starters, the GOP sure does need alot of different "supplies." And, secondly, if Marco is eating, chances are extremely good that it's "party business."

And as for diligence, let's look at the simple concept of opening one's wallet and looking at more than one credit card inside. Many of us do that daily. Many of us have personal credit cards and business credit cards.

Diligence would be pulling out your own personal credit card for your own personal expenses, and pulling out the other GOP issued credit card for expenses that are used exclusively for influencing elections. (After all, that's what the IRS expects the GOP to do with its donations--use them exclusively for influencing elections).

But, hey, maybe the Clerk at Farm Stores or the gal behind the counter at the Chick-fil-A is more likely to vote for Marco because he walked in or pulled through the drive-through and bought some stuff on the GOP's dime. Ya think?

And, although I've lived in Florida most of my life, I didn't realize that we have a "First Lady of the Florida House of Representatives." But, according to Marco, we do, and he thinks that it is "absolutely appropriate for her to accompany me to official events and party functions." Sure, I understand that--no problem, but at whose expense? Is anyone voting for the First Lady of the Florida House?

Doesn't all of this sound alot like the escapades of Sarah Palin and the First Dude and their interesting expense reports chocked full of charges when she flew her family all over Alaska on "official business" at taxpayer expense?

Of course, the GOP and Bill McCollum say this is all just a private matter. No taxpayer money involved. No need to look under the hood and see how the engine is running or why it is leaking oil. We'll clean up our own mess--move along--nothing to see here.

But that's the lesson here. These free-wheeling Republican spenders are running the State of Florida's fiscal house. They are making all of our budgetary decisions--and have for many years. Republican Party business--and how lavishly they spend money for themselves-- is a mirror of their fiscal habits. Is it any wonder we are in such a mess financially in Florida?

If Marco thinks that everything he does is party-related or business-related, and charges it all to others, what is he going to do if he gets the chance to exercise his diligence in Washington? I think we know. We've already seen his lavish spending in Tallahassee when he was Speaker of the House.

"I'll have a number one, extra pickles, hold the mayo, and 367 B-22 bombers." (Or, perhaps he'll spend alot of money to refurbish his office, just like he spent $400,000 as House Speaker to remodel his office and to build a members' only dining room.)

What? Were the lines at Chick-fil-A too long?

Marco calls these leaks of his AMEX spending "a political act of desperation by his opponent."


It's more than that. Marco doesn't connect that dots.

It may be that by not paying back personal expenses to the GOP, or by paying them back more than 6 months later, that he essentially received income (for the personal expenses he didn't pay back) or interest-free loans (from Republican Party donors for those expenses that he eventually paid back months later).


Think we need to look under the hood a little more before the election?

That's the conservative thing to do.

Fire Up The Nukes! It's Time To Declare War!

Bring on the "Nuclear Option." The so-called Nuclear Option is the process that a Senator will rise on the floor of the U.S. Senate and call into question the unconstitutionality of the Filibuster, and immediately call for a vote to annihilate this arcane rule that is making our Federal Government completely dysfunctional.

The nuclear option, being brought up as a "point of order," would not require a 60-vote margin to pass. It would simply take a majority vote to pass and get rid of this unconstitutional road block. All we need is 51 votes to do this!

It's just a "rule" that 100 people made up. At the time they created it, it was rarely used. Over the years, Senators have changed it before--it used to take 67 votes to overcome a filibuster, now it takes 60. Why not 51?

The Senators can, and must, change it again--because, it is being abused and it has paralyzed our Federal Government. It is time for the Senate to be governed by majority rule. It is time to get things done, and the Filibuster is standing in the way of Everything.

I come to this conclusion because the Filibuster is being abused. It is now used on nearly EVERY piece of legislation that moves into the Senate.

In the 1950's, during each 2-year term of Congress, the Filibuster was only used an average of ONE TIME EVERY 2 YEARS. In the current term of Congress which began on January 1, 2009, the Filibuster has already been invoked MORE THAN 239 TIMES.

Enough!

The filibuster exists only to give power to those 100 people. It does nothing for the rest of us. This rule does not exist in our Constitution.

But wait, it gets worse!

What's even worse that the Filibuster is the Single Senator Hold that is routinely used by ONE Senator to completely hold up appointments of Judges and other Executive Branch appointees who must be confirmed by the Senate.

There is never even a confirmation vote if the One Senator Hold is invoked.

And, as we have seen recently, it is invoked many times solely as a form of political bribery--like Sen. Shelby in Alabama having a hold on 70 appointees simply because he wanted funding to be approved for pork projects in his state.

Questioning the qualifications of appointees is something that can and should be decided in the confirmation process--it should not be decided by ONE Senator.

And if you think that the One Senator Hold is bad policy now, just wait until we have the Senator From Exxon or the Senator From Aetna (oh, wait a minute, we already do--"Dick" Liberman).

Time is running out on our democracy. We are out of timeouts, there are 3 seconds left on the clock, and we need to put up a 3-pointer to win the game.

We need to light up the airwaves and social networks about this problem. We need to educate our friends about what's going on and why "nothing ever gets done."

We need to pressure Democrats and Bernie Sanders in the Senate to stand up and push the proverbial red button. Give them the launch codes for the Nukes. Make all 100 Senators weigh in on this. Televise it on all the networks and give it the same publicity as we did for Friday's Press Conference for Tiger Woods.

If we can televise Tiger Woods' press conference on all networks to find out who else he's screwing, then why can't we televise this Nuclear Option vote and let the 100 Senators show us who they are screwing?

Then count the votes and start grilling the naysayers as to why they oppose Majority Rule.

And, if it doesn't pass the first time, bring up the Point of Order for another vote again--until we get Majority Rule in the U.S. Senate.

After all, until that happens, nothing else will get done in Washington, anyway.

The Dumbest Thing We Could Ever Do!

Drilling for Oil off the Florida Coast. It makes no sense, and it makes no cents!

Florida has 825 miles of sandy beaches and 8,500 miles of tidally influenced coastline. More than 950,000 Floridians make their living from jobs relating to tourism and our coastal waters. In 2008, visitors spent $65.2 billion and Florida collected $3.9 billion in total tourism tax revenues. We have a large marine fisheries business that depends upon clean water.

Why would we ever want to risk all of that revenue and all of those jobs—both are irreplaceable—now and forever!

Don’t believe BIG OIL when they tell you that their “new drilling technology” is completely 100% safe. It is the very same type of drilling rig that began leaking off the coast of Australia in August, 2009, and continued to leak more than a million gallons of oil all the way until November, when they were finally able to stop the leak (after the rig caught on fire).

A similar spill off the West coast of Florida would damage our coastline and inland waters for hundreds of miles. It could easily impact Tampa Bay and the very expensive desalination plant that we are now using to obtain 25 million gallons of drinking water daily for people in Tampa. Has anyone thought about that yet?

With one spill like the one off of Australia, we would be out of the tourism business for years, and would jeopardize our major source of jobs and tax revenue.

Why would we be willing to risk that $65 Billion Dollars of annual revenue and all those jobs? For what -- the hope or “promise” of lower gas prices? Or is it the promises of lots of money to the State of Florida for oil leases. Please don't tell me we are that stupid!

Don’t believe BIG OIL for a second when they talk about “protecting America’s energy independence” or reducing “our reliance” on foreign sources of oil. The ONLY thing we can count on for certain is BIG OIL will sell their oil for the highest price to the highest bidder. It is a global market, and if the Chinese want to pay more than people in Tampa, you know where it will be sold, in a heartbeat.

And when it comes to the sales pitch and the estimates of how much Florida will receive, judge BIG OIL by what they have done in the past, not by what they say they will do in the future if we just give them the right to drill. The estimates of revenues are higher than all of the money that has ever been paid to Louisiana and Texas for the last 50 years. Sorry, but that sounds like a lie. We are never going to receive as much money as they are "promising."

Texas only receives approximately $45 Million for their oil leases. That's a dirty drop in the bucket compared to the $65 Billion in annual revenues that Floridians receive from tourism and the $3.9 Billion that the State now receives, annually, from tourism tax dollars. I'm not willing to make that trade, are you?

And what about the cost of cleanup when (and yes, it is only a matter of when) there is a major spill? Don’t count on BIG OIL. Exxon is still fighting the costs of cleanup from the Exxon Valdez spill that occurred more than 20 years ago!

BIG OIL never wants to talk about the fact that when oil spills into the Gulf it turns into tar balls, ranging in size from a dime to a dinner plate. Tar balls harm sea life (when they ingest them) and tar balls stick to the feet of anyone walking on the beach. A solvent (such as mineral spirits) will be required to remove the tar from your feet or your bathing suit when tar balls invade our beaches.

Just think about having to scrub your young children all over with mineral spirits after a fun day of digging on the beach....Are you ever going back? No, of course not, and neither will the tourists. Game over.

Don’t believe BIG OIL when they spread another of their standard lies—like how there was no environmental damage during Hurricane Katrina.

The truth is that over half a million gallons of oil spilled from platforms, rigs, tanks and pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

And don’t forget that drilling for oil is simply a nasty, dirty industrial process. In addition to spills, oil and gas drilling also produces massive amounts of toxic waste muds and cuttings, which can contain mercury, lead, cadmium and other toxic substances.

Thanks, BIG OIL, but you can keep your toxic waste, your leaky rigs, your spills and your tar balls off of our beautiful beaches. Floridians simply cannot afford the environmental damage, the clean-up costs, the loss of jobs, the loss of tax revenue, and the reduced land prices that your filthy drilling will bring to Florida.

And, I haven’t even touched on the National Security issues, yet. The Pentagon opposes drilling off the panhandle because it would affect the training of our fighter pilots. And just exactly who are these folks that want to set up platforms within sight of our beaches?

And isn’t it particularly troubling that those forces who are pushing so hard to pass legislation through the Florida Legislature for oil drilling will not disclose who they are, or who they represent?

For all we know, it’s the Chinese, or BP, or Iran. That’s the point—we don’t know—and they aren't disclosing. Why the big secret?

So, if offshore oil drilling isn’t the DUMBEST THING WE COULD EVER DO IN FLORIDA, I’d sure like you to show me something worse!

Write your legislators. Educate your friends. Stop this from happening. Draw a line in our clean sand! It is up to you.

Party On, GOP... And Put It All On Credit Cards

To anyone paying even just a little bit of attention to things in Tallahassee and Washington, is it really a surprise that:

• The Florida Republican Party has run amok with its credit cards, spending hundreds of thousands of contributors' dollars on lavish perks for its party's big wigs?

• No one in the GOP who had a Party Credit Card (and boy, what a Party it must have been because no one is talking...) wants ANY of the spending records disclosed?

• Republican Attorney General Bill McCollum (whose job it is to be the top law enforcement officer in the State) sees absolutely nothing to investigate in this whole credit card thing?

• The Republicans in Congress just voted "NO" (again) to a Democratic party proposal that would require the Federal Government to Pay As It Goes, and not fund programs that aren't fully paid for (i.e., you can't "put spending on a credit card" and ignore budget deficits)?

• The Republican-controlled Florida Legislature and Republican Governor have borrowed money from the Federal Government and from State Trust Funds, to pay general operating budget items for the past two years and will do it again this year?

Since when did fiscal responsibility go from "paying as you go" to "putting it on the credit card"? When Floridians elected Republicans to control the State Budget, that's when!

The first thing to do when you find yourself in a deep hole is to stop digging. Oh, yea... and take away the shovel from the ones in charge of digging the hole.

Floridians have figured out that we can't live beyond our means and can't live off of credit cards. We have to pay as we go.

The GOP doesn't think it's relevant for us to look at their spending habits. (They say, it's a Private Matter.) Guess what, it's very relevant. In fact, it's indicative of the way they act when they are in power and it is indicative of their public governance, too. Quite frankly, the GOP leadership has run our state into the ditch.

This GOP Credit Card Scandal is relevant and material to anyone who wants to save our State.

The voters of Florida need to send a message to the Florida GOP--Go ahead and Cut up your Credit Cards, Open Up Your Books, Let the Sunshine In, and Hand Over the Keys--it's time for a new Driver--one that knows how to get a beautiful car out of the ditch without damaging it further.

And as Bill Nelson reminded us Saturday night, to make the car go forward, you put the Transmission in "D", not "R."

CHRI$ DODD $ELL$ OUT

What if you spent a lifetime in the Senate rising to a position of power on the powerful Senate Banking Committee, at a time when financial markets were in desperate need of true reform?

And what if you announced that you were not going to run for re-election, so that for once, you would no longer be beholden to the powerful forces that could fund your opponent in the next election, and, for once, at the most opportune time, you could exercise your own independent judgment?

And what if you professed to be a progressive Senator who has shown the ability to get legislation passed.

And what if the country was dying for someone just like you to step up and shepherd real financial reform through the Senate--for example, to restore the Glass-Steagall Act? Restoring Glass-Steagall would again provide regulation in a form that we all know and don't fear-- and would restore stability in financial markets again, just like it was during the 60 year period following World War II-- an unmatched era of prosperity and stability.

What if you had the chance to end your career in the Senate on a memorable, historic note? To actually act like a Statesman? What would you do?

Well, if your name is Chris Dodd, you announce that you are not going to take up ANY financial reform legislation for the rest of the year. Instead, you cater solely to the Big Banks and the Wall Street moguls, and set yourself up for a new cushy job after you leave the Senate.

Chri$$, I'm sure that your old friend, Teddy Kennedy, is turning over in his grave. You have sold out all of your principles for your own personal financial gain.

Real classy, Chri$$!

Do us a favor, Chri$$, just resign and take the big money now. Stop wasting taxpayer dollars taking up space in the Senate.

Hey, what is it about the water in Connecticut? Apparently, if you drink it, you forget who you are and immediately want to sell yourself to the highest bidder.

What other explanation is there for you, Chri$$ and your buddy "Dick" Liberman?

Go ahead and pull a Sarah Palin and quit for the money in the private sector. Quit wasting our time.

Nobody Wants To Have An Abortion

This evening, in the biggest media event of each year--the Super Bowl--there will be an anti-abortion advertisement celebrating the life of Tim Tebow, whose mother, Pam, had a choice to make several years ago.

First of all, let me say that no one is a bigger fan of Tim Tebow than I am. I have season tickets to Gator games and have lost my voice on several occasions during the last four years cheering for his accomplishments on the field.

Tim has also been a wonderful person off the field in reaching out to help others less fortunate than himself. The stories of his interaction with children with terminal diseases, and stories about Tim spending Spring Break or summer vacations in the Phillipines assisting doctors to provide medical care to the poor are admirable.

I'm glad that Tim Tebow's parents had the ability to provide for him and to care for him and made a choice to bring him into the world knowing that it might be a challenge and might not work out so well. If Tim had not become a superstar, his parents would have been there for him. They were older and were experienced in parenting. Tim was their fifth child.

But, what about pregnancies that occur without that kind of "Leave It To Beaver" parental support system?

What if the woman who has to make the choice is a teenage child herself with absolutely no parenting skills and no ability to provide a stable home environment for her child? What if the pregnant woman is addicted to drugs? What if the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest? What if the prospective parents were abused as children and know deep inside themselves that they will not be good parents and might actually harm the child? What if the pregnant woman knows that due to her financial circumstances, she will never be able to provide the basic necessities (food, prenatal medical care and necessary medical care during the first two years of life when most brain function is maximized), or shelter in a safe and nurturing environment?What if carrying the pregnancy will endanger the woman's own health?

No one wants to abort a pregnancy. It is never an easy decision.

However, it is just as egregious to force a woman to have a child who will be sentenced to a miserable existence. We have enough children in this position already, who need to be rescued from their unfortunate circumstances, right in our own backyard.

The Guardian ad Litem Program in the Hillsborough County courts (and in courts across the other 66 counties in Florida) is begging for volunteers to represent the interests of children who are involved in horrible living situations and need an advocate for the children because their parents are harming them. These children need a responsible adult to look out for them and to report back to the Court what is happening in the child's life so that decisions can be made for their care while they are growing up.

And yet, this year's (Republican) budget in Tallahassee will further cut funding for the Guardian ad Litem Program. It's bad enough that the parents are abusing these children by having them in untenable living situations, but it is even worse that society turns a blind eye to them after they are born. It is tragic that there is not enough money to fund the Guardian ad Litem program and even worse that there are not enough volunteers in the community to advocate for these children after they are born.

Do those in the Right to Life movement see this disconnect? Why don't they put some of their energy into volunteering to fill the vacancies in the Guardian ad Litem program? Walk a mile in these children's shoes. (How about having the proceeds from the "Choose Life" Florida license tags go solely to funding the Guardian ad Litem program?)

No one wants to have an abortion.

Women who choose to have an abortion should not be made to feel guilty or ashamed for that very personal decision. Sadly, that is the message from Tim Tebow's Super Bowl ad.

Perhaps the pregnant woman knows that she cannot, in good conscience, knowingly bring a child into a world where he or she will be harmed.

Not everyone can be Tim Tebow.

"If You Like The Heath Insurance You've Got, You Can Keep It..."

Twice each year, I have the opportunity to sit down with our health insurance agent and review our "choices" for coverage for the next year. I have two small businesses that I serve on the Board of Directors of, and one of our annual duties is to try to choose the best available health insurance coverage for ourselves and our employees.

Today was the meeting for the larger company. The size of our group is 17 people. Some people have single coverage, some have family coverage. Some opt for a PPO plan and some participate in a Health Savings Account Plan (HSA).

Several years ago, when HSA's were first invented, the health insurers priced those plans lower because they thought that their insureds would be more discriminating consumers and would spend less (since you essentially self insure until you meet your deductible).

This year, for the first time, the cost of the HSA premiums rose more than the premiums for the PPO. Apparently the actuaries have determined that people in HSA's aren't spending less, and once they hit their deductibles, the coverage is 100%.

So, welcome to today's meeting. Here's what we learned.

If we want to keep the coverage we've got (i.e., the same coverage as last year), the premiums are increasing 28.2%. Remember the President's line about health care reform--"if you like the coverage you've got, you can keep it?" Well, you can, if you want to pay 28.2% more this year.

It wouldn't be "renewal time" without the annual "other options" that the insurers always provide to us. It's always the same. They tweak the deductibles and "out of pocket" expenses, in at least one or two other "lower-priced options"--lower priced in terms of monthly premiums only. And when I say "lower-priced" please know that one is an increase of 4.3% in annual premiums, and the other is an increase of 11.5%. However, the true shell game is played with the increased deductibles, co-pays, etc.

By the way, in this shell game, "out of pocket" expenses are not to be confused with "co-pays"--which although they are indeed paid out of your pocket in the literal sense, they are not, in the insurance company's contractual mind, counted toward your deductible. In other words, "out of pocket" means one thing to the patient and something quite different to the insurance company.

Of course, the actuaries are the only ones who know the exact claims paid experience of our group. That information is right at their fingertips when they give us their annual quotes. They know how much our group paid for prescription drugs, surgeries, and emergency room visits, and how often we used doctors in the network or out of the network, etc.

On the other hand, those of us who have to choose the best coverage option for our ourselves and our employees don't have access to any of that information because it is all "confidential." So, for example, we don't know how many people in our group were very close to reaching their deductibles last year and might actually benefit from a plan with the lower deductibles (in the total amount they pay annually for their health care), even if it costs more in monthly premiums.

I'm convinced that today's premium increase of 28.2% was specifically designed to try to drive our decision so that we will not keep the same coverage as we had last year and will instead choose one of the other plans with higher deductibles, which appear--at first blush-- to be a better deal. But, I'm equally as convinced that the insurance companies' actuaries know exactly what the score is, and that no matter which option we choose, they will end up with more money in the insurance company's pocket at the end of the year.

Because they can. They will.

There is no competition. There is no anti-trust regulation of insurance companies. Why?

This system only exists because we allow it.

If you like the insurance coverage you have, it's probably because you don't understand it.

The cops break up shell games of "3-Card Monty" on the street.

However, all across America (and no where else in the world) in Board Rooms and in offices, large and small, we welcome these shell games into our workplace every day.

Because we let them.

When are we going to stop letting them?