Congressional leaders decided to roll the transportation and student loan legislation into a single bill because, in the short term, they were both being paid in part by changes in pension laws.

Congressional bargainers reached an agreement earlier this week on the $6 billion college loan portion of that bill that would avert a doubling of interest rates beginning Sunday on federal loans to 7.4 million students. The current 3.4 percent interest rate on subsidized Stafford loans would balloon back to 6.8 percent on Sunday under a cost-saving maneuver contained in a 2007 law. - Christian Science Monitor

Deficit Spending

Christian Science Monitor - Congress Moves Toward Passage of Highway Bill, Takes Action on Student Loans

Eric Holder

Politico - Eric Holder Contempt: Democrats Protest Vote With Walkout

ObamaCare

ABC News - Could the Republicans Really Repeal ObamaCare?

Los Angeles Times - Conservatives Seize on Tax Label to Attack Healthcare Ruling

In 2002, Paul Krugman said, "To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble." Not only did Greenspan follow this terrible advice, but the bubble he subsequently created led to the biggest pop since 1929. So, the pundits are predictably at it again looking for new bubbles that could hopefully pull us out of recession. This time, however, it’s with student loans. 

Today, central planners from both sides of the aisle came to an agreement authorizing a $6 billion bailout to fuel a bubble in the education market. The subsidy is meant to pay for the continuation of extremely low interest rates, currently sitting at 3.4%. Had this subsidy not been been agreed upon by Congress’ big spenders, the current student loan rate would jump to 6.8% on Sunday - a thought which made sense back in 2007 when the rate hike was seen as a necessary cost saving maneuver. Now, though, both Democrats and Republicans have been using Keynesian arguments for why letting the student loan interest rate rise to a less-subsidized level is evil. Student debt, they argue, has risen to such an alarming level that letting a rate hike occur would cripple our fragile economic recovery. Student debt, like mortgage debt, has a large macroeconomic effect. Student debt, also like mortgage debt, is subject to microeconomic laws that dictate the following: a price ceiling that prevents prices from rising to free market levels causes a larger quantity demanded than quantity supplied, also known as a surplus. In context of the student loan crisis, this means that more students are getting cheap loans due to artificially low prices on the rates. Once this occurs, the government has two options: either endure an adjustment that sees less people getting cheap loans, or continue to throw money into a subsidy that sends wrong signals to the economy. And guess which path our government has taken? 

Congress decided to saddle our youth with extreme debt, and the more they do this, the more the taxpayers will pay for college-aged kids to get degrees that lead to them mopping up floors and pouring drinks at Starbucks. If insanity really means doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results, then it is no stretch of rhetoric to call our Representatives insane. Only, when will we do something about it?

Chief Justice Roberts, a Bush appointee, was the swing vote on the court, deciding that Congress did not have the authority to enforce the mandate under the commerce clause, but instead that Congress' authority to tax was broad enough to encompass the mandate.

Amy Howe from Scotusblog explains the ruling:

In Plain English: The Affordable Care Act, including its individual mandate that virtually all Americans buy health insurance, is constitutional. There were not five votes to uphold it on the ground that Congress could use its power to regulate commerce between the states to require everyone to buy health insurance. However, five Justices agreed that the penalty that someone must pay if he refuses to buy insurance is a kind of tax that Congress can impose using its taxing power. That is all that matters. Because the mandate survives, the Court did not need to decide what other parts of the statute were constitutional, except for a provision that required states to comply with new eligibility requirements for Medicaid or risk losing their funding. On that question, the Court held that the provision is constitutional as long as states would only lose new funds if they didn't comply with the new requirements, rather than all of their funding.

In other words, ObamaCare just became the biggest tax hike in American history.

We'll have more on this later today, but for now, you can read the ruling yourself here. 

  Another dynamite article on CAFR's and how the bulk of the Return on Investment fund is not used by the state to fund the budget shortfalls from less tax revenue. The Govt. of the States always say they have run out of money when in fact if one counts the Return on Investment and Enterprise funds there is more than enough and than some more to take care of any money problems the state in question may have. Look at California's CAFR in the linK :

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/06/cafr-summary-if-600b-fund-cant-fund-27b-pension-16b-budget-deficit-why-have-it.html

CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?

A CAFR consists of 3 part: tax income, return on investment income and Enterprise income. By far the largest fund involves the Return on Investment. So  , if the Return on investment is gargantuous compared to tax revunues, why are the states saying austerity measures have to be instituted? Are they criminal liars because it looks like the funding is availabe from the ROI section of the consolidated annual financial reports.

link:http://www.examiner.com/article/does-california-need-a-600-billion-investment-fund-given-our-austerity

Does California need a $600 billion investment fund given our austerity?

If we are to recover our Republic, we need as many good, honest, hard-working people as possible, who are willing and able to hold office and join our fight for Liberty.  I believe that Justin Amash is one of those people.  

I have committed to raising $500 in donations for the Justin amash campaign. will you help?

 Go here: : https://secure.piryx.com/donate/b3y1Ooay/justinamash/300hanson

We want to see the finial version of the bill BEFORE the vote.

NO MORE passing bills without reading them.

NO MORE adding hundreds of pages in the middle of the night to be voted on the next morning.

NO MORE special interests groups influencing our laws invisibly.

NO MORE bundling bills the way Wall Street bundles securities.

How can congress be sure the bill they HAVEN'T read, will solve the problem they HAVEN'T looked at?! Get involved and help make an honorable foundation of the legislative process. This is non-partisan and it won't be a congressman that heads this movement for reform. It has to be "we the people" that DEMANDS it. Email me at info@honorinoffice.org if you would like to get involved.

SPRINGFIELD, Va., Jun 27, 2012 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- On Wednesday, the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee passed Congressman Ron Paul's H.R. 459, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, by a bipartisan voice vote. Republican leadership has promised a vote on the bill, more popularly known as "Audit the Fed," on the House floor this July.

Audit the Fed would require the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct the first thorough audit of the Federal Reserve in the central bank's nearly 100-year history. A Rasmussen poll conducted in late 2010 showed almost 80% of the American people supported requiring such transparency from the Fed.

"Campaign for Liberty is glad to see the Committee respond to hundreds of thousands of calls, petitions, and emails from our members calling for Congress to carry out its oversight responsibilities and pull back the veil of secrecy surrounding the Fed," stated Matt Hawes, Vice President of Campaign for Liberty.

"As Americans continue to struggle with the fallout from a crash partially fueled by the Fed's outrageous behavior, we deserve to know exactly what the Fed is doing with our money. C4L looks forward to the full House taking up Audit the Fed in late July, and we hope the spirit of bipartisanship will carry over into the Senate, as we anticipate finally passing this long overdue, common-sense legislation."

Founded in 2008, Campaign for Liberty now includes over half a million members nationwide. Audit the Fed has long been C4L's top legislative priority, and the grassroots mobilization effort to advance the legislation has rallied grassroots Americans and enabled the organization's rapid growth.

3.) Spread the word!  Tell your family and friends to take action and help end the Fed's rein of destruction and secrecy.

See Committee Members below.

H.R. 459 cosponsors are indicated by an (**).

Republicans

Rep. Darrell E. Issa (CA-49)
Rep. John L. Mica (FL-07)**
Rep. Todd Platts (PA-19)**
Rep. Michael Turner (OH-03)**
Rep. Patrick T. McHenry (NC-10)**
Rep. Jim Jordan (OH-04)**
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (UT-03)**
Rep. Connie Mack (FL-14)**
Rep. Tim Walberg (MI-3)**
Rep. James Lankford (OK-5)**
Rep. Justin Amash (MI-3)**
Rep. Ann Marie Buerkle (NY-25)
Rep. Paul Gosar (AZ-1)**
Rep. Ra]]>