Democrats and their media lapdogs and busy exploiting first responders in the Zadroga bill in whatever way possible to gain political advantage. Despite President Obama telling the NY delegation that he opposed funding the legislation earlier this year and waffling back and forth, Democrats and their state media have inundated America with headlines accusing the GOP of refusing to pass the Zadroga bill due to coldheartedness.
In reality, the problem lies with Democrats refusal to cut any of their entitlement spending in order to pay for it. See, while our first responders are important to them when it’s time to issue a sound bite, they cease to occupy the same space on Dems list of priorities – which included a pork-laden omnibus bill with enough earmarks to fund the Zadroga bill many times over.
Republicans have applied the brakes due to their desire to discover and eliminate earmarks and to make sure that the heros who risked their lives for us on 9/11 actually get their money and that it’s not a repeat of Pigford.
In the Pigford fraud, as evidenced by many attorneys and original victims in the case, people who had never farmed (but expressed a desire to do so) were given the same $50,000 as someone like Jimmy Dismuke, who’d spent his entire life farming. The discrepancy is one that the GOP wishes to avoid, and surely Democrats do as well. Because “anywhere from 10-50%” of the claims are fraudulent in this just-signed settlement, says Huffington Post reporter Lee Stranahan, you can imagine the caution felt by some on the right in entering this legislation. Yes, those who risked their lives for America may be eligible for care but you have to wonder: if it’s as important as Democrats say it is, then why would they oppose safeguards to make sure that those who need help aren’t looted out of it by shysters?
This bill has languished in congress for awhile now. Democrats passed a $26 billion-dollar EduJobs teachers’ union bailout before this. They passed a failed stimulus before this. They passed DADT before this. They debated the Omnibus with billions of dollars of earmarks before this. All of these things apparently infinitely more pressing than helping first responders, which, now that the cameras are on, is suddenly important to the left. When Democrats had the chance to turn it into action they compromised themselves by choosing a procedure that impeded their ability to shove it through.
the new Senate bill would impose a 2-percent excise fee on certain foreign companies that receive U.S. government contracts. This raises roughly $4.5 billion over 10 year. To offset the remaining cost of the 9/11 measure, the bill includes two other revenue-raising measures that have passed the Senate either unanimously or on a broad, bipartisan vote.
And Democrats have backed off the attempt to close tax loopholes that benefit major corporations and instead are offering to pay for the bill, according to aides familiar with the negotiations, by setting a fee on federal government contractors with foreign countries that have not signed certain procurement agreements with the U.S and by extending a fee that already exists on certain H1B visas. The latter fee had unanimous support among Republicans and Democrats earlier this year.
Democrats are spinning Republicans’ desire to assure that the money spent isn’t money wasted on fraud as “The GOP is being cold-hearted.” Some interesting considerations to simply note:
Not that all of those collecting compensation are sick. It’s hard to argue that retired FDNY Lt. Johnny McLaughlin, who is receiving $86,000 in disability compensation and runs triathlons, suffered lasting injuries at Ground Zero. The same might be said of retired Lt. John Brown, who pulls in an $82,000 disability pension while continuing to work as a firefighter on Long Island.
But there’s an even bigger problem. Namely, doctors have no way of determining whether specific cases of heart and lung disease or cancer were caused by inhaling dust at the Ground Zero site.
Democrats are so busy faking outrage for use as leverage since their policies don’t do the trick, they completely miss the point of this above concern: Don’t you think Individual A, who suffered greater injuries and has more for which to pay, would benefit from having more money to help offset those costs – and that Individual B, who did not suffer and has nowhere near the amount if injury as Individual A, should not receive as much as someone struggling with greater health issues and bills? Because if that’s the point, to help those struggling, then cutting an equal check for all sounds less like the intended goal and more like a pay out – a la Pigford – and this is exactly the sort of thing congress should NOT want to repeat.
Of course, Democrats, by their behavior on this issue, seem concerned only with who comes out on top in 2012 and are spinning their wheels in the mud as fervently as possible in order to exploit this entire issue for political gain – while, ironically, screeching that those who dare to oppose their rushed-through and sloppily vetted proposal hate first responders, America, bald eagles, and baby Jesus.
This is the real outrage – that such a public relations ploy would be used in lieu of responsible legislation – and they can get away with it because their media refuse to hold them accountable.