Tax Stock Trades

Reps. Peter Defazio (D-OR) and Ed Perlmutter (D-CO) are proposing a 0.25 percent tax, or $0.10 per share tax, on the sale and purchase of financial instruments such as stocks, options, derivatives, and futures. The real problem is that the tax would effectively end U.S. dominance of financial markets.

We live in a highly competitive financial world where initial public offerings (IPOs) migrate to London when the process becomes prohibitively expensive or lengthy here. Do you really think this tax wouldn't drive trading to a location that was less expensive to transact business? Major U.S. financial institutions are already planning. The NYSE, EuroNext, OMX, and CME all have developed relationships in areas outside the jurisdictional reach of the U.S. Congress. If it means $50billion to $200 billion per year in cost differential between staying put or going overseas, do you think that the exchanges will sit by as their business is stolen offshore?

If this bill is approved, Congressmen Defazio and Perlutter will not be adding to our economy, but instead will be killing jobs and tax revenues. Can you say unintended consequences?

Breast Cancer Diagnostic Rationing

Has politics already gotten in the way of good healthcare? On Monday, a government task force said that most women don't need mammograms in their 40’s and should get one every two years starting at 50. This is a break with the American Cancer Society's long-standing position. What's more, the panel said breast self-exams do no good, and women shouldn't be taught to do them.

At a time when more and more women are finding early diagnosis of breast cancer the difference between life and death, this government task force’s findings seem insane. Is the plan to let women in their 30’s and 40’s go virtually unchecked, potentially missing any chance of early detection? If mammograms are not an effective tool, then where is the prescription of another diagnostic method? There is no mention of other scans or DNA/RNA cataloging.

False positives, and cost per life, are not a good enough reason for sticking our heads in the sand. This is politics at its worst. If this diagnostic technology doesn’t work, then why keep it for women in their 50’s? Once again, this is about conservation and reduced consumption, but this time it isn’t about light bulbs or gasoline. It’s about the lives of our mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters. Washington, spend more time funding and approving better diagnostic technology and less time on rationing.

AP article

9/11 Terrorist Trial - Attacking the Constitution

Our current administration has found it fit to bring the 9/11 terrorists to NYC. They will sit in a civilian criminal court. They will be given the rights of an American citizen and have the U.S. Constitution in their corner. Besides the concern of further Muslim extremist attacks during the trial, there is a greater fear – the evisceration of our Constitution.

Let me explain, there are four Constitutional issues that will be put into question: Miranda, chain of evidence, illegal search and seizure, and coercion/torture. It is almost certain that the detainees weren’t Mirandized prior to questioning. The chain of evidence was more than likely not followed in the villages and mountain of Afghanistan and Pakistan where these individuals were captured. I highly doubt there was a search warrant issued for the military team that captured them. Finally, any amount of information gathered without the presence of an attorney could be suggested to be coerced.

What does this mean? Every stitch of evidence against these terrorists could be thrown out. Within a civil criminal court it will be hard to convict these individuals, but that won’t happen. The citizens of this country won’t allow it. We are being put into a Catch-22. We are being given a choice between justice for those who died in 9/11 or our civil liberties. That is the trade off. The reality is that they will be convicted, and in doing so we will gut our own Constitution. This trial will create legal arguments for the government to walk all over our civil rights. If evidence is allowed with disregard to the Constitution we will have set a precedent that there is no turning back from.

The fact that we are allowing foreign war criminals the use of our constitution is ludicrous. I have fought the urge to question the motivation of this administration, but this act makes me doubt their motives and intent.

GE's Political Influence

A few months back the U.S. Department of Energy decided it would not guarantee a loan for USEC to expand a centrifuge uranium enrichment plant in Ohio. Not only did this cost the citizens of Ohio more than 2000 jobs, but it came as a bit of a surprise since the U.S. imports 80% of its reactor fuel. It is especially curious since 35% of the worlds enrichment facilities will be rendered obsolete, by 2017, due to age and old technology. It seems like this would be a great investment considering that no taxpayer money was needed, just a guarantee on a private loan.

With 53 new nuclear reactors currently being built worldwide, one has to ask; why the Dept. of Energy would help eliminate jobs, increase foreign energy dependency, and prevent a U.S. based company from effectively competing in a growing marketplace. The answer has now become clear. Once again, General Electric has flexed its political influence.

See, GE has a different and potentially more profitable way to enrich uranium. They’re focused on a laser technology which is supposedly more efficient. The problem is that this technology is yet to be proven and has failed to provide results several times since its inception in the early 1980’s. Even if it proves to be everything promised, it still baffles the mind why the government would prevent USEC from participating in the marketplace? General Electric has already said that it would apply for federal loan guarantees to help finance the building of its laser plant. I wonder if the D.O.E. will approve that application?

Oh, by the way, GE has spent $19M YTD on lobbying efforts.