Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Phillips Blasts Hinchey's MSNBC Comments on Bin Laden









Phillips Blasts Hinchey's MSNBC Comments on Bin Laden

Binghamton, NY --- George Phillips, Candidate for US Congress in NY's 22nd Congressional District sharply criticized his opponent Maurice Hinchey for outrageous comments he made on MSNBC yesterday.

Hinchey stated President Bush 'intentionally let Osama Bin Laden get away' as part of an Iraq War plan (see link below).

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/11/30/congressman_bush_let_bin_laden_go_to_start_iraq_war.html

Phillips stated, "These wild accusations by a Member of the United States Congress on national television are simply outrageous."

Phillips added, "Americans put their lives on the line to capture this terrorist leader. Hinchey's comments are simply insulting to our men and women in the armed services. He should retract these groundless allegations and issue an apology."


Contact: Phillips for Congress --- (607) 341-8866
www.electgeorgephillips.com

Sunday, November 29, 2009

Phillips blasts NYC 9/11 Trials


Phillips Criticizes NYC 9/11 Trials
Trials will Give Terrorist Suspects the Stage, Put America at Risk

For Immediate Release

Binghamton, NY --- George Phillips, Candidate for US Congress against Maurice Hinchey, sharply criticized the Justice Department decision to give alleged terrorists civilian trials in New York City.

"The suspects being charged in the 9/11 terror attacks were involved with acts of war. They don't deserve a civilian trial," Phillips said. "Imagine if those who attacked Pearl Harbor had been given civilian trials. The idea is absolutely preposterous."


"I worry this trial will give terrorist suspects the stage and enable them to incite more violence and attacks on America with inflammatory rhetoric. Unfortunately this could turn into a circus-like atmosphere that these alleged terrorists will take full advantage of" Phillips warned.

Phillips noted that military tribunals and courts could offer the suspects a chance to have their cases heard without giving them the profile and that war crimes such as the 9/11 attacks should be considered in such courts.

"The decision by Attorney General Holder puts America at risk. I hope the New York delegation and the Congress will urge him to reconsider his decision," Phillips added.


Contact: Phillips for Congress (607) 341-8866

Health Care Debate Op-Ed


Weighing in on the Health Care Debate

By George K. Phillips

The health care debate has captivated the nation this summer as members of Congress travel to “town hall” meetings across the country to explain and discuss a complex health-care reform bill that is more than 1,000 pages long.

At the heart of the debate is an effort to provide health insurance to the millions of Americans who currently lack it while improving, or at the very least not diminishing, the current-health care system. While “shouters” at the meetings have garnered much of the media attention, I would like to offer a few of what I hope are “reason-minded” critiques of the current bill and suggestions for improving the overall system.

To assess the long-term implications of the legislation before Congress that could create a new, large government bureaucracy, we must consider the state of our national government and economy.

The federal government has racked up an astounding $11 trillion national debt and will run an estimated $1.8 trillion budget deficit this year. The Social Security and Medicare trustees report for 2009 estimates the Social Security program will start running deficits in 2016 and states that the Medicare program is already running deficits.

With these staggering deficits and baby boomers soon moving into retirement and raising Social Security and Medicare costs even more, does it make sense to add another large government entitlement program? Even if the proponents do not intend for this new program to ration health care, wouldn’t health-care rationing result if the government simply can’t afford to pay the bills?

The plan relies on penalties and taxes on small businesses to enforce implementation at a time when unemployment is hovering near 10 percent. In 2005, the most recent year it has data available for, the Small Business Administration estimated small businesses were responsible for creating nearly 80 percent of new jobs. How can we pull out of this recession and grow the economy if we are placing additional restrictions on already overburdened small businesses?

I believe the plan should take the opposite approach: instead of taxes and penalties, give small businesses and their employees tax credits to purchase health insurance. Current estimates show small businesses pay an estimated 18 percent more for health-care benefits than larger firms. Small businesses should be allowed to partner together, amassing a larger group of employees together to compete for better plans that would enable them to lower their costs and expand benefits.

Helping small businesses pay for help insurance would help cover a large number of the uninsured. Efforts could be made to get the remaining uninsured into Medicaid rather than creating an entirely new program.

A key part of the health care-reform debate that is not even being considered in the current legislation is medical malpractice reform. Frivolous lawsuits impose billions on the U.S. economy each year. These lawsuits dramatically raise medical malpractice insurance as well as health-care costs for all Americans and cause doctors to practice defensive medicine.

Capping these suits and reforming a broken part of the health-care system that currently allows OB-GYNs to be sued up to 21 years after they have delivered a baby would greatly reduce costs for all Americans.

Health care can be reformed without creating a new big-government program. Empowering small businesses to better provide health insurance and lowering overall costs through medical malpractice reform should be part of the solution.

Stop Obama Care


Nancy Pelosi has unveilved a $900 billion, budget busting, government controlled health care bill that she plans to bring to the House floor this week.

This bill will put additional tax burdens on Americans in an econmy understrain and set up a government run health care program that millions of Americans will likely be forced into, dimishing and even leading to the rationing of care.

My opponent Congressman Maurice Hinchey has long supported big government health care and socialized medicine. He has stated that he strongly supports “the establishment of a national health care system.”

I have been fighting Obama Care for months — hosting a Town Hall Meeting after my opponent refused and writing an Op Ed to local newspapers on the topic.

I need you to keep fighting too. Your donation to our campaign will send a strong message to a liberal Democrat in small town America and Nancy Pelosi that Americans won’t stand for her bill and give up control of our future to Obama Care.

Our liberty and the future of our nation are at stake. Please act today by sending a donation.

Health Care Reform: What’s Needed

With out of control costs and millions of Americans struggling to afford health insurance, health care reform legislation is needed. However, Obama Care will simply make matters worse.

In Congress, these are the principles I’ll fight for to help improve our health care system:

1) Health Care Partnership - enable Small Businesses to form together in coaltions for group buying power so they can have rates that are competitive with corporate plans.

2) Tort Reform - frivolous lawsuites are driving up medical malpractice insurance and costs for everyday Americans and should be capped.

3) Health Savings Accounts -Americans should be allowed to save for their own medical needs through tax free health savings accounts

4) Keeping Your Insurance & Increasing Choices - Americans should be allowed to keep their insurance plan when they lose or change jobs and be allowed to select from a greater pool of insurance providers. Competition will lower costs

5) Tax Credits - Both Small Businesses and invididual Americans struggling to pay for health insurance should be given tax credits to help afford these costs

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Time for a change


Here is another news article about NY Congressman Maurice Hinchey trying to get land protected in Utah. I'm not against protecting the environment but here in the 22nd district of New York we have our own problems going on. We need a representative that is going to be focused on our needs in our district. It's time for a change.


Lawmakers urge Salazar to protect Utah wild lands
By JOAN LOWY (AP) – 9 hours ago
WASHINGTON — Eighty-nine House members sent a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar asking him to protect 9.4 million acres of red rocks lands in Utah while Congress works on legislation.
The letter sent Tuesday also asks Salazar to rescind an agreement reached between the Bush administration and the state of Utah that prevents the Bureau of Land Management from designating new wilderness study areas. The wilderness study designation discourages uses of the land that might alter its natural character.
Rep. Maurice Hinchey, a New York Democrat sponsoring the Utah wilderness bill, said that a consensus has developed that millions of acres within the state should be protected even if there remains disagreement on how to do that.
"It makes sense for the Interior Department to step in and temporarily protect these lands while Congress and state officials sort out the best way to protect these precious acres for this and future generations of Americans to enjoy and admire," Hinchey said in a statement. "These are the very scenic lands that the previous administration hoped to turn into off-road vehicle playgrounds and oil and gas fields.
Kendra Barkoff, a spokeswoman for Salazar, said the department is reviewing the letter.
The bill has 151 co-sponsors, but only seven are Republicans. It is opposed by the Utah congressional delegation, who say decisions on which lands should receive the protective wilderness designation are best made locally.
"Since they can't achieve their goal of locking up millions of acres of western land through an open and transparent democratic process, they're now trying to use back door, undemocratic rules and regulations to lock up public lands," Rep Rob Bishop, R-Utah, said in a statement. "If Congressman Hinchey was serious about protecting lands in Utah, he should try to work with Utahans instead of trying to go around us."
At a hearing before a House Natural Resources Committee subcommittee last month, some witnesses from Utah said the bill would prevent development of the lands, hurting the state's economy. However, former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson and a Utah outdoors equipment maker told the subcommittee that protecting the lands will draw more visitors to the state, boosting the economy.
The red rocks wilderness bill, as the legislation is known, was first introduced in 1989 by the late Wayne Owens, a former Democratic congressman from Utah. Hinchey has been reintroducing the bill every two years since Owen left Congress in 1993.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j08imnWBr9ZvGiTvxOYgxVxHV6PQD9BTDI383

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Hinchey should be focused on NY not Utah


million acres in Utah

By Thomas Burr
The Salt Lake Tribune

Updated: 11/10/2009 02:50:35 PM MST

Related
• Wilderness bill
• Oct 1:
• Red Rock hearing: Agreement on wilderness, but not on how or how much
• Sep 30:
• Some worry wilderness measure could hurt schools
• Sep 29:
• Rocky Anderson to champion Red Rock bill
• Sep 28:
• Advocates: Support growing for wilderness bill
• Utah political elite to fight 'Red Rock bill' in Congress
• Sep 17:
• After 20 years, Red Rock bill gets first hearing in Congress
Washington » Nearly 90 members of Congress want the Interior Department to protect 9.4 million acres of Utah public lands from development while lawmakers consider a measure to set aside the areas as wilderness.
Led by New York Democratic Rep. Maurice Hinchey, the members of Congress wrote to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar on Tuesday asking him to use his "considerable authorities" to protect the millions of acres until Congress can act.
"While there are some differences of opinion on how to protect Utah's remarkably beautiful landscape, there is a consensus that millions of acres within the state warrant wilderness protection," Hinchey said in a statement.
"Given the common belief that much of this land should be safeguarded, it makes sense for the Interior Department to step in and temporarily protect these lands while Congress and state officials sort out the best way to protect these precious acres for this and future generations of Americans to enjoy and admire."
A House Natural Resources subcommittee last month held a hearing on the legislation, which has not come up for a vote in the 20 years it has been introduced. The bill, called America's Red Rock Wilderness Act, would designate 9.4 million acres of public land in Utah as Wilderness, effectively barring new roads, mining or off-road vehicle use.
None of Utah's members of Congress support the legislation, which was first introduced


by late Rep. Wayne Owens. Utah officials who testified said they preferred more smaller scale, local-level solutions to preserving public lands.
Rep. Rob Bishop, a Utah Republican who says the Red Rock bill is an attempted land grab by outsiders, said Tuesday's letter is evidence that supporters of the legislation realize they can't push their "massive one-size-fits-all wilderness" bill through Congress.
"Since they can't achieve their goal of locking up millions of acres of Western land through an open and transparent democratic process, they're now trying to use backdoor, undemocratic rules and regulations to lock up our state," Bishop said. "If Congressman Hinchey was serious about protecting lands in Utah, he should try to work with Utahns instead of trying to go around us."
Hinchey previously joined with more than 70 members of Congress earlier this year in asking Salazar to halt any more oil and gas leases after Salazar delayed 77 such leases in Utah.
The Interior Department did not comment on Hinchey's letter.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13755686

Sunday, November 8, 2009

Doomed to fail



Very interesting Pelosi compared the passage of this legislation against two other Government run programs both which are failing. Is this going to be indicative of this program in the future?

A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi compared the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later.

By ERICA WERNER

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Democratic-controlled House has narrowly passed landmark health care reform legislation, handing President Barack Obama a hard won victory on his signature domestic priority.
Republicans were nearly unanimous in opposing the plan that would expand coverage to tens of millions of Americans who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry.
The 220-215 vote late Saturday cleared the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.
A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi compared the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later.
Obama, who went to Capitol Hill earlier on Saturday to lobby wavering Democrats, said in a statement after the vote, "I look forward to signing it into law by the end of the year."
"It provides coverage for 96 percent of Americans. It offers everyone, regardless of health or income, the peace of mind that comes from knowing they will have access to affordable health care when they need it," said Rep. John Dingell, the 83-year-old Michigan lawmaker who has introduced national health insurance in every Congress since succeeding his father in 1955.
But minority Republicans cataloged their objections across hours of debate on the 1,990-page, $1.2 trillion legislation.
"We are going to have a complete government takeover of our health care system faster than you can say, 'this is making me sick,'" said Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich.
In the run-up to a final vote, conservatives from the two political parties joined forces to impose tough new restrictions on abortion coverage in insurance policies to be sold to many individuals and small groups.
The legislation would require most Americans to carry insurance and provide federal subsidies to those who otherwise could not afford it. Large companies would have to offer coverage to their employees. Both consumers and companies would be slapped with penalties if they defied the government's mandates.
Insurance industry practices such as denying coverage because of pre-existing medical conditions would be banned, and insurers would no longer be able to charge higher premiums on the basis of gender or medical history. The industry would also lose its exemption from federal antitrust restrictions on price fixing and market allocation.
At its core, the measure would create a federally regulated marketplace where consumers could shop for coverage. In the bill's most controversial provision, the government would sell insurance, although the Congressional Budget Office forecasts that premiums for it would be more expensive than for policies sold by private companies.
The bill drew the votes of 219 Democrats and Rep. Joseph Cao, a first-term Republican who holds an overwhelmingly Democratic seat in New Orleans. Opposed were 176 Republicans and 39 Democrats.
From the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada issued a statement saying, "We realize the strong will for reform that exists, and we are energized that we stand closer than ever to reforming our broken health insurance system."
To pay for the expansion of coverage, the bill cuts Medicare's projected spending by more than $400 billion over a decade. It also imposes a tax surcharge of 5.4 percent on income over $500,000 in the case of individuals and $1 million for families.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091108/D9BREBKG1.html