Bachmann Bulletin: House Votes to Fund ACORN Over Bachmann Objections

Statement

Bachmann Bulletin: House Votes to Fund ACORN Over Bachmann Objections:

Despite the fact that just last week, criminal charges were filed against ACORN and its employees both in Nevada and Pennsylvania, the House of Representatives voted to give that organization continued access to millions of your tax dollars.

I was gravely disappointed by this vote. Congress is far too cavalier with your money. The threshold for spending your tax dollars should be high and an organization that wants to gain access to federal funding should have to earn it. After all, this is your hard-earned money, and it is a privilege - not a right - for an organization to use it.

In my opinion, an organization that is and has been under repeated investigation by several prosecutors across the nation - and that's both Republican and Democrat prosecutors - has not earned the right to use your money. The evidence against ACORN and its employees abounds:

Larry Lomaz, the registrar of voters in Las Vegas believes that 48% of ACORN's filed voter registration forms are "clearly fraudulent."

Nevada's Attorney General, Catherine Cortez Masto has stated that ACORN's training manuals "clearly detail, condone and …require illegal acts."

And, Fred Voight, deputy election commissioner in Philadelphia, told CNN last year that ACORN's problems have "been going on for a number of years."

Congress has been spending money without regard to the consequences for the taxpayers of today or of tomorrow. If Congress can't draw the line with funding for organizations investigated for criminal activities in more than a dozen states, where will it draw the line?

Debate over Socialized Medicine is Expected This Summer:

The Obama Administration is expected to announce its health care reform proposal in the next week or so, and the Democrat leadership in Congress has indicated that it hopes to pass it by the end of June.

Regrettably, all indications are that the proposal will lead the United States to a single-payer, government-run system. Not only do I have serious concerns that this will mean rationed care, especially for the most vulnerable; reduced consumer choices; and an inefficient and ineffective delivery of the very best medical care in the world; I am also quite concerned about the fiscal implications of socialized medicine as well.

Take Medicare as an example. When it was created in 1965, it was said to be a backstop. Benefits were limited and retirees actually paid a significant portion of the costs. That year, Medicare was estimated to cost $3.1 billion by 1970. But it actually came in at $6.8 billion. Today, it costs $455 billion and the costs continue to rise substantially.

The healthcare reform debate is an important one, and I hope that it will not get caught up in soundbite politics. As the Wall Street Journal put it in an editorial today, "This one is about whether to turn 17% of the U.S. economy entirely and permanently into the arms of the government." What Congress does will have far-reaching consequences for our economy and our freedoms, and I hope that Congress gives these issues serious reflection.

Source