Saturday, January 30, 2016

KENNETH S. STEPP, 41ST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT CANDIDATE IN THE NONPARTISAN ELECTION FOR CIRCUIT FAMILY COURT JUDGE.

KENNETH STEPP IS NOT RUNNING FOR UNITED STATES CONGRESS. NO ONE IS SCHEDULED TO BE ON THE BALLOT AS A DEMOCRAT FOR UNITED STATES CONGRESS FOR THE KENTUCKY FIFTH DISTRICT IN 2016. TWO REPUBLICANS ARE RUNNING, AND THERE SHOULD BE A REPUBLICAN PRIMARY THIS SPRING. KENNETH STEPP IS RUNNING IN THE NONPARTISAN ELECTION FOR THE POSITION OF CIRCUIT FAMILY COURT JUDGE FOR THE KENTUCKY 41ST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT. KENNETH STEPP.

Friday, October 24, 2014

AMERICA'S MOST BELOVED VETERANS!

RECENTLY, THE AMERICAN LEGION MAGAZINE RAN AN ARTICLE ON "AMERICA'S MOST BELOVED VETERANS".  THE NAMES OF THOSE TEN VETERANS ARE:
1.  AUDIE MURPHY.
2.  GEORGE WASHINGTON.
3.  THEODORE ROOSEVELT.
4.  ALVIN YORK.
5.  GEORGE PATTON.
6.  DWIGHT EISENHOWER.
7.  NORMAN SCHWARZKOPF.
8.  ROBERT E. LEE.
9  JIMMY DOOLITTLE.
10.  ULYSSES S. GRANT.
      NEXT TIME YOU GO TO THE CHURCH, OR SYNAGOGUE, OR MOSQUE, OR SHRINE, OR TEMPLE OF YOUR CHOICE--OR JUST STAY HOME ON A WEEKEND MORNING, THANK A VETERAN.  NEXT TIME YOU SHOW UP AT A PUBLIC MEETING, THANK A VETERAN.  NEXT TIME YOU GET IN YOUR CAR AND DRIVE FOR MILES TO VISIT A FRIEND OR RELATIVE, WITHOUT HAVING TO GET PERMISSION FROM A GOVERNMENT OFFICE, THANK A VETERAN.  THE LAND OF THE FREE AND THE HOME OF THE BRAVE, THAT'S WHERE WE LIVE--THANKS TO VETERANS LIKE AUDIE MURPHY, GEORGE WASHINGTON, THEODORE ROOSEVELT, ALVIN YORK, GEORGE PATTON, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, NORMAN SCHWARZKOPF, ROBERT E. LEE, JIMMY DOOLITTLE, AND ULYSSES S. GRANT.

Saturday, December 28, 2013

The cost of the sequestration.

Let's Ditch Mitch Luke Johnson Luke Johnson Become a fan . luke.johnson@huffingtonpost.com . Here Are All The Times Congress Screwed Americans This Year In The Name Of Austerity Posted: 12/28/2013 9:19 am EST Share on Google+ . congress austerity . 1,108Share 494Tweet 40Email 1807Comment Get Politics Newsletters: Subscribe .. Follow: Congress, AUSTERITY, Austerity Economics, Austerity Measures, Budget Cuts Congress, Congress Austerity, Congress Budget Cuts, Fiscal Tightening, Politics News . WASHINGTON -- As the year winds to a close, Congress is cautiously celebrating passing a year-end budget that relieves just about a third of the sequestration cuts. But those cuts, along with a slew of other fiscal measures enacted by Congress, amounted to a year of fiscal austerity that took money out of the economy, slowed GDP growth and cut the number of jobs that could have been created. The tightening began on the first of the year, when the "fiscal cliff" deal passed both houses of Congress and was signed by President Barack Obama. While the deal did stop some sharp tax increases that would have put a real drag on economic growth, it allowed the payroll tax holiday to expire, meaning all workers got less money in their paychecks. Predictions made around the time the deal was crafted estimated it would shave between 0.4 and 0.6 percent off of GDP growth in 2013. That deal delayed sequestration cuts for two months, and they began on March 1. The plan mandated $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts until Oct. 1. The cuts damaged the public defender system, stalled cancer research and cut scientific research. The cuts also hit programs for the most vulnerable, including Head Start and Meals on Wheels. The economic effects of these policies are tangible. According to the most recent estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, made in early 2013, sequestration was expected to cost around 750,000 jobs that would have been created or retained if not for the cuts. CBO also estimated that sequestration along with fiscal tightening would cost about 1 ¼ percentage points in growth from the fourth quarter of 2012 to the fourth quarter of 2013. The CBO also estimated that without sequestration, the economy would have been expected to grow faster in 2013 by about 0.6 of a percentage point. Independent research firm Macroeconomic Advisers estimated in October that budget tightening had reduced annual GDP growth by 0.7 of a percentage point since 2010 and raised the unemployment rate by 0.8 percent. Repealing the sequester would create economic dividends. Canceling sequestration would increase third quarter GDP in 2014 by 0.7 percent and increase payrolls by 0.9 million, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate from July. The budget deal signed by President Barack Obama this week replaces about a third of these draconian cuts that were scheduled -- eliminating $63 billion out of an estimated $180 billion in cuts in 2014 and 2015. On Oct. 1, Congress did not pass an appropriations bill, and the government shut down for 17 days. During that time, more than 800,000 federal workers were furloughed without pay, and nonessential federal offices were closed. Congress passed an appropriations bill funding the government at current levels on Oct. 17. Federal workers received back pay, and the government reopened. However, the shutdown had economic costs. According to the White House Council of Economic Advisers, it shaved off an estimated 0.25 percent of annualized GDP growth in the fourth quarter, or about $10 billion. On Nov. 1, food stamp benefits were cut by $5 billion when legislation from 2010 that reallocated funding went into effect. The cut affected 47 million Americans, and reduced the maximum benefit from 11 to 36 dollars, depending on family size. With the cut came a jump in the need at soup kitchens and food banks. The costs to the economy could be more than $5 billion -- Moody's Analytics has estimated that every additional dollar spent on food stamps generates about $1.74 in economic activity. JPMorgan Chase Chief Economist Michael Feroli estimated that the cuts could shave 0.1 of a percentage point off the annual growth rate of the nation's GDP in 2013. Despite the cuts, the economy grew at a relatively fast pace of 4.1 percent in the third quarter of 2013, up from 1.1 and 2.5 percent in the quarters before. However, the growth rate may not reflect true economic activity. As Slate's Matt Yglesias points out, real gross domestic income -- an alternative measure for GDP measuring all incomes of an economy -- grew by a much lower 1.8 percent. Plus, with all of the cuts enacted by Congress, many Americans hardly feel like the economy is getting better. Moreover, the economy remained about 3.1 percent below its potential output in 2013, according to OECD, and about 5 million jobs short of full employment, according to CBO. The cuts will continue into 2014. On Saturday, 1.3 million Americans will lose their unemployment benefits, as Congress failed to extend the benefits before adjourning for the year. Federal benefits tend to kick in after state ones expire, which in most places is 26 weeks. Congress could reinstate the benefits retroactively once it returns at the beginning of next year, but recipients will at least face a lapse. The White House Council of Economic Advisers has estimated that not extending the benefits would cost 240,000 jobs in 2014. Estimates from the Congressional Budget Office and JP Morgan have pegged the cost to GDP growth at 0.2 to 0.4 percent." Next time elect more Demicrats. .

Wednesday, December 25, 2013

MERRY CHRISTMAS

MERRY CHRISTMAS! KENNETH STEPP wishes you and yours a MERRY CHRISTMAS! KENNETH STEPP.

AUDIT THE FED.

AUDIT THE FED! The Congress has the obligation to monitor and supervise the actions of the rest of the Federal Government. Congress passes statutes that define the policy of the Federal government That is the function of the legislative branch of government. How can Congress fulfill its function if it is kept in the dark and does not know what the government is doing? The Fed (Federal Reserve System) including the Federal Reserve Banks) has been loaning out a lot of money lately. But, to whom? Probably, some to Uncle Sam. But how much? The Congress should know who the Fed is loaning your money to, and how much it is loaning to each borrower. I have read allegations that the Fed has been making loans to foreign governments and/or foreign corporations to bail them out. Are those loans that we reasonably expect to have repaid? Are those loans in your and my best interest as taxpayers? Other units of the government regularly get audited. The Fed should be audited too! Kenneth Stepp stands for auditing the Federal Reserve System. Kenneth Stepp.

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

Alison Lundergan Grimes Tied With Mitch McConnell In Senate Race

"Alison Lundergan Grimes Tied With Mitch McConnell In Senate Race The Huffington Post | By Ariel Edwards-Levy Posted: 11/12/2013 12:00 am EST | Updated: 11/12/2013 12:03 pm EST "Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes (D) are running neck and neck in the 2014 Senate race, according to a new poll from the liberal group MoveOn.org. "The survey, conducted by the Democratic firm Lake Research for MoveOn, found McConnell and Grimes each attracting 37 percent of likely Kentucky voters in the general election. McConnell had a commanding 50 percent to 17 percent lead over his primary challenger, tea party-aligned businessman Matt Bevin. "The survey also found that 52 percent of the Kentucky voters rated McConnell unfavorably and 42 percent rated him favorably. Nationally, about 49 percent of Americans view him unfavorably -- a fact that Grimes' campaign hopes will give her a boost. "Publicly released partisan-sponsored polls typically produce slightly better results for their clients than do polls with independent sponsorship. A study of publicly released horse race surveys between 2000 and 2002 found that "polls identified as partisan tended to skew in favor their sponsor about 3 percentage points and against their opponent by roughly the same amount." "While a number of surveys have been conducted this year on the Senate race in Kentucky, all have been by partisan firms or sponsors. A previous Lake Research poll, taken in August for the liberal Public Campaign Action Fund, put Grimes 6 points ahead of McConnell. Two other recent Democratic surveys -- an internal Grimes poll by the Mellman Group in July and an Americans United for Change survey conducted by Public Policy Polling in October -- both gave Grimes a 2-point lead. The Republican firm Wenzel Strategies, meanwhile, found McConnell ahead 8 points in July. "Lake Research surveyed 603 likely Kentucky voters by phone between Oct. 24 and Oct. 29." This time let's Ditch Mitch and elect a Democrat to replace him!

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Ralph Nader explains the deadlock.

"The Congress, that polls show the American people would like to replace in its entirety, has "kicked the can down the road" again, putting off the government shutdown until January 15 and another debt ceiling showdown until February 7. The polls also show, convincingly, that people blame the stubborn Republicans more than the Democrats for the adverse effects of the impasse on workers, public health, safety, consumer spending, recreational parks and government corporate contracts. There is another story about how all this gridlock came to be, fronted by the question: "Why didn't the Democrats landslide the cruelest, most ignorant, big-business-indentured Republican Party in its history during the 2010 and 2012 Congressional elections? (See "The Do Nothing Congress: A Record of Extremism and Partisanship") There are a number of answers to this fundamental political question. First and most obvious is that the Democrats are dialing for the same commercial campaign dollars, which beyond the baggage of quid pro quomoney, detours the party away from concentrating on their constituents' needs, in a contrasting manner with the GOP. Democrats like Rep. Marcy Kaptur (Dem. Ohio) tell me that when the House Democrats get together in an election year, they go into the meetings talking about money and walk out talking about money, burdened with the quotas assigned by their so-called leadership. Last year, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (Dem. Calif.) was reported to have attended 400 fundraisers in D.C. and around the country for her campaigning Democrats. Helping Democratic candidates with fundraising is a major way she asserts her control over them. Over ninety percent of the Democrats in the House defer to her and do not press her on such matters as upping the federal minimum wage, controlling corporate crime, reducing corporate welfare giveaways, reasserting full Medicare for all, diminishing a militaristic foreign policy and other policies reputed to be favored by the Party's Progressive Caucus, numbering 75 Representatives. Instead, the Progressive Caucus remains moribund, declining to press their policy demands on leader Pelosi, as the hardcore Tea Partiers do with their leaders. So when election time comes around, voters do not know what the Democrats stand for other than to save Social Security and Medicare from the Republicans. Former senator and presidential candidate Gary Hart, now living in Denver, said last year that the local Democrats in Denver didn't know what the national Democrats stood for. The 2010 election was crucial for the winners in the state government races who gained the upper hand in redistricting decisions for a decade. That meant more gerrymandered one-party dominated districts. The Republicans won a majority of those gubernatorial and state legislative races and took over the U.S. House of Representatives with Speaker John Boehner (Rep. Ohio) and his curled-lip deputy, Eric Cantor (Rep. Va.). And there is also President Obama's political selfishness. Obama knew that he could not govern with a knee-jerk blocking Republican House of Representatives. Yet he did not provide serious campaign support and progressive policy leadership for Democratic candidates. Consequently he was overcome in 2011 by the Republican demands for sharp cuts in federal budgets serving people, while exempting corporate entitlements from similar cuts, and the spectre of government shutdowns and Republicans in Congress refusing to raise the government's debt ceiling to pay current debts, during his first term presidency. So you'd think that in 2012 President Obama would run arm-in-arm with Congressional Democrats. No way. He not only signaled his "going it alone" approach by turning down a Democrat's request for $30 million from his billion dollar campaign hoard, but he had little interest in campaigning with the local Congressional candidates as he traveled around the country. The House Democrats were dismayed, but kept quiet. So he got the Boehner/Cantor duo for another two years after the 2012 election. That meant another shut-the-government-down don't-lift-the-debt-ceiling imbroglio -- a clash that crowded out all the necessities and the matters of justice that our government is supposed to champion. The greed and power of the Walmarts, the Exxons, the Aetnas, the Lockheed Martins and the rest of the global corporate power structure that has turned its back on taxpaying, American workers and their families remains unchecked by our government. Fast forward to the elections of 2014. No House Democrat believed, until the recent Congressional impasse, that the Democrats would win back the House in 2014. Given that many House-passed Republican votes since 2011 sided with big business, on the wrong side of fair treatment of children, student borrowers, workers, women, consumers, small taxpayers and providing necessary public services, one would think the Democrats should win next year in a slam dunk. Not likely, unless the Republican echo chamber, with its "mad dog" extremists, hand control of the House to the Democrats. From the Nineteen Forties to the Nineteen Nineties, the Republican Party did not behave as badly as today's snarling version of the GOP. Yet the Democrats beat Republicans in most Congressional races. Imagine what Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Baines Johnson would have done with today's crop of Republican corporatists and rabid ideologues. Today's Democrats with very few exceptions are dull, tired and defeatist. They regularly judge themselves by how bad the Republican Party is, instead of how affirmatively good they could be for our country and its politically alienated people. They cannot even muster themselves to battle for a higher minimum wage on behalf of 30 million American workers, just to the level of 1968, inflation adjusted, which is supported by over 70 percent of the people. Neither Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader, nor House Democratic Leader, Nancy Pelosi are really taking this minimum wage fairness issue to the people and directly confronting the Republican Party. Yet they both profess to believe in "catching up with 1968." They just don't believe in themselves enough to generate the focused energy to make it happen. (For those readers interested in letting their members of Congress have an earful, the switchboard is 202-224-3121.) Autographed copies of my book "The Seventeen Solutions: Bold Ideas for Our American Future" are available from Politics and Prose, an independent book store in Washington D.C." You asked for it, you got it. Next time elect more Democrats.

Tuesday, October 01, 2013

What is perhaps most remarkable is that many House Republicans do not find it awkward to send tens of thousands of federal employees home without pay, deny countless services to their constituents, and degrade confidence in the competency of the U.S. government, simply because of a dispute on government funding that their party and legislative body largely failed to take a position on. Rather than exhibit willingness to provide a little more flexibility in light of that rather severe omission, they are insisting on injecting into the legislation an issue that is far more controversial, has nothing to do with the annual funding of government agencies, and is in the jurisdiction of a number of major House committees, none of which include the Appropriations Committee. The backbenchers that have engineered this train wreck may not be embarrassed by their handiwork, but party veterans clearly want no part of it. Perhaps the most telling aspect of the Saturday night debate—which may prove to be one of the most momentous in the modern history of the Republican Party—was the total absence of party leadership. Rep. Rogers was forced to take the floor because, to his obvious discomfort, the legislation had his name on it. But Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader Cantor, and Majority Whip McCarthy were all missing in action. They had done their best to protect their party from this unfolding debacle. They were happy to give the limelight to those who somehow thought this was a good idea. Scott Lilly is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress Next time let's elect more Democrats!