That's the republicans for you. They want smaller goverment and less goverment intrustion in their lives until it comes to abortions, who's sleeping with you and other moral issues. Sheesh.
I'm pretty pro-life myself and even I think this over reaches by a large margin. More and more the Republicans paint themselves into a corner with their big government conservatism.
You know I really don't want to think that all Republicans are heartless, cruel slaves to their corporate masters but the ones in charge just keep proving me wrong. *sigh* The only thing we can do is keep informing people as to what's going on and hope for the best.
When I was on welfare not that many years back (in Oregon) the standard was that you weren't allowed to have over $50.
*Technically* I was in violation for the time between when I got my benefits and when I used them to pay for the bills.
The way welfare and food stamps are set up is *really* insane on a lot of details like this.
As I recall, there have been a number of studies that showed that the measures to "prevent cheating" cost far more than cheats ever did. And they mostly dehumanize the recipients as well.
Wait, how could they even enforce that? If/when I get a tax refund, it goes into my savings account, which I withdraw from as needed for groceries/rent/bills/etc. So how does one prove that I didn't buy goods or services with tax money? WHY ARE WE WASTING TIME WITH THIS.
Well, see, that's the thing. As hbruton and shsilver point out above, this is rank hypocrisy -- the Repubs constantly bellow that they want smaller government, and also constantly do shit like this. And, yeah, this one's completely unenforceable (and, if you read the story, you'll see the IRS doesn't want to enforce it). It has no chance of becoming law -- zero, none. All it is is a sop to the religious right, and to those who need to have power over women.
Because it's a means of intimidating people out of getting abortions. "Get an abortion, and we'll fine you for spending taxpayer money on it. And there's no way to prove you didn't, because money is fungible."
someone tell me, please please please, let this be a joke. This is the party of small government, yes? Less government intrusion into our lives? Hello?
I guess they only want Big Brother when it suits them.
"(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), EBT cardholders may opt to have up to $20 per month accessible via automatic teller machine or receive up to $20 cash back from a vendor."
Actually, this is simply because they want vendor or ATM transactions curbed. Notice it says nothing about any limits on getting cash from a financial institution withdraw (in this case, Wells Fargo is the bank that backs EBT, which is why they don't charge withdraw fees to EBT holders)
I am appalled. This can't possibly pass because Roe v. Wade guaranteed a right to privacy, but the ideas that are coming out of the GOP machine this year are just plain vile.
No, it *can* pass. It *might* eventually be declared unconstitutional.
Remember, they keep passing anti-porn measures (mostly *supposedly* aimed at child pornography) that anyone with a brain could tell would be thrown out by the Supreme Court.
And eventually they were. But in the meantime, if folks like the adult entertainment groups hadn't been able to get injunctions passed, the law was in force.
Unfortunately, nothing prevents Congress from passing laws that are unconstitutional. So they keep doing shit like this.
This is the direct result of all the people who said, "I can't vote for a Democrat because they're not being progressive enough." Well, the Teahadist base bloody well did come out and vote, and now we're all reaping the consequences.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: there may or may not be someone I want to vote FOR, but there's damn well always someone I want to vote AGAINST.
Unfortunately, the flip side of this is that the Democrats will continue to become more and more conservative. Look at our president, who has actually now gone beyond Dubya in engaging America in yet another war without any Congressional action whatever...
What worries me here is exactly what I've BEEN saying about some of the crazier Republicans who've been speaking out... they encourage the craziness in hopes that they can slip other measures that don't seem so Draconian by comparison thru in their place... like how no one noticed the language in this bill at first because of the "forcible rape" language.
I frequently manage to get my health care expenses as a deduction on my federal taxes...I don't have to itemize what those expenses are.
Are they planning to put a box on tax questionnaires that ask if any claimed expenses pertaining to an abortion???
Or, does this only kick in if you get audited? And if yes, I wonder if that means that people who do claim medical expenses as deductions are going to be more likely to be audited.
Would I, as a woman over 50 who claims no dependents not have to deal with this invasive questioning?
As usual, the right wing religious nut jobs are trying to legislate their morals, and doing so without caring AT ALL what the ramifications of their laws are going to be.
I just discovered there's a chance I'm an Irish citizen. Having options would be nice...
Theology's got nothing to do with it. Well, it does. It's being used as a smoke screen. It's about power, and about fear.
That said, you being over 50 and no dependents and generally filing a 1040EZ or at worst an -A? Especially with the aforementioned budget cuts on IRS enforcement? Not a chance of an audit. Unless -perhaps- you put your legal name to too many anti-teahadist (I like that word) statements and start having an effect...
Irish citizenship on the face of it... not as great as it used to be by itself. But that would make you an EU citizen... dunno the ramifications of working in a different country in the EU than what your passport says, but might be worth checking into. If Finland weren't so freaking cold...
That makes perfect sense because, you know, smaller... uh... government... and... uh... Okay, wait. They also want to cut funding to the IRS for collecting unpaid taxes, and that will help balance the budget by... uh... That'll save money by collecting less income... and then devoting even more resources so they can do... abortion audits... uh... No, no. Wait...
Okay, I give up. I can't even come up with any convoluted logic that would cause this to make any sense at all.
I don't know where I got this originally, but I think that whoever first claimed that Republicans want government small enough to climb into a woman's vagina was on to something.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
They are nucking FUTS.
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
*Technically* I was in violation for the time between when I got my benefits and when I used them to pay for the bills.
The way welfare and food stamps are set up is *really* insane on a lot of details like this.
As I recall, there have been a number of studies that showed that the measures to "prevent cheating" cost far more than cheats ever did. And they mostly dehumanize the recipients as well.
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Word
no subject
I guess they only want Big Brother when it suits them.
*goes and hides*
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/03/so_thats_what_they_mean_by_the.php
no subject
no subject
"(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), EBT cardholders may opt to have up to $20 per month accessible via automatic teller machine or receive up to $20 cash back from a vendor."
Actually, this is simply because they want vendor or ATM transactions curbed. Notice it says nothing about any limits on getting cash from a financial institution withdraw (in this case, Wells Fargo is the bank that backs EBT, which is why they don't charge withdraw fees to EBT holders)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
Remember, they keep passing anti-porn measures (mostly *supposedly* aimed at child pornography) that anyone with a brain could tell would be thrown out by the Supreme Court.
And eventually they were. But in the meantime, if folks like the adult entertainment groups hadn't been able to get injunctions passed, the law was in force.
Unfortunately, nothing prevents Congress from passing laws that are unconstitutional. So they keep doing shit like this.
It's been happening for *decades*.
no subject
I've said it before and I'll say it again: there may or may not be someone I want to vote FOR, but there's damn well always someone I want to vote AGAINST.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Are they planning to put a box on tax questionnaires that ask if any claimed expenses pertaining to an abortion???
Or, does this only kick in if you get audited? And if yes, I wonder if that means that people who do claim medical expenses as deductions are going to be more likely to be audited.
Would I, as a woman over 50 who claims no dependents not have to deal with this invasive questioning?
As usual, the right wing religious nut jobs are trying to legislate their morals, and doing so without caring AT ALL what the ramifications of their laws are going to be.
I just discovered there's a chance I'm an Irish citizen. Having options would be nice...
Down with theocracies!
no subject
That said, you being over 50 and no dependents and generally filing a 1040EZ or at worst an -A? Especially with the aforementioned budget cuts on IRS enforcement? Not a chance of an audit. Unless -perhaps- you put your legal name to too many anti-teahadist (I like that word) statements and start having an effect...
Irish citizenship on the face of it... not as great as it used to be by itself. But that would make you an EU citizen... dunno the ramifications of working in a different country in the EU than what your passport says, but might be worth checking into. If Finland weren't so freaking cold...
(no subject)
no subject
Okay, I give up. I can't even come up with any convoluted logic that would cause this to make any sense at all.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
. . . . .
no subject
People complain about the perceived nanny state. The R's seem to want to create the nunny state.