Tsongas HAS GOT TO GO: February 2012

Welcome

Representative Tsongas is NOT one of us!
Most of us that live in the 37 cities and towns that comprise the 3rd Congressional District would love to be in the stratosphere that is the life style of our Representative”.
In the 2010 Election on a Lowell Sun debate, Ms. Tsongas insinuated that she "was a regular person” and attempted to paint her challenger as an elitist. She also indicated her personal involvement in saving money for us taxpayers. She mentioned not taking a raise and voting for a freeze on a congressional pay raise as well as cutting staff expenses by 75 thousand dollars. Her statement seemed not to be in line with the facts.
Between Jan 1st and 30 July 2010, a six month period, Ms. Tsongas had spent $498.897 for her staff, this projects out to $997,794 for the year! In 2009 her staff expenses were $960,829, In 2008 the expense was $898,711. This does not indicate a reduction but rather a slow increase in the cost to operate her office.
She failed to mention that she voted for the congressional pay raise (H413 on June 19, 2009) before she voted against the automatic pay adjustment in 2010.
On a personal front Ms Tsongas’s income is $174.000 for a congressional salary. Based on Financial Disclosure reports a public record, her net worth is listed as between $1,845,054 and $7,999.999 which ranks her 66th RICHEST in the House of Representatives. Her assets includes her three properties, a small Condo at 52 Lawrence Drive Unit 411M, in Lowell, rarely used other than an election cycle, valued at $119.600. Her primary residence, at 26 Auburn St., Charlestown Ma. Purchased in 2003 for $760,000 with an accessed value of $602,300. And finally her property at 455 Shore Rd. Chatham Ma; valued at $2,440,800.This is the individual who supports Occupy Wall Street and is in fact a FAT CAT!
We personally hope Ms. Tsongas makes and spends whatever she desires, that is the America as it was and should be, not the America she and her fellow elitist elected officials want to make it for us and exclude themselves.

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Tsongas on taxes

Tsongas supports Taxing the “Rich”

FITCHBURG -- U.S. Rep. Niki Tsongas was in Fitchburg on Monday to meet with local business executives in a new area she would gain if re-elected in November.
Mayor Lisa Wong and state Rep. Stephen DiNatale were present at the meeting, held at cybersecurity firm mZeal. Also at the meeting were representatives of about a dozen manufacturing firms, including David Garrison, CFO of Micron Integrated Technologies in Fitchburg; Alfred Cotton, Jr., director of corporate communications for Nypro Plastics of Clinton; and Tom Gramaglia, vice president of strategy and business development for iRobot of Bedford. Fitchburg is currently part of Massachusetts' First District, represented by U.S. Rep. John Olver, who is not seeking re-election.

The group talked Monday about ways the federal government can aid Massachusetts businesses and communities. Tsongas said municipalities in the state require a support system, and she sees one of her tasks as helping communities advance their vision of themselves.
"I don't think a member of Congress can create that vision," Tsongas said. Garrison from Micron said his firm has a problem finding potential manufacturing employees who understand basic math and science. "Scientific literacy is not there," he said.
Garrison said he believes there is a cultural stigma that manufacturing work is repetitive, a view he said is false, and that stigma discourages people who are scientifically literate from seeking manufacturing work. Tsongas said the general public underestimates how much manufacturing still takes place in Massachusetts, and as a result, too many students fail to enroll in vocational
classes that would make them better suited for manufacturing.
"We have this feeling that we're not making anything, but we actually are," Tsongas said. DiNatale received a chorus of agreements when he asked the business leaders if they have
trouble making decisions to expand their operation because of a lack of predictability and reliability in federal policy. When the business leaders complained that China is using its taxpayers' money to subsidize its exports, Tsongas said she has voted against most free-trade agreements that have come her way. She said subsidies and tariffs are policy choices that will allow American companies to develop industries like solar panels instead of letting the Chinese control that industry. Wong said Massachusetts needs to figure out what industries it has a comparative advantage in so companies can focus on those industries and not ones where other regions will have a natural advantage.
Tsongas stressed that for the time being, the area is still served by Olver and she still has to beat whoever wins the Republican nomination for the seat. After the meeting, she told representatives from the Sentinel & Enterprise that there is a big debate over the proper role of the federal government, and she believes it is to actively help society move in the direction it envisions. She also took positions in favor of raising taxes on the rich, passing a jobs bill, combating sexual assault in the military, and maintaining postal deliveries on Saturdays.
Read more: http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/ci_19960246?source=rss_viewed#ixzz1nhhRO3Dt

"The top 10 percent income earners pay about 70 percent of federal income taxes," says Will McBride of the Tax Foundation. "The bottom 50 percent of tax filers pay almost no federal income tax. They pay about 3 percent of federal income taxes." And for many of the people who pay no taxes, the government also allows tax credits, which end up providing refunds.
"Close to a hundred billion in checks sent out by the IRS (go) to folks who have no tax liability," McBride said. "So the IRS is becoming a spending agency."
Arthur Brooks, head of the American Enterprise Institute, put it this way: "Half of the people who don’t pay anything in federal income taxes -- about half of them pay less than zero."
But Brooks says the system is tilted even more toward those in the middle class and below because they also get services from the federal government. As a result the per capita value of government spending exceeds what those individuals pay in federal taxes.
"Right now about 70 percent of Americans take more out of the tax system than they put into it, according to the Tax Foundation," Brooks said."That's something that should really alarm a lot of Americans."

Tsongas On Pac Money

Tsongas’s Opinion of Citizens United versus Federal Elections

Our representative is up in arms over the ability of a corporation to donate money, as an individual, as was the decision of the U.S. Supreme court . Our Representative has no problems in accepting HUNDREDS of Thousands from Unions, who have been acting in this manner for her entire political career.

Here is her statement on the Supreme Court Decision;

WASHINGTON, DC– March 10, 2011 – Today, Fifth District Congresswoman Niki Tsongas reintroduced legislation to prevent any federal funds received by corporations, private companies, or other entities from being used for lobbying or in political campaigns. Tsongas’ legislation, entitled the No Taxpayer Money for Corporate Campaigns Act was first introduced last February in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Tsongas released the following statement regarding the reintroduction of this legislation in the 112th Congress.

“Last year’s Supreme Court ruling, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, allowed for unlimited amounts of corporate money to be spent influencing the outcome of elections. We quickly saw the consequence of this ill-conceived decision, when a record-shattering $4 billion was spent during the 2010 election cycle, which included an unprecedented influx of corporate funds being used for political purposes.

“The transparency of our electoral process was further undermined last month, when the House of Representatives voted to eliminate the voluntary Presidential Election Campaign Fund. This public financing system was created specifically to ensure Presidential candidates wouldn't have to rely on corporate and special interest money to finance their campaigns. During debate of this
measure on the House floor, I offered an amendment that would have banned corporations, contractors, or other entities that receive taxpayer dollars from using those funds to contribute to a Presidential campaign but it was blocked by limitations Republicans placed on the amendment process.

“These significant blows to attempts at limiting the influence of money on our electoral process come at a time when unparalleled taxpayer funds have been committed to shoring up our nation’s financial institutions. Additionally, billions of federal dollars are awarded annually to defense contractors, private companies, and other entities.

“The legislation that I am reintroducing today explicitly states that no federal funds may be used for lobbying activities or to support or oppose any political candidate. Companies like AIG, Goldman Sachs, and Halliburton should not be able to take taxpayer dollars and use them to support political candidates who do their bidding, or oppose those that don’t.

“Democracy cannot function when special interests can drown out the influence of the average voter. It would be further inhibited when citizens have their money spent on political causes they do not support. While the effort to completely reverse the Supreme Court’s wrong-headed ruling is one that will take years, I believe that this commonsense legislation addresses one of its most harmful consequences.”

Another case wherein Representative Tsongas words are betrayed by her actions; here is the money she receives from groups acting exactly like the Supreme court allowed corporations to act.

Tsongas on Earmarks

Sunday, February 26, 2012

TSONGAS RATINGS

During the 2010 election cycle varied groups have rated Representative Tsongas on key issues.
To determine if YOU are truly being represented look through this listing, find your area of concern and review the rating from the organizations key in those specific issues.

Tsongas costing YOU-Staff Expenses

As a steward of our tax dollars Tsongas is woefully inadequate, Each year she spends MORE and has accomplished less for the 5th ( soon to be 3rd ) Congressional District. Each year in office her expenses related to staff increase, more than the costs of living adjustment;

http://www.legistorm.com/member/879/Rep_Niki_Tsongas_MA.html

Tsongas Rating On Illegals

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Unemployment- While Tsongas has been in office

Representative Tsongas Repeating The Unemployment Lie;

The last three years have seen some of the highest unemployment rates reported since the Great Depression. The official rate moved from 5 percent in January 2008 to a high of 10.1 percent in October 2009, and a current rate of 8.6 percent. It rests 3 points above the 1948-2007 average of
5.6 percent. Unfortunately, the reality is even worse than these numbers suggest.
To stay in office, there is one thing President Obama and Representative Tsongas should hope for: an improvement in the employment picture before the 2012 elections.

This is because of the way the Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates the official unemployment rate. Conceptually the unemployment rate seems simple - it is just the number of unemployed divided by the number of people in the labor force. However, deciding whom to include in the labor force is a complicated task. In the official unemployment rate, the Bureau of Labor Statistics measures the labor force as those who are employed or who have actively looked for work within the last four weeks. As a consequence, the official rate excludes workers who have decided to drop out of the labor market altogether because economic conditions have discouraged them, or for other reasons. The official rate also ignores those who settle for part-time work since they are unable to find a full-time job.

So, the way in which we calculate unemployment might mask the actual weakness of our economy. Paradoxically, if pessimism about the economy drives workers to stop looking for work or to settle for a part time job, it could actually cause the official unemployment rate to fall because of a bad outlook.

To compensate for this problem, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has published an alternative measure of the unemployment rate based on an analysis of the Current Population Survey, a household survey. This measure, referred to as the "U-6 rate", includes those that would still like a job and have looked for work in the last twelve months, not just the last four weeks. It also includes people who opted to work part-time even though they would like full-time jobs. Unfortunately, this measure is not cited nearly enough.

The U-6 rate offers a clearer picture of how precarious a situation we are in. It has moved from 8.8 percent in December 2007 to 17.4 percent in October 2009 and 15.6 percent in November 2011. Today the gap between the U-6 rate and the official rate is 7 percentage points, meaning that the number damaged by the weak job market is almost twice what the official number would suggest. At the start of the recession, there was only a 3.8 percentage point difference.

By comparison, during the 2001 recession, which lasted only a few months, the difference grew by a meager 0.9 points from 3 percent to 3.9 percent.

For a historical perspective, we obtained data on these two measures going back to 1994. The evidence reveals the gap between the official rate and the U-6 rate has averaged less than 4 percentage points, and has not exceeded 5 percentage points except for the first month in 1994. October 2008 is the first time that the difference exceeded 5 points, and since then has averaged around 7 points. Currently more than 5.7 million Americans have been unemployed for more than 27 weeks, or an astounding 43 percent of all unemployed. The tremendous increase in long-term unemployment is one factor driving the unprecedented disparity between the official measure of unemployment and the alternative measure. Long-term unemployment has a damaging psychological impact on workers' willingness to keep searching for work and motivates them to accept part-time work. More importantly, however, long-term unemployment has a real impact on their ability to find a job because skills erode and employers tend to recoil from large gaps on a resume.

Monday, February 20, 2012

Tsongas, One Of Us.?

Representative Tsongas is NOT one of us!

Most of us that live in the 37 cities and towns that comprise the 3rd Congressional District would love to be in the stratosphere that is the life style of our “Representative”.

In the 2010 Election on a Lowell Sun debate, Ms. Tsongas insinuated that she “was a regular person” and attempted to paint her challenger as an elitist. She also indicated her personal involvement in saving money for us taxpayers. She mentioned not taking a raise and voting for a freeze on a congressional pay raise as well as cutting staff expenses by 75 thousand dollars.

Her statement seemed not to be in line with the facts.

Between Jan 1st and 30 July 2010, a six month period, Ms. Tsongas had spent $498.897 for her staff, this projects out to $997,794 for the year! In 2009 her staff expenses were $960,829, In 2008 the expense was $898,711. This does not indicate a reduction but rather a slow increase in the cost to operate her office.

She failed to mention that she voted for the congressional pay raise (H413 on Jun 19, 2009) before she voted against the automatic pay adjustment in 2010.

On a personal front Ms Tsongas’s income is $174.000 for a congressional salary. Based on Financial Disclosure reports a public record, her net worth is listed as between $1,845,054 and
$7,999.999 which ranks her 66th RICHEST in the House of Representatives. Her assets includes her three properties, a small Condo at 52 Lawrence Drive Unit 411M, in Lowell, rarely used other than an election cycle, valued at $119.600. Her primary residence, at 26 Auburn St., Charlestown Ma. Purchased in 2003 for $760,000 with an accessed value of $602,300. And finally her property at 455 Shore Rd. Chatham Ma; valued at $2,440,800.

This is the individual who supports occupy wall street and is in fact a FAT CAT!

I personally hope Ms. Tsongas makes and spends whatever she desires, that is the America as it was and should be, not the America she and her fellow elitist elected officials want to make it for us and exclude themselves!

Tax the Rich...Which is Anyone

We should be sick and tired of the whole group of millionaires telling us we somehow created a 15 trillion dollar debt, We're somehow racists, prejudice, or hate mongers, simply because we want to keep most of the money we earned, to take care of OUR OWN!
ANYONE who makes a few more dollars is “rich”, when in fact the “rich” pay more taxes then the restof us combined and
49.5% of the Americans pay NO…NO Federal Income Tax.
And again we are made to somehow feel responsible for NOT paying enough to help… When Tsonas is the 66th richest person in congress and most of the elected officials in Washington D.C are MILLIONAIRES, and who’s benefits packet most of us would die for!