Obamism marches on: Shauna Daly’s new assignment. Charity ends with Obama. ACORN’s national portal.
Shauna Daly, who for about a month was ensconced in the White House Counsel’s Office as research director there, didn’t stay very long in that position. It was announced late last week that Daly was leaving her White House post to become Research Director at the Democratic National Committee.
But DNC, White House, and Congressional Democrats say she was at counsel’s office long enough. Daly did not waste her time in an office that had reams of Bush Administration documents related to such things as the firings of U.S. Attorneys, the use and internal debate over the USA PATRIOT Act, FISA, and the Scooter Libby and Karl Rove investigations, among others.
“She saw everything, and who knows what she was able to scan and pull out on data sticks,” says a Senate Republican Judiciary Committee staffer. “We’ll find out soon enough when we see what the DNC is putting out during [Sen. Patrick] Leahy’s ‘truth committee’ hearings.”
Daly, according to White House staff, was often in her office early and one of the last to leave the Old Executive Office Building, which does not jibe with official White House claims that Daly was not doing much in the office, which was one reason for her leaving.
“She realized that she could do more with all the material she saw outside of the building than inside, where she’d be bound by the rules and legalities of the White House Counsel’s Office. Now she isn’t,” says a DNC staffer who works in the communications field. “She’s good at what she does; her time at the White House means we’ve got a mother load of material that will have Republicans scrambling. At least that’s what we hope.”
OBAMA CHARITY CENTRAL
Lost in the coverage of the Obama Administration’s 2010 budget proposal to limit the tax rate at which taxpayers can take itemized deductions for charitable giving is the administration’s plan to create a government-financed fund that would mitigate losses charitable groups might suffer as a result of the tax increase on charitable giving.
“Obama is telling charities, ‘Don’t worry about the tax increase on your donors, government will be here to make up the difference if you have a down year because of my policies,’” says a Senate Joint Tax Committee staffer. “We’re still trying to figure this one out, because it doesn’t make a heck of a lot of sense.”
Some House Democrat leadership aides believe the fund could be in the hundreds of millions. “We can’t have charities losing desperately needed funds in times like this, because our wealthier citizens aren’t willing to give,” says one staffer in the Speaker of the House’s office. When it was pointed out that the decrease in giving was due to the Obama Administration’s essentially raising the tax on deductible giving, the aide said, “We’re not raising the tax, we’re making it harder for the wealthy to take advantage of a tax write-off.”
That isn’t accurate, however. In Obama’s budget document, “A New Era of Responsibility — Renewing America’s Promise,” the administration outlined a plan capping the tax rate that families with incomes over $250,000 can claim for itemized deductions at 28 percent. Those individuals subject to the 33 or 35 percent bracket who now claim itemized deductions at this rate will would find five to seven percent of their charitable contributions subject to income tax.
For example, a prospective charitable donor in the 35 percent bracket who gives a homeless shelter $100,000 under current law would reduce his income taxes by $35,000.
Under the Obama plan, the donor would only be able to deduct his gift at the 28 percent rate, meaning a $28,000 savings in taxes. This would mean an additional $7,000 in taxes and an almost 11 percent increase in taxes on the donation.
Sources in the Office of Management of Budget report that when the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of 2010, charitable givers in the 39.5 percent tax bracket will be hit with a 19 percent tax on giving.
According to a Senate Democrat aide, who has been briefed on the federal fund to offset charitable losses, the government funds would come with strings attached. “If, say, a Catholic hospital sought and received those funds, it would be required to adhere to federal polices on issues like abortion. Or the hospital could simply not seek the funds to make up the difference,” says the aide.
Several left-leaning nonprofit or community-based groups are seeking $250 million in funds budgeted in the stimulus bill for high-tech or Internet projects, to create what some Democrats in the House and Senate describe as a web portal modeled on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?