NRC's Jaczko: "right now I intend to continue to serve out my term"

??? Didn't he just announce his resignation?

From The Hill (5/23/2012):

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Gregory Jaczko acknowledged Wednesday that it could be a while before he steps down as head of the agency, despite announcing plans to resign this week.

And he declined to outright dismiss the possibility that he could be re-nominated to a second term as chairman if his successor is not confirmed by next year.

“Right now my focus is on nuclear safety and I have been privileged and honored to serve in this position, and right now I intend to continue to serve out my term,” Jaczko said at a press conference in Charlotte, N.C., the chairman’s first public appearance since announcing his plan to step down.

“If by that time, a successor has not been found, then I’ll deal with those issues at that time.”

The comments came a day after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) suggested that Jaczko could be re-nominated if his successor is not confirmed by June 30, 2013, when the chairman’s first term ends.

“We hope to have a replacement before that. But if we don’t, Greg will be there for the duration,” Reid told reporters in the Capitol Tuesday. “And if something doesn't work out, he can always be re-nominated.”

Pressed by reporters Wednesday for clarification of his remarks, Jaczko added: “I announced my resignation contingent on a successor being nominated and confirmed. And until that time I intend to continue to serve as chairman.”

Asked if he intends to serve out his term, Jaczko said, “It depends on the process whether a successor is nominated and confirmed. So if that happens before the end of my term, then I would leave at that time.”

The White House has said President Obama hopes to nominate Jaczko’s replacement “soon.” But Reid’s comments Tuesday cast doubt on how quickly the nomination will move through the Senate.

The Senate is also grappling with the re-nomination of Republican NRC Commissioner Kristine Svinicki, who faces opposition from Reid and other top Democrats.

Reid has been a vocal defender of Jaczko, his former aide, amid allegations that he bullied NRC staff.

Republicans have added the allegations to the long list of reasons they dislike Jaczko’s leadership on the commission. Other reasons include Jaczko’s decision to close out a review of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository and the chairman’s opposition to recent approvals of new nuclear reactors.

Jaczko again defended his tenure at the NRC Wednesday and denied that his resignation had anything to do with a pending inspector general report examining his leadership on the panel.

“Any inspector general report had nothing to do with this decision,” he said.

The chairman repeated the assertion that he made his decision in order to give the president and the Senate time to name a successor.

“The timing I thought was appropriate for the president and the Senate to find a replacement for me,” he said.

Jaczko declined to offer suggestions for his replacement.

“I’m not involved in the process of identifying a replacement,” he said.

Tweet

NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko to Resign as Obama Nominates Successor

Washington Post hints at Jacko having lost support from Senator Harry Reid.

From Washington Post (5/21/2012):

Nuclear Regulatory Commission chief Jaczko resigns

The nation’s chief of nuclear safety announced his resignation Monday after a turbulent three-year tenure that included allegations of bullying and misogyny in the workplace and of providing potentially false testimony at a congressional hearing last year.

The departure of Gregory B. Jaczko, an advocate of tough safety standards at nuclear reactor sites during eight years on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, caps almost a year of concerns about his leadership of the NRC, which he has chaired since 2009.

It also signals that he had lost the support of his former boss, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), a fierce opponent of efforts to store nuclear waste at Nevada’s Yucca Mountain, a key concern of the nuclear agency. In a statement Monday, Reid thanked Jaczko for his service, noting his leadership of the agency in the aftermath of the Japanese tsunami and partial meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear plant.

“I am confident whomever replaces Chairman Jaczko will share his commitment to protecting the safety of the American people over the interests of a single industry,” Reid said.

Several congressional aides had said that Jaczko would resign only if Reid signaled that he could no longer give him political support. Aides reached Monday confirmed that diminishing support for Jaczko on Capitol Hill was a factor, but they also cited Jaczko’s desire to move on amid the allegations.

The White House can now nominate a replacement who could be paired with a Republican NRC member who requires confirmation for a new term as commissioner.

While Jaczko’s own flaws might have been a key factor behind his resignation, some supporters said he also fell victim to the nuclear power industry and its allies in Congress who were happy to seize upon a reason to question his leadership. A voice for tighter safety standards, Jaczko frequently found himself voting as the sole dissenter in key commission votes.

Jaczko’s tenure included the awarding of the first new nuclear construction permit in three decades and the U.S. response to the Japanese tsunami and nuclear reactor crisis.

“This is the right time to pass along the public safety torch to a new chairman who will keep a strong focus on carrying out the vital mission of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,” Jaczko said.

(Full article at the link)

Tweet

Reid Plans Christmas Eve Vote on Health Care Bill

What a hard-working Congress. After passing $1.1 trillion spending bill on Sunday, the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is planning the vote on the Senate health care bill on Christmas Eve. Makes you proud, doesn't it?

Reid plans Christmas Eve passage of health bill
(12/17/09 MSNBC via Newsvine)

"WASHINGTON - Senate Democratic leaders have laid out an ambitious timetable for passing the health care bill on Christmas Eve. But if they're successful with their strategy, the vote that matters most and sets the stage for final passage would happen on Monday.

"To be successful, the plan assumes Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., will have three key elements before the weekend: the bill's cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office, the legislation completely written and available to the public, and assurance from all 60 members of his caucus that they will vote for the package.

"As of this writing, none of those things has materialized."

If they manage to pass this piece of you know what, what a wonderful Christmas present for the health care lobby! For taxpayers, let's forget Christmas, there's nothing to be cheerful about.

According to Rasmussen Report on December 14, 56% of U.S. voters are now against the health care reform plan being crafted by the Obama administration and congressional Democrats. 40% of the voters are in favor. More importantly, however, 46% now strongly oppose the plan, compared to just 19% who strongly favor the plan. Also, according to Scott Rasmussen, "63% of senior citizens oppose the plan, including 52% who strongly oppose it."

Rasmussen Report also reports that unprecedented 71% of the U.S. voters are angry at the federal government, including 46% who are very angry.

But no matter how much the voters are against the government's health care reform, how angry they are at the government, they don't get to express their displeasure until 2010 election.

Besides, I still remember what happened in September/October 2008: people were dead-set against the $700 billion bank bailout bill (something like 99 to 1 against), but the Democratic Congress passed it anyway (those who opposed were Republicans). And what happened to those Democrats in November election? Nothing. Almost all of them got elected back.

99% of poll respondents at Fox News are against the government raising debt ceiling, Zero Hedge reports. They will raise it anyway, and give themselves a nice raise as an aside.

As long as 1% of population is for it, Congress will pass any and everything. Health care bill, debt ceiling bill, defense bill, what have you.

To add insult to injury, the overburdened taxpayers were lectured by President Obama the other day that unless the health care bill gets passed, the federal government will go bankrupt. (I also remember how he threatened the general public with "catastrophe" unless Congress passed his so-called stimulus bill.)

First, your government is already broke, Mr. President, as you already admitted back in May. Second, in case you don't know yet, an increasing number of Americans (voters, not the political class) will cheer if your government goes broke and stops spending. It would make a very nice Christmas present if you stop spending, for a change.

Tweet

Senate Health Bill Gives Louisiana $300 Million

not $100 million. Vote-buying? Hell no, it is business as usual.

This is a piece of news from 2 days ago:

The $100 Million Health Care Vote?
(Jonathan Karl, ABC News The Note)

"What does it take to get a wavering senator to vote for health care reform?

"Here’s a case study.

"On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section increasing federal Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster.”

"The section spends two pages defining which “states” would qualify, saying, among other things, that it would be states that “during the preceding 7 fiscal years” have been declared a “major disaster area.”

"I am told the section applies to exactly one state: Louisiana, the home of moderate Democrat Mary Landrieu, who has been playing hard to get on the health care bill.

"In other words, the bill spends two pages describing would could be written with a single world: Louisiana. (This may also help explain why the bill is long.)

"Senator Harry Reid, who drafted the bill, cannot pass it without the support of Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu.

"How much does it cost? According to the Congressional Budget Office: $100 million."

The ABC article has the actual section (Section 2006 of the Senate health care bill).

And now? Did it work? Sure it did. In another sneaky vote done on the Saturday evening (8 PM EST), the bill had just enough votes (60, super-majority) to move to debate. Louisiana, thanks to Ms. Mary Landrieu, would receive not $100 million but $300 million:

Landrieu defends state funding in heath bill
(11/21/09 Politico Live Pulse) [emphasis is mine]

"Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu defended a provision in the health bill that would send $300 million to her state, saying it was not the reason she will vote in favor of moving the bill forward. Insiders questioned whether the money was dropped in as a sweetener to win her vote."

"“I’m proud to have asked for it and I’m proud to have fought for it and I will continue to. That is not the reason I am moving the debate," Landrieu said, adding that the entire Louisiana congressional delegation and Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal support the provision."

[Well, who wouldn't? Free money for them.]

""And, in typical Louisiana fashion, Landrieu corrected reports, based on a Congressional Budget Office estimate, that the provision would cost $100 million. In fact, she said, it will bring home Louisiana $300 million."

$300 million to buy her vote, which was really, very, truly, absolutely critical in securing the Saturday's vote to move the bill to debate. The vote was 60 to 39, and Reid needed all of 60 votes.

Louisiana, by the way, is suffering from budget shortfall partly due to its ever-expanding state payroll. Under the Republican governor, as the state revenue has decreased, the state payroll increased by 3%, with the largest job gain in the higher incomes. (For more, read this news from February this year.)

I wonder what has been promised to the other wavering Democratic Senator, Ms. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas.

Tweet

Senate Health Care Bill Is Bigger than House Bill

and probably contains just about everything they wished for all along.

Not to be outdone by Pelosi, Harry Reid has unveiled his 2,074-page health care "reform" bill. Not to be discouraged by the sheer size, I've started peeking in. The Table of Contents alone constitutes 14 pages.

This bill is supposed to reduce the federal deficit. How? By sucking up the money from you, the taxpayers. So the government may or may not reduce the deficit which has suddenly become important (even Obama mentioned it), but you can be sure it will cost you more, as that's where the money for the government comes from.

The following is taken from the Table of Contents of the bill (I found the link to the entire bill from CNN). It looks like a list of revenue sources to fund this monstrosity of a "reform". [My quick find is in the square bracket. I will add as I read more.]

TITLE IX—REVENUE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A—Revenue Offset Provisions

Sec. 9001. Excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage.
[Tax equal to 40% of "excess benefit", which is defined as any monthly benefit in excess of 1/12 of $8500 for self-only plan, 1/12 of $23000 for coverage other than self-only.]

Sec. 9002. Inclusion of cost of employer-sponsored health coverage on W–2.
Sec. 9003. Distributions for medicine qualified only if for prescribed drug or insulin.

Sec. 9004. Increase in additional tax on distributions from HSAs and Archer
MSAs not used for qualified medical expenses.
[IRS codes are modified to increase the tax from 10% to 20% on HSAs, 15% to 20% for Archer MSAs.]

Sec. 9005. Limitation on health flexible spending arrangements under cafeteria
plans.
Sec. 9006. Expansion of information reporting requirements.

Sec. 9007. Additional requirements for charitable hospitals.
[If they fail to qualify, they will have to pay $50,000 tax.]

Sec. 9008. Imposition of annual fee on branded prescription pharmaceutical
manufacturers and importers.
[If the sales receipt is less than $5 million, 0% of the receipt is taxable. More than $5 million but less than $125 million, 10%. More than $125 million but less than $225 million, 40%. More than $225 million but less than $400 million, 75%. Over $400 million, 100% of the receipt is taxable. They call it "annual fee", but it is an excise tax.]

Sec. 9009. Imposition of annual fee on medical device manufacturers and importers.
Sec. 9010. Imposition of annual fee on health insurance providers.
Sec. 9011. Study and report of effect on veterans health care.
Sec. 9012. Elimination of deduction for expenses allocable to Medicare Part D
subsidy.
Sec. 9013. Modification of itemized deduction for medical expenses.
Sec. 9014. Limitation on excessive remuneration paid by certain health insurance
providers.
Sec. 9015. Additional hospital insurance tax on high-income taxpayers.
Sec. 9016. Modification of section 833 treatment of certain health organizations.

Sec. 9017. Excise tax on elective cosmetic medical procedures.
[Botox tax is back! Cosmetic procedures are taxed at 5%. What's "cosmetic" anyway? It is a procedure that: "is not necessary to ameliorate a deformity arising from, or directly related to, a congenital abnormality, a personal injury resulting from an accident or trauma, or disfiguring disease". (Is aging considered "disfiguring disease"? I'm thinking about Pelosi's botox and Biden's hair transplant.)]

Just remember, whatever added cost is to these entities - hospitals, insurance companies, medical device manufacturers, you will end up paying as those costs are passed on as higher price tags for their goods and services.

Tweet

Health Care "Reform": They Will Own It

House Speaker "un-American" Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader "evil-monger" Harry Reid think they have the votes on health care "reform" that has so divided the country.

Pelosi and Reid Tell President: We Have the Votes; President Wants Bill Passed Soon (9/8/09 ABC News)

"While White House spokesman Robert Gibbs today refrained from telling reporters whether President Obama in his speech Wednesday night will set a deadline for passing health care reform, sources tell ABC News that in his private meeting with Democratic congressional leaders this afternoon the key word was urgency.

"The president told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that it is important for them to pass health care reform bills soon, the sources said.
"Both leaders told the president that despite the difficult rough and tumble of the legislative process in the last few weeks, they are optimistic that both the House and Senate can pass health care reform legislation.

"What will be in the bill remains an open question, though after the meeting, Reid told reporters that “we're going to do our very best to have a public option or something like a public option before we finish this work.”

The key word is urgency? The president wants to have these "reform" bills passed urgently for... what? Why because I say so! (If there is a reason, no one is saying.)

That probably means Democrats will pass the health care "reform" bills on their own, a strict partisan vote. As Reid indicated, the bill will probably include all the contentious sections - public option, extensive power to IRS (Section 141 , Section 245, Section 431, Section 453 of H.R. 3200), extensive power to an unelected Presidential appointee (Health Choices Commissioner, Section 141 of H.R. 3200), end-of-life care (Section 1233 of H.R. 3200), penalty/surtax for people without insurance (Section 401 of H.R. 3200); big pharma companies will be happy with their deal with the White House, no doubt. Oh, one more thing: Congress will be exempt from the "reform".

And one last thing: intrusive health care information technology (computerizing everything), the bulk of which was already signed into law with hardly any restraint (because it sneaked in in the stimulus bill in February), will no doubt be spearheaded by a dynamic Indian duo of Information Czar and Technology Czar. If the cash for clunkers program is any indication of the government idea of information technology in the 21st century, good luck to all of us. We will need it aplenty.

Democrats and the president will own it, if they ram the health care "reform" through Congress.

(Did "health care crisis" crash the stock market and plunge the whole world into a severe recession last fall? Maybe it did... Oh wait, it was "global warming" that did it, didn't it? Or was it "school crisis"?)

Tweet

Reid's Town Hall "Evil-Mongers" and a Little Kitty Laughs

Not to be outdone by the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's "protesters are un-American", the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is calling town hall protesters "evil-mongers".

Reid: Protesters are 'evil-mongers' (8/13/09 The Hill's Blog Briefing Room)

"Town hall protesters are "evil-mongers," says Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)

"Reid coined the term in a speech to an energy conference in Las Vegas this week and repeated it in an interview with Politics Daily.

"Such "evil-mongers" are using "lies, innuendo and rumor," to drown out rational debate, Reid said.

""It was an original with me," Reid said of the term. "I maybe could have been less descriptive," he said, adding that "I doubt you'll hear it from me again."

"Nevertheless, Reid worked in the word one more time during the interview.

""I feel I haven't done anything to embarrass [my children]," Reid joked. "Except maybe call somebody an evil-monger.""

I was looking for an article that would make me laugh so that I could use this cute little gif animation, and now I've found the above. Good. And here's a kitty I found at Market Ticker.

What else can you do at this point, other than to laugh?

I simply do not understand the psychology of a person who calls his fellow Americans "evil-mongers", and is seemingly proud of the term he created.

And at the local town hall meeting in my area, people who were shouting down and drowning the legitimate concerns and opinions were, guess who? The supporters of the health care "reform" as proposed by Mr. Reid's Party. So much so that the Congressman who was conducting the town hall meeting mistook, at least initially, them as "opponents". After a particularly loud applause and shouting in support of what he just said, the Congressman thought the noise came from the opposition and admonished the audience for "not allowing the rational discussion". (He is not quite known as the sharpest guy in town, for sure.)

Tweet