PDA

View Full Version : Conservatives say cut AARP's federal funds



SnakebyteXX
02-07-2006, 09:17 PM
By Jim Abrams, Associated Press Writer | February 7, 2006

WASHINGTON --Conservative groups urged Congress on Tuesday to end all federal funds to AARP, saying it was wrong for the seniors group to be receiving tens of millions in taxpayer dollars at the same time it was campaigning against administration policies.

"AARP does not have the right to expect taxpayers to foot the bill to help advance its political agenda," said John Carlisle of the National Legal and Policy Center, author of a paper on federal funding to the seniors organization.

David Sloane, senior managing director of government relations at AARP, said the paper was a "sour grapes" response to the coalition's failure to advance President Bush's proposal to privatize Social Security, which AARP opposed.

Sloane said AARP participates in competitive bidding for all federal grants and has shown good results in its federally backed program to find employment for low-income seniors. He said financing for the foundation that runs such programs is totally separated from other AARP activities, including political lobbying.

Carlisle said AARP's 2004 annual report showed $878 million in revenue. In the same year it received about $83 million from the federal government through a variety of grants.

Of that, $75 million came from a Labor Department job-training program for low-income seniors. The AARP also won grants to help seniors file their taxes and to avoid Medicare or telemarketing fraud.

"An organization as affluent as AARP does not need public money to pursue such charitable missions," Carlisle wrote in his paper.

Carlisle's organization said in a statement that AARP aggressively pushes a liberal political agenda and last year spent at least $10 million to block Bush's attempt to introduce private retirement accounts to the Social Security program.

A letter sent to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., asking Congress to cut off funding for AARP was signed by the heads of several conservative groups, including Americans for Tax Reform, 60 Plus, American Conservative Union and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste.


web page (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/02/07/conservatives_say_cut_aarps_federal_funds/)

Fran Crimi
02-07-2006, 11:47 PM
I think the most fascinating thing about that article is that there was never a mention of which "conservative groups."

Don't you find that rather odd???

Fran

Drop1
02-08-2006, 05:00 PM
I don't think the AARP,should be receiving any Fereral funds,just as I don't believe any religeous organization should be receiving any money from the government. There is a growing wave towards larger Churches;those with two thousand,members our more on a given Sunday. California leads the Nation,with 14 churches,and Texas follows with 12. This is a trend more suited to todays consumer mentality that has made the big box markets sucsesful. I think the elderly should expect a program of support for health,and a minimum sum of money each month that guarantees their final years can be lived in dignity. For the Seniors that already have the ability to finance their own health program,and live in a dignified fashon,I say pull the plug on government aid.

Deeman3
02-08-2006, 05:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I don't think the AARP,should be receiving any Fereral funds,just as I don't believe any religeous organization should be receiving any money from the government. There is a growing wave towards larger Churches;those with two thousand,members our more on a given Sunday. California leads the Nation,with 14 churches,and Texas follows with 12. This is a trend more suited to todays consumer mentality that has made the big box markets sucsesful. I think the elderly should expect a program of support for health,and a minimum sum of money each month that guarantees their final years can be lived in dignity. For the Seniors that already have the ability to finance their own health program,and live in a dignified fashon,I say pull the plug on government aid. <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue">I agree. We should pull the plug on the AARP plus any religeous groups that are getting assistance beyond their tax exempt status. This should go doubly for the National Public Radio and other news/entertainment groups. If you can't stand on your advertising dollars, you don't need to be a subsidised service. It is shameful that the NPR claims to be supported by your dollars (voluntary contributions) and free nof advertising when they have nothig but sponsors mentioned every ten minutes. We have enough "public servants" (sociatial leaches) on the dole right now in our national and local governments. </font color>


Deeman

wolfdancer
02-08-2006, 06:11 PM
As an AARP member.....while the idea is appealing, that there is an org. that will speak up for the senior citizens....the reality is that it seems more like an ins. corp at times. I appreciate the discount offer at Disneyworld, but a liberal Democrat in Fla?....what are my chances of survival?
The great savings on auto ins. for my two cars, came in at an unbelievable $600 over my Farmer's rate.
I don't think they should be funded...unless they are providing a necessary service, at a cost below the Republican favored, Haliburton Pork Packaging co.....

nAz
02-09-2006, 09:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I
<font color="blue">I agree. We should pull the plug on the AARP plus any religeous groups that are getting assistance beyond their tax exempt status. This should go doubly for the National Public Radio and other news/entertainment groups. If you can't stand on your advertising dollars, you don't need to be a subsidised service. It is shameful that the NPR claims to be supported by your dollars (voluntary contributions) and free nof advertising when they have nothig but sponsors mentioned every ten minutes. We have enough "public servants" (sociatial leaches) on the dole right now in our national and local governments. </font color>

Deeman <hr /></blockquote>

Het D , I hear this a lot but from what I understand NPR only recieves about %2 (not much) from goverment funding the rest comes from their member stations.
Not sure how much AARP gets but if it's less then %5 that should not be a problem even though all that money could be used to fund the war in Iraq for maybe 20 mins. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Deeman3
02-09-2006, 12:06 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote nAz:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Drop1:</font><hr> I
<font color="blue">I agree. We should pull the plug on the AARP plus any religeous groups that are getting assistance beyond their tax exempt status. This should go doubly for the National Public Radio and other news/entertainment groups. If you can't stand on your advertising dollars, you don't need to be a subsidised service. It is shameful that the NPR claims to be supported by your dollars (voluntary contributions) and free nof advertising when they have nothig but sponsors mentioned every ten minutes. We have enough "public servants" (sociatial leaches) on the dole right now in our national and local governments. </font color>

Deeman <hr /></blockquote>

Het D , I hear this a lot but from what I understand NPR only recieves about %2 (not much) from goverment funding the rest comes from their member stations.
Not sure how much AARP gets but if it's less then %5 that should not be a problem even though all that money could be used to fund the war in Iraq for maybe 20 mins. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> NAZ,

Good, if you are right, they should not mind giving up that pitance so we don't have t support them. </font color>

Deeman

pooltchr
02-09-2006, 05:58 PM
Since we are talking about cutting unnecessary funding, don't forget PBS...the liberal tv version of NPR. Now that we have the history channel, the learning channel, the discovery channel, C-span, the cartoon channel, and a hundred other "educational" channels who seem to do pretty well without government funding, do we really need to subsidize Big Bird????
Steve

nAz
02-10-2006, 02:44 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> Since we are talking about cutting unnecessary funding, don't forget PBS...the liberal tv version of NPR. Now that we have the history channel, the learning channel, the discovery channel, C-span, the cartoon channel, and a hundred other "educational" channels who seem to do pretty well without government funding, do we really need to subsidize Big Bird????
Steve <hr /></blockquote>

Hmmm you guys will do anything to cut any kind of education funding for children. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

seriously though didn't you watch Sesame Street as a child... it's good for children, i do not see the harm in a show like that at all or even frontline or nova.

The conservatives in this country have that Republican fund raiser Kenneth Tomlinson as the current (CPB) Chairman. he is working hard to turn PBS into Rush L. style programing.
btw he appointed Patricia Harrison, the one time Republican National Committee Chairman and conservative ideologue as president of the CPB.
arghhh your wish will come true soon enough /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Gayle in MD
02-10-2006, 05:59 PM
Kind of makes you wonder if republicans just sit around all day saying, "What good thing can we destroy next?" Doesn't it?

Gayle in Md,.

ceebee
02-10-2006, 09:50 PM
AARP is just like any other GOOD IDEA. Somehow, some SOB will make a mess of it. I have belonged to AARP for 13 years now. There is no Oldie Goldie Coalition there, it's one Liberal SOB weilding his power. They will have to screw this guy into the ground, he is so crooked. Horace Deets is a 1st Class, 2-faced MoFo.

Our elders made this country, they deserve to be taken care of when necessary. I would like to have some future assistance, because I too added my part. Someday the youth of this country will want that too.

The crooked members of your government make sure they &amp; their families are taken care of for their entire lifetime. They let the physicians cheat the government with their $100 plus dollar doctor visit &amp; terestrial costing medicines. The government doesn't work 8 hours a day, ever, but they make sure they are taken care of for their lifetime. They get a million times more than they deserve. The tell you &amp; I, they are serving us, they are sdervicing us alright.... pass the vaseline.

Their priorities are all messed up. The citizens are much more valuable than the governement.

No money for AARP, that's OK with me... that SOB running the association is a crook. God I hate to candy coat things

pooltchr
02-11-2006, 08:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote nAz:</font><hr>
Hmmm you guys will do anything to cut any kind of education funding for children. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif
<font color="red"> I am all for education...just not particularly fond of the brainwashing the government funded educational probrams promote. </font color>

seriously though didn't you watch Sesame Street as a child... it's good for children, i do not see the harm in a show like that at all or even frontline or nova.
<font color="red"> I LOVE COOKIE MONSTOR!! When it started, PBS offered an alternative that didn't exist anywhere else. Now we have hundreds of alternatives, none of which are supported by my tax dollars. I think the value of PBS has diminished to a point where it is no longer needed. If PBS did not exist, do you not think Sesame Street would still find a home somewhere? </font color>

The conservatives in this country have that Republican fund raiser Kenneth Tomlinson as the current (CPB) Chairman. he is working hard to turn PBS into Rush L. style programing. <font color="red"> All the more reason you and I should agree on this point. Why would you want your tax dollars to support any programming with a political agenda under the disguise of "educational television"? </font color>
btw he appointed Patricia Harrison, the one time Republican National Committee Chairman and conservative ideologue as president of the CPB.
arghhh your wish will come true soon enough /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif <hr /></blockquote>
Steve

Sid_Vicious
02-11-2006, 11:29 AM
""An organization as affluent as AARP does not need public money to pursue such charitable missions," Carlisle wrote in his paper."

Let us not fail to forget the huge profits for the big oil companies after getting a 10B tax cut! Them SonsofaB!tches snumb'd their noses at even attended meetings from the legislative branches to ask why the huge money gains. If either the AARP or big oil is dinged here, just which one do you think is more needy? An 80 year old grandmother or a rich oil dude? Let's put this into true perspective and retract that tax withdrawal from this country's general fund...sid

eg8r
02-13-2006, 05:48 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Let us not fail to forget the huge profits for the big oil companies after getting a 10B tax cut! <hr /></blockquote> Let us not forget this has nothing to do with the subject. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

eg8r
02-13-2006, 05:51 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm you guys will do anything to cut any kind of education funding for children.

seriously though didn't you watch Sesame Street as a child... it's good for children, i do not see the harm in a show like that at all or even frontline or nova.
<hr /></blockquote> I agree Sesame Street is good for children, but I don't agree that it should be subsidized by the government.

Throwing money at education has been proven unsuccessful. Just take a quick look at Atlanta. It costs more money per student to go to public school in Atlanta than anywhere else in the US. The kids popping out of schools in Atlanta are hardly cracking out of the bottom 5 in the entire country. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Money is not always the only answer.

eg8r

nAz
02-13-2006, 05:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> All the more reason you and I should agree on this point. Why would you want your tax dollars to support any programming with a political agenda under the disguise of "educational television"? </font color>

Steve <hr /></blockquote>

Steve sorry but I do not see the political agenda maybe i am too biased to see it. either way when a society (government)cuts funding for education (programming) and the arts that should be a tell tale sign that it is on a decline, IMO.

nAz
02-13-2006, 05:55 PM
and i agree with you whole heartily just throwing money at education (or any program) is not the answer there has to be accountability by all parties involved but to simply cut the flow of money to PBS programs can not be the answer. i think we need to see if these programs are helping or hurting our society. After all these years i think the latter is true, and remember not everyone has cable TV.

pooltchr
02-13-2006, 06:17 PM
nAz,
There is more than enough money being spent on education...it's just not being spent wisely. PBS has outlived it's usefulness, and we need to cut unnecessary spending. This is a perfect example.
As for the arts, there is too much govermnent money going there as well. Who was the artist a few years ago doing the cross in urine thing? Yeah, that's what I want my tax dollars supporting. Locally, our city wastes so much money on "art" it is crazy. We spent thousands a few years ago when we built a new coliseum for "art". It came in the form of a dozen bushes lining the enterance that were cut into round forms to represent balls.
The "arts" only benefit those who attend the functions...not the entire community. It shouldn't be government's responsibility to pay for things that don't benefit the majority. I think my tax dollars can be put to better use.
Steve