A wise old Lakota-Sioux Woman

My photo
The old photo to your left is an important one:Chief's Red Cloud and Sitting Bull. (Update: a fellow blogger notified me and corrected the Warrior next to Red Cloud is American Horse. Also see picture of American Horse in full headress at bottom of this blog) I'm a Lakota-Sioux ,born and raised in Central Wyoming on the Arapho/ Shoshone Rez. My wisdom comes from the school of hard knocks,and the paths I choose to take. Along with the advice and stories from my elders, my road has lead me here.

Friday, February 27, 2009

More History and contemporary Info blog


Share/Save/Bookmark Everyone who is on the side of the Native American and their needs, their injustice's and lives for the past 500 years, needs to click on the header of this post.
And follow up by looking at my other past posts about John McCain and a few Senator's and see what they are up to, to steal the very lands the government put them on in the years of the Indian wars. Now have a desire for the coal, uranium, and to crowd them yet again on their land. To commit geonicide to the likes of the Navajo to relocate them onto the hazardous waste dumps that are causing the illness, cancer, with radioactive pools located close to the schools and the houses the elders are forced to live in.
These sites have all the truth's and history of what the white man has done to the Native American's. McCain and his Senator buddies in this modern time are following along the crimes so they can get rich! Please go to their site and read!

Saturday, February 21, 2009

legend of Crazy Horse This is way cool!


Share/Save/Bookmark I have been hunting for this song ever since 1981 after I split up with a loser and he cleaned me out of everything cept a spoon, a coffee cup,the bottom sheet and the bed. Oh yea, my dog and my Grandpa's shotgun also. I lost track of time through the years and couldn't remember who sang it. J D Blackfoot is I believe the one who sang it first. If you got about 20 minutes [thats how long the song is] it's well worth it. If you do listen to it, thank you and enjoy!

Russel Means tells of the Lakota Sovereignty and what it means for his people


Share/Save/Bookmark Russel Means tells of the sovereignty. How the Tribe took back their freedom, their lands;and why. And Americans didn't come to help. But people from Europe came amd seen the wind and offered to put up the 'windmills',And solar power because of the amount of sun that shined upon their lands. The video is very interesting and inlightening to watch,I pray for them that the Europians don't have the tongues of the lizard.' Lakota.....Has a nice ring to it, the country of Lakota.



I pray for them that they will beat John McCain in his determination to destroy more of the Navajo land with Nuclear power plants. All Native American's should go with sovereignty, take back their lands, Do as the Lakota do...you could light up all the North American country and maybe all the Native American babies that were taken and adopted out worldwide can come home to their roots

Experts from the wounded knee massacre


Share/Save/Bookmark Philip F. Wells
Interpreter for General Forsyth
"I was interpreting for General Forsyth… The captured Indians had been ordered to give up their arms, but Big Foot replied that his people had no arms. Forsyth said to me, ' Tell Big Foot he says the Indians have no arms, yet yesterday they were well armed when they surrendered. He is deceiving me. Tell him he need have no fear in giving up his arms, as I wish to treat him kindly…' Big Foot replied, 'They have no guns, except such as you have found. I collected all my guns at the Cheyenne River Agency and turned them in. They were all burned.' They had about a dozen old-fashioned guns, tied together with strings – not a decent one in the lot…."

Joseph Horn Cloud
Lakota
"While this was going on, the same officers said to the Indians, 'I want you all to stand in a rank before the officers… I want the same number of soldiers to stand in front of the Indians and take the cartridges out of the guns and cock them and aim at their foreheads and pull the triggers. After this you will be free.' Some of the Indians were getting wild at such talk and some said, 'Now he sees that we have nothing in our hands, so he talks this way.' Others said, 'We are not children to be talked to like this.' A man cried out:'Take courage! Take courage!' Big Foot spoke up, 'Yes, take courage. There are too many children and old people.'"

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Native American-- Indian Justice


Share/Save/Bookmark What happens here stays here!
If you are entering Indian country do you leave your rights behind?

The answer is YES!

You May or may not be aware that each time you cross from Pechanga Parkway onto the Casino you are essentially leaving US governed territories. Or for that matter, any Native Reservation. Oh you didn't know! Well you should, and moreover you should be able to read what rights you are losing before you make that decision.

When you cross the border anywhere from the US there is a large sign telling you clearly that you are now crossing into another country and you are essentially governed by a different set of laws. When you step onto Casino property you are also leaving the US and you should read the following stories which may make you think twice before you do it again.

OP Blog
"Anonymous said...
Isn't it funny how they use the laws to suit them?...my Aunt was gambling at the Casino and 2 tribal girls got in a fight and threw their beer mugs at each other..one of the beer mugs crashed into my Aunts head...the Casino wouldn't even let the police come into the building...we all had to go outside in the street..the Casino wouldn't even offer to pay for any medical..and as we were waiting outside for the police...they snuck the 2 tribal girls out and said that they were banned from the Casino...and by the way...we were 7 Star players at the time and they totally blew us off..people should know that they have no rights inside these Indian Casino's...and now it sounds like even the cops have no rights...they didn't shoot them because they were Indians minding their own business...they were causing trouble and shooting guns..quit using the race card..."

Extracts taken from an article, "Some learn Indian justice the hard way".California tribes enjoy the same immunity from civil suits as that granted to foreign countries.By Stephen Magagnini -- Bee Staff Writer

"If you get into a car accident with a tribal employee on tribal business, are injured at an Indian resort or casino, or are fired without just cause, you can't sue the tribe in California court. If you're owed money in a business dispute or are sexually harassed, you can't sue, either.The tribes alone determine civil justice in Indian territory because, as sovereign nations, they enjoy immunity from civil suits -- the same immunity granted to states and foreign countries."
These are just a couple of instances. Feel free to post your thoughts.
One suggestion is:
"When you cross the border anywhere from the US there is a large sign telling you clearly that you are now crossing into another country and you are essentially governed by a different set of laws."
Do you think you should know what your rights are when you visit Pechanga or any indian Casino?

My rant: The same NA'S in control of the casino's are slowly ripping their own tribe apart! Native American's can be brutal even to each other, so when you cross that line, be careful. If they ask you to leave and point to a door, take that door..If you have belongings in a room, tell them and they will go get them for you. Just stay outside and wait. As for the cops, only the Native American cops have juristion and the FBI.
The Native's carry alot of rage for all the injustice's that have happened to their Elder's and all the way from the 1700's to today. When you look at any given race, they stand out at maybe second from the top of being the most whipped.
Be watching for my blog on some really serious act's of injustice to the Native's happening in today's world.like this one:

Today New York State has a black Democratic Governor, David A. Paterson. He has just signed an illegal document authorizing the destruction of the existing economies of eleven Ongwehonwe communities in the state. It is obvious the Americans are the big bullies they’ve always been since King Henry VII issued the “Cabot Charter” in 1496
More in my next blog.....

Bury my heart at wounded knee....


Share/Save/Bookmark Thomas H. Tibbles
Omaha World Herald
"Nothing I have seen in my whole… life ever affected or depressed or haunted me like the scenes I saw that night in that church. One un-wounded old woman… held a baby on her lap… I handed a cup of water to the old woman, telling her to give it to the child, who grabbed it as if parched with thirst. As she swallowed it hurriedly, I saw it gush right out again, a bloodstained stream, through a hole in her neck." Heartsick, I went to… find the surgeon… For a moment he stood there near the door, looking over the mass of suffering and dying women and children… The silence they kept was so complete that it was oppressive… Then to my amazement I saw that the surgeon, who I knew had served in the Civil War, attending the wounded… from the Wilderness to Appomattox, began to grow pale… 'This is the first time I've seen a lot of women and children shot to pieces,' he said. 'I can't stand it'…. Out at Wounded Knee, because a storm set in, followed by a blizzard, the bodies of the slain Indians lay untouched for three days, frozen stiff from where they had fallen. Finally they were buried in a large trench dug on the battlefield itself. On that third day Colonel Colby… saw the blanket of a corpse move… Under the blanket, snuggled up to its dead mother, he found a suckling baby girl."

Rahm Emanuels 'Rent' by Dick Morris


Share/Save/Bookmark RAHM'S 'RENT' IS JUST THE TIP OF ETHICS ICEBERG

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published in the New York Post on February 17, 2009



News broke last week that Rahm Emanuel, now White House chief of staff, lived rent- free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate. But this is only the tip of Emanuel's previously undisclosed ethics problems.

One issue is the work Emanuel tossed the way of De Lauro's husband. But the bigger one goes back to Emanuel's days on the board of now-bankrupt mortgage giant Freddie Mac.

Emanuel is a multimillionaire, but lived for the last five years for free in the tony Capitol Hill townhouse owned by De Lauro and her husband, Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg.


During that time, he also served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - which gave Greenberg huge polling contracts. It paid Greenberg's firm $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008. (Emanuel's own campaign committee has also paid Greenberg more than $50,000 since 2004.)

To be fair, Greenberg had polling contracts with the DCCC before - but each new election cycle brings its own set of consultants. And Emanuel was certainly generous with his roommate.

Emanuel never declared the substantial gift of free rent on any of his financial-disclosure forms. He and De Lauro claim that it was just allowable "hospitality" between colleagues. Hospitality - for five years?

Some experts suggest that it was also taxable income: Over five years, the free rent could easily add up to more than $100,000.

Nor is this all that seems to have been missed in the Obama team's vetting process. Consider: Emanuel served on the Freddie Mac board of directors during the time that the government-backed lender lied about its earnings, a leading contributor to the current economic meltdown.

The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency later singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for "failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention." In other words, board members ignored the red flags waving in their faces.

The SEC later fined Freddie $50 million for its deliberate fraud in 2000, 2001 and 2002.

Meanwhile, Emanuel was paid more than $260,000 for his Freddie "service." Plus, after he resigned from the board to run for Congress in 2002, the troubled agency's PAC gave his campaign $25,000 - its largest single gift to a House candidate.

That's what friends are for, isn't it?

Now Rahm Emanuel is in the White House helping President Obama dig out of the mess that Freddie Mac helped start.

The president's chief of staff isn't subject to Senate confirmation, but his ethics still matter. Is this the change that we can depend on?

My thoughts: Just how in the hell do I get this kind of position? Who do I have to lay with to get this rich? And lastly but most important, was it really worth it to have a reputation of a crook and in general sleezebag?
This is more than likely the reason he wants to take away our gun rights too, so he doesn't get shot for being such a lowdown crook!

Monday, February 16, 2009

Check out this video of Harry Reid


Share/Save/Bookmark

This man was elected to such an important position in congress, along with Pelosi they are like a train wreck. When they jumped on the Stimulas Package it was like children in a candy store. I can just see them in that closed room with locked doors so the Republican's couldn't get in and have any. And Pelosi can't get it right, she knows kind of what candy she bought, but forgot what quanity of each kind, and the wrong flavors. What the hell are people thinking when they go to vote anyway?

H.R.45 gun ownership rights just filed in the House!


Share/Save/Bookmark Hide your guns!

Gun ownership rights are under 'stealth' attack. While Congress and the public have been obsessed with the 'Spendulus Bill', three things have occurred that should make every gun owner fearful. The items are H.R. 45 introduction, confirmation of Eric Holder as Attorney General and the government medical records data base that is mandated in the stimulus bill. Let me explain.

First, H.R. 45 was filed in the House of Representatives by Rep Rush, Bobby L.[IL] on January 6, 2009. This bill will impose severe restrictions for licensing on gun ownership. This anti gun bill requires that all new guns be licensed. The bill goes retroactive after two years. What this means is that two years after the passage of this bill, all firearms in your possession must be registered. This will not just apply to new gun purchases.

Second, Eric holder was confirmed as Attorney General. Eric Holder has a very anti gun record. He supported the District of Columbia’s handgun ban and has argued the second amendment to the Constitution does not protect an individual's right to firearm ownership. Also, Eric Holder has supported national handgun licensing and mandatory trigger locks.

Third, sections 13101 through 13434 of HR 1
will set up the infrastructure to computerize the medical records of all Americans in a government-coordinated database. This database will contain all records of medical and psychiatric treatment. This will include what drugs you have been prescribed. Why is this worrisome? Under the NICS Improvement Act, 150,000 veterans have already been unfairly stripped of their gun rights by the government. These rights were removed without a court hearing. Now, we will all be susceptible to this tactic.

Sunday, February 15, 2009

McCain trying to dump nukes on the Navajo lands again!


Share/Save/Bookmark
The truth well told independant web news article:
Who's that nuking at my door?
Navajo vice president tours energy facilities in France

Copyright © 2009
Gallup Independent
By Kathy Helms
Diné Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — Navajo Nation Vice President Ben Shelly is in Paris this week to look at renewable energy and the recycling of nuclear fuel.

Sherrick Roanhorse of the Vice President’s Office said Shelly is one of nine tribal leaders invited by the International Institute for Indigenous Resource Management in Denver. “The trip is purely educational. It’s to educate tribal leaders about energy policy, energy technology, and it’s to make the tribal leaders aware of energy projects.

“The United States currently does not recycle spent fuel rods by the United States’ 104 reactors,” Roanhorse said.

According to its Web site, the Institute and Areva — the world leader in nuclear power — organized a series of site visits to Areva energy facilities in France for a tribal delegation from the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, Osage Nation, and Navajo Nation.

Also in the delegation are representatives of the Council of Energy Resource Tribes and Sinte Gleska University in Mission, S.D. The site visits are intended to further inform tribal leadership on the wide range of energy and sustainable development issues that already are the focus of national and international energy and climate policies and programs, the announcement states.

Areva has manufacturing facilities in 43 countries and a sales network in more than 100. The nuclear giant has a front-end division that deals with uranium ore exploration, mining, concentration, conversion and enrichment, nuclear fuel design and fabrication.

The company also designs and constructs nuclear reactors, while its back-end division specializes in the treatment and recycling of used fuel and cleanup of nuclear facilities. It also has a transmission and distribution division that provides systems and services designed to transport and distribute electricity from the power plant to the final user.

The Arizona Legislature is considering House Bill 2623, to add a renewable energy standard. Under the bill, nuclear energy would be considered renewable energy. The “Renewable Energy Policy” would include tax credits and incentives relating to the production and distribution of solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, nuclear, hydro generation, agricultural waste and landfill gas power.

Resources Committee Chairman George Arthur, who was unaware of the vice president’s trip or that it was being paid for out of the division’s budget, said, “That’s interesting, because I’m getting my education right here on Navajo with people that are party to some of these discussions and I don’t have to travel very far to get good information on renewable energy like wind power and solar energy. It’s just next door to us.

“As far as nuclear interest is concerned, I’m kind of puzzled that one particular leadership should be having to travel abroad to expand on the industry or to be educated in respect to nuclear development when that in itself has been very devastating to our own Navajo people. I, for one, took the initiative to put forth a legislation that I assume the Navajo Nation leadership upholds and will uphold in respect to the banning of nuclear development, either mining or processing activities.”

Budget and Finance Committee Chairman LoRenzo Bates also said that the Navajo Nation has spoken on the uranium issue “and before any possibility of that being considered, it most definitely has to be brought back to the Nation for consideration. But given the lack of any further revenue outside of the casinos, outside of Desert Rock that has yet to become a reality, a president may end up looking at some sort of involvement with uranium.

“But up until then, that president cannot be beating around the bush. A president has to come out and let the people know that this is what’s being considered. This back-room tactics doesn’t cut it with the Navajo people. At some point there will be a president that’s going to have to deal with the matter.”

Roanhorse said the trip was just a fact-finding trip.

“Renewables is one answer. It’s not the whole answer, but it’s one answer to economic development,” Roanhorse said. “What’s driving our whole energy policy is just to try to develop what we have, as well as bring more jobs to our people, and we’re looking at different avenues.

“But we’re not building a nuclear plant. We’re not discussing it, we’re not thinking about it, and it’s not on our agenda because the Navajo Nation Council and the Navajo Nation as a whole oppose uranium mining and milling. It’s the law of the land. We follow that.”

When asked whether the Nation was looking at selling uranium to a foreign entity, Roanhorse said, “I can’t answer that. There’s no talks of uranium mining or anything of that nature. It’s too premature to talk about uranium mining or future nuclear facilities.” He said the group is looking at biomass — the burning of wood fuels — and wind energy, and that the vice president did tour a nuclear recycling fuel site.


My rant:

Why does McCain think that the best place to do his dumping is on Native land? His projects have destroyed so much of the land, and the people are herded all over the Rez, some have been herded into living across the street from where a waste dump is still so hot that the children and eldery are sick from it. The Native school ground! RADIOACTIVE!

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Kick Ass and take names Rep. Manzullo!


Share/Save/Bookmark

Monday, February 9, 2009

Senator Thune and the tax cut for the american people


Share/Save/Bookmark Sen. John Thune [R-SD]: Mr. President, as many of my colleagues have already noted, the jobs numbers today were very bleak and should cause great concern for all of us as we look at steps we can take to get this economy growing again. But that is why the CBO report that came out yesterday also is so troubling because it indicated the Democratic proposal, the stimulus plan before us, would create as few as 1.3 million jobs--as many as 3.9 million, to be fair, but as few as 1.3 million jobs. Well, a trillion dollars is a terrible price to pay for a bill that may create as few as 1.3 million jobs over, I might add, a 2-year period.

It also went on to say, the CBO report did, that it would reduce the GDP growth in the outyears. So not only does it create potentially a very small amount of jobs--1.3 million over a 2-year period--but it also diminishes the amount of GDP growth we would experience in later years.

Now, if it, in fact, does create only 1.3 million jobs, if this trillion dollar plan--again, all based on borrowing from future generations--does create as few as 1.3 million jobs, if you do the arithmetic on that, if you spend $1 trillion, and you only create a little over a million jobs, that is $800,000 per job. Try and think about how you can convince your constituents back in your home States about the need to spend $800,000 to create a single job.

I mentioned this yesterday, but I will repeat it again: For the people in my State of South Dakota, the average annual salary is about $30,000 per year. So to think about spending $800,000 to create a job is something that is going to be very hard to accept for a lot of people around this country, which is why I believe, and so many people around the country are rallying and saying, this is the wrong direction in which to head.

I happen to agree with that assessment, and I think there are some things that could be done that would make this process more fair in terms of including ideas that Republicans have to put forward but, more importantly, to get a product that is more effective--more effective--at creating jobs at a lower cost.

Now, many of us have tried to improve this bill. I supported a McCain amendment yesterday, a comprehensive approach that is much better in terms of addressing the issue and much better focused in terms of job creation at about half the cost of the underlying bill, the majority bill we are debating today. So we tried to make this bill more focused and more fiscally responsible. I think putting the focus and the emphasis on job creation is the right place to be. But many of the efforts we have made to that end have failed. We have also offered amendments to cut much of the wasteful spending out of this bill, most of which have been defeated.

So what I have sort of concluded is, as much as we tried to make this a better bill by cutting wasteful spending, by making the focus on job creation, by trying to reduce taxes on small businesses and middle-income taxpayers, which would get more money back into the economy, and emphasize less spending on Government programs in Washington, DC, where the bulk of this is committed, that is a much better approach, and many of our amendments have been focused in that direction. But, as I said, none have been accepted.

I have one more amendment I have filed and I hope to have an opportunity to call up. It is sort of a last-ditch effort to bring some reason to this whole debate. But what it essentially would do is take the total cost of the Democratic bill--about $900 billion without interest; $900 billion, when you add in the interest costs, as I said before, you get up to about $1.2 trillion or north of that, all of which is borrowed money, borrowed from future generations--but take that total amount of $900 billion and divide it by every tax filer in this country--anybody who files an income tax in this country--and basically write them a check.

Now, it is probably surprising to most of us here what you could do with that. But for an average individual filing a tax return in this country, you could write them a check for $5,143; for a couple filing jointly, $10,286.

Now, to be fair, I also wrote the amendment so anybody making more than $250,000 a year would not be eligible. I tried to make this so you cannot argue this is a tax cut for the rich. So anybody who makes more than $250,000 would not be eligible. All filers who have under $250,000 in taxable income would be eligible under this amendment. You could actually write a check to an individual filing for $5,143 dollars; and to a couple filing jointly, a check for $10,286.

I think that is a lot of money in most people's family incomes and it makes a lot more sense, in my judgment, than spending $900 billion on programs that many of us know will not work, creating new bureaucracies in Washington, DC, at a very high cost per job. As I said, if the CBO numbers are right on the low end--1.3 million new jobs--and you divide that, do the arithmetic on that, you are talking, in round numbers, about $800,000 per job. What kind of sense does that make?

It is pretty clear, in my opinion, and I think in the opinion of most of the American people, this is very misdirected in terms of the mission of this whole thing. The intention is great, but the substance of this particular piece of legislation is very flawed.

I would add one last thing; that is, we talk about economic models and analysis and methodology, but the President's own chief economic adviser put together a methodology about a year ago--a little over a year ago--that said for every dollar of tax cuts you get a multiplier of 2.2 percent increase in GDP. So if you cut taxes by a dollar, GDP increases by 2.2 times.

It seems to me, at least, that you can take that methodology--and it seems intuitive to most Americans--when you reduce their taxes, middle-income families' taxes and taxes on small businesses, which create the jobs in this country, you get a much better outcome in terms of GDP growth, in job creation, than sending a bunch of money into Government programs here in Washington, DC, many of which, I might add, are new programs that will not get up and be started for a very long time. There will be a tail on them. As a consequence, you will not see the result in the short period of time we are trying to target here--the temporary approach to this--that actually creates jobs and helps pull us out of the economic crisis we are in.

That is an amendment I have filed. It takes that total amount--$900 billion--breaks it down on a per-filer basis, and if you are an individual filing, you can get a check for $5,143, and if you are a couple filing jointly, you can get a check for $10,286.

But I wish to see us approach this in a different way. A lot of amendments, as I said, have been offered--some good alternatives. The McCain alternative we voted on yesterday makes a lot of sense to me. It does it at about half the cost, and is a lot more effective at creating jobs. That was defeated, as have been all the other amendments we have offered to make this more fiscally responsible, more focused, and more targeted on job creation.

With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor and thank the Chair.

A look into the halls of the Senate AZ Senators have the floor on the stimulis contents


Share/Save/Bookmark Chair: The Senator from Arizona.

Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, for the benefit of my colleagues, on this side we have Senators THUNE, GRAHAM, SESSIONS, COBURN, and ALEXANDER waiting to speak. I would imagine that, given that, between now and 11:30, hopefully, we could get most of those in between now and the time for voting, of course observing the protocol of those being recognized on the other side of the aisle.

While we are here in the Chamber discussing this issue, we all know discussions are being held behind closed doors between two or three or four Republicans in order to try to get 60 votes in order to pass this legislation. Obviously, the overwhelming majority of Republican Senators are opposed to the legislation. That same overwhelming majority of Senators are in favor of stimulating our economy and creating jobs.

How did we get here, and where do we go? We got here by the Speaker of the House saying: We won, so we wrote the bill. In the years I have been here, that is not called bipartisanship. Without the votes of 11 Democrats and without the vote of a single Republican, the bill emerged from the other body and came over here. Again, through the Appropriations and Finance Committees, the bill was written without significant input or with negligible input from Senators on this side of the aisle. There is an old saying: If you are not in on the takeoff, you will not be in on the landing.

We are up to approximately $1.2 trillion in the piece of legislation in front of us. The Congressional Budget Office yesterday said that this legislation would increase employment by the end of the fourth quarter of 2010 by 1.3 million to 3.9 million jobs. I did the math. So $1.2 trillion, 3 million jobs, is $923,997 for each job. For 1.3 million jobs, which is the low end determined by the Congressional Budget Office, it is only $307,092 per job.

The American people are figuring out that this is not a stimulus bill. It is a spending bill full of unnecessary spending, unexamined policy changes or policy changes that have been examined and rejected in the past, and, of course, tax cuts which do not stimulate the economy.

I ask to have printed in the Record examples of the House spending provisions and the Senate spending provisions which I find not only questionable but obviously, in the view of any objective observer, unnecessary, unwanted, and, indeed, wasteful.


There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

$1.7 billion to make upgrades in the National Park System.

$50 million in funding for the National Endowment of the Arts.

$650 million to extend the DTV coupon program.

$6 billion for broadband and wireless services in underserved areas.

$41 billion to local school districts, including a buy American iron and steel requirement on the $14 billion School Modernization and Repair Program.

$325 million to establish an "innovation" fund for academic achievement awards to states and local education agencies or schools.

$726 million for an after school snack program.

$39 billion to help unemployed pay for COBRA.

$44 million for repairs to USDA headquarters.

$209 million for agricultural research facilities.

$200 million to "encourage electric vehicle technologies" in state and local government motor pools.

$600 million for new cars for the Federal government.

$300 million to provide rebates for buying energy efficient Energy Star products.

$32 billion for energy and transmission system improvements, including $11 billion for the Smart Grid Investment Program.

$245 million to upgrade the computer systems at the Farm Service Agency.

$200 million to repair and modernize U.S. Geological Survey facilities and equipment.

$400 million to NOAA for "habitat restoration".

$70 million for the "Technology Innovation Program" at NIST.

$10 billion for science facilities and research.

$3 billion for the National Science Foundation, including $100 million to improve instruction in science, math, and engineering.

$2 billion for NIH Biomedical Research.

$1.5 billion for NIH to renovate university research facilities and help them compete for biomedical research grants.

$462 million to enable CDC to complete its Buildings and Facilities Master Plan.

$1 billion "to minimize undercounting of minority groups" in the 2010 census.

$3 billion for a new "Prevention and Wellness" fund.

$600 million to increase the number of doctors, nurses and dentists.

$20 billion for health information technology.

$1.1 billion for Amtrak and Intercity Passenger Rail Construction Grants to improve speed and capacity.

$500 million to install Aviation Explosive Detection Systems in airports.

$1 billion for Community Development Block Grants.

$8 billion for loans for renewable energy power generation and transmission projects.

$6.7 billion for renovations and repairs to federal buildings.

$6.9 billion for Local Government Energy Efficiency Block Grants.

$2.5 billion for Energy Efficiency Housing Retrofits.

$2 billion for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Research.

$2 billion for the Advanced Battery Loan Guarantee and Grants Program.

$6.2 billion for Home Weatherization.

$2.4 billion for carbon capture and sequestration technology demonstration projects.

$500 million for Industrial Energy Efficiency manufacturing demonstration projects.

$300 million for grants and loans to state and local governments for projects that reduce diesel emissions.

$98.527 million to support the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative to prevent and address cyber security threats.

Requires TSA to buy 100K employee uniforms from U.S. textile plants.

Legislation to give federal workers new whistle-blower protections.

An exemption for yacht-repair companies from paying for federal workers' compensation insurance to cover those hurt on the job (an exemption sought for 6 yrs by the Marine Industries Association of South Florida). Inserted by FL Reps. Deborah Wasserman Schultz and Ron Klein.

Net neutrality: the bill "includes language favoring open access--so-called net neutrality--that telecoms have long opposed."

Unemployment: the House language "secures an expansion of unemployment insurance for part-time workers" that Dems "have sought for more than a decade."

Education: "the stimulus aims more than" $125B "at bolstering public education, an unusual federal intervention in a sphere usually left to state and local governments."

Public housing: $5B "for the construction and repair of public housing. One House GOPer "depicts it as a quiet reversal of a 30-year trend of the government extracting itself from public housing construction."

Health care: the bill expands COBRA and allows workers older than 55, or those who have worked at a company for 10 years, to keep their COBRA coverage until they qualify for Medicare or find a new job. But "among the plan's biggest departures" from past policy is "allowing those who are unemployed to enroll in Medicaid." That provision "would temporarily expand" the program "to allow millions of unemployed workers to qualify for benefits."

$20 Billion to spur the adoption of electronic medical records, which would be, "by far, the biggest government infusion to enable medical information to follow patients back and forth among doctors' offices, hospitals and other providers." Starting in Oct. '10, "hospitals, doctors and others would be able to get increased payments from Medicare and Medicaid for using such systems."

$20 million "for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers."

$400 million for STD prevention.

$25 million to rehabilitate off-roading (ATV) trails.

$34 million to remodel the Department of Commerce Headquarters.

$70 million to "Support Supercomputing Activities" for climate research.

$1.4 billion to green HUD assisted housing.

$100 million to teach children green construction skills.

$20 million for trail repairs in wildlife refuges.

$25 million for habitat restoration on wildlife refuges.

$198 million for a school food service equipment.

$120 million to upgrade WIC computer systems.

$23 million for repairs to National park Service trails.

$55 million for the Historic Preservation Fund.

$40 million to make Park Service offices more energy efficient.

$150 million for facility improvements at Smithsonian museums.

$75 million for smoking cessation.

$88 million for replacement of headquarters of the Health Resources Services Administration.

$2.9 billion for the Weatherization Assistance Program.

$4.5 billion for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability (ie modernizing the electricity grid).

$430 million for the DOE Science Program including $330 million for laboratory infrastructure and construction and $100 million is for computer research and development.

$1 billion for National Nuclear Security Administration Weapons activities.

$20 million is for port modernizations in Guam.

$30 million is for water and wastewater infrastructure needs in Guam.

$12 million is for electrical transmission line upgrades in Guam.

$20 million to develop web-based programs for school lunch programs to manage food orders.

$100 million for grants to state to assist with aquaculture losses.

$300 million for diesel emission reduction grants.

$50 million to fund biomass utilization grants.

$100 million to repair Forest Service trails.

$20 million for retrofitting BLM offices to make them more energy efficient.

$20 million for USGS groundwater wells and surface water stations.

$85 million is provided for new USGS research equipment.

$25 million for abandoned mine site remediation on forest lands.

Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: The distinguished majority leader mentioned that economists like Marty Feldstein said we need a stimulus. He certainly did. He later said this was not the stimulus we need. There are a large number of economists saying that what we are doing is what I know we are doing, and that is to lay an unacceptable multitrillion-dollar debt on future generations. If the purpose of this legislation is to create jobs and get the economy going, why did we reject the trigger amendment yesterday which got 44 votes which said: Once we have two quarters of positive GDP growth, we are required to embark on spending cuts to stop mortgaging our children's futures.

If we keep running up these debts, history shows that we will have debased the currency, printed more money. Hyperinflation takes place, which is, obviously, the greatest enemy of the middle class.

There are provisions such as the "Buy American" provision, Davis-Bacon, a number of other provisions in the bill which have nothing to do with jobs, nothing to do with stimulating the economy. In fact, Davis-Bacon and "Buy American" mean additional costs to the taxpayer.

The President, last night, speaking to the Democrats, said:

So then you get the argument this is not a stimulus bill. This is a spending bill. What do you think a stimulus is? That's the whole point.

The whole point is to enact tax cuts and spending measures that truly stimulate the economy. There are billions and tens of billions of dollars in this bill which will have no effect within 3, 4, 5 or more years, or ever. We are talking about a lot of money.

I used to come to the floor and object to provisions that were thousands of dollars, then hundreds of thousands of dollars, then millions--$50 million in funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. All of us are for the arts. Tell me how that creates any significant number of jobs. An afterschool snack program is probably a good idea. Do we really want to spend $726 million on it?

Here we are. My other colleagues want to speak, and so I will be speaking later on. It is important that others do as well. But here we are. We are in a situation where the overwhelming majority of Republicans--in fact, all--voted for both the trigger amendment and for our alternative, which was $421 billion in spending. There are behind-the-scenes negotiations going on so that they can try to pick off two or three Republicans. You cannot call a bill bipartisan if it has two or three or four or even five Republicans out of 535 Members of Congress. You can call it an agreement, but you cannot call it a bipartisan agreement. That is not what the American people want today. Yes, unemployment is up to 7.6 percent. The American people expect us to sit down together.

I see the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee, the Senator from North Dakota. He probably knows as much about budget issues and spending as anybody. My recommendation is that he and others be appointed by both leaders to sit down in a room so that we can come out with a bipartisan agreement. That means leadership. That means involvement, not just of a couple or three who may be in some respects not reflective of the whole 41 Republican Members of the Senate.

Maybe we have to go back to square one. Maybe we should go back to the beginning because it was flawed when it began, when the authors of this legislation from the House said: We won, so we wrote the bill. That is not bipartisanship.

I urge both Senator McConnell and Senator Reid to appoint a group of Senators to sit down together and hash this out. We share the same goal, the same goal of stimulating this economy and creating jobs. We realize we have to spend money to do it. But we also realize--most of us should realize--that if we mortgage our children's future, they already have a $10 trillion debt; this is another trillion. There is going to be an Omnibus appropriations bill coming down the pike. There is going to have to be a TARP 3. We are looking at spending as far as we can see for which we do not have revenues.

We can have a modest--I say modest, I take that back. We can have a bill that is $400 or $500 billion. We can have a bill that truly stimulates this economy, with tax cuts that, in the view of economists, do create jobs, not a one-time injection of sending people a check. That didn't work the last time we did it under the previous administration.

I urge colleagues not to send a message to the American people that we have come out with a bill with 3 or 4 Republicans out of 535 Members of Congress. Let's try to sit down one more time, all of us, and come out with something that truly creates jobs, truly stimulates the economy, and restores the faith and confidence and trust of the American people in the Congress, which has badly eroded and is at historic lows. These are tough times. Let's act tough for a change and get something done, rather than have some partisan result which the American people--certainly a significant percentage--will resoundingly reject because it does not have fiscal responsibility.

I yield the floor.