Part 3: Knollenberg's Economic Policies Hurt Middle Class Families

The Really Rich Get Much Richer, While The Middle Class Falls Behind

While families work harder, their wages continue to decline.
Middle-class families are working harder and earning less today than they were at the start of the Bush Administration.

According to the Wall Street Journal, “Since the end of the recession of 2001, a lot of the growth in GDP per person – that is, productivity – has gone to profits, not wages.”[13]

Median household income, adjusted for inflation, has declined $1,273 from $47,599 in 2000 to $46,326 in 2005.[14]

Meanwhile, employment compensation has lagged behind productivity gains.

While the productivity of the American worker rose by 17.5 percent between the first quarter of 2001 and the fourth quarter of 2006, real compensation per hour increased by only 8.7 percent.[17]

In the first quarter of 2007, productivity in the non-farm business sector further improved by 1.7 percent, while real weekly earnings increased by only 1.2 percent.[18]

Therefore, Americans have worked harder – and more productively – for their families, but are not receiving the proportionally increased rewards for their hard work.

Earnings for workers with college degrees declining.

The LA Times has reported that: “Wage stagnation, long the bane of blue-collar workers, is now hitting people with bachelor’s degrees for the first time in 30 years.

Earnings for workers with four-year degrees fell 5.2 percent from 2000 to 2004 when adjusted for inflation, according to White House economists…

Not since the 1970s have workers with bachelor’s degrees seen a prolonged slump in earnings during a time of economic growth…trends for people with master’s and other advanced degrees…have found that their inflation-adjusted wages were essentially flat between 2000 and 2004.”[19]

Worst job creation record since Hoover Administration.

A growing economy should be good news for those seeking jobs. But over the last 6 years, his Administration has the worst overall job creation record since Herbert Hoover more than 70 years ago.[20]

Overall non-farm payroll employment has increased by just 5.2 million since President Bush took office in January 2001 compared with 22.7 million during the Clinton presidency. Overall employment growth has averaged just 70,000 per month under President Bush – much lower than the approximately 150,000 jobs needed each month to keep up with population growth. It was not uncommon to see monthly job gains of 300,000 and even 400,000 during economic expansions under previous Administrations. [21]

Private sector job creation has been especially poor during the Bush presidency, with an average annual job growth rate of only 0.5 percent per year since 2001.[22]

Just 3.8 million private sector jobs have been created during the Bush presidency, compared with over 20 million private sector jobs during the Clinton presidency.[23]

The manufacturing sector, often the source of jobs with good pay and benefits, has lost three million jobs since the start of the Bush Administration.[24]

Nearly half of the jobs created since 2001 were part-time and freelance positions without benefits.[25]

Unemployment has increased 7.1 percent and long-term joblessness has nearly doubled.

The national unemployment rate stands at 4.5 percent,[26] which is 7.1 percent higher than the 4.2 percent rate when President Bush took office.

Unfortunately, once unemployed, America’s workers also are staying unemployed longer. In 2006, over one in six of the unemployed had been out of work for more than 26 weeks.[27]

The number of long-term unemployed has increased by 61 percent since President Bush took office.[28]

Bush’s deficit-financed tax cuts have widened the income gap between millionaires and middle-class workers.
In testimony before the Congress, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke warned against rising income inequality: “[T]o the extent that incomes and wealth are spreading apart, I think that is not a good trend.”[29]

The Wall Street Journal has attributed the widening income gap to President Bush’s tax policies: “[I]t appears that the highest-salaried workers – executives, managers and professionals – are widening their lead on the typical worker…The Bush tax cuts appear to have widened the income gap, according to many analyses.”[32]

In fact, President Bush’s capital gains and dividends tax cuts will cost $197 billion over ten years, with most of the benefits going to multimillionaires.

In an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, economists found that the immediate effect of the Bush tax cuts has been “skewed in favor of those with high incomes,” benefiting the most wealthy households the most.[33]

In 2006, for example, “families making more than $1 million a year saw their after-tax income increase by 6 percent because of the tax cuts, while families making $40,000 to $75,000 saw after-tax income rise by about 2.5 percent.”[34]

More American families and children face severe financial problems.
The average annual increase in the poverty rate during President Bush’s first term is second only to that during George H.W. Bush’s administration and contrasts sharply with the declines in the Clinton and Kennedy-Johnson Administrations.[35]

The poverty rate has increased 12 percent to 12.6 percent since 2000.[36]

Nearly thirty-seven million Americans were living in poverty in 2005,[37] an increase of 5.4 million over the 2000 level, the year before President Bush took office.[38]

Poverty has hit America’s children particularly hard. with almost one out of every six American children living in poverty.[39]

The number of children living in poverty has increased 6.5 percent during the Bush Administration.[40]

_______________
References:
[13] Greg Ip, “Wages Fail to Keep Pace With Productivity Increases, Aggravating Income Inequality,” Wall Street Journal at A2 (March 27, 2006).
[14] U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Census Bureau, Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005, Figure 1 (August 2006), available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/p60-231.pdf.
[15] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey: Historical Data for the Tables of the Usual Weekly Earnings of Wage and Salary Workers, available at http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpswktab1.htm.
[16] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey: Historical Data for the Tables of the Usual Weekly Earnings of Wage and Salary Workers, available at http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpswktab1.htm.
[17] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Productivity Data, available at ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/History/prod2.03062007.news and ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/History/prod2.06052001.news.
[18] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Productivity and Costs: First Quarter 2007, preliminary, available at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/prod2.pdf and U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Weekly and hourly earnings data from the Current Population Survey, available at http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpswktab1.htm.
[19] Molly Hennessy-Fiske, “That Raise Might Take 4 Years to Earn as Well: Those with bachelor's degrees are finding their incomes stagnate despite a growing economy,” Los Angeles Times at A1 (July 24, 2006).
[20] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Situation Summary, available at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.toc.htm.
[21] See e.g., Speech of Gary H. Stern, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Perspectives on the Economy (March 29, 2007), available at http://www.minneapolisfed.org/news/pres/Stern03-29-07.cfm.
[22] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Industry at a Glance, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey, available at http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab5.htm (visited April 26, 2007).
[23] Id.
[24] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Industry at a Glance, available at http://www.bls.gov/iag/manufacturing.htm.
[25] Molly Hennessy-Fiske, “That Raise Might Take 4 Years to Earn as Well: Those with bachelor's degrees are finding their incomes stagnate despite a growing economy,” Los Angeles Times at A1 (July 24, 2006).
[26] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Situation Summary (May 4, 2007), available at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm.
[27] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey, Table A-9, http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab7.htm
[28] Id.
[29] Testimony of Ben Bernanke before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, (July 19, 2006), available at http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/hh/2006/july/testimony.htm
[32] Greg Ip, “Wages Fail to Keep Pace With Productivity Increases, Aggravating Income Inequality,” Wall Street Journal at A.2 (March 27, 2006).
[33] Greg Leiserson and Jeffrey Rohaly, “The Distribution of the 2001-2006 Tax Cuts: Updated Projections, November 2006,” The Tax Policy Center (November 15, 2006), available at http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411378_tax_cuts.pdf.
[34] Michael Abramowitz and Lori Montgomery, “Bush Addresses Income Inequality,” The Washington Post at A04 (February 1, 2007), citing “The Distribution of the 2001-2006 Tax Cuts: Updated Projections,” supra.
[35] Joint Economic Committee analysis of data maintained by the Bureau of the Census and U.S. Department of Commerce from 1959-1995.
[36] U.S. Census Bureau, CPS 2005 Annual Social and Economic Supplement, POV01 (August 29, 2006), available at http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032006/pov/new01_100_01.htm.
[37] Id.
[38] U.S. Census Bureau, CPS 2000 Annual Social and Economic Supplement, POV01 (December 11, 2001), available at http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032000/pov/new01_001.htm
[39] U.S. Census Bureau, CPS 2005 Annual Social and Economic Supplement, POV02 (August 29, 2006), available at http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032006/pov/new02_100_01.htm
[40] U.S. Census Bureau, CPS 2000 Annual Social and Economic Supplement, POV02 (December 11, 2001), available at http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032001/pov/new01_003.htm.

Part 2: Knollenberg's Economic Policies Hurt Middle Class Families

Middle-Class Families Squeezed By Skyrocketing Costs

Health care premiums have increased by over 80 percent.

• The cost of family health insurance has skyrocketed 80.8 percent since 2000.


• Premiums are rising twice as fast as wages and inflation.


• The typical family health insurance premium is now $11,480 a year compared with $6,348 in 2000.[1]


• The number of uninsured Americans has increased every year since President Bush took office, from 39.8 million in 2000 to a record high of 46.6 million in 2005.[2]

Gas prices have more than doubled.

Prices at the gas pump have jumped 102.7 percent from $1.47 per gallon the week President Bush took office in January 2001[3] to $2.87 in the latest week of energy price data.[4]

• The average price of gas for this summer is estimated to be $2.97 per gallon, 84 percent higher than the average price for the summer of 2001.[5] (And given that it is over $3.00 now, that is probably a low estimate!)


• The price for a barrel of oil has more than doubled during the Bush Administration from $30.63 in January 2001 to $65.26 in April 2007.[6]


• The average household with children will spend about $3,743 on transportation fuel costs this year, an increase of 97 percent or $1,841 over 2001 costs.[7]

College education costs have risen by 44 percent.

• Average tuition, fees, room, and board costs at four-year private universities have increased by $6,786 from $22,240 in the 2000-2001 academic year to $29,026 in the 2005-2006 academic year.


• Tuition, fees, room, and board charges at four-year public colleges grew more rapidly between 2000-2001 and 2005-2006, after adjusting for inflation, than during any other five-year period since 1975.


• Total costs jumped from $8,439 in 2000-2001 to $12,127 in 2005-2006 – an increase of $3,688, or 44 percent.[8]


• The cost of a college education is rising faster than family income.

Housing affordability has reached a 15-year low.

• In 2006, housing affordability reached its lowest level since 1991.[10]


• According to the Washington Post, “[o]ne of every 92 U.S. households faced foreclosure last year and the number is expected to get larger.


• Over the next two years, monthly payments on millions of loans will surge as their low introductory interest rates balloon by as much as 50 percent.


• The nonprofit Center for Responsible Lending predicts that one in five subprime mortgages taken out in the past two years – those marketed to borrowers with poor credit histories and limited incomes – will end up in foreclosure.


• The crisis may eventually cost as much as $164 billion…


• There is considerable fear that the pace of foreclosures, which jumped again in the first three months of this year, will continue to rise and jeopardize the entire economy.”[12]
  
  Knollenberg's Positions HURT Middle Class Families
  

__________

References:

[1] Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research and Educational Trust, 2006 Employer Health Benefits Survey, available at http://www.kff.org/insurance/ehbs-archives.cfm.
[2] U.S. Census Bureau, 2005 and 2006 Current Population Survey (CPS) Annual Social and Economic Supplement (August 2007), available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/p60-231.pdf, (revised March 23, 2007) (see U.S. Census Bureau, Census Bureau Revises 2004 and 2005 Health Insurance Coverage Estimates (March 23, 2007), available at http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/health_care_insurance/009789.html.
[3] Energy Information Administration, Petroleum Navigator, available at http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mg_rt_usw.htm.
[4] Energy Information Administration, Household Vehicle Energy Use: Latest Data and Trends (2005), available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/rtecs/nhts_survey/2001/; Weekly Retail Gasoline and Diesel Prices (updated April 30, 2007), available at http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_dcus_nus_w.htm.
[5] Energy Information Administration, Short-Term Energy Outlook (April 2007), available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html.
[6] Spot Prices for Crude Oil (updated April 23, 2007).
[7] Energy Information Administration, Household Vehicle Energy Use: Latest Data and Trends; Short Term Energy Outlook (April 2007).
[8] The College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2006 (October 2005), available at http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/press/cost06/trends_college_pricing_06.pdf.
[9] Analysis of Department of Education data contained in “The College Cost Crunch: A State-by-State Analysis of Rising Tuition and Student Debt” at 2, available at http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=sr-109-2-91.
[10] National Association of Realtors, Housing Affordability Index (updated February 9, 2007), available at http://www.realtor.org/Research.nsf/Pages/HousingInx.
[11] Michael Grunwald, “The Housing Crisis Goes Suburban,” Washington Post at B01 (August 27, 2006).
[12] Michael R. Crittenden, “Bracing for Default Day,” CQ Weekly at 1168 (April 23, 2007).

Knollenberg's Economic Policies Hurt Middle Class Families: Part 1

Joe Knollenberg's "follow-the-leader" position on economic policies has hurt middle class families in Oakland County.

Joe Knollenberg has never voted against a Bush economic policy. Instead, Joe Knollenberg has voted to increase our debt, to continue with runaway deficit spending, declining wages, well all the while, increasing costs of fuel and education put middle class families further and further behind.

Just Say NO to KNOLL-enomics!

Middle Class Families Have to Struggle Just To Stay Even
For millions of hard-working, middle-class families, life has grown less affordable and less secure.

President Bush’s record of fiscal incompetence and mismanagement, and Knollenberg’s close ties with special interests, have helped lead to both lower wages on the one hand and skyrocketing costs for basic necessities like gas, health care, and college tuition on the other.

Unfortunately, instead of producing solutions to the problems facing the middle class, Bush and Knollenberg have ignored them and pushed for policies that would make matters even worse.

In addition to tightening the squeeze on families, Knollenberg’s economic policies have made our entire nation less financially secure.

Knollenberg has followed his leaders into increasing our debt to nearly $9 trillion while insisting on spending billions of dollars every year on budget-busting tax breaks for special interests and multi-millionaires.

Knollen-omics Risk To National Security
By voting for Bush's failed economic policies, Knollenberg continues to compromise our economic security by increasing our reliance on foreign investment from in China, Japan, and Dubai.


Film at 11.

Joe Will Start to Waver on Iraq

We don't need a crystal ball to devine that Joe Knollenberg will soon be wavering in his support for Iraq.

Never much of a leader or a voice in Congress, Knollenberg easily bends to the will of others -- particularly lobbyists. But in this particular case, nervous about the impact Iraq will have on Republican re-election campaigns, referring to House Minority Leader Johm Boehner, CNN reports "The top House Republican said Sunday that GOP support could waver if President Bush's Iraq war policy does not succeed by the fall."

CNN then attributes the following statements to Boehner:

"Over the course of the next three to four months, we'll have some idea how well the plan's working. Early signs are indicating there is clearly some success on a number of fronts," he said.

But, he added, "By the time we get to September or October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't, what's Plan B."

So, those are the talking points. If Joe even mentions Iraq, those "follow the leader" talking points are sure to be heard.

Joe "Do Nothing" Knollenberg is a follower, not a leader.

Why Has Joe Knollenberg Been Silent on These Key Issues?

Why is Joe Knollenberg silent about George Bush's Blunders?

Here is just a starter list of Bush's Blunders:

Afghanistan Falling Back into Taliban Hands
Tora Bora
WMD
Yellowcake
Aluminum Tubes
Ahmed Chalabi
Greeted as Liberators
Jessica Lynch
Jack Abramoff
Bob Ney
Jay Garner
Mission Accomplished
Duke Cunningham
Bring 'em On
Debaathification
Dead or Alive
Crusade
Go it alone
Abu Ghraib
Walter Reed
Pat Tillman
Valerie Plame
Donald Rumsfeld
The Economy
New Orleans
Halliburton
Fallujah
Military Contractors
Katrina
Body Armor
When they stand up, we'll stand down
Price of Gas
the "Surge"
3,346 Americans killed
26,188 Americans wounded
the 1,458 days the United States has occupied Iraq

Joe Knollenberg has failed to show even a modicum of leadership on any of these issues.

Joe Knollenberg Is NOT A Leader. Oakland County Deserves A Leader in Congress.

Fire Joe Knollenberg. 2008

Meet Joe's Colleagues

The Impact of Knollenberg's NO Vote on the Jewish Community

Joe Knollenberg had a chance Thursday, May 3, 2007, to make it a hate crime for anyone to commit a violent crime against jews if that crime was motivated by prejudice based on actual or perceived religion, etc. But Joe Knollenberg voted NO on the hate crime bill. [Roll Call Vote 299, May 3, 2007]

Knollenberg doesn't even mention this legislation on his website. Instead, his blog entry for the day was about the Red Wings. I like hockey and I love the Red Wings -- but I don't think they should be more important to my Representative in Congress than a hate crime!

This hate crime legislation was strongly supported and heralded by the Anti-Defamation League. Here is an excerpt of the ADL's position on the issue:

All Americans have a stake in an effective response to violent bigotry. Hate crimes demand a priority response because of their special emotional and psychological impact on the victim and the victim's community. The damage done by hate crimes cannot be measured solely in terms of
physical injury or dollars and cents. . . .

The ADL also notes that the argument that such legislation might be unconstitutional is a red herring:

In June 1993, the United States Supreme Court upheld a Wisconsin hate crime statute that was based on model legislation originally drafted by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in 1981. ( Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993).)

Joe Knollenberg is not representing our interests in Congress.

Once Again, Joe Knollenberg voted AGAINST the Jewish Community.

Joe Knollenberg Voted AGAINST The Jewish Community AGAIN!

Joe Knollenberg had a chance today to make it a hate crime for anyone to commit a violent crime against jews if that crime was motivated by prejudice based on actual or perceived religion, etc. Once again, Joe Knollenberg voted against the jewish community in metro Detroit. [Roll Call Vote 299, May 3, 2007]

Joe Knollenberg voted AGAINST the Jewish Community today.

Joe Knollenberg is out of touch and should be out of office.

Voters Express Disappointment In Joe Knollenberg

A recent spate of letters to the editor are illustrative of the frustration and disappointment that voters in Oakland County share over Congressman Joe Knollenberg's obedience to President Bush and lobbyists.

These are powerful. This is democracy in action.

I encourage everyone to write letters to the editor, and to Joe Knollenberg directly, so that someday, all of our voices will be heard.

Knollenberg's voting record on issues relating to women's rights, environmental protection and safe gun laws are all 100 percent negative. I know that his voting record on Iraq spending follow Bush's leadership precisely. He's been guilty of taking favors and campaign funding from lobbyists. These are not opinions, but easily verified facts. It is up to voters to form their opinion about "the smart, effective, common-sense approach of our Congressman Joe Knollenberg." I hope they will make their decisions based on performance, and not their favorite pundit's arguments.

B.T., Pontiac

Anyone with half a brain and a clue would realize that the only hope the auto industry has right now is to improve government regulations and CAFE standards on all vehicles made in the United States. When surveyed, most UAW workers were in favor of these changes that would result in the future of their jobs.
Shame on Joe Knollenberg and his "out of town band of supporters" . . . for backing these insane standards for our country. The only hope Michigan has is to send Joe Knollenberg and his absolutely clueless supporters packing.

P.L., Wayne

Quite a few folks in Joe Knollenberg's district are unhappy with his stances, and don't mind saying so.

S.W. , Clawson

Joe Knollenberg has had years to present his positions. None of them match the flurry of activity shown on the papers of recent date. Too little; too late -- and disingenuous to boot.

R.M., Rochester Hills

It boils down to whether you like the kind of leadership and direction of Bush, Knollenberg and the Republicans or not. I do not.

M.S., Clawson

Eccentric Letters to the editor in Troy and Farmington

The May 3 edition of the Troy Eccentric ran several letters to the editor regarding Joe Knollenberg Click here to read the letters.

Mulitple letters were also published in the Farmington Eccentric. Click Here to read the letters.

Joe Knollenberg continues to rubber stamp the disaster in Iraq and send more of our brave soldiers to their deaths. He actually thinks that the war in Iraq is winnable. Well, guess what, the Iraqi parliament plans to go on vacation for 2 months. During that 2 months, 200 of our soldiers will die, if recent events are any indication and $8 billion of our taxpayers' dollars will be wasted in the black hole known was the war in Iraq.

Joe Knollenberg refuses to listen to his constituents and vote for an end to the madness in Iraq.

Help send Joe back to Bloomfield Hills permanently. Also visit www.retirejoeknollenberg.com

Knollenberg Gives Bush 100% Unconditional Support On Iraq

Once again, Joe Knollenberg has acted as a rubber stamp for George Bush's War on Iraq.

On Tuesday, the 4th anniversary of "Mission Accomplished", Congress sent Bush legislation that fully funded, trained, and equipped our troops.
Joe Knollenberg voted NO on that legislation to fully fund, train, and equip our troops.


But Bush vetoed the legislation.

Today, Joe Knollenberg voted to sustain Bush's veto.

Once again, Joe Knollenberg voted lockstep with George Bush on the Iraq War.

So far, Joe Knollenberg has voted exactly as George Bush has told him too on every single piece of legislation related to the disaster in Iraq.

Joe Knollenberg is Too Extreme for Oakland County.

What Knollenberg Thinks is Important

Bloggers, particularly political bloggers, are generally pretty passionate about the topics they cover. Many do extensive research -- well beyond the type of investigative reporting done by most major newspapers today.

In short, bloggers write about things that are important to them. Looking at the headlines from Joe Knollenberg's blog, we can see what is important to him -- not much.

---

• The Hemi-Hybrid: 40 percent better highway fuel economy!

• The Yen, Domestic Content, and Toyota
• Detroit Basketball!
• It’s time for the Democrats to stop playing politics with the war!
• 92nd Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide
• Clean Diesel Beats the Prius on Mileage
• Stop the Canadian Trash
• The Hybrid Center

• The Great Lakes are Magnificent
• Manufacturing is Cool!
• Toyota and the Detroit TigersU.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Spirit of Enterprise Award
• Karmanos on the importance of the auto industry
• Tigers’ Attitude
• Diesels: A Big Part of the Solution
• Beaumont: Center of Medical Excellence
• Orion Assembly Center Tour
• The Pickup Truck Tax!
• Presidential Candidates Should Understand Manufacturing
• WoodwardAvenue.org
• GM’s Big Move to Small Chevys
• Go Tigers!

Kind of odd headlines from a Congressman. They are not original stories. Most of them are merely links to stories in the Freep or the News -- as though without his help, voters would never think to read the newspapers.

The sports entries are particularly interesting. Is Knollenberg a cheerleader or a Congressman.

He certainly isn't a leader. There isn't an original idea in any of those entries.

We deserve A Representative in Congress that is a leader, not a follower.

Joe Knollenberg is Out of Touch with Voters in Oakland County.

The Truth

Call George Bush and tell him he cannot veto the truth.

Call Joe Knollenberg and tell him he should stand up for the American people for a change.

Tell George Bush he can't veto the truth. Call: 202-456-1111

 

This is Progress?

The headline in today's Washington Post:

April Toll Is Highest Of '07 for U.S. Troops

Over 100 Killed in Month; Iraqi Deaths Far Higher

Is this progress?


Even General Petraeus has stated that there isn't a military solution for Iraq. But Bush and Knollenberg have refused/failed to pursue other avenues.

Even school children know it is important to work towards a political solution. But now that is falling apart as well. From the Washington Post:

The deaths came as the largest bloc of Sunnis in Iraq's parliament, the Iraqi Accordance Front, threatened to pull out its ministers from the cabinet, saying that it "had lost hope" in having Sunni concerns addressed by the Shiite-led government. The threat prompted President Bush to phone one of Iraq's two vice presidents, Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni, in an attempt to defuse the potential political crisis, Hashimi's office said in a statement. A Sunni withdrawal could seriously hamper efforts at national reconciliation and further weaken the government. Only two weeks ago, six cabinet ministers loyal to Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr resigned from the cabinet.

So, in the last 2 weeks, 6 Shiite ministers have resigned and now the largest bloc of Sunnis are threatening to resign from the Cabinet. That would mean the "unity" government had failed. The elections for their parliament and their constitution would be meaningless.

Iraq is a total failure. Bush & Knollenberg have created a failed state in Iraq.

How much longer do we have to wait to see if there is "progress"?

How many more American troops have to die
before Knollenberg determines
if there has been "progress"?

"Progress" According to Joe

Joe Knollenberg has very little to say about the war in Iraq. He has been a follower on the issue, not a leader. He rubber stamps whatever George Bush says.

At most he explains that he wants to see "progress" in Iraq.

He has been saying that for months. How long do we have to wait until we know if they are making progress?

Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki Supports Militias & Not the U.S.
According to the Washington Post, Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki is actually working against us, not with us. He is firing army and police officers who are too aggressive in combating militias:

A department of the Iraqi prime minister's office is playing a leading role in the arrest and removal of senior Iraqi army and national police officers, some of whom had apparently worked too aggressively to combat violent Shiite militias, according to U.S. military officials in Baghdad.

The problem is that Maliki is merely a puppet for Al Sadr and his militas. How can we possibly train Iraqi troops and quell violence when they are not really working with us, but instead are taking the training and the weapons we supply and using them against Sunnis and even American troops. Is that progress?

U.S. Has Given Up on Goal of Training Iraqi Troops to "Stand Up"

For years we have heard Bush say that our troops will "stand down when the Iraqi troops stand up". And that we have been training the Iraqi troops so they can stand up. Bush has been saying that since before the elections in 2004.

Well, apparently we've given up on that goal:

Military planners have abandoned the idea that standing up Iraqi troops will enable American soldiers to start coming home soon and now believe that U.S. troops will have to defeat the insurgents and secure control of troubled provinces.

Training Iraqi troops, which had been the cornerstone of the Bush administration's Iraq policy since 2005, has dropped in priority, officials in Baghdad and Washington said.

Is that progress? Is giving up on training Iraqi's progress? If we don't train them, how will they ever stand up so that we can stand down?

How Many More U.S. Troops Have To Die Before We See "Progress"?
Bush announced the escalation of the war in Iraq in January and began increasing the troop levels in February. The results so far? More U.S. troops died in April than any other month this year.

Joe Knollenberg Has Failed To Show Any Leadership on Iraq

Knollenberg has never once stood up for changing policies or strategies in Iraq. He has done nothing but quiver in Bush's shadow.

If this is progress, then how much more progress can we bare?

How many more U.S. troops Have To Die before we know if we are making "progress"?

We Deserve A Leader in Congress. Retire Joe Knollenberg.

Knollenberg Never Lets Facts Get In His Way

Joe Knollenberg doesn't let facts get in the way of his decision making.

He has given his full support to Bush's escalation of the war in Iraq. He says we have to give the new "strategy" time to work.

But, the expert of all experts -- General David Petraeus already predicts that the surge will fail to quell the violence in Iraq.

Petraeus spent the last 1 1/2 years rewriting the military manual on counterinsurgency. Field Manual 3-24 was co-written by Petraeus and published last December. In an article last month on the manual, Airforce magazine notes:

It usually takes a while for a government to realize that an insurgency is under way, Petraeus and Amos wrote. The insurgents “take advantage of that
time to build strength and gather support.” When the fight erupts, defenders “have to ‘come from behind'" and catch up to the situation.
In short, counterinsurgencies don’t go too well at first. Western militaries “falsely believe that armies trained to win large conventional wars are automatically prepared to win small, unconventional ones” and fight COIN with a similar mind-set.

But here is the real money quote from the manual:

During previous conflicts, planners assumed that combatants required a 10 or 15 to 1 advantage over insurgents to win. However, no predetermined, fixed ratio of friendly troops to enemy combatants ensures success in COIN. The conditions of the operational environment and the approaches insurgents use vary too widely.

A better force requirement gauge is troop density, the ratio of security forces (including the host nation’s military and police forces as well as foreign counterinsurgents) to inhabitants. Most density recommendations fall within a range of 20 to 25 counterinsurgents for every 1000 residents in an AO. Twenty counterinsurgents per 1000 residents is often considered the minimum troop density required for effective COIN operations

Petraeus says there should be 20 to 25 combat troops for every 1000 residents. According to the CIA Factbook, Iraq has a population of 27,499,638. That means, according to Petraeus, there should be 549,993 - 687,491 combat troops in Iraq. Even with the surge, the troop level will be somewhere around 150,000. That is just a little over 25% of the troops needed.

Heck, Bush didn't even give Petraeus enough troops to secure Baghdad!

How can Bush say he supports the troops when he won't train or equip them properly?

How can Bush say he supports the General when he won't give him the troops he needs to get the job done?

Apparently Knollenberg is unfamiliar with Petraeus's work as a General -- Knollenberg certainly hasn't said the number of troops in the surge isn't enough to succeed.

Joe Knollenberg. Uninformed. Out of Touch.

Given The Chance To Support the Troops -- Knollenberg Voted NO

Once again, Joe Knollenberg has voted against our troops.

On April 25, 2007, Congress voted on legislation that would have guaranteed that troops in Iraq were properly trained and equipped before being deployed.
But Joe Knollenberg voted NO.

This bill, HR 1591, gave the military $2 billion more than the President requested so as to improve military readiness.
But Joe Knollenberg voted NO.

This bill provided for non-binding timelines for the President to begin withdrawing US troops from Iraq.
But Joe Knollenberg voted NO.

This bill provided funds to improve our Homeland security.
But Joe Knollenberg voted NO.

Once again, Joe Knollenberg has voted against our troops, and against the wishes of the people in Oakland County.

Joe Knollenberg is too EXTREME for Oakland County

Rubber Stamp Knollenberg condemns more troops to death in Iraq

There he goes again. After saying his patience was running out on the disaster in Iraq, Rubber Stamp Joe Knollenberg votes against funding the troops in Iraq. Even though the Iraq Accountability Act fully funds the troops, Joe Knollenberg voted against funding the troops because it has a goal of bringing our troops home to their families, hopefully alive, rather than in a coffin.

When does Joe Knollenberg finally vote to end the madness that is going on in Iraq?

Even though a recent survey conducted in downtown Birmingham, at the heart of the most Republican part of Joe's district, showed that 79% of respondents are against the escalation of the war in Iraq, Joe refuses to represent his district. Joe continues to vote against the vast marjority of his district. Why does he refuse to take his head out of his rear end and take a breath of fresh air?

Maybe it's a lack of oxygen to Joe's brain that is causing him to continue to Rubber Stamp President Bush's disasterous policies in Iraq.

Looks Like Bush & Cheney Were Telling Tales To Get Us Into Iraq

We've been hearing it for awhile now.

That Bush & Cheney & complicit Congressman like Joe Knollenberg dragged us into this war in Iraq under false pretenses.

We have been hearing about them cherry picking intelligence that supported their position and ignoring intelligence that was contrary.

We also know from former Bush Administration officials that this Administration was planning to invade Iraq well before 9/11.

Paul O'Neill, Bush's Treasury Secretary, 60 minutes interview:

At cabinet meetings, he says the president was "like a blind man in a roomful of deaf people. There is no discernible connection," forcing top officials to act "on little more than hunches about what the president might think."
* * *
And what happened at President Bush's very first National Security Council meeting is one of O'Neill's most startling revelations.

“From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go,” says O’Neill, who adds that going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.

“From the very first instance, it was about Iraq. It was about what we can do to change this regime,” says Suskind. “Day one, these things were laid and sealed.”

British Government Memoranda (Known As the Downing Street Memos)
The Downing Street memo is really a copy of the minutes of a meeting on July 23, 2002, where British Prime Minister Tony Blair's Senior Minister's met to discuss a recent meeting with the Bush Administration and their plans to invade Iraq.

One of the most damning indictments of how the Bush Administration was lying to the public is contained in this paragraph of the memo:

Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

George Tenet Was in Bush's Inner Circle & He Now Confirms we Were Mislead
But much of this has not gotten much attention. Maybe it will now that George Tenet, former head of the CIA, has written a book about how the war came about. According to MSNBC:

White House and Pentagon officials, and particularly Vice President Cheney, were determined to attack Iraq from the first days of the Bush administration, long before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and repeatedly stretched available intelligence to build support for the war, according to a new book by former CIA director George J. Tenet.

Why Hasn't Joe Knollenberg Challenged The Administration on Any of This?
Because Joe Knollenberg is a rubber stamp that just does whatever Bush tells him to do. And if Bush isn't telling him what to do, then the lobbyists are.

Joe Knollenberg Still Supports Bush's Failed "Stay the Course Strategy" in Iraq.

Joe Knollenberg is Out of Touch With the Voters of Oakland County.

This Says It All

This 30 second video says it all. The Democrats in Congress voted to bring our troops home. Bush needs to sign that bill.

Unfortunately, Joe Knollenberg voted to give George Bush a blank check, an open-ended commitment for troops and money.

Joe Knollenberg Is Wrong on Iraq.

Joe Knollenberg's Unconditional Support for George Bush's War in Iraq: Part 5

In the face of mounting evidence that staying in Iraq will only lead to more US Troops being killed, Joe Knollenberg is steadfast and resolute in his support of George Bush's War in Iraq. [HR 1591, Rollcall #265, April 25, 2007]

The public on the other hand, knows better. In the most recent WSJ/NBC poll, 49% of us realize that the situtation in Iraq has been getting worse over the last 3 months.

And 55% don't believe "victory" (whatever Bush defines as victory this week) is possible.

Perhaps most interesting, 56% of voters think the Democrats should impose timelines withdrawing the troops!

Joe Knollenberg Voted To Keep Troops in Iraq Indefinitely
Once again, is acting contrary to the interests of the voters in Oakland County.

Joe Knollenberg voted NO on legislation that would have fully funded & equipped the troops and imposed tentative guidelines for withdrawal. By voting no, Joe Knollenberg is once again giving George Bush and the failed Iraqi government a blank check to continue with their failed strategy.

Joe Knollenberg is out-of-touch & too extreme for Oakland County.

Knollenberg Fails to Protect Our Health and Safety

FDA Fails to Protect Our Food Chain
Many of us are asking where the FDA was when the wheat gluten that contained the poisonous melamine was being imported and put into the food of our dogs and cats. (Many more of us are going to be wondering where the FDA has been once they finish their investigation and find out that the wheat gluten in human food has been similarly contaminated.)

First of all, why do we import wheat gluten? Don't we grow wheat and export it to countries like China?

Second, why does the FDA either not have adequate standards or does not conduct adequate inspections, etc. to find out that our food supply has been poisoned -- BEFORE people and pets get sick.

We know for example, that FDA knew about the problem with e. coli contamination of spinach long before the outbreak last year resulted in at least 3 deaths and hundreds of people getting sick. FDA took no action except to "urge" the industry to take appropriate actions.

OSHA Fails to Protect Worker Health
Today, the NYT reports that OSHA has done nothing to protect workers (or consumers) from exposure to diacetyl, a dangerous chemical that is put in microwave popcorn.

Seven years ago, a Missouri doctor discovered a troubling pattern at a
microwave popcorn plant in the town of Jasper. After an additive was modified to produce a more buttery taste, nine workers came down with a rare, life-threatening disease that was ravaging their lungs.

Puzzled Missouri health authorities turned to two federal agencies in
Washington. Scientists at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health, which investigates the causes of workplace health problems, moved
quickly to examine patients, inspect factories and run tests. Within months,
they concluded that the workers became ill after exposure to diacetyl, a
food-flavoring agent.

But the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's response has been to say that they plan to prepare a safety bulletin on the matter! That is it! Oh, and they may do some inspections. Inspections for what? If they aren't regulating the material or the process what are they inspecting for? And why haven't they done anything for 7 years?

And if this chemical is so horrible for the workers lungs, what makes them think it is okay for us to eat!?!

Knollenberg Fails to Do Anything
So what has Joe Knollenberg done about these problems?

Nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
He doesn't discuss them on his website.
He hasn't proposed a single piece of legislation regarding these issues.
He has done nothing.
Nothing.

Joe Knollenberg Is A Do-Nothing Congressman. We Deserve Better.

Joe Knollenberg's Unconditional Support for George Bush's War in Iraq: Part 4

Like George Bush, Joe Knollenberg is ignoring the expert's advice on the Iraq war. According to General Petraeus,

"There is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq, to the insurgency of Iraq," Petraeus told a news conference, adding that political negotiations were crucial to forging any lasting peace.

So, knowing that, what has been Joe Knollenberg's proposal to resolve the most serious foreign policy matter facing this country?

Nothing.

Joe Knollenberg has no policy on Iraq. No proposal. No ideas. No nothing. He doesn't even list "Iraq" as an "issue" on his official website.

We deserve a representative in Congress who is willing to address the tough issues like Iraq, the economy, healthcare, etc.

Joe Knollenberg is a Do-Nothing Congressman. We Deserve Better.

Joe Knollenberg's Unconditional Support for George Bush's War in Iraq: Part 3

Joe Knollenberg continues to support Bush's war in Iraq. If you read any of the quotes in the local press about Knollenberg's position on the war, he generally makes milquetoast comments like "he is concerned" or he wants to "see progress".

But when given a chance to actually impose any means of measuring progress on Bush or on the Iraqi's, Knollenberg voted NO. Knollenberg's position on that legislation -- that funds and equips the troops while also establishing goals for a phased withdrawal -- is contrary to that of many military experts.

"This bill gives General Petraeus great leverage for moving the Iraqi government down the more disciplined path laid out by the Iraq Study Group. The real audience for the timeline language is Prime Minister al-Maliki and the elected government of Iraq. The argument that this bill aides the enemy is simply not mature - nobody on the earth underestimates the United States' capacity for unpredictability. It may further create some sense of urgency in the rest of our government, beginning with the State Department."

--Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, USA, Ret.

"The bill gives the president a chance to pull back from a disastrous course, re-orient US strategy to achieve regional stability, and win help from many other countries -- the only way peace will eventually be achieved."

--LT GEN Wm. E. Odom, USA, Ret.

"Supporting the Iraq Supplemental Bill not only reflects the thinking of the Iraq Study Group but puts teeth to the phrase "Supporting the Troops". By establishing timelines it returns the responsibility of self preservation and regional sovereignty to the people of Iraq and their government."

--Maj. Gen. Mel Montano, USANG, Ret

"This important legislation sets a new direction for Iraq. It acknowledges that America went to war without mobilizing the nation, that our strategy in Iraq has been tragically flawed since the invasion in March 2003, that our Army and Marine Corps are at the breaking point with little to show for it, and that our military alone will never establish representative government in Iraq. The administration got it terribly wrong and I applaud our Congress for stepping up to their constitutional responsibilities."

--Maj. Gen. John Batiste, USA, Ret.

"We must commence a coordinated phased withdrawal of U.S. combat troops and condition our continuing support of the Iraqi government on its fulfilling the political commitments it has made to facilitate reconciliation of the contending secular factions. Otherwise, we will continue to be entwined in a hopeless quagmire, with continuing American casualties, which will render our ground forces ineffective."

--Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, USA Ret.

So, once again, Joe Knollenberg is on the wrong side of an issue.

Joe Knollenberg is too Extreme for Oakland County.

Knollenberg still unconditionally supports Bush's War in Iraq -- Part 2

As we reported in Part 1, Joe Knollenberg has been a rubber stamp that just approves everything President Bush wants regarding the Iraq war. Michigan voters however strongly disagree with how Bush is handling the war in Iraq.


Joe Knollenberg supports An Open-ended commitment of U.S. Troops

It only took American's 3 1/2 years to defeat the Nazis in WWII, but we have already been in Iraq for over 4 years. And there is no end in sight.

Ever since voting to authorize the war in Iraq in October 2002, Joe Knollenberg has given Bush unflinching support for his "STAY THE COURSE" approach -- even though that approach has failed miserably by all accounts.

Knollenberg even supports Bush's current escalation of the war in Iraq. Knollenberg and Bush are sending over 40,000 new troops into Iraq this year alone.

But Michigan voters disagree with Bush and Knollenberg's plan to leave U.S. Troops in Iraq indefinitely. In fact, 49% of Michigan voters support withdrawing our troops over the next 6 months! [April 13-15 survey by Strategic Vision LLC.]


Knollenberg Does Not "Support The Troops"

Last month, Joe Knollenberg voted NO on a bill that provided supplemental funding to the troops in Iraq. President Bush requested $96 billion in additional funding for the troops and the Democratic Congress approved a bill that provided that funding. But Joe Knollenberg voted NO.
[HR 1591, Roll Call Vote 186]

In addition, the bill provided that troops are entitled to a year in between tours in Iraq and that they must be properly trained and equipped. But Joe Knollenberg voted NO. [HR 1591, Roll Call Vote 186]

Joe's Friends Are Abandoning Him On CAFE Standards

Detroit Faces Bipartisan Fire Over Fuel Economy
Even Auto Industry Allies Seek Change

By Sholnn Freeman and Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, April 24, 2007; D01

For more than 20 years, the American automotive industry has deflected attempts to force improvements in vehicle mileage. Now Detroit is getting battered on the issue from almost every side, and even industry-friendly lawmakers say change is looming.

Read More

Knollenberg's Online FEC Report is Still Wrong

We reported last week that Knollenberg's report on the FEC website was wrong.

We have been checking to see when it gets corrected. That hasn't happened yet.

The information has been changed, but it still isn't correct!

Such blatant errors and the inability to correct them seem to be a hallmark of both Bush & Knollenberg (e.g., Iraq, Katrina, US Attorney scandal, etc.)

Knollenberg's report still shows that he received $74,800 in contributions from Political Action Committees (PACs). (These PACs represent special interests and are usually very closely tied with lobbyists.)

But when you click on the link to see where the individual PAC contributions came from, they only list $23,000 in donations. So they report $74,800 in contributions, but only show $23,000. Where did the other $52,800 come from?




If Knollenberg is this careless with his FEC reports, does that mean he is this careless when it comes to making decisions on how to vote on key issues in Congress?

Knollenberg Still Unconditionally Supports Bush's War in Iraq -- Part 1

Joe Knollenberg has given Unconditional Support to George Bush's war in Iraq.

In one of his most recent statements, Knollenberg said he was supporting Bush's "STAY THE COURSE", but add more troops plan.

Specifically, Knollenberg said, "I am hopeful that the Administration’s new policy [the additional 21,000 troops] will bring an end to the sectarian violence in Iraq. . ." (March 23, 2007 statement.)

Instead, as we have seen, as more and more troops are added, the violence in Iraq just increases as well. Although only half of the additional troops have even arrived in Iraq, last month was the bloodiest month in the history of the conflict.


Vast Majority of Voters in Michigan Disagree with Knollenberg

But voters in Michigan disagree with Knollenberg on the war. In an April 21, 2007 article, the Detroit News reports that 67% of voters disapprove of Bush's handling of the war.

A full two-thirds of us disapprove of Bush's overall job performance! That is a remarkable statistic.

With only a third of us approving of the President's job performance, one would think that our Congressional representatives would feel similarly. Not because they would be following the polling, but simply because it seems they would be well aware of the same failures and problems of which the rest of us are aware and concerned about. But Knollenberg continues to vote with Bush over 90% of the time -- including unquestioning support for the war in Iraq.

Joe Knollenberg's Position on Iraq is Too Extreme for Oakland County.

What does Joe have against the people of DC having full representation?

Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed H R 1905 District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act, which gives the District its first full seat in Congress. Joe voted against the legislation. It may not have enough votes to pass the Senate, and the president has promised to veto the bill if it reaches his desk. Why don't Republicans want residents of Washington, DC to have full representation? They claim it's because it's unconstitutional -- that only states have the right to representation. But we know the real reason -- the seat will certainly be a sure Democratic seat. However, the compromise for passage included adding a representative to Utah, a heavily Republican seat.

The people of DC do pay taxes, so shouldn't they be entitled to have a voice in Congress? Perhaps a load of teabags on the WH lawn would be in order.

Source: Washington Post
By Mary Beth Sheridan and Yolanda Woodlee
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, April 20, 2007; Page A01A

Bill giving the District its first full seat in Congress cleared the House yesterday, marking the city's biggest legislative victory in its quest for voting rights in nearly three decades.Democrats on the House floor burst into applause, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) grabbed the arms of the District's nonvoting delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, as the 241 to 177 vote was announced.

"There was nothing but joy in the chamber this afternoon," Norton said.

But the bill faces considerable obstacles. Democrats don't appear to have enough votes in the Senate to avoid a filibuster, and the White House has threatened a veto. If the measure becomes law, it probably will be challenged in court.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

Knollen-omics Strikes Again

Joe Knollenberg's positions on economic policies may help his lobbyist friends, but his positions hurt voters in Oakland County.

According to today's Free Press,

After decades of double-digit growth in property values of residential, commercial and industrial properties, Oakland County's assessed value rose by a mere 1.17% in the past year -- the smallest margin in nearly 40 years.

Knollenberg's positions on economic issues favor the super-rich, but hurt middle-class families. When the economy is strong, it can handle bad policy decisions without having as much impact on families. But eventually these bad policy decisions will have an impact -- and they always hurt middle class families the most.

Joe Knollenberg's Economic Policies Hurt Middle-Class Families.

Michigan Democratic Party Launches Knollenberg Watch

The Democratic party of Michigan has joined the clarion call to the public to be looking at Joe Knollenberg's record, as this blog has been doing for months. Welcome aboard. Click here to view the MDP Knollenberg Watch page.

Once Again Joe Knollenberg Shows Neither Leadership Or Vision

Leaders lead.

Joe Knollenberg is not a leader.

Joe Knollenberg is a follower.

We've already discussed how he "follows" the direction of lobbyists and George Bush when it comes to voting on legislation.

But glancing at his new blog illustrates Knollenberg's lack of leadership and vision. The majority of his blog posts start with phrases such as "great column in the Detroit News today" or "The Detroit News has a great story..."

In short, his blog posts are nothing but links to newspaper articles.

Leaders are people with original thoughts. If Knollenberg had any vision or leadership skills, he would use his blog to discuss what is going on in Congress. He would tell us what his positions were and why. We don't need his help to read the local papers.

We need a representative in Congress who understands our concerns and will fight for our best interests. We deserve someone better than Joe Knollenberg.

How Much Does Knollenberg's Chief Lobbyist Cost Taxpayers?

Joe Knollenberg's Chief of Staff is Trent Wisecup, a Washington D.C. lobbyist.

We know that Washington DC lobbyists like Jack Abramoff make millions of dollars a year.

The only reason someone like that would give up a lucrative job like that would be because working on the inside would give him influence over a Congressman's votes and also because it would give him a network of people to call on later when he went back to lobbying. In DC they call it the "revolving door".

But how much does Knollenberg charge taxpayers for his lobbyist's salary? Wisecup isn't listed as an employee for Knollenberg for the last reporting period that ended on 12/31/06. So we don't know his exact salary, we can only guess it must be more than the $105,505 paid to his Constituent Services Director.

Here is what Knollenberg's other staffers make for 3 months work:

Payee Name	Start date	End date	Position	Amount	Notes
Betz, Steven V	10/01/06	12/31/06	Field Representative	$17,750.00
Brown, Eric K	10/01/06	12/31/06	Staff Assistant	$10,000.00
Ciavattone, Shawn	10/01/06	12/31/06	District Staff Director	$23,900.00
Elrod, Ruth R	10/01/06	12/31/06	Staff Assistant	$8,250.00
Foster, Stuart	10/01/06	12/31/06	Congressional Aide	$9,125.00
Geibel, Karen Sue	10/01/06	12/31/06	Executive Assistant	$28,375.00
Goff, Jeffrey	10/01/06	12/31/06	Legislative Associate	$18,999.99
Hallmark, Jessica	10/01/06	12/31/06	Staff Aide	$12,625.00
Hing, Jennifer L	10/01/06	12/31/06	Communications Director	$20,000.00
Johnson, Kathleen I	10/01/06	12/31/06	Constituent Services Director	$26,376.33
Last, Jeffrey M	10/01/06	12/31/06	Staff Assistant	$8,750.00
Lee, Lindsay A	10/01/06	12/31/06	Legislative Correspondent	$10,499.99
Mitchell, Mildred I	10/01/06	12/31/06	Part-time Employee	$8,000.34
Onizuk, Jeffrey M	10/01/06	12/31/06	Assistant to Rep. Knollenberg (P)	$15,455.01
Orear, Mary M	10/01/06	12/31/06	Field Representative	$18,500.00
Schwarz, Lindsay	10/01/06	12/31/06	Legislative Correspondent	$12,689.17
Wilson, Heather	10/01/06	12/31/06	Staff Assistant	$15,250.00
17 results

Knollenberg Keeps His Lobbyist's Very Close & Their Money Too

We have reported numerous times about how Joe Knollenberg's Chief of Staff, Trent Wisecup, is a Washington, DC Lobbyist who used to represent drug companies & who fought to prevent Seniors from being able to import less expensive medication from Canada. We have also reported on Knollenberg's links to other lobbyists such as Mark Valente and Paul Welday.

Well, today we would like to show you a graphical illustration of the donations that Knollenberg gets from his lobbyist friends.

If you look at the charts below, you will see the names of all of Knollenberg's campaign donors for the 1st quarter of 2007. The lines highlighted in red are lobbyists. You'll see some names scattered around on the charts that are highlighted in red -- until you come to page 4 -6 when you'll see a long block of lobbyists and special interest donors.

No wonder Joe Knollenberg votes the way the lobbyists tell him to vote. They pay for it.

What is Wrong With Knollenberg's FEC Reports?

What is wrong with these pictures?








Knollenberg's Federal Election Commission (FEC) report for the 1st Quarter of 2007 is wrong.

There is money reported as having been collected from special interest Political Action Committees (PACs), but according to the FEC, Knollenberg doesn't reveal from whom it was collected.

Click on the document to the left to enlarge it.

You will see that that the FEC lists Knollenberg as having collected:

Total Receipts: $264,311
Transfers From Authorized Committees: $0
Individual Contributions: $187,530
Non-Party (e.g. PACs) or Other Committees: $74,800


But if you went to the original FEC page for that document, and clicked on that last line item, the FEC link to "non-Party (e.g., PACs) or Other Committees", it only lists 4 PACs that contributed for a sum of $9,500. But the line item above clearly shows receipts of $74,800.

That is a difference of ($74,500 - $ 9,500 =) $65,000. In other words, we only know the source of $9,500 of those special interest PAC funds. Where did the $65,000 come from?

Did Knollenberg and his Chief Lobbyist fail

to properly report $65,000

that they got from special interest PACs?

To be fair, and we are always fair, this error could be the fault of the FEC. If it is, then we would expect Knollenberg's campaign staff to make certain that the error is corrected quickly.

Democrats go after Knollenberg Oakland Press 4/17/07

Democrats clearly have Joe in their sights, not because they're "playing politics" as Trent Wisecup likes to repeat again and again and again. Joe Knollenberg is clearly out of step with his constituents, so much so that he won't let anyone that doesn't see things like the war his way even in his office to talk to him, an office taxpayers pay for. Joe thinks people that disagree with him are "liberal agitators." I think beacons for change is a better way to describe those of us that want to see Joe sent back to Bloomfield Hills permanently.

He's so out of touch, he doesn't even mention Iraq as an issue on his web site. And he doesn't acknowledge the 79% of those surveyed in a Birmingham survey that think the escalation in Iraq is bad policy.

I expect we'll see a letter to the editor any day now from a family member of Trent Wisecup, defending Joe's positions.

I wonder if Joe's heard about the water powered car

Someone sent me this video and I can hardly believe it. This car actually runs on water. They also have a web site, Water Powered Car. I checked it out on Snopes.com and I can't find anything that says it's a hoax. The video is of a news report. Joe, do you think the Big 3 could manufacture this or it could be mass produced here in Michigan? I've forwarded the information to Governor Granholm for further investigation. Not to worry, Republicans wouldn't run with a good idea if it hit them upside the head.

The Sunday, April 15th, 2007 edition of the Oakland Press has a great letter to the editor from Thomas Bem of West Bloomfield Township. Tom hits the nail on the head on Joe Knollenberg's backward thinking. It's nice to see that other constituents are catching on to Joe's lack of leadership on important issues, like having our car manufacturers making cars that are cleaner and get better gas mileage. After all, why are we REALLY in Iraq? Could it be the oil? Just asking.