Latest Answers

Latest Answers http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/latest/%2A/%2A/%2A/VA a view of answers sorted by date en Actually 1.5 million is too much to be receiving farm subsidies.  The difference is it was 2.5 million and now it’s down to 1.5 million.  And that’s for a couple but $750,000 per individual.  I would liked to have seen a huge drop below that but what you find out around here is if you can get big incremental moves like a third lower than that’s heading the right direction and you better grab a one third incremental move in the right direction and keep pushing to get better. http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/%2526lt%3Bp%2526gt%3Bactually-1.5-million-too-much-be-receiving-farm-subsidies.%2526amp%3Bnbsp%3B-difference-it- http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/%2526lt%3Bp%2526gt%3Bactually-1.5-million-too-much-be-receiving-farm-subsidies.%2526amp%3Bnbsp%3B-difference-it-#comments Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:07:51 -0500 amukherjee 1542 at http://askyourlawmaker.org Mr. Meyer, I voted against the farm bill because I could not see any rationale for the farm bill. I was very upset that we are continuing to pay subsidies to people who make $1.5 million. There’s a lot that’s wrong with the current farm bill. I voted against it. I was one of only three members of the agriculture committee to vote against it. So I don’t think it was a good bill for the United States or for the average citizen. It’s a good bill for a lot of special interests groups but not good for this country. http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/%2526lt%3Bp%2526gt%3Bmr.-meyer%2C-i-voted-against-farm-bill-because-i-could-not-see-any-rationale-farm-bil Thu, 07 Aug 2008 13:58:25 -0500 amukherjee 1540 at http://askyourlawmaker.org It’s my understanding that if people are hired and they turn in a social security number that they are charged or pay social security. Whether or not they ever collect that would depend on whether they ever get legal and are using a social security number that is legal. I am opposed to agreements with other countries that would allow people, for example in Mexico, to pay into their Mexican system and then draw money out of our system or participate in our system. But if a person is working in this country, whether they’re legal or illegal, if they’re using a social security number and paying into the social security system, then I assume that if they can hold on to that social security number, they can get it back. http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/it%E2%80%99s-my-understanding-if-people-are-hired-and-they-turn-social-security-number-they-are-char http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/it%E2%80%99s-my-understanding-if-people-are-hired-and-they-turn-social-security-number-they-are-char#comments Thu, 07 Aug 2008 13:52:32 -0500 amukherjee 1538 at http://askyourlawmaker.org I just haven’t had anybody raise that to us, so we’ll be glad to look into that and see. http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/i-just-haven%E2%80%99t-had-anybody-raise-us%2C-so-we%E2%80%99ll-be-glad-look-and-see. Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:16:21 -0500 Matt Laslo 1391 at http://askyourlawmaker.org Well, the current law does allow sitting Senators to run for another political office- namely President. In my state, in many instances if you decide to run for another office you have to quit your current office. So Congress could change the law, I presume, to allow that. We’d have to have some constitutional scholars tell us if whether constitutionally that’s enforceable or not. But I would say it’s not altogether a decision to do one thing or another, because we have many Senators- I saw Senator Clinton, Senator Obama here today, Senator McCain’s been back frequently on key votes where their votes make a difference to come back and make sure they do that. And of course their staffs continue to work with constituents and the like. But I think it would require an act of Congress to change- that would be my belief. http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/well%2C-current-law-does-allow-sitting-senators-run-another-political-office-namely-president. Thu, 22 May 2008 00:49:00 -0500 Jodi Breisler 1331 at http://askyourlawmaker.org Well, which is really interesting, because you already have many non-citizens serving today. I believe the first soldier who died in Iraq was a non-citizen, someone that illegally immigrated to California, he was an orphan and then joined the Marines and died. I know that we have non-citizens from San Antonio that have died, because actually their funerals took place in Mexico. So you already have that going on to be honest with you. But, no, I don’t think that’s going to be one of these solutions- that if you want to come over here, you join our armed services. You join our armed services because of the love of our country and what it represents. That’s your only motivation, there is nothing back there- whether you are a citizen, non-citizen or whatever it is, you just have to genuinely believe and have that in your heart. We have incentives, which we understand. But this would not be something of a carrot that we would hold out and that way we would plus up our military. That’s not the way we do that. I understand what this particular individual is advocating, but it probably would not be workable. http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/well%2C-which-really-interesting%2C-because-you-already-have-many-non-citizens-serving-today.-i- Thu, 08 May 2008 14:05:27 -0500 Jodi Breisler 1279 at http://askyourlawmaker.org They are only the new jet engines that don’t create noise. It’s based upon a noise level and if they can prove they don’t go over the noise decibel level they are allowed to fly, otherwise the curfew applies. That’s the answer. We got some new jets . . . We are trying to encourage them, that’s the incentive for airlines to make new jets that don’t make noise. http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/they-are-only-new-jet-engines-don%E2%80%99t-create-noise.-it%E2%80%99s-based-upon-noise-level-and-if-they-ca Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:14:00 -0500 Matt Laslo 1245 at http://askyourlawmaker.org Geothermal will play a greater role. The question is how much and how soon? We are dramatically shifting investment over the next three years into renewable energy supplies for the future and geothermal is nearly inexhaustible. And is one where there are more applications than people think and it needs to be a part of a diverse portfolio.” Reporter: “Is funding an issue?” Blumenauer: “Funding will be less of an issue in the next Congress, because we will shift away, there is no question in my mind, from subsidizing the mature sources of the past. We are in the process of shifting subsidy from the mature sources of that are part of our energy past and redirecting it for things that are part of our energy future that aren’t yet mature and for whom this subsidy makes all the difference in the world. I think there will be more money over the next three years and it will be targeted in ways that will magnify its impact. http://askyourlawmaker.org/answers/geothermal-will-play-greater-role.-question-how-much-and-how-soon%3F-we-are-dramatically-shift Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:04:00 -0500 Matt Laslo 1216 at http://askyourlawmaker.org