Sen. Bunning, reported tonight as giving the unsenatorial ‘middle digit’ to a reporter, also threw a hissy fit on camera. He was outraged that the press would dare to question him, he an elected public offical, about his purposely standing in the way of vulnerable others’ income support today, essentially monkey-wrenching the government.

But wait, I remember in 2007, Bunning bent over backward to protect his own special homie groups’ incomes. At the same time, he was rabid about defeating the SCHIP bill which would have extended health care for many children and families.

Bunning’s rationale for defeating the bill was so tobacco sellers in his state of Kentucky would not suffer financially should cigarettes be taxed to help decrease devastating and preventable illnesses, and to help extend SCHIP nationwide.

I’ve been to Kentucky many times as a teen, crossing the state line to ‘Loo’ville’ to the road shacks for the most divine get-down nasty blues that side of Chi. I saw how terribly poor many of the Kentuckians were and still are. ‘Tobacco farmer’ is a misnomer for many. Often poor people lived in a shotgun shack with only a tiny front and side yard planted in tobacco. The families were living on subsistence, horribly uneducated, with supperating wounds and loss of teeth and other signs of ill health amongst the poor.

I dont find that Bunning has tried to make this sad part of Kentucky’s economy any better than Michigan had the foresight to try to make inroads to retool/ educate/ manufacturing and autoworkers before it became curtains for most everyone…

and practically all of Northern Indiana, Michigan and parts of Ohio, over time, practically rusted shut permanently.

Bunning’s rationale of quasi-protecting Kentuckian ‘tobacco suppliers’ back in 2007 was that the hazards of cigarette smoking and income to his Kentucky tobacco feeders could not possibly be trimmed. Far better to leave more children without health coverage, and to keep tobacco going so children and adults had a good chance onging to get the ‘habit’ so Bunning’s people could continue to ‘farm’ an increaingly depreciated cash crop.

Just a note, last year 2009, it is said Bunning missed more than half the Senate votes on various bills without reasons given. Colleagues are said to be reporting he is quite secretive about his whereabouts, and increasingly roused to rages. He’s 78 years old.

Bunning says he’s being squeezed out of running 2010 by his own party who oppose fund raising for him. The sad part, to me, is he may be suffering from something that could be way beyond wanting to weirdly go out with a bad ‘lookie at me’ scene. The Republicans who deserve to find a decent and strong transformative moment for their party, aren’t going to find it in Bunning

… or anyone who, for whatever reason, acts like a child tantrumming on the supermarket floor… and obstructs income for those in great need (and who dont even have a front yard planted in tobacco), as well as government projects in situ that cost a mint to stop and then start up again later. Something is wrong re Bunning. Something.

Below is the salient part of Sen Bunning’s speech before Senate in 2007, ‘protecting people’s jobs’ vociferously, albeit with his bizarre ‘logic.’

“…That’s right. Revenue is expected to go down over time as the number of legal sales of tobacco products declines.

Whatever its other problems, the tobacco tax is a poor foundation for SCHIP. We are matching a declining source of revenue with a growing federal program. This does not make fiscal sense.

If we were honest, and truly wanted to fully fund SCHIP spending with a tobacco tax, the federal government would have to encourage people to smoke.

That’s what this chart shows. The federal government would need an additional 22.4 million smokers by the year 2017.

Of course, I don’t support any such effort, but this highlights the budget gap that this bill is sure to create. The revenue for this program is going to have to come from more tax increases down the road.

And we all say we oppose regressive taxes. But what are we considering today? A highly regressive tax. In fact, this tax is among the most regressive types of taxes we could consider.

In my state, the impact on low income taxpayers will be compounded. It will hit low income Kentuckians, Kentucky tobacco farmers, and every citizen of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

Although there has been a dramatic decrease in the amount of tobacco farmers in my state due to the tobacco buyout, tobacco continues to play an important role in Kentucky’s agricultural landscape.

Tobacco barns and small plots of tobacco still dot the Kentucky landscape. Cash receipts for tobacco are projected to contribute between $300 -$350 million to Kentucky’s economy this year.

An increase in the excise tax on tobacco will drive down the demand for consumption. This will result in less tobacco being purchased from Kentucky tobacco farmers by manufacturers – both cigarette and non-cigarette.

It will most likely force the specialty growers in my state – Kentucky burley leaf and Kentucky Wisconsin leaf – out of business. These are small family farms in rural Kentucky that rely on the revenue for their crops.

The money they get from tobacco pays their mortgage, puts their kids through school or allows them to keep farming.

The CBO has estimated that the SCHIP proposal will result in a 5-6% reduction in demand for tobacco during its first year.

This will most likely cause a $5.4 million reduction in payments to rural farmers in my state next year under the master settlement agreement.

Some people will say there’s nothing wrong with all this, because it will force some people to quit smoking and we’re using the money to help poor children.

But, who gets credit for this supposed act of charity? This plan would take money from one group of poor people and give it to another.“