July 6, 2014

Protestors: Comcast Not Paying Its ‘Fair Share’

Democrat-linked company hit with protests for its low tax payments

BY: Bill McMorris
July 3, 2014 3:55 pm

Pennsylvania protestors are taking aim at one of President Barack Obama’s largest corporate supporters for not paying a “fair share” of taxes.

On Sunday, a dozen protestors showed up outside the state capital building in Harrisburg, accusing Comcast and a slew of other major companies of failing to pay enough taxes. The demonstrators chanted “pay your fair share,” in reference to the multi-billion dollar companies tax rate in the state.

Ron Whitehorne, a retired Philadelphia teacher, told a local CBS affiliate that the Fortune 500 company should be forced to pay higher taxes in order to increase education spending in the state.

“We think the policies are out of whack with what the people of our state need. It’s the 1 percent getting everything and the 99 percent is hurting,” Whitehorne said. ”They should be paying their fair share … that is all we are asking. We are not saying don’t make a profit. We’re saying, ‘hey, let’s put some back.’”

Comcast is the parent company of MSNBC, the liberal cable news channel that has championed rhetoric favoring the “99 percent” in recent years.

The telecom giant also has very close ties with the Obama administration. Comcast CEO Brian L. Roberts has golfed with President Obama and executive vice president David Cohen raised $2 million for Obama’s two presidential runs. Cohen has also visited the White House 14 times since 2010.

The company has split its money more evenly in 2014 than it did in 2012, giving Democrats about $850,000 compared to $780,000 for GOP candidates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Pundits predict Republicans have a good chance of recapturing the Senate in November.

The company is working hard to foster more relationships on Capitol Hill. Comcast is courting federal regulators and Washington political players to push through a merger with Time Warner that would give the company control of about 33 percent of the cable market. The company has spent $3 million on lobbyists so far in 2014 after spending nearly $20 million on Washington insiders in 2013, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The left-leaning Citizens for Tax Justice, which is in favor of higher corporate taxes, estimates that the company has paid an average tax rate of 24 percentover the past five years. Comcast spokesman John Demming disputed the notion that the company did not pay enough taxes, highlighting that the Pennsylvania-based company paid the nearly $4 billion in taxes in 2013, including Pennsylvania taxes of nearly $350 million.

Demming pointed out that the company has been a boon to the local and national economy, employing tens of thousands of employees in Pennsylvania and the country.

“Comcast is a significant taxpayer that benefits the state of Pennsylvania [and the country] through economic activity, improved employment, and contributing to charity,” Demming said. “When you look at the numbers themselves, it’s clear that Comcast is a significant contributor.”

This entry was posted in Issues and tagged Comcast, David L. Cohen. Bookmark thepermalink.

July 1, 2014

Hobby Lobby Actually Lavishes Contraception Coverage on Its Employees

By Deroy Murdock

June 30, 2014 9:56 PM

The Left is foaming at the mouth over the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision this morning.

“This is going to turn the dial back,” Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultzwarned on MSNBC. The Democratic party’s national chairwoman added: “Republicans want to do everything they can to have the long hand of government, and now the long hand of business, reach into a woman’s body and make health care decisions for her.”

“Today’s Supreme Court decision unfortunately jeopardizes basic healthcare coverage and access to contraception for a countless number of women,”said Democratic senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire.

Consequently, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said that his party now must “fight to preserve women’s access to contraceptive coverage.”

This is not just garbage. It’s an entire landfill on stilts.

Imagine that a woman starts work at Hobby Lobby tomorrow morning — July 1. She joins Hobby Lobby’s health care plan. It includes access, copay-free, to the following categories of FDA-approved birth-control:

Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Vasectomies
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants

(This new woman at Hobby Lobby cannot use male condoms or a vasectomy, at least not directly. However, if she chose either contraceptive method, in conjunction with her husband, she would have access to it.)

Further, not only would she have access to these medicines and devices, but Hobby Lobby would fund them. That’s right: while White House press secretary Josh Earnest claims that it “jeopardizes the health of women,” Hobby Lobby’s health plan pays for 16 different kinds of contraceptives for its female employees!

In the Left’s fantasy world, the militant Christians at Hobby Lobby police single female employees to assure that they have not engaged in sinful, pre-marital sex. As for married women, Hobby Lobby deprives them of birth control so that each can deliver a new baby every nine months, for God’s glory, just like in the Old Testament.
Liberals are living in a cartoon of their own making.

Again, Hobby Lobby’s health plan pays for birth-control pills, vaginal rings, contraceptive patches, and other items to help female employees plan their pregnancies. The Left’s arguments to the contrary are — surprise, surprise — lies.

What Hobby Lobby will not cover are four contraceptive methods that its owners fear are abortifacients:

Plan B (“The Morning After Pill”)
Ella (a similar type of “emergency contraception”)
Copper Intra-Uterine Device
IUD with progestin

Rather than simply prevent sperm and ova from uniting, Hobby Lobby’s owners believe that these medications either kill human beings when they are fertilized eggs or prevent them from implanting themselves in utero, whereupon they die.

Hobby Lobby does not prevent its female employees from using any of these four types of contraceptives. However, since they believe these innovations kill babies, they simply require that any employees who want to use them buy them with their own money.
The Left behaves as if Hobby Lobby were forcing their female employees to wear burqas. But Hobby Lobby’s policy is no different than, say, walking into the cafeteria at Yeshiva University and demanding a bacon cheeseburger.

“I am sorry,” the cafeteria manager replies. “We keep kosher. If you want a chicken sandwich or some brisket, we can help. Indeed, our prices are subsidized. So, we will help you buy those items. But if you want to mix milk and meat and bite into a pork product, please purchase a bacon cheeseburger at the restaurant across the street. When you are done, please come back to work.”

Likewise, if one were on staff at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and tried to order veal scaloppini at its internal lunch counter, the chef likely would say, “We consider it unethical to kill calves, cook them, and eat them. If you disagree, please enjoy your veal off site and then come back here to help us defend other animals.”

Those who are screaming themselves hoarse after the Hobby Lobby decision would agree that Yeshiva need not serve unkosher food, and PETA need not include calf meat on its menu. Yes, somehow, Hobby Lobby is evil because it pays for 16 kinds of contraceptives, and expects its employees themselves to purchase four others that might kill human babies.

At its core, the Left’s moaning over Hobby Lobby is less about access to medicine and more about access to free stuff.

The Corner

Abortion Advocates Downplaying the Science of Abortifacients

By Jeanne Monahan

July 1, 2014 1:59 PM

Being present when the Supreme Court announced the Hobby Lobby decision on Monday was a moment of joy I will never forget. I was standing next to two friends who are mothers and lawyers and who work professionally to build a culture of life. The three of us were surrounded by about a hundred young, smart, enthusiastic pro-life women who were cheering at the news. It was a culminating moment of emotion and a feeling of justice that will not easily be dimmed.

Afterwards, I sensed a spirit of desperation from abortion advocates. I was a bit shocked at their dishonesty about issues related to “access” and their overall mischaracterization of the decision. The poor folks who run SCOTUSBlog were the unfortunate recipients of misdirected anger and vitriol about the decision (SCOTUSBlog is a private blog sponsored by Bloomberg Law and unconnected to the court). But perhaps most tellingly, abortion proponents are actively trying to downplay the science of the drugs and devices in question in the case.

A few years ago I researched this topic in preparation for testifying before Congress on the HHS mandate. My findings proved that it was scientifically valid to believe that conception and pregnancy begin at fertilization, not implantation; in fact, three out of four American medical dictionaries supported this position until recently,according to one analysis. Furthermore, a number of drugs and devices included in the mandate have mechanisms of action that can prevent implantation; that is, they can cause an early chemical abortion. Examples include the morning-after pill and intrauterine devices (IUDs). In the case of one drug, “Ella,” the mechanisms of action can work post-implantation. For a more in-depth information, please see this study, specifically the section on “abortion inducing drugs.”
There is a world of difference between a drug that prevents life and a drug that can destroy life in its earliest and most vulnerable stages. The HHS mandate and the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby provide an excellent opportunity to educate the public about such life-destructive drugs and devices. Women deserve the right to know how they work upon their bodies and the nascent life in their wombs.

— Jeanne Monahan is president of the March for Life.

June 30, 2014

SCOTUS Rules for Hobby Lobby; Lefties Go Nanners

Posted by V the K at 11:49 am - June 30, 2014.
Filed under: Civil Discourse,Obama Health Care Tax/Regulation

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that some companies cannot be forced to provide birth control and abortifacients to their employees on First Amendment grounds.

The left claims that by not forcing third parties to provide contraceptives and abortifacients to women, these companies are “denying women access to health care.” The left apparently believes that 1.) women are just life-support systems for uteri, and the only health care needs they have are for contraceptives, so that they may provide sexual gratification to men without risk of creating children and 2.) women are stupid, helpless creatures, who must have their contraception provided to them because they are incapable of getting it on their own.

Birth control, by the way, runs about $9 a month for most women.

The left was really, really hoping that Church would once again be forced to bow at the feet of State, but it didn’t happen. So, they responded in the usual manner and spewed the f-word like a sailor with Tourrette’s while threatening Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court, churches, and America generally with vandalism, arson, and murder.

And then, of course, some of us question why, in a free society, the Government has any business whatsoever dictating to private companies what benefits they must provide to their employees.

June 29, 2014

A form of liver disease has quickly emerged

as a public health threat

BY JOE SMYDO

Pittsburgh Post-GazetteJune 29, 2014 Updated 2 hours ago

Obesity in America

TISH WELLS — McClatchy

PITTSBURGH — Renee Terney, who traveled to Erie, Pa., earlier this month to ride the slides at Splash Lagoon, has come a long way in the 2 1/2 years since she was struck by a form of liver disease that has quickly emerged as a public health threat and a challenge to transplant programs.

Blood work and other tests revealed that the Sheraden resident had non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, an accumulation of fat in liver cells associated with poor diet, a sedentary lifestyle and obesity. The damage to Terney's liver was so extensive that she was near death at the time of her May 2013 transplant at Allegheny General Hospital.

Terney, now 48, lost 85 pounds during the ordeal. "My goal is not to put it back on," she said.

Like other chronic conditions and other liver ailments, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease can be a silent killer, with some patients experiencing no symptoms for years or longer.

Jose Oliva, medical director of Allegheny Health Network's liver transplantation program, said it's often discovered when routine blood work ordered by a primary care physician reveals elevated levels of liver enzymes. He said follow-up tests, such as a CT scan or ultrasound, are used to confirm the diagnosis.

If caught early, exercise and improved diet can slow or reverse the disease. "It's behavior modification," Oliva said.

However, there are no medications to assist with treatment, and in the most severe and advanced cases, known as non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, or NASH, scarring of the liver is identical to the damage caused by alcoholism.

Some of these patients - who eventually experience symptoms such as belly pain, jaundice and swelling of the legs, as Terney did - must pin their hope for survival on a transplant.

But livers are in short supply. "There aren't enough now as it is," and a rising tide of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease will make matters worse, said Vinod Rustgi, medical director of liver transplantation for UPMC.

Of about 17,000 people on waiting lists nationwide, Oliva said, only about 6,500 receive transplants each year. Rustgi said 15 percent die before receiving an organ.

According to the American Liver Foundation, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease already is "the most common liver disease in most of the Western world." It affects 30 million Americans, and the numbers are growing.

"We are particularly concerned about the high prevalence of fatty liver disease in children. It is setting them up on a path to liver failure and puts them at significant health risk," foundation Chairman Tom Nealon said in a statement.

Obesity is believed to be the chief culprit.

As obesity has soared in recent decades, so have the diseases associated with it. People depositing fat in their livers are also depositing it in other organs, increasing their risk of cardiovascular disease and other problems. The situation worsens when patients develop type 2 diabetes, Rustgi said.

"I think it's very, very important that people recognize that obesity can shorten life expectancy, and, conversely, longevity has been associated with thinness," he said.

Unlike heart disease, hypertension and type 2 diabetes - long the subject of public awareness and education campaigns - non-alcoholic fatty liver disease remains little known and little understood among the U.S. population. When told they have liver disease, Oliva, some patients are perplexed.

"The first thing they say is, 'I don't drink,' " he said.

More than a year after her transplant, Terney says she feels great. She credited her partner, Nancy Burns, with supporting her fight, and said her five adopted children were an inspiration.

"I wanted to keep going for them," she said.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/06/29/231842/a-form-of-liver-disease-has-quickly.html?sp=/99/200/328/#storylink=cpy

June 22, 2014

The scandal of fiddled global warming data

The US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record

A scene from 'The Day After Tomorrow': in reality, officially approved scientists fudge the data

By Christopher Booker

4:04PM BST 21 Jun 2014

2156 Comments

When future generations try to understand how the world got carried away around the end of the 20th century by the panic over global warming, few things will amaze them more than the part played in stoking up the scare by the fiddling of official temperature data. There was already much evidence of this seven years ago, when I was writing my history of the scare, The Real Global Warming Disaster. But now another damning example has been uncovered by Steven Goddard’s US blog Real Science, showing how shamelessly manipulated has been one of the world’s most influential climate records, the graph of US surface temperature records published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Goddard shows how, in recent years, NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been “adjusting” its record by replacing real temperatures with data “fabricated” by computer models. The effect of this has been to downgrade earlier temperatures and to exaggerate those from recent decades, to give the impression that the Earth has been warming up much more than is justified by the actual data. In several posts headed “Data tampering at USHCN/GISS”, Goddard compares the currently published temperature graphs with those based only on temperatures measured at the time. These show that the US has actually been cooling since the Thirties, the hottest decade on record; whereas the latest graph, nearly half of it based on “fabricated” data, shows it to have been warming at a rate equivalent to more than 3 degrees centigrade per century.

When I first began examining the global-warming scare, I found nothing more puzzling than the way officially approved scientists kept on being shown to have finagled their data, as in that ludicrous “hockey stick” graph, pretending to prove that the world had suddenly become much hotter than at any time in 1,000 years. Any theory needing to rely so consistently on fudging the evidence, I concluded, must be looked on not as science at all, but as simply a rather alarming case study in the aberrations of group psychology.

BOOK: HILLARY HAS BAD HEART Sun Jun 22 2014 18:01:30 ET *Exclusive** A new provocative work by bestselling author Ed Klein claims Hillary Clinton's health problems are much more severe than she has publicly revealed! "She had managed to keep her medical history secret out of fear that, should it become public, it would disqualify her from becoming president," writes Klein in BLOOD FEUD. BLOOD FEUD hits the street this week [it ranked #89 on AMAZON Sunday afternoon.] Page 193 The true story of what happened to Hillary, which is being recounted in these pages for the first time, was radically different from Reines’s version. To begin with, Hillary fainted while she was working in her seventh-floor office at the State Department, not at home, as Reines told the media. She was treated at the State Department’s infirmary and then, at her own insistence, taken to Whitehaven to recover. However, as soon as Bill appeared on the scene and was able to assess Hillary’s condition for himself, he ordered that she be immediately flown to New York–Presbyterian Hospital in the Fort Washington section of Manhattan. When Reines subsequently released a statement confirming that Hillary was being treated at the hospital over the New Year’s holiday, it naturally intensified speculation about the seriousness of her medical condition. While she was at the hospital, doctors diagnosed Hillary with several problems. She had a right transverse venous thrombosis, or a blood clot between her brain and skull. She had developed the clot in one of the veins that drains blood from the brain to the heart. The doctors explained that blood stagnates when you spend a lot of time on airplanes, and Hillary had clocked countless hours flying around the world. To make matters worse, it turned out that Hillary had an intrinsic tendency to form clots and faint. In addition to the fainting spell she suffered in Buffalo a few years before, she had fainted boarding her plane in Yemen, fallen and fractured her elbow in 2009, and suffered other unspecified fainting episodes. Several years earlier, she had developed a clot in her leg and was put on anticoagulant therapy by her doctor. However, she had foolishly stopped taking her anticoagulant medicine, which might have explained the most recent thrombotic event. “The unique thing about clotting in the brain is that it could have transformed into a stroke,” said a cardiac specialist with knowledge of Hillary’s condition. Page 195 According to a source close to Hillary, a thorough medical examination revealed that Hillary’s tendency to form clots was the least of her problems. She also suffered from a thyroid condition, which was common among women of her age, and her fainting spells indicated there was an underlying heart problem as well. A cardiac stress test indicated that her heart rhythm and heart valves were not normal. Put into layman’s language, her heart valves were not pumping in a steady way. When the author attempted to contact the Clintons’ cardiologist, Dr. Allan Schwartz, he refused to comment, which made it impossible to determine the exact nature of Hillary’s medical status or its long-term significance. However, sources who dis- cussed Hillary’s medical condition with her were told that Hillary’s doctors considered performing valve-replacement surgery. They ultimately decided against it. Still, before they released Hillary from the hospital, they warned Bill Clinton: “She has to be carefully monitored for the rest of her life.” Developing...

The IRS signed a contract with Sonasoft, an email-archiving company based in San Jose, California, each year from 2005 to 2010. The company, which partners with Microsoft and counts The New York Times among its clients, claims in its company slogans that it provides “Email Archiving Done Right” and “Point-Click Recovery.” Sonasoft in 2009 tweeted, “If the IRS uses Sonasoft products to backup their servers why wouldn’t you choose them to protect your severs?”

Sonasoft was providing “automatic data processing” services for the IRS throughout the January 2009 to April 2011 period in which Lerner sent her missing emails.

But Sonasoft’s six-year business relationship with the IRS came to an abrupt end at the close of fiscal year 2011, as congressional investigators began looking into the IRS conservative targeting scandal and IRS employees’ computers started crashing left and right.

June 21, 2014

Congressman Stockman introduces hilarious ‘The Dog Ate My Tax Receipts Act!’

June 21, 2014 by Michele Kirk 53 Comments

What’s good for the goose . . .

A week after the IRS announced it would not be producing emails from former Exempt Organizations Division Director Lois Lerner, Texas Congressman Steve Stockman introduced “The Dog Ate My Tax Receipts Act.” The language and premise of the resolution takes a humorous approach to a sobering issue.

The bill states, “All taxpayers shall be given the benefit of the doubt when not producing critical documentation, so long as the taxpayer’s excuse therefore falls into one of the following categories:

1. The dog ate my tax receipts
2. Convenient, unexplained, miscellaneous computer malfunction
3. Traded documents for five terrorists
4. Burned for warmth while lost in the Yukon
5. Left on table in Hillary’s Book Room
6. Received water damage in the trunk of Ted Kennedy’s car
7. Forgot in gun case sold to Mexican drug lords
8. Forced to recycle by municipal Green Czar
9. Was short on toilet paper while camping
10. At this point, what difference does it make?”

The documents requested by House investigators are presumed to “implicate agency personnel in illegal targeting of citizens critical of President Barack Obama,” according to Stockman’s statement.

“The United States was founded on the belief government is subservient and accountable to the people. Taxpayers shouldn’t be expected to follow laws the Obama administration refuses to follow themselves,” said Stockman. “Taxpayers should be allowed to offer the same flimsy, obviously made-up excuses the Obama administration uses.”

The full text of the resolution:

The resolution may be cited as the “Dog Ate My Tax Receipts Resolution.”

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) must allow taxpayers the same lame excuses for missing documentation that the IRS itself is currently proffering

Whereas, the IRS claims that convenient, unexplained, miscellaneous computer malfunction is sufficient justification not to produce specific, critical documentation; and,

Whereas, fairness and Due Process demand that the American taxpayer be granted no less latitude than we afford the bureaucrats employed presently at the IRS;

Now, therefore, be it resolved that it is the sense of the House of Representatives that unless and until the Internal Revenue Service produces all documentation demanded by subpoena or otherwise by the House of Representatives, or produces an excuse that passes the red face test,

All taxpayers shall be given the benefit of the doubt when not producing critical documentation, so long as the taxpayer’s excuse therefore falls into one of the following categories:

1. The dog ate my tax receipts
2. Convenient, unexplained, miscellaneous computer malfunction
3. Traded documents for five terrorists
4. Burned for warmth while lost in the Yukon
5. Left on table in Hillary’s Book Room
6. Received water damage in the trunk of Ted Kennedy’s car
7. Forgot in gun case sold to Mexican drug lords
8. Forced to recycle by municipal Green Czar
9. Was short on toilet paper while camping
10. At this point, what difference does it make?

In any case, IRS can see the NSA for a good, high quality copy.

June 17, 2014

EDITORIAL

What Obama wrought

Highly organized and bloodthirsty, the radical Islamist army called ISIS took but a few days to subjugate the cities of northern Iraq as it dreams of taking over the entire country — while President Obama played it cynically cool.

The group’s stunning, barbaric march prompted the President on Friday to offer to review a range of options because America has “a stake in making sure that these jihadists are not getting a permanent foothold in either Iraq or Syria.”

Returned now to the White House from a long-weekend family vacation in California, the President must face the awful reality that he dodged last week:

ISIS is already firmly in charge of large swaths of both of those countries, has ambitions to devour more and is showily slaughtering scores of captured and unarmed prisoners.

Al Qaeda Nation is being bloodily born before the world’s eyes.

The battle — for now and surely for the long run — has been lost, in no small part because Obama declined to show strength at crucial moments when strength was needed. Still worse, boxed in by his own failures, he’s flailing for a strategy desperately enough to consider partnering with Iran.

Yes, that Iran, the country whose regime has held Americans hostage, exported terror against the U.S., supplied weapons to insurgents who killed American troops in the Iraq War and driven insistently toward nuclear weapons capability. Just this month, the grand ayatollah there scoffed, “American cannot do a damn thing.”

Yes, that Iran. The taste in the mouth is awful.

The world is reaping what Obama helped sow.

Elected on the promise of ending the Iraq War, the President was true to his word. He wound down the conflict, enabling Vice President Joe Biden to boast in 2010 that Iraq was “one of the great achievements of this administration.”

“We’re leaving behind a stable and self-reliant Iraq,” Obama said in 2011 as the last U.S. troops left a war that cost nearly 4,500 of them their lives.

But he left no residual force to combat terrorism, having failed to reach a troop agreement with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. In our absence, ISIS grew quickly into a malignant force.

Made up of Sunni Muslims, who are a minority in Iraq and who despise the Shiite majority, ISIS staged more than 600 attacks in 2011, up from 34 the year before. With no U.S. troops to control them, and with Maliki repressing Sunnis, ISIS followed up in 2012 with more than 400 attacks.

When civil war broke out across the border in Syria, Obama proved impotent. He called for President Bashar Assad’s ouster to no avail. He threatened missile strikes if Assad used chemical weapons, then he dropped the threat after Assad fatally gassed 1,400 people. He considered and then ruled out providing militarily significant arms to moderate anti-Assad forces.

ISIS chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his fighters marched into Obama’s vacuum, seized territory in southern Syria and proclaimed in January that he planned to create his own domain by taking ground in Iraq, including the capital Baghdad.

He also made clear that he had a larger target, saying on an audio recording:

“Our last message is to the Americans. Soon we will be in direct confrontation, and the sons of Islam have prepared for such a day. So watch, for we are with you, watching.”

You can’t say that Obama wasn’t warned.

Overeager to leave Iraq, gun-shy about intervening in Syria and insufficiently vigilant about the rising threat of ISIS, the President opened the way to an Islamist force of unprecedented power.

The toll wreaked by his disengagement from the world and retreat from the use of American influence is severe. While ISIS expands its reach with summary executions possibly running into the thousands, Obama is left to offload onto Maliki all responsibility for the chaos that’s happened and all that’s to come.

That's the easy way for Obama to escape admitting that he blew it.

June 13, 2014

Revealed: Chelsea Clinton earned an annual salary of $600,000 at NBC News even though she is barely on the air and the show she was working for has been cancelled

Chelsea Clinton joined NBC in 2011 but her last segment aired in January
Contract switched from annual to month-to-month because she will not stay with the network if her mother runs for president
Was originally a special correspondent for Rock Center with Brian Williams but the show went off the air in June 2013
Also unclear if she will continue making the infrequent taped segments after she gives birth this fall
News of her salary came the morning after she attended a charity function wearing leather pants, a Chanel necklace and Christian Louboutin heels
She and her husband bought a $10.5million apartment last spring

By MEGHAN KENEALLY

PUBLISHED: 11:56 EST, 13 June 2014 | UPDATED: 15:04 EST, 13 June 2014

View
comments

Chelsea Clinton had a $600,000 annual contract with NBC but has recently switched over to a month-to-month arrangement in case her mother runs for president.

The news network would cut ties with the former first daughter if her mother formally announces that she will be seeking the presidency, and the month-to-month contract would be an easier way to do that.

It is not clear how much she earns in the monthly deal, but Politico reported that her contract was up for renewal or non-renewal this year.

Peacock pay up: Chelsea Clinton started working for NBC in 2011 and making segments for the now-defunct Rock Center with Brian Williams (pictured) but her most recent contribution aired in January

She joined the network as a special correspondent with a three-month trial period starting in November 2011 before she was signed on full time.

The segments that she worked on showed up largely on the now-defunct Rock Center with Brian Williams, and her most recent coverage aired on Nightly News but her last contribution came in January.

More...

Neither NBC nor Clinton commented on the report of her salary, but the number prompted an outcry in the media world.

While it is not uncommon for well-known anchors to earn multiple millions per year, but Clinton's reported annual salary is high for the frequency of her segments.

Earning her keep: Chelsea switched from an annual to a month-to-month contract earlier this year (pictured with her mother watching over her at a function n New York City on Thursday)

Luxury look: Chelsea wore leather pants, a Chanel necklace and Christian Louboutin heels to the Thursday event

By comparison, her salary is higher than both of the last two editors of the New York Times.

The paycheck inevitably helped Chelsea, 34, and her husband when they bought a $10.5million apartment next to New York's Madison Square Park last spring.

It is not clear how much fellow first daughter Jenna Bush Hager, who is a Today Show correspondent, makes as part of her contract.

Paying the mortgage: Chelsea and her husband Marc bought this four bedroom apartment overlooking Madison Square Park in Manhattan for $10.5million last spring

The NBC paycheck is just part of her take-home pay, however, since she has been spending most of her time working for her family's eponymous foundation.

Her mother's expected presidential run is not the only factor that could weigh into her contractural switch from year to month since she is expecting her first child this fall.

She has not discussed what she plans to do when the baby is born and whether or not she will return to NBC as a mom.

The Politico report about Clinton's salary comes just days after her mother's book was released, and during an interview with ABC's Diane Sawyer she said that the family struggled financially after leaving the White House in 2001.

'We came out of the White House not only dead broke but in debt. We had no money when we got there, and we struggled to piece together the resources for mortgages for houses, for Chelsea’s education. You know, it was not easy,' she said.

Chelsea Clinton paid $600K by NBC