Showing posts with label repeal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label repeal. Show all posts

Monday, January 6, 2014

2014: The Resurgence of the Tea Party

Posted by Lloyd Marcus on January 5, 2014

It is not looking good for the Tea Party and our efforts to restore America in 2014. The Obama Administration, mainstream media, major liberal advocacy groups and the GOP establishment have launched an extremely well-funded war against us.

So, how do we compete?

Answer: We do what we did in 2010. The Bible says one will put a thousand to flight, but two will put 10,000 to flight. (Deut. 32:30) In other words, when we are united our power and effectiveness increases exponentially. The 2010 Republican sweep of the elections driven by the Tea Party confirms this truth.


Thursday, June 28, 2012

Cantor: House will vote on repeal of Obamacare July 11

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said Thursday that the Republican-led House will vote on repealing the health care law soon after the July 4 recess. Cantor, who sets the floor schedule in the House, said in a statement that the House will vote on the repeal the week of July 9 – which Cantor said will clear the path for “patient-centered reforms that lower costs and increase choice.”


CONTINUED:  http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-congress/2012/06/cantor-house-will...

You have to get ACTIVE. HIT THE PHONES, FAXES, EMAILS, SNAIL MAILS! If you have never contacted Congress before NOW IS THE TIME TO START! Don't just call your representatives, call them ALL!!!

Friday, February 17, 2012

Tea Party Patriots--Road to Repeal Rally

February 17, 2012

Save the Date - Road to Repeal Rally


Dear Patriot,

Save the date and join us on Saturday, March 24, 2012 at 12pm in Washington, DC as we begin our journey down the Road to Repeal.

Are you worried about Government run health care? Are you opposed to the Federal government making medical choices for you? Join thousands of patriots who share your views on ObamaCare. Come to Washington, DC and be a part of the Road to Repeal Rally.

A majority of Americans view government run health care as a sign of what’s to come from big government. More politics, more control and less personal choice.

Recent decisions by the US Department of Health and Human Services show precisely how government run healthcare will work. The government will make healthcare decisions based on political considerations over the needs of individuals.

Say NO to ObamaCare! Say NO to government managed health care!

ObamaCare is set to be heard by the Supreme Court of the United States March 26-28. If the Supreme Court does not throw this monstrosity out, then the battle for our healthcare continutes on into November and January.


Now is the time to act! We need your help to send a strong, clear message to the big government types who are bent on trampling our personal choice and freedom. This is the first stop on the Road to Repeal! We need your help to win this fight and repeal government run health care!

Go to RoadtoRepeal.com for more information and check back often for event updates!

http://roadtorepeal.com/

Monday, February 13, 2012

Legislative Update: February 12, 2012

Compliments of Tea Party Patriots!

TPP Legislative Update & Newsletter

February 13, 2012

Passion to Action:  There are SO many things going on right now, but you can make a huge difference with the following small actions.

CLASS ACT! Call/email/fax your Senators and ask them to bring the CLASS Act Repeal (HR 1173) up for a vote in the Senate, and tell them to vote YES!
NON-RECESS! While you’re on the phone, ask them what they are planning to do about the President’s unconstitutional non-recess appointments, and tell them you expect them to fight back.
REPEAL! Tell everyone you know about the Road to Repeal Rally in Washington DC on March 24. This is the Saturday before the Supreme Court begins to hear arguments on Obamacare. We need to show the world that Americans still want that law repealed.

Federal Budget

Not so happy Valentines Day: Tuesday, February 14 marks the 1021st day since the Senate has passed a budget. Over the last couple of weeks we’ve seen Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and President Obama try to dodge their responsibility in this budget fiasco. They said they had already passed a budget through passing the debt ceiling deal. Everyone knows that’s not accurate. Now they are trying to straight-up lie about what it takes to get a budget passed. On Sunday, the President’s new Chief of Staff, Jack Lew, told the morning news shows that it takes 60 votes to pass anything in the Senate because of the filibuster and the Republican “obstructionist.” THIS IS A BLATANT LIE. As we all learned during the Obamacare debate, the Senate may use the process of reconciliation to pass budgetary items with only 51 votes so that budgets are immune to filibustering. This also doesn’t address the fact that the Democrats had total control of the House, the Senate, and the White House for two years and only managed to pass one budget instead of two.
Obama’s Budget: The President finally released his budget today, and as expected, it would give us deeper deficits, increased spending, bigger government, and higher taxes. Key facts from his budget:
          o Spends Too Much:
                $47 trillion of government spending over the next decade
                Proposes a net increase over current spending projections
         o Taxes Too Much:
               $1.9 trillion in new taxes
               Raises taxes, not to pay down the debt, but to fuel more government
                  spending
         o Borrows Too Much:
              Four straight years of trillion-dollar-plus deficits; no plan to reduce the debt
              Gross debt at the end of FY22: $25.9 trillion
        o Budget Gimmicks & Broken Promises
              Overstates new deficit reduction by taking credit for savings already enacted
              Exploits discredited budget gimmick by “not spending” nearly $1 trillion that
                 was never going to be spent

Read more about President Obama’s budget here. And don’t forget, Obama has missed the budget deadline three out of four years. If you’d like to read the President’s one-pager on his budget, click here.
Reports: The RSC puts out a weekly Budget and Spending Task Force report. Check it out here. They also put out a report called “Money Monitors” so be sure to check them both out, as there is good information there.
History of Deficits: Read a paper titled, “A short history of federal deficits and surpluses,” and stay ahead of the spin regarding the budget.

Constitutional Issues

New Website: Please check out a new website called the Intolerable Acts at http://www.theintolerableacts.org/. There you will find resources to fight against the unconstitutional provisions embedded within the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). There are a number of states that are fighting back by passing resolutions. You can find templates, etc. on the website to use with your own local and state elected officials.
Still Confused? Are you still confused about NDAA? Click here for a good explanation of why it’s so bad.

Jobs & Economic Growth

Increasing American Competitiveness: Check out Mercatus Center’s research fellows’ testimony to the Senate Committee on Finance on tax reform. Also take a look at their testimony to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce about how government can’t really “create” jobs and what it takes for long-term prosperity.
Green Jobs: The fraud behind the President’s “green jobs” initiatives.
Real Energy Jobs: The American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act of 2012 (HR 7) passed through committee and is now moving through the Rules Committee in preparation of bringing it to the floor for a vote. Read more about it here. According to the Speaker & the Republicans, HR 7:
     o Removes barriers to job growth by approving the Keystone pipeline rejected
        by President Obama, lifting the president’s offshore drilling ban, opening a small
        portion of ANWR, and more;
     o Eliminates wasteful spending and earmarks, eliminates nearly 70 duplicative
        federal transportation programs, and ensures taxpayer dollars are spent on
        highways – not ‘beautification’ projects and other non-highway activities;
     o Cuts the permitting time in half by speeding up bureaucratic approvals, and
        delegates more decision-making authority to where it belongs: individual states, not
        Washington; and more.

Note: See below in the summary of what the House is up to this week to read about conservative concerns with HR 7.

Obamacare

Business group states case against health care mandate
Obama appointee muzzled Army chaplains, forbade reading of anti-Obamacare Catholic Archdiocese letter
Obama’s covert war on insurers succeeding
Final rules make a mish-mash of ACO’s
Medicaid bait and switch
Everything you wanted to know about Medicare Premium Support & more here
Obama’s war on religion causes buyer’s remorse Loopholes may cost sick workers their coverage
Supreme Court must consider threat to doctor-patient relationship
Obama’s war on religion: No ceasefire on either side & the statement from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops
Obamacare mastermind admits premiums to soar
Cuccinelli and Coakley debate on C-SPAN
43 Republican Senators filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court to challenge the individual mandate
Liberty Legal Foundation file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court that connects Obamacare with the 1942 precedent of Wickard v. Filburn that allowed for the expansion of the commerce clause
American Action Forum filed two amicus briefs with the Supreme Court that explain how the expansion of Medicaid and the individual mandate render the entire law unconsitutional
CMS refuses to answer question about whether or not seniors can purchase health care with their own money
Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) has introduced legislation to restore religious freedom to repeal the new Obamacare mandate that was just created by the Health and Human Services – the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 2012
Democrats abandoning unconstitutional violation of religious liberties
Obama’s fraudulent “accommodation” on mandates for Catholic Church
Obama’s Chief of Staff says there will be no more compromises on mandates

Education

Teacher’s Unions Don’t Care: On the New Jersey Capitol Report this past weekend, New Jersey Education Association Director Vincent Giordano was asked his views on a legislative proposal to offer private scholarships to low-income students who attend public schools judged to be under-performing. Giordano, who according to Newark Star-Ledger earned roughly $422,000 from the union in 2010, said he supported low-income children attending private schools as long as they paid for it themselves. When asked whether that was a practical solution, given their household income, Giordano responded: “Well, you know, life’s not always fair and I’m sorry about that.”

Sustainable Development

We must be making a difference: The left now feels obligated make fun of us. In their view, critics MUST be extremists. Read here and here.
UN Treaties: Dick Morris discusses various UN treaties that President Obama’s administration is considering.
Property Rights Council: The Property Rights Council is a group that has formed to be proactive in the fight to protect property rights. So rather than always playing defense, it’s time we started playing offense.
RNC Resolution: The RNC resolution opposing sustainable development is making a big splash. Here’s a taste – ‘Lawson read an excerpt of the resolution: "Whereas, the United Nations Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control that was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment…”’ Will your legislators sign the RNC Resolution?
From Across the Pond: Please listen to our friends across the pond and the horror of sustainable development as it destroys Europe. Listen here.
Confused about America's Poor Economy? Here is why...
EPA now "regulates" affordable housing: Affordable housing is subsidized housing, and just like with anything else subsidized by the government, this is why these Smart Growth neighborhoods are so expensive. When you seal off the majority of the land from development the remaining land becomes extremely scarce and expensive. Then throw in affordable housing (subsidized housing) which generates no taxes and you have truly unaffordable living standards for those that go to work everyday. Look at CA. This is why it is so expensive to live there and getting worse. People are leaving CA by the truckload.
HR 3864: Legislation in the House that seeks to eliminate dedicated funding for the Mass Transit Account. Mass Transit is a staple of sustainable development so defunding this would be great.
For Local Government Officials: Need help explaining why sustainable development practices are dangerous to property rights? Send this video to your local government officials to educate them.
Petition: Recently President Obama signed an executive order establishing the President's Global Development Council. This Council is tasked with implementing sustainable development programs across the country. You can sign a petition here to ask Speaker Boehner to do something to combat this.

Illegal Immigration

Documentary: TPP North Carolina State Coordinator Mark Hager assisted with the documentary titled, “Invasion: Freedom Under Fire!” about the struggles of American citizens who live along the southern border. If you would like to order a copy, please click here for more information.
Waivermania: Kansas’ Agriculture Secretary is asking the Department of Homeland Security for a waiver so that agricultural businesses in Kansas could hire illegal immigrants. The agriculture businesses and others in the business community are supporting this effort. So far the Obama administration have handed out healthcare waivers and educational waivers. Are illegal immigrant waivers next? When waivers become the law of the land, there is no law.
Alabama Too: The Attorney General in Alabama is trying to get the legislature to gut their new, stricter laws dealing with illegal aliens because he doesn’t want to have to go to court to fight for it. The Chamber of Commerce and the agricultural businesses are also supportive of the attempt to gut the laws.

House of Representatives

*Summary information provided by the RSC

Weekly Wrap Up

Civilian Property Realignment Act — Last week, the House approved H.R. 1734, the Civilian Property Realignment Act, by a vote of 259-164. The Federal government owns more real property than any other entity in America (900,000 buildings). Republicans have long advocated selling the most wasteful of these properties. H.R. 1734 establishes an independent commission known as the Civilian Property Realignment Commission (CPRC) to provide recommendations on civilian federal properties that can be sold, transferred, exchanged, consolidated, or redeveloped, so as to reduce the civilian real property inventory, reduce the operating costs of the government, and create the highest value and return for the taxpayer. Specifically, the CPRC would be required to identify not less than five federal properties that have a total market value of at least $500 million and transmit the list to the president and Congress within 180 days. Once approved by the president, CPRC’s recommendations would be considered in Congress under expedited procedures. Under the bill, the CPRC would sunset six years after enactment. According to CBO, the bill would cost $3 million in FY 2012 and $68 million over the FY 2012 through FY 2017 period. However, H.R. 1734 could result in the sale of at least five high-value federal properties with an estimated total fair market value of at least $500 million, which would fully offset the funding provided in the bill and reduce the deficit by an additional $432 million.
Budget Transparency — Also last week, the House approved H.R. 3581, the Budget and Accounting Transparency Act, by a vote of 245-180. This legislation will require federal credit programs to be accounted for on a fair value accounting basis. This means that federal accounting would have to consider not just the borrowing costs to the federal government, but also the cost of the market risk the federal government is incurring. The purpose of the bill is to bring federal budgeting practices in line with the private-sector in order to paint a more accurate picture of federal finances. Under current law, the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (FCRA) requires that the credit subsidy cost of federal direct loans and loan guarantees be measured on a “net present value” basis, which determines the cost of a loan program based on calculations using the interest rates on Treasury securities. However, this calculation ignores additional costs associated with market risks. According the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), “By incorporating a market-based risk premium, fair-value estimates recognize that the financial risk that the government assumes when issuing credit guarantees is more costly to taxpayers than FCRA-based estimates suggest.” By more accurately accounting for the costs of federal credit programs, H.R. 3581 increases the estimated costs of such programs compared to measures used under current law. According to CBO, if fair-value procedures were used to estimate the cost of new credit activity in 2012, the total deficit for the year would be about $55 billion greater than the deficit as measured under current estimating procedures. However, since the legislation would not
change the terms of such credit programs, but would change what is recorded in the budget as the cost of credit assistance, the changes in the estimates of the costs of credit programs would not be scored by CBO as attributable to H.R. 3581.
Line-Item Veto — On Wednesday, the House approved H.R. 3521, the Expedited Line-Item Veto and Rescissions Act, by a vote of 254-173. H.R. 3521 establishes an expedited procedure for consideration of presidential proposals to rescind certain spending provisions in newly enacted spending legislation. Under the expedited procedure, Congress will be required to consider proposals to rescind specific funding included in spending legislation if the rescission is proposed by the president within 45 days of the spending bill’s enactment. Under the legislation, any savings achieved through these procedures would be used for reducing the deficit or increasing the surplus. The authority of the president to propose rescission packages for expedited consideration established by H.R. 3521 would expire on December 15, 2015. According to CBO, “enacting H.R. 3521, by itself, would not have a significant impact on the federal budget. Any impact on the budget would depend on the extent of the President’s use of the new cancellation procedure and on future Congressional actions.”
STOCK Act — Yesterday, the House approved an amendment to S. 2038, the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act, by a vote of 417-2. The bill makes clear that Members of Congress, Congressional employees, and executive and judicial branch employees are prohibited from using nonpublic information for private profit. The bill also amends the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 and the Ethics in Government Act and would require the Senate and the House of Representatives to implement an electronic filing system for financial disclosure forms, as well as provide the public with on-line access to that information in a searchable database. In addition, the legislation requires timelier reporting of certain financial transactions by Members of Congress, Congressional employees, and executive and judicial branch officials and employees. The House amendment strengthens the Senate’s STOCK Act, expands the scope of the bill to require more financial disclosures by government employees, and ensures that the law is workable and meets the goal of preventing those who hold public office (and their staff) from profiting from insider information. According to CBO, implementing this legislation would cost $4 million over the 2012-2013 period primarily for new computer hardware and software and additional labor to support the financial disclosure system required under the bill. In addition, maintaining the new system would cost $1 million annually, CBO estimates. In total, CBO estimates that implementing the legislation would cost about $9 million over the 2012-2017 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.

The Week Ahead

Transportation Bill — This week, the House may consider H.R. 7, the American Energy & Infrastructure Jobs Act. The American Energy & Infrastructure Jobs Act would provide a five-year extension of federal highway and transit programs. The bill would eliminate all earmarks from the highway bill. The last surface transportation law approved by Congress in 2005 contained over 6,300 earmarks. The bill would cut red tape and streamline highway funding by consolidating or eliminating nearly 70 highway programs and eliminating mandates that prevent states from funding infrastructure needs. However, there are two main areas that cause serious concern for many conservatives. First, the cost of the legislation. The bill proposes $262 billion in spending over the next five years. This is an increase over the amount of $191.5 billion that was proposed in July and consistent with the House-passed budget. Furthermore, CBO estimates that gas tax revenues will be $193 billion over the next five years. That leaves a funding gap of roughly $70 billion. And while some of that gap may be covered from revenues from increased domestic energy production, many conservatives believe that we should use that revenue to reduce the deficit, not for new spending. The legislation also makes it harder to make the conservative case that road users—through the gas tax—pay the cost of the federal highway program. Second, many conservatives have long argued that the overwhelming majority of transportation programs and spending should be devolved to the states. While there is increased state flexibility in this bill, it falls short of devolution.
Payroll Tax Cut Extension — Also this week, the House may consider legislation relating to H.R. 3630, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2011. H.R. 3630 was approved in the House on December 13, 2011 by a vote of 234–193. The House-passed version of H.R. 3630 provided an offset one-year extension of the current payroll tax rates, a delay in the implementation of the Medicare Sustainable Growth Rate (the so-called “Doc Fix”), and an extension of reformed Unemployment Insurance benefits. Currently these programs are operating under two-month extension (H.R.3765) set to expire on February 29, 2012.

Senate

The Senate will convened at 2:00 p.m. today and was in Morning Business until 4:30 p.m. At 4:30 p.m., the Senate began debate on cloture on Executive Calendar #437, Adalberto Jose Jordan, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit. At 5:30 p.m., the Senate should be voting on cloture on the nomination.
Once the Senate completes action on the Jordan nomination, the Senate will pivot back to S.1813, the Highway bill (current extension expires 3/31/12). Currently pending to S.1813 is Reid (for Johnson (SD)/Shelby) amendment #1515 (transit title). They expect the remaining Committee measures (Commerce and Finance) will also be voted on as separate amendments later this week. At this point, it is unclear if they will complete action on the Highway bill this week.
In addition to the Highway bill, other items which are possible for floor action this week include: Payroll Conference Report and/or STOCK Act. The House amended S.2038, the STOCK Act, by a vote of 417 to 2 last week. It is unclear if a Conference Committee will be convened or if Leader Reid will turn to the House passed bill.
Next scheduled Senate and House recess: February 20th – February 24th.
Legislative items which are possible during the next work period include: Cybersecurity; Postal Reform; CLASS Act Repeal (H.R.1173).
Upcoming “No Vote Days” in the Senate: March 5th, March 12th, and March 19th.
Harry Reid resurrects SOPA.

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

Nationwide NDAA 2012 Congressional Protest

Congressional Offices Throughout the CountryTHIS IS A MONTHLY PROTEST THAT STARTED ON FEB. 3RD AND WILL CONTINUE ON THE FIRST FRIDAY AND SATURDAY OF EACH MONTH UNTIL NDAA 2012 IS REPEALED.


Americans will gather at congressional offices and other public places the first Friday and Saturday of each month to protest NDAA 2012 (H.R. 1540). The organizers of each protest should decide which location is best for their area. Look at the links below to find out how your congressmen voted (under house and senate) and their local office locations.

This is a new page to help organize protests across the country: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.280660888662374.65795.248343955227401&type=3

House
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-932

Senate
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-230

Office Locations for Congressmen
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state&Sort=ASC
http://www.house.gov/representatives/

More info on NC Renegade
http://ncrenegade.com/

Saturday, January 14, 2012

THE HERITAGE INSIDER: Why the Davis–Bacon Act Should Be Repealed

By James Sherk
January 12, 2012

What Is the Davis–Bacon Act (DBA)?
  • The DBA requires federal construction contractors to pay at least the wage rates prevailing on non-federal construction projects in the same locality.
  • The act was intended to prevent the purchasing power of the federal government from driving down construction wages during the Great Depression.
  • The act applies to contractors and subcontractors performing on federally funded or assisted contracts in excess of $2,000 for the construction, alteration, or repair (including painting and decorating) of public buildings or public works.
  • To calculate the wages that contractors must pay, the Wage and Hour Division (WHD) surveys construction wages and publishes prevailing wage determinations for each county in the United States. Federal contractors must then pay their employees at least the prevailing wage for each class of worker.
Policy Concerns
  • In most cities, DBA wages bear no resemblance to prevailing market wages. In some cities, DBA rates are more than double market wages. In other cities, DBA rates are the minimum wage.
  • DBA wages differ from actual construction wages because fundamental flaws mar the process used to determine prevailing wages.[1]
    • WHD uses unscientific self-selected survey samples.
    • Most DBA estimates are based on responses from fewer than 30 workers—too few to accurately estimate wages even if the survey were scientifically representative.
    • Inspector general audits found errors in 100 percent of wage reports examined.
    • Most prevailing wage surveys are years out of date. Some rates in effect have not been updated since the 1970s.
  • DBA rates average 22 percent above market wages.[2] This needlessly inflates the cost of federal construction and wastes taxpayer dollars.
  • Where DBA rates are below market wages and the federal government is a major construction employer, the government’s purchasing power can depress wages—precisely the effect the law was intended to prevent.[3]
  • Despite the proven flaws in the DBA, proponents of the act continue to call for its expansion to private-sector construction projects. Private-sector employers do not have the same purchasing power as the federal government, and there is no economic justification for extending DBA coverage to private construction.
Economic Effects
  • The DBA increases the cost of federally funded construction projects by 9.9 percent.
  • Repealing the DBA restrictions would allow the government to build more infrastructure and create 155,000 more construction-related jobs at the same cost to taxpayers.
    • Tax dollars could be used to build more for less money. Instead, the DBA builds less for more money.
  • Alternatively, repealing the act would have saved the federal government $10.9 billion on construction costs in 2011.[4]
  • The DBA’s requirements make it extremely difficult for minority, open-shop contractors to employ and train unskilled minority workers. Given that unskilled workers must be paid the same wage as skilled workers, there is no incentive to hire the unskilled worker.
    • Ralph C. Thomas, executive director of the National Association of Minority Contractors, stated that a minority contractor who acquires a DBA contract has “no choice but to hire skilled tradesmen, the majority of which are of the majority. This defeats a major purpose in the encouragement of minority enterprise development—the creating of jobs for minorities.… [The DBA] closes the door in such activity in an industry most capable of employing the largest numbers of minorities.”[5]
    • Eliminating prevailing wage requirements raises minority wages.[6]
James Sherk is Senior Policy Analyst in Labor Economics in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation.
http://www.insideronline.org/summary.cfm?id=16607

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Have You Done All You Can Do for Senate Repeal Amendment Yet?

The Senate still has not voted on the Repeal Amendment. Sen. Reid has put up a procedural hurdle that will require the Repeal Amendment to have 60 votes to be attached to the Federal Aviation bill (S 223).

February 2, 2011--Vote is expected around 5-6:00 pm!

HAVE YOU DONE ALL YOU CAN TO INFLUENCE THE SENATE? The time is now to put more pressure on the Senate. We need to know which Senators are willing to vote in favor of the will of the people. We need to know which Senators are willing to stand with the Ruling Elite to prevent the repeal of government controlled health care.

Today we are witnessing a hunkered down, ruling elite minority in the Senate, using procedural "tricks" to prevent the repeal of Obamacare from coming to a vote in the Senate. The American public has consistently expressed its majority opinion in opposition to Obamacare, both before and subsequent to its passage. In November 2010, the American public clearly expressed its opinion in elections in which the President and his party, by his own words, took a "shellacking." That shellacking, in large measure was due to a rejection of Obamacare and the expansive and intrusive approach to government which it represented. Fulfilling a campaign promise, the House of Representatives repealed Obamacare by an overwhelming margin (far more than by the narrow margin by which it originally passed). Two federal courts have ruled that the individual mandate of Obamacare is unconstitutional. Preventing such a vote, and preventing the people from knowing where their own Senators stand on the issue is dishonest, and frankly looks like tyranny to us.

Harry Reid, and the rest of the ruling elite in the Senate are acting like colonial governors prior the Revolutionary War; doing the bidding of King Obama while ignoring the will of the American people. It is time for those governors to respect the will of the American people, and the wisdom of the courts. Thanks to the genius of the Founding Fathers, if they do not do so they will be removed from power; not by a violent revolution, but by the continuation of a peaceful electoral revolution which began in 2010.

Immediate Passion to Action To List:

Regardless of where you live, call your own Senators and tell them to vote for the repeal of Obamacare.

If you live in NM, PA, WV, MO, FL, NE, MT, or VA ask your friends, family, and neighbors to call make those calls to the Senators in your state.

Regardless of where you live, change your facebook, twitter, and other social media statuses to "Call your Senators NOW to tell them to vote for the repeal of Obamacare today."

If you know people who live in NM, PA, WV, MO, FL, NE, MT, or VA, call and email them asking them to call their Senators as well.

The following are the best Senators to call to encourage to vote for the repeal of government controlled health care.

Bingaman, Jeff (D-NM): (202) 224-5521
Casey, Robert P. (D-PA): (202) 224-6324
Manchin, Joe (D-WV): (202) 224-3954
McCaskill, Claire C. (D-MO): (202) 224-6154
Nelson, Bill (D-FL): (202) 224-5274
Nelson, Ben (D-NE): (202) 224-6551
Tester, Jon (D-MT): (202) 224-2644
Webb, James H. (D-VA): (202) 224-4024

These are our second tier Senators to call to encourage to vote for the Repeal Amendment:

Akaka, Daniel (D-HI): (202) 224-6361
Brown, Sherrod (D-OH): (202) 224-2315
Cantwell, Maria (D-WA): (202) 224-3441
Cardin, Ben (D-MD): (202) 224-4524
Carper, Tom (D-DE): (202) 224-2441
Conrad, Kent (D-ND): (202) 224-2043
Gillebrand, Kristen (D-NY): (202) 224-4451
Kohl, Herb (D-WI): (202) 224-5653
Liberman, Joe (D-CT): (202) 224-4041
Menendez, Bob (D-NJ): (202) 224-4744
Nelson, Bill (D-FL): (202) 224-6551
Sanders, Bernie (D-VT): (202) 224-5141
Stabenow, Debbie (D-MI): (202) 224-4822
Whitehouse, Sheldon (D-RI): (202) 224-2921

Note: All the Republicans have already agreed to vote in favor of the Repeal Amendment to S 223.

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

NTUF Preliminary Analysis of H.R. 2

THE TAXPAYERS TAB
NEWS FROM THE NTU FOUNDATION BillTally PROJECT

Wed, January 19, 2011
From: National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF)

Vol. 2 Issue 2 January 19, 201

NTU State of the Union Address Coverage

The National Taxpayers Union would like to invite you to our second annual coverage of the President's State of the Union Address. Starting at 9 p.m. on Tuesday, January 25th, join with policy experts, activists, and fellow citizens in a national dialogue on the President's agenda and how it affects taxpayers.

The conversation will cover four social media outlets to help you discuss the speech in the most effective way you see fit. Using @NTU on Twitter, users can link with other NTU Members by using the hashtag #SOTU and #NTUSOTU. The NTU Facebook page and blog, GovernmentBytes.com, will also be open for comments throughout the entire night. For a special real-time interactive experience, NTU.org will also host a dedicated chat room for anyone to discuss developments as they happen.

Be sure to mark your calendars for next Tuesday's NTU coverage of the President's State of the Union Address!

NTUF Preliminary Analysis of H.R. 2

H.R. 2, the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act," sponsored by Eric Cantor (VA), would repeal last year's controversial Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The bill would also repeal the health-related sections of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, which used the budget reconciliation process to modify the PPACA before it was sent to the President for his signature.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) stated that it has not yet completed a detailed analysis of the budgetary impact of repealing those laws. In the meantime, it released a preliminary estimate of the changes in direct spending and revenues, reporting that H.R. 2 would increase the deficit by around $230 billion over the next ten years. This figure includes the repeal of costs to expand health care coverage under the law, savings that were assumed to occur in Medicare, and taxes established in the law (Americans for Tax Reform has compiled a comprehensive list of all the new taxes in the health care law). After a few days and numerous questions regarding this estimate, CBO provided some additional information: the bill would lower revenues (i.e., taxes) by $770 billion and lower spending by $540 billion.

Since BillTally only looks at the spending effects of legislation, these numbers are more helpful. However, the estimate excludes any changes in discretionary spending. It also fails to provide a year-by-year breakdown of the outlays. Under BillTally's methodology, a five-year budget window is used to determine the cost of legislation. Much of the spending in the PPACA occurs beyond that five-year window as components of the complex law are gradually implemented. Until CBO publishes its complete analysis of H.R. 2, NTUF will rely on data gleaned from CBO analyses released last year to estimate the cost of the health care package. Over Fiscal Years 2011 through 2015, H.R. 2 would decrease outlays by $102.679 billion, or $20.536 billion annually.

Estimated Budgetary Impact of H.R. 2 for FY 2011-2015 (in millions of dollars)
SEE CHART AT:  http://www.ntu.org/ntuf/taxpayerstab/2-2.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About NTUF

The National Taxpayers Union Foundation is a research and educational organization dedicated solely to helping citizens of all generations understand how tax policies, spending programs, and regulations at all levels affect them now and in the future. Through NTUF's timely information, analysis, and commentary, we're empowering citizens to actively engage in the fiscal policy debate and hold public officials accountable every day.

NTUF is a 501(c)(3) research and education organization. Donations are deductible for personal income tax purposes. Please make a donation today to help further NTUF's mission of research and education!

This information is for educational purposes only and is not intended to aid or hinder the passage of any legislation or as a comment on any Member's fitness to serve. Cosponsor information obtained from GovTrack.us.

Friday, October 8, 2010

The Patriot Post

New & Notable Legislation

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) introduced legislation for the lame-duck session that would repeal right-to-work laws in 22 states. Currently, workers in those states employed in unionized companies can choose whether to join the union and pay dues. In the other 28 states, known as "forced dues" states, it's legal for unions to mandate that all workers pay union dues and to fire workers who don't comply. This is a blatantly obvious power grab by unions and their minions in the Democrat Party. Sherman disguises it as an attempt to level the playing field for "forced dues" states like his native California that "have to compete with the race to the bottom as our companies have to compete with those where the workers would like better wages, working conditions and benefits but are unable to organize to get them."


Sherman is either incorrect or just plain lying about the fact that workers in right-to-work states don't have the right to unionize. Nothing prevents unionizing in these states other than workers' votes. Furthermore, while he's correct that California businesses are losing out to right-to-work states, that's because unions have put such a squeeze on companies to enrich their own bank accounts that many choose not to set up shop there. Others have simply moved to other states.

Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) introduced legislation that would require the president to deploy a minimum of 10,000 National Guard troops to the southern border in an effort to stem the tide of illegal immigration. "The uniqueness of this," said Poe, is that the troops "would be paid by the federal government, because everybody says it is the responsibility of the federal government to protect the border. So the federal government will use the resources it already has to pay for those 10,000 National Guard troops, but they will be supervised by the governors of the four states on the border."

In other news, the House is waiting on the Senate to take action on some 420 bills it has passed since January 2009. We never thought we'd say it, but we're thankful for the 111th Senate.

http://patriotpost.us/edition/2010/10/08/digest/

Monday, April 26, 2010

Rx on Obamacare: Don't get sick | Washington Examiner

Rx on Obamacare: Don't get sick Washington Examiner

Economic experts from President Obama's own Health and Human Services Department have released a devastating report noting that Obamacare "will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010-2019," according to the Associated Press. Even worse, "Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15 percent of hospitals into the red and 'possibly jeopardizing access' to care for seniors." In other words, to recall the words of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Congress had to pass the bill before we could begin discovering what's in it. And what we are finding is frequently the opposite of what Obama, Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic advocates told us. Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Rx-on-Obamacare_-Don_t-get-sick-92050239.html#ixzz0mDKewjmI

Monday, March 29, 2010

REPUBLIC vs. DEMOCRACY

REPUBLIC vs. DEMOCRACY


________________________________________



I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands,

one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."



SUMMARY

In the Pledge of Allegiance we all pledge allegiance to our Republic, not to a democracy. "Republic" is the proper description of our government, not "democracy." I invite you to join me in raising public awareness regarding that distinction.

A republic and a democracy are identical in every aspect except one. In a republic the sovereignty is in each individual person. In a democracy the sovereignty is in the group.

Republic. That form of government in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. [NOTE: The word "people" may be either plural or singular. In a republic the group only has advisory powers; the sovereign individual is free to reject the majority group-think. USA/exception: if 100% of a jury convicts, then the individual loses sovereignty and is subject to group-think as in a democracy.]

Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. [NOTE: In a pure democracy, 51% beats 49%. In other words, the minority has no rights. The minority only has those privileges granted by the dictatorship of the majority.]

________________________________________

The distinction between our Republic and a democracy is not an idle one. It has great legal significance.

The Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to "liberty and justice for all." Minority individual rights are the priority. The people have natural rights instead of civil rights. The people are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy. (see People's rights vs Citizens' rights)

In a pure democracy 51 beats 49[%]. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority: there are no minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority. Only five of the U.S. Constitution's first ten amendments apply to Citizens of the United States. Simply stated, a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority. Socrates was executed by a democracy: though he harmed no one, the majority found him intolerable.

SOME DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS

Government. ....the government is but an agency of the state, distinguished as it must be in accurate thought from its scheme and machinery of government. ....In a colloquial sense, the United States or its representatives, considered as the prosecutor in a criminal action; as in the phrase, "the government objects to the witness." [Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 625]

Government; Republican government. One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. [Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 626]

Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, pp. 388-389.

Note: Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, can be found in any law library and most law offices.

COMMENTS

Notice that in a Democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the free citizens. The sovereignty is not divided to smaller units such as individual citizens. To solve a problem, only the whole body politic is authorized to act. Also, being citizens, individuals have duties and obligations to the government. The government's only obligations to the citizens are those legislatively pre-defined for it by the whole body politic.

In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people themselves, whether one or many. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives as he chooses to solve a problem. Further, the people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the people, is obliged to its owner, the people.

The people own the government agencies. The government agencies own the citizens. In the United States we have a three-tiered cast system consisting of people ---> government agencies ---> and citizens.

The people did "ordain and establish this Constitution," not for themselves, but "for the United States of America." In delegating powers to the government agencies the people gave up none of their own. (See Preamble of U.S. Constitution). This adoption of this concept is why the U.S. has been called the "Great Experiment in self government." The People govern themselves, while their agents (government agencies) perform tasks listed in the Preamble for the benefit of the People. The experiment is to answer the question, "Can self-governing people coexist and prevail over government agencies that have no authority over the People?"

The citizens of the United States are totally subject to the laws of the United States (See 14th Amendment of U.S. Constitution). NOTE: U.S. citizenship did not exist until July 28, 1868.

Actually, the United States is a mixture of the two systems of government (Republican under Common Law, and democratic under statutory law). The People enjoy their God-given natural rights in the Republic. In a democracy, the Citizens enjoy only government granted privileges (also known as civil rights).

There was a great political division between two major philosophers, Hobbes and Locke. Hobbes was on the side of government. He believed that sovereignty was vested in the state. Locke was on the side of the People. He believed that the fountain of sovereignty was the People of the state. Statists prefer Hobbes. Populists choose Locke. In California, the Government Code sides with Locke. Sections 11120 and 54950 both say, "The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them." The preambles of the U.S. and California Constitutions also affirm the choice of Locke by the People.

It is my hope that the U.S. will always remain a Republic, because I value individual freedom.

Thomas Jefferson said that liberty and ignorance cannot coexist.* Will you help to preserve minority rights by fulfilling the promise in the Pledge of Allegiance to support the Republic? Will you help by raising public awareness of the difference between the Republic and a democracy?

________________________________________

* "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1816.

________________________________________

MORE LAWNOTES

http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm

Friday, March 26, 2010

Obama Just Got His Private Army

Obama Just Got His Private Army

By: Nancy Matthis at American Daughter

Remember when Obama said he wanted a “national security force?” Not the national guard, but a civilian one that has not sworn to uphold the Constitution? On July 2, 2008 in a speech in Colorado Springs, Barack Obama called for a police state.

Remember that first alarming glimpse of what that army might look like? Notice how much these “Hitler youth” type young men talk about health care!

Obama just got his private army…
…And no one seems to have noticed. It is buried in the Senate revisions to the health care bill.
Subtitle C–Increasing the Supply of the Health Care Workforce Sec. 5201. Federally supported student loan funds. Sec. 5202. Nursing student loan program. Sec. 5203. Health care workforce loan repayment programs. Sec. 5204. Public health workforce recruitment and retention programs. Sec. 5205. Allied health workforce recruitment and retention programs. Sec. 5206. Grants for State and local programs. Sec. 5207. Funding for National Health Service Corps. Sec. 5208. Nurse-managed health clinics. Sec. 5209. Elimination of cap on commissioned corps. Sec. 5210. Establishing a Ready Reserve Corps.Subtitle D–Enhancing Health Care Workforce Education and Training
See the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, page 1312:

SEC. 5210. ESTABLISHING A READY RESERVE CORPS.Section 203 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 204) is amended to read as follows:SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS.(a) ESTABLISHMENT–(1) IN GENERAL.–here shall be in the Service a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency.(2) REQUIREMENT.–All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended.(3) APPOINTMENT.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.(4) ACTIVE DUTY.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall at all times be subject to call to active duty by the Surgeon General, including active duty for the purpose of training.(5) WARRANT OFFICERS.–Warrant officers may be appointed to the Service for the purpose of providing support to the health and delivery systems maintained by the Service and any warrant officer appointed to the Service shall be considered for purposes of this Act and title 37, United States Code, to be a commissioned officer within the Commissioned Corps of the Service.(b) ASSIMILATING RESERVE CORP OFFICERS INTO THE REGULAR CORPS.—Effective on the date of enactment of the Affordable Health Choices Act, all individuals classified as officers in the Reserve Corps under this section (as such section existed on the day before the date of enactment of such Act) and serving on active duty shall be deemed to be commissioned officers of the Regular Corps.
[Note here that those personally appointed by BO -- without advice and consent of the Senate -- automatically become a part of the Regular Corps. Ed.]
(c) PURPOSE AND USE OF READY RESERVE.–(1) PURPOSE.–The purpose of the Ready Reserve Corps is to fulfill the need to have additional Commissioned Corps personnel available on short notice (similar to the uniformed service’s reserve program) to assist regular Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions.(2) USES.–The Ready Reserve Corps shall–(A) participate in routine training to meet the general and specific needs of the Commissioned Corps;(B) be available and ready for involuntary calls to active duty during national emergencies and public health crises, similar to the uniformed service reserve personnel;(C) be available for backfilling critical positions left vacant during deployment of active duty Commissioned Corps members, as well as for deployment to respond to public health emergencies, both foreign and domestic; and(D) be available for service assignment in isolated, hardship, and medically underserved communities (as defined in section 399SS) to improve access to health services.(d) FUNDING.—For the purpose of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of the Commissioned Corps under this section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to the Office of the Surgeon General for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014. Funds appropriated under this subsection shall be used for recruitment and training of Commissioned Corps Officers.
How many of you, dear readers, were aware of the fact that the health care bill created another army?

See more:

Thursday, March 25, 2010

State AGs Miss Target with Health Care Lawsuit says the Tenth Amendment Center

State AGs Miss Target with Health Care Lawsuit says the Tenth Amendment Center

Thu, 03/25/2010 - 2:14pm posted by Brett Bittner

I received this press release yesterday from the Tenth Amendment Center, and I think that it gives calls attention to the long-forgotten ideas of nullification and interposition with regard to ObamaCare:

“Prominent founders such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison warned us that if the federal government ever became the sole and exclusive arbiter of its own powers, those powers would continue to grow, regardless of elections, courts, separation of powers or other much-vaunted checks and balances in our system,” said Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center.

Nullification, according to the Center, is the rightful remedy to an unconstitutional act, as it considers the recently-signed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to be. When a state nullifies a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or non-effective, within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.

Today, the Tenth Amendment Center announced a different strategy for activists and state government. “We are pleased to announce model nullification legislation that is crafted to specifically address the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on a state level,” Boldin said. “We encourage grassroots activists and state legislators alike to work to get this bill passed in their home states.”

The legislation, the Federal Health Care Nullification Act, would codify in state law that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act “is not authorized by the Constitution of the United States…is hereby declared to be invalid…shall not be recognized…is specifically rejected…and shall be considered null and void and of no effect” within the boundaries of any state enacting it. It also mandates that it “shall be the duty” of the State’s legislature “to adopt and enact any and all measures as may be necessary to prevent the enforcement.”

“The greatest problem with relying on lawsuits by state Attorney’s General for Constitutional protection is the reality that the Supreme Court has set years and years of bad precedent, allowing the federal government to control many aspects of our lives that the Founders and Ratifiers never authorized,” said Boldin. “The real question we must ask is this,” he continued, “Does the Constitution mean what the founders said it means, or does it mean what the Supreme Court says it means…until it changes its mind?”

“Like any legal document, the words of the Constitution mean today the same as they meant the moment it was ratified,” said Boldin. “The Commerce Clause, the General Welfare Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause have not been amended, and the original Constitutional meanings of those clauses do not permit the federal government to exercise such powers.”
According to the Center, on a political level, the new health care reform legislation not only violates conservative principles by greatly enlarging federal power and control, but also is an affront to traditional progressive principles because it requires millions of people to their money to an industry that many liberals revile, and interferes with the ability of states and local communities from enacting their own health care programs as they see fit.


“It’s time to remind the federal government that We the People are in charge and not the other way around,” said Boldin. “Following the Constitution every issue, every time, without exceptions or excuses requires us to resist federal overreach and keeping our health care decisions where the Founders assured us that they’d be and where they belong…close to home.”
About the Tenth Amendment Center: The Tenth Amendment Center, a Los Angeles-based think tank founded in 2006, acts as an educational forum on issues related to the 10th Amendment and Constitutional governance.
http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/

If the ideas this proposal interest you, I STRONGLY recommend seeking out work done by Thomas Woods of the Ludwig von Mises Institute with regard to the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. Also, he will be releasing a book on the subjects of nullification and interposition this year.

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/5375-state-ags-miss-target-with-health-care-lawsuit-says-the-tenth-amendment-center

WE ARE A REPUBLIC!

Congressmen and other elected officials on both sides, sometimes get angry or nasty messages, calls and letters. It is a fact of life. As a matter of fact, I got a nasty, nasty phone call from a liberal myself recently. Bush’s administration got plenty! So why is it such a big deal now, when it is the Democrats? Guilt for pushing this country into socialism? Shock that people don’t agree? Nah, we been telling em! I am sorry folks, but telling someone who just funded the murder of children and set this country on a path of destruction, that they are a piece of sh%& and that there are people who wish them ill, -- is not the same as threatening them harm!

Now I don’t condone threats or violence, even in cases of ignorance. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters -- "Clearly our democracy is about participation. Our democracy is about differing and debate, and animated debate and passionate debate -- but it is not about violence," he added. "It is about making sure that everybody in America feels free to express their opinion ... without subjecting themselves their family or others to behavior, and frankly criminal behavior, in some respects, that undermines our democracy."

How about we all contact Hoyer’s office and explain to him that we are a REPUBLIC, not a DEMOCRACY. A Republic is governed by law, a Democracy by majority.

REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER!
Lynn Childs

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Constitutional Awakening

Constitutional Awakening
by Walter E. Williams

If there is anything good to say about Democrat control of the White House, Senate and House of Representatives, it's that their extraordinarily brazen, heavy-handed acts have aroused a level of constitutional interest among the American people that has been dormant for far too long. Part of this heightened interest is seen in the strength of the tea party movement around the nation. Another is the angry reception that many congressmen received at their district town hall meetings. Yet another is seen by the exchanges on the nation's most popular radio talk shows such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and others. Then there's the rising popularity of conservative/libertarian television shows such as Glenn Beck, John Stossel and Fox News.

While the odds on favorite is that the Republicans will do well in the fall elections, Americans who want constitutional government should not see Republican control as a solution to what our founders would have called "a long train of abuses and usurpations." Solutions to our nation's problems require correct diagnostics and answers to questions like: Why did 2008 presidential and congressional candidates spend over $5 billion campaigning for office? Why did special interests pay Washington lobbyists over $3 billion that same year? What are reasons why corporations, unions and other interest groups fork over these billions of dollars to lobbyists and into the campaign coffers of politicians?

One might say that these groups are simply extraordinarily civic-minded Americans who have a deep and abiding interest in elected officials living up to their oath of office to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. Another response is these politicians, and the people who spend billions of dollars on them, just love participating in the political process. If you believe either of these explanations, you're probably a candidate for some medicine, a straitjacket and a padded cell.
A far better explanation for the billions going to the campaign coffers of Washington politicians and lobbyist lies in the awesome government power and control over business, property, employment and other areas of our lives. Having such power, Washington politicians are in the position to grant favors and commit acts that if committed by a private person would land him in jail.

Here's one among thousands of examples: Incandescent light bulbs are far more convenient and less expensive than compact fluorescent bulbs (CFL) that General Electric now produces. So how can General Electric sell its costly CFLs? They know that Congress has the power to outlaw incandescent light bulbs. General Electric was the prominent lobbyist for outlawing incandescent light bulbs and in 2008 had a $20 million lobbying budget. Also, it should come as no surprise that General Electric is a contributor to global warmers who help convince Congress that incandescent bulbs were destroying the planet.

The greater Congress' ability to grant favors and take one American's earnings to give to another American, the greater the value of influencing congressional decision-making. There's no better influence than money. The generic favor sought is to get Congress, under one ruse or another, to grant a privilege or right to one group of Americans that will be denied another group of Americans.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi covering up for a corrupt Ways and Means Committee Chairman, Charles Rangel, said that while his behavior "was a violation of the rules of the House. It was not something that jeopardized our country in any way." Pelosi is right in minimizing Rangel's corruption. It pales in comparison, in terms of harm to our nation, to the legalized corruption that's a part of Washington's daily dealing.

Hopefully, our nation's constitutional reawaking will begin to deliver us from the precipice. There is no constitutional authority for two-thirds to three-quarters of what Congress does. Our constitution's father, James Madison, explained, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined ... (to be) exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce."

Copyright © 2010 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
http://townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=63ef6e7f-29e4-49ac-9c10-299ccac6327d&t=c

Reconciliation Bill Adds Even More Taxes

Reconciliation Bill Adds Even More Taxes
Reposted from: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/24/reconciliation-bill-adds-even-more-taxes/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

A jubilant President Obama put his signature on health care legislation yesterday, but the work isn’t done quite yet. The U.S. Senate must pass the Reconciliation Act of 2010, making a number of tax changes to current law.

By signing the legislation, Obama already broke his campaign promise not to raise “any form” of taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year. The reconciliation bill adds even more taxes for Americans — an estimated $52.3 billion over 10 years, according to a new analysis from Americans for Tax Reform.

ATR’s Ryan Ellis spoke at The Bloggers Briefing yesterday about the reconciliation measure: ”We lost a major fight on Sunday. That fight is lost; President Obama has signed it into law. Rather than wallowing … and waiting until the election, we have a fight this week on the floor in the Senate. Do we want to have an additional tax increase on top of the tax increase that has just been signed into law?”

Heritage’s Robert Book, Guinevere Nell and Paul Winfree have been documenting these tax changes, noting how the legislation imposes new taxes on employers, the sick, and low-income and moderate-income workers.

Below is a table showing taxes that apply to everyone regardless of income. See table:
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/03/24/reconciliation-bill-adds-even-more-taxes/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

Monday, March 22, 2010

DeMint to Introduce Bill to Repeal ObamaCare

DeMint to Introduce Bill to Repeal ObamaCare

March 21, 2010 - WASHINGTON, D.C -
Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) announced that he will introduce legislation this week to repeal President Obama's government takeover of health care. House Democrats voted this evening to pass the Senate version of the health care bill and it will likely be signed into law by President Obama later this week. "This bill is unconstitutional and it cannot be fixed. It must be repealed," said Senator DeMint. "The battle for health care freedom is not over and I will introduce legislation this week to repeal this health care takeover. "Unless this trillion-dollar assault on our freedoms is repealed, it will force Americans to purchase Washington-approved health plans or face stiff penalties. It will fund abortions, raise taxes and insurance premiums, while reducing health care choices and quality." "This arrogant power grab proves that the President and his party care more about government control than the will of the American people. Americans told Washington to keep its hands off their health care in opinion polls, at public protests, and at the ballot box, but their pleas were ignored. "If the President and Democrats were serious about true health care reform, there were many free-market solutions we could have easily passed. Americans support commonsense reforms such as purchasing coverage across state lines, stopping frivolous medical lawsuits, and giving the same tax breaks to Americans who don't get their insurance at work. Unfortunately, Democrats refused to listen." The bill passed in the House today raids $52 billion from Social Security, cuts nearly $500 billion from Medicare, and doesn’t account for the hundreds of billions Congress must pass to pay doctors who treat elderly patients. TEXT of Senator DeMint’s bill to Repeal ObamaCare:

To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. REPEAL. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the amendments made by that Act, are repealed.
http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=83c30740-e517-93b0-a484-448d7e81dbe6