Fighting to Preserve Liberty in America
Photo by shannonpatrick17
First we were told we had to pass the stimulus bill because if we didn’t unemployment would rise to 9%. The good news was that there were hundreds of shovel ready project raring to go. Later we learned that “shovel ready was not as shovel ready as we expected.” $800 billion dollars of squandered stimulus dollars later, unemployment is at 9%. But what about a real shovel ready project that doesn’t need taxpayer dollars?
That was the famous “Pottery Barn” analogy that Colin Powell used regarding the war in Iraq. Now that ObamaCare + Reconciliation is done, all the ugly details that come crawling out of the health care bill like cockroaches when you turn the lights on, will all come to you courtesy of the Democrats.
Because they chose to go the reconciliation route, the Senate could not dare change a word in the House bill of “fixes” so they could approve what the House sent them with less than 60 votes. Here’s a sampling of what the genius of government brings you, wrapped in arrogance, with a bow of disdain for the people, as reported by Kimberly Strassel in the Wall Street Journal:
“Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) offered language to bar the government from subsidizing erectile dysfunction drugs for convicted pedophiles and rapists. Democrats voted . . . No! Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) proposed exempting wounded soldiers from the new tax on medical devices. Democrats: No way! Pat Roberts (R., Kan.) wanted to exempt critical access rural hospitals from funding cuts. Senate Democrats: Forget it! This was Republicans’ opportunity to lay out every ugly provision and consequence of ObamaCare, and Democrats—because of the process they’d chosen—had to defend it all.
And so it went, into the wee Thursday hours. All Democrats in favor of taxing pacemakers? Aye! All Democrats in favor of keeping those seedy vote buyoffs? Aye! All Democrats in favor of raising taxes on middle-income families? Aye! All Democrats in favor of exempting themselves from elements of ObamaCare? Aye!”
Now doesn’t that just make you warm and fuzzy inside?
Bill O’Reilly and Congressman Anthony Weiner had a debate on O’Reilly ‘s show that was jaw-dropping to listen to. Weiner said that O’Reilly and others were blatantly misstating the facts about the health care bill. O’Reilly questioned Weiner about the IRS learning details about people such as whether or not they had health insurance. Weiner said that was untrue and that if you wanted to get a tax credit for health care, you had to say on your tax return that you had health insurance. He said it is just like if you claimed a tax credit as a first time homebuyer (I won’t get into all the fraud taking place on the homebuyer credit, even by IRS employees). So according to Weiner it’s all voluntary reporting, just as takes place every year when we file our taxes. How can Weiner stand there and make such a statement? A key requirement is that everyone has to be covered by health insurance according to the law and the law provides for hiring 16,000 more IRS agents! Well what are those agents going to be doing if not following up with you if you don’t say you are covered? Weiner danced and dodged and at one point stood silently pouting when O’Reilly tried to pin him down.
This is ugly and it is going to get uglier as we learn what is in this cancer on our economy. But Nancy Pelosi warned us. “We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.” Well, they passed it, now we get all the bad news.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people — Amendment X, United States Constitution
“I’m Mad as Hell and I’m Not Going To Take It Any More”
That quote from the movie “Network” popped into my head as I read about a legislator in Oklahoma, calling for legislative support for the 10th Amendment to the Constitution. It passed the state assembly unanimously. So what does this mean? The sponsor of the bill, State Senator Randy Brogdan, explains:
The “federal government has been putting the screws on (the states) a little tighter and tighter each year” along with unfunded mandates of varying sorts.
And each time this happens, Brogdon explained, “We lose a little bit of our freedom and liberty.”
The federal government has been growing enormously and taking on more and more things that used to be handled locally, such as education, and welfare. Other programs have not changed as the economy has, for example, as the percentage of the population that farms has decreased dramatically has the Department of Agriculture shrunk accordingly?
You Must Obey!
The way the federal government works around this is by saying, okay, you don’t have to do what we tell you, but you will get no federal funding if you don’t. It seems like a Catch-22, no? Since the 16th Amendment, which authorized the income tax, the federal government can decide how much to tax incomes and there is little that the states can do about it. They take money from your pocket under threat of imprisonment, and will give it back to you only if you comply with their rules.
How Do We Fix This One?
It may require a constitutional amendment to fix as the 16th Amendment says:
The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. — 16th Amendment to the Constitution
I’ll leave the legal mechanics to those better qualified, but I would propose the following. That the federal budget shall include a breakdown of projected revenues derived from income taxes, broken down by source: individual, corporate, etc. A state should then be allowed to refuse mandates and programs from, say, the Department of Education, and withhold from the IRS that proportion of tax dollars destined for the Department of Education from that state.
Certain departments should be deemed mandatory, such as Defense, State, Treasure, to name a few as these departments serve all citizens.
The legislation under consideration in Oklahoma will have little effect if the federal government can suck up as much money as it wants to from the states, via their citizens and then just keep the money if the states refuse to participate in the programs. How do you determine which programs should be subject to the states discretion? No money should flow from a state, to Washington, and then back to the state. That is just plain stupid and wasteful, or a distribution of wealth, none of which is a government function. Paying for roads and infrastructure that does not cross state lines should be funded locally. It is ridiculous that the federal government pays 90% of the cost of a highway that lies entirely within a city. Look at the scandalous “Big Dig” in Boston. Billions of dollars spent and parts of it are falling down. Why should any of this be paid for by the people of Kansas, Oklahoma, Alaska, New York, Florida, et al.?
But the real answer is following the 10th Amendment. It clearly states that the role of the federal government is spelled out in the Constitution. If it’s not in the Constitution then that responsibility is left to the states or the people. Show me where in the Constitution it says that the federal government is responsible for education. It’s not in there and that department should be shut down tomorrow.
It’s Time to Rein the Monster In
The anger in the country is growing. Those who acted responsibly are being told they have to bail out the irresponsible. They are being told by “Buck a Day Biden” that it is their patriotic duty to pay higher taxes to help out. Meanwhile half a dozen Obama appointees haven’t paid the taxes they owe, let alone paying more. I give Biden the “Buck a Day Biden” moniker because that is how much this millionaire gives to charity. He doesn’t want to spend his own money on charity, he wants the government to take your money to fund government programs to do that.
If you don’t think the anger is growing take a look at this. Rick Santelli
