The High Price of Freedom

Memorial Day is an occasion of special importance to all Americans, because it is a day sacred to the memory of all those Americans who made the supreme sacrifice for the liberties we enjoy. We will never forget or fail to honor these heroes to whom we owe so much.

We honor them best when we resolve to cherish and defend the liberties for which they gave their lives. Let us resolve to do all in our power to assure the survival and the success of liberty so that our children and their children for generations to come can live in an America in which freedom’s light continues to shine.

The Congress, in establishing Memorial Day, called for it to be a day of tribute to America’s fallen, and also a day of national prayer for lasting peace. This Nation has always sought true peace. We seek it still.

Our goal is peace in which the highest aspirations of our people, and people everywhere, are secure: peace with freedom, with justice, and with opportunity for human development. This is the permanent peace for which we pray, not only for ourselves but for all generations.

The defense of peace, like the defense of liberty, requires more than lip service. It requires vigilance, military strength, and the willingness to take risks and to make sacrifices. The surest guarantor of both peace and liberty is our unflinching resolve to defend that which has been purchased for us by our fallen heroes.

On Memorial Day, let us pray for peace — not only for ourselves, but for all those who seek freedom and justice.

Ronald Reagan

This Should Scare You

Government always grows at the expense of the private sector. Government is growing, and that should scare you.

"As for the private sector, thanks to Democrat spendthrifts, it's shrinking while the public sector grows.

"Paychecks from private business shrank to their smallest share of personal income in U.S. history during the first quarter of this year," according to USA Today.

"At the same time, government-provided benefits -- from Social Security, unemployment insurance, food stamps and other programs -- rose to a record high during the first three months of 2010."

Patriot Post

And "The Dino" Is In

After months of uselessly wasting other people's energy, time and money NOW "the Dino" decided he wants to be Senator.

Oh how very "politician-y".

A Repulsive Spectacle

Unprecedented: Calderon Slams US From House Floor. Receives Standing Ovation

by Lori Ziganto

Unprecedented, indeed. But, not surprising, given that our own President has done nothing but the same. I’m wondering if Calderon at least read the Arizona bill first, before demonizing an American state. That would actually be unprecedented, amongst our alleged leaders, at least.

President Obama, for once, forewent bowing. Not to worry, though! The Democrats in Congress picked up his slack and went one further. Standing ovations!

For a foreign leader bashing an American state. From our own House floor.

Not only do the Democrats fail to figuratively stand up for America, but they literally stand up for and applaud those who seek to condemn it. Worse, it is condemnation from the foreign leader whose own country is a primary source of our illegal immigration issues. All compounded by the fact that Arizona was forced to try to deal with their immense problem on their own, since the weak-willed and spineless folks in attendance at the Joint Meeting of Congress refused to do so.

You know, the very same ones who are breathlessly applauding and jumping to their feet in sycophantic grand-standing, including two, Janet Napolitano and Eric Holder, who have admitted to not reading the 16 page law. Which I’ve read and can comprehend. Granted, I’m no community organizer or an (alleged) lawyer, but still.

Allahpundit at Hot Air notes:

It’s a repulsive spectacle. And as bad as it is, it’s not even the most audacious bit of meddling that Calderon did today. Brace yourself for this.

On the gun question, Mr. Calderón said: “We have seized 75,000 guns and assault weapons in Mexico in the past three years, and more than 80 percent of those we have been able to trace came from the United States.”

He said it did not seem coincidental that violence in Mexico had begun to grow in 2006, not long after the weapons ban expired in the United States.

That’s right. WE are the source of Mexico’s problems, according to Calderon. If only we had weapons bans, Mexico would be free of crime and violence!

On the plus side, at least we can save some tax-payer cash. There is no longer a need for Obama to travel to commence apology tours. Now, he just invites the foreign leaders here where he apologizes and they bash.

From our House floor.

To cheers and ovations. Remember that, in November. Remember who cheered the bashing of an American state and the denigration of American citizens. For passing a law necessitated by the fact that the federal government themselves refused to act.

Arizona is just doing the job the federal government doesn’t want to do.

A(nother) Great Big Tax

Democrat Cap And Tax Scheme

Wednesday, John Kerry (D-MA) unveiled the Democrats’ cap and trade bill in the Senate. It is 1,000 pages of new regulations, tax hikes and income redistribution. Many conservatives refer to cap and trade as “cap and tax,” but you don’t have to take our word for it.

John Dingell (D-MI) is the longest-serving Democrat in the House of Representatives. He referred to cap and trade as “a great big tax.” Warren Buffett has called it “a huge tax…and a fairly regressive one.”

The liberal New York Times inadvertently admits it even as it acknowledges that cap and trade is a massive redistribution of wealth scheme. Here’s how the Times described Kerry’s bill in a May 13th column: “Two-thirds of allowance revenues raised by the program, outside the 25 percent that goes toward paying down the deficit, will go to households through their utility bills. Low-income residents will receive additional rebates.”

If Congress wants to reduce the deficit, don’t come up with great big, huge new taxes. Just cut spending! And why bother imposing a tax when you know from the outset that 66% of it will be given back? Where’s the logic in that? It’s socialist redistribution of wealth plain and simple. It couldn’t be more obvious.

And why are those rebates necessary? Because cap and trade is a massive tax on energy intended to cause utility rates to skyrocket. Don’t believe me? Barack Obama told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2008, “Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

Unfortunately, it’s more than just your utility bill. Cap and trade will cause food prices to skyrocket, it will cost families $1,800 a year, and lead to $7.00 a gallon gasoline.

Gary Bauer

Democrat Debt Crisis - U.S. Deificit 4X Higher in One Year!

From Reuters today:

The United States posted an $82.69 billion deficit in April, nearly four times the $20.91 billion shortfall registered in April 2009 and the largest on record for that month, the Treasury Department said on Wednesday.

It was more than twice the $40-billion deficit that Wall Street economists surveyed by Reuters had forecast and was striking since April marks the filing deadline for individual income taxes that are the main source of government revenue.

Department officials said that in prior years, there was a surplus during April in 43 out of the past 56 years.

The government has now posted 19 consecutive monthly budget deficits, the longest string of shortfalls on record.

The U.S. full-year deficit this year is projected at $1.5 trillion on top of a $1.4 trillion shortfall last year.

White House budget director Peter Orszag told Reuters Insider in an interview on Wednesday that the United States must tackle its deficits quickly to avoid the kind of debt crisis that hit Greece.

Democrats obviously enjoy spending with astounding reckless abandon, even to the point of placing our nation in the same peril as Greece.

Puerto Rico - Our 51st State?

Puerto Rico is amazing, but do we want it as our 51st state? I don't think so! Would you be surprised to know that later this week the U.S. House is scheduled to vote to begin the process of doing just that?

Is it a good idea? I think we should have some good information before we decide. Brian Darling from The Heritage Foundation released this post today on The Foundry:

According to Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the House will vote on H.R. 2499 , the Puerto Rico Democracy Act, later this week. The legislation provides Puerto Rico a two stage voting process and makes some non-resident Puerto Ricans eligible to vote on Puerto Rican statehood.

This legislation has rigged the process in favor of making Puerto Rico the 51st state and is not a fair way to force statehood on a Commonwealth whose people may not want it. Furthermore, this may be an expensive proposition for the American people who are already on the hook for approximately $12.9 trillion in national debt.

This bill attempts to rig the voting process and denies the American people a real say on the issue of whether they want to allow Puerto Rico to be granted statehood.

The fact of the matter is that Puerto Ricans have rejected statehood numerous times and this bill seems to have been written in a way to fast track statehood without a majority of Puerto Ricans favoring the idea.

Furthermore, the people of the United States should be allowed a vote on whether they want to admit Puerto Rico as a new state. If the people of Puerto Rico can vote, the people of the United States should have a vote.

You can read the rest of Brian Darling's post here. Then call your Representative - Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

House Attempts to "Invent" Another DC Congressmen this Thursday! Call!

The D.C. House Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional.
Ask your Representative to vote NO on H.R. 157!
Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

After casting a career-defining vote in favor of Big Government Obamacare, congressional liberals know that they have little time left as the majority party in Congress, so they are pushing hard for all the little-known leftist bills that have been sitting in dusty desk drawers for decades. One such piece of legislation is the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act. Just last week, President Obama called on Congress to get this bill passed and to his desk before November 2010 rolls around.

Sponsored by DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 (H.R. 157) would establish full House of Representatives voting rights for the District of Columbia while adding an additional seat to Utah, a traditionally Republican stronghold and the next state in line to pick up a Congressional seat in reapportionment. However, there is one minor problem: D.C. is NOT a congressional district or a state!

The D.C. House Voting Rights Act would accomplish the following:

• Subvert the District Clause of the U.S. Constitution - Article I, Section 8, clause 17 - which makes clear that D.C. is a federal city, not a state, with final governing authority resting with Congress. The U.S. Constitution states that the House shall be composed of "Members chosen...by the People of the several States," not delegates representing non-state territories.

• Silence critics of D.C. voting rights by buying them off with a "sure Republican" seat because they know the D.C. seat will be a solid Democrat. In the last 12 elections since D.C. was granted the right to cast presidential electoral votes, it has never cast less than 74.8 percent of its popular vote for the Democratic presidential candidate. This move is simply a partisan trade-off by the congressional liberal Majority wanting to add a permanent Democrat vote to their tallies.
• Bribe Republicans to favor the idea by including a provision to increase the number of House Members from 435 to 437 and give the extra Representative to Utah.

• Lay the initial groundwork for achieving the ultimate goal of establishing two permanent Democrat Senate seats for the District. If the initial inclination is for DC to be "considered a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives," then the idea for DC to be "considered a state for the purposes of representation in the U.S. Senate," will not be far down the road.

Simply introducing a bill such as this is unconstitutional! DC cannot be "treated as though it were a congressional district," unless it were formally made a congressional district via a constitutional amendment, which would require a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress as well as three-fourths of the states to ratify it.

This is nothing new from the Left. Congressional liberals have been trying to grant full voting rights to the District of Columbia since the 1980s. The maiden attempt to amend the U.S. Constitution through the "D.C. Representation" Amendment was unsuccessful, after it passed Congress but was rejected by the American people and died on August 22, 1985 after a decisive majority of 34 of the 50 states refused to ratify it. Now, Members of Congress are attempting to forgo the constitutional process and slip one past the American people in order to accommodate their political agenda!

Remember, the Senate passed its version of the DC Voting bill (S. 160) by a vote of 61 to 37 (Roll Call 73) in February 2009. However, that bill stalled in the House because it contained a Senate Republican-offered amendment which repealed strict DC gun laws. Although the language of H.R. 157 has not yet been made public, the bill is expected to contain either the same or similar gun provisions, and although many House liberals favor DC gun control laws, it is likely that the liberal House leadership will approach this legislation in much the same way it did Obamacare: Pass it now, fix it later.

TAKE ACTION!

The House is scheduled to vote on H.R. 157 on Thursday, April 22, 2010! Please call and email your representatives and tell them to vote NO on this unconstitutional bill!

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

Eagle Forum

Firm Pledge

Barak Obama campaigning in 2008:

“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”

Held Hostage With Lies

Dori Monson had this interesting post on My Northwest:

King County officials say they will likely put a sales tax increase on the ballot this summer. They say they need to jack the tax to avoid drastic cuts to police and criminal justice services.

Without the increase, they claim there will be no more tracking of burglars, fewer domestic violence investigations, arrest warrants piling up, and fewer cases filed.

And they say they need to raise the tax because they have already cut to the bone.

Really?

Take a look at this link with the list of the 17,894 King County employees and their salaries. I'm not very good with Excel - but I know some of you are. Do any of you in the comments want to take a shot at breaking down how many are making over $100,000/year? What is the average salary?

And see if you can find some of the more ridiculous job titles.

But most importantly, can anyone look at this list and tell me, with a straight face, that there is no fat to cut in King County? And that they need to raise taxes to preserve law enforcement?

Please stop buying this game that our politicians play - holding that which is important to us hostage - so their lies can grease the skids for yet another tax increase. It's an incredibly sleazy, shameless strategy on their part.

King County employee salaries

One commenter discovered this: I count 1,473 employees making over 100k/year while the average gross is $54,349.34. Michael David Miner, Police Officer, added 127k worth of overtime to Gross 228k, more than doubling his salary.

Public Disapproval Grows

A new KING 5 News poll of people statewide finds strong disapproval of the job Gov. Chris Gregoire and the Legislature is doing.

In a poll of 600 adults conducted by SurveyUSA, 62 percent say they disapprove of Gregoire's job performance. 35 percent approve and 3 percent are not sure.

It's even worse for the Legislature. Seventy percent disapprove of the job they are doing while just 21 percent approve. Ten percent are not sure.

The poll comes two days after the Legislature approved about $800 million in new taxes to help close a $2.8 billion budget hole.

by DREW MIKKELSEN / KING 5 News

Tax Burden Dangerously Shifted To One Side Of The Boat

Much has been made in recent years of the "Bush tax cuts" for wealthier individuals, and certainly there have been benefits for higher-income Americans. But the class warfare waged by Democrats is sorely misguided.

Here are the facts:

- The top 1 percent of wage earners in this country pay more than 40 percent of all federal income taxes.

- The top 5 percent pay over 60 percent of all federal income taxes.

- The top 10 percent pay over 71 percent of all federal income taxes.

Those numbers completely debunk the emotional blackmail coming from the left about who pays the freight in this country.

But it is what it is, as they say. The more troublesome statistic is that we are approaching the day when a majority of this country pays no income taxes.
Think about the ramifications of that.

When a majority of voters receive government services without paying for them, the natural incentive is to seek more of those services -- and not to bother about whether tax rates have to increase to support those services.

That starts a political and mathematical chain reaction that leads toward a financial meltdown. It is simply unsustainable.

Nor is it healthy, even for those who end up on the receiving end.

"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, told the Associated Press.

National policies cannot help but be warped if half or more of the people in this country have no skin in the game.

Moreover, you have to ask: Should Americans even want a tax system that requires nothing of so many of us? Where's the pride? Where's the American spirit of self-reliance and selflessness?

Tax time tends to pervert the spirit. Americans are the most generous on Earth when it comes to helping out the less fortunate with their time, talent and treasure. One recent news report brought that home in a very personal way: A nurse headed for volunteer work in Haiti broke her leg in three places, then learned she had breast cancer -- and she still left for Haiti.

Yet, late-night television ads happily trumpet how individuals and couples have managed to drastically reduce or eliminate the federal taxes they owe. Is that really something to celebrate? Didn't those people just shift more of the tax burden onto you?

A lower tax burden for all is a good thing. But shifting the weight too much to one side of the boat will only make it perilously unstable.

We're all in the same boat. Shouldn't everyone who's capable grab an oar?

Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff

Obama Tax Hikes...So Far

Yesterday, President Obama made the following comment in Miami about the Tea Party rallies on Tax Day:

"In all, we passed 25 different tax cuts last year. And one thing we haven't done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000 a year -- another promise that we kept," he told supporters at the Arsht Center for the Performing Arts. "So I've been a little amused over the last couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes. You would think they would be saying thank you."

You know what? You're right, Mr. President. We should be thanking you. Not for keeping your actual promise never to raise "any form" of taxes on families making less than $250,000 (as opposed to the stripped-down promise you make above).

No, taxpayers should instead be "thanking" you for the following tax hikes you have signed into law (so far):

• a hike in the tobacco tax
• a new tax on individuls not purchasing and employers not providing "qualifying" health insurance
• a 40% excise tax on high-cost health insurance plans
• a new "medicine cabinet tax" on over-the-counter purchases from HSAs, FSAs, and HRAs
• increasing the non-medical early withdrawal HSA penalty from 10 to 20 percent
• a "special-needs kids" tax (capping FSA contributions at $2500)
• an increase in the top Medicare payroll tax rate from 2.9 to 3.8 percent (in so doing raising the top marginal tax rate on labor from 37.9 to 43.4 percent)
• a hike in the capital gains rate from 15 to 23.8 percent
• a hike in the dividends tax rate from 15 to 43.4 percent
• a hike in the "other" investment tax rate from 35 to 43.4 percent
• an increase in the "reduction of the deduction" for medical expenses from 7.5 to 10 percent of AGI
• new annual taxes on health insurance companies, innovator drug companies, and medical device manufacturers--which will make
• a 10% excise tax for tanning salon sessions
• eliminating the deduction for employer-provided retiree Rx coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D
• creating the "economic substance doctrine," which allows the IRS to disallow perfectly-legal tax deductions it deems are only being used to reduce tax liabilities
• requiring 1099-MISC information reporting for small business payments to corporations, increasing compliance burdens for small employers

If that's not enough thanks for you, Mr. President, maybe we should also be thanking you for the new taxes that you or your advisors have proposed on top of these tax hikes:

• a European-style value-added tax (VAT)
• a "bank tax," even on financial institutions that never received a dime of bailout money or who paid their bailouts back with interest
• restoring the death tax from totally gone (this year) to either a 45 or 55 percent rate (depending whom you ask)
• a dangerous new "cap and tax" energy tax on every American family who uses energy
• raising taxes on investment partnership managers, which will result in lower profit sharing for charities, universities, and pension plans
• restoring the "Superfund" tax for trial lawyers
• repeal "LIFO accounting," which is a tax hike on every America using liquid energy sources
• imposing a whole host of international tax hikes which will drive jobs and capital offshore
So thank you, Mr. President, for all you've done for us this Tax Day week.

Ryan Ellis, EA
Tax Policy Director of ATR

Back At Ya! Initiatives Filed To Repeal Democrat Taxes

Tim Eyman took direct aim at the $668 million of new taxes Democrats passed in Olympia on Monday by filing eight seperate initiatives to repeal them. Stay tuned.

Tax and Run

One of the state Legislature's top lawmakers voted to increase your taxes on Saturday, and then announced her retirement today. Of course she did!

Democrat House Majority Leader Lynn Kessler told the House today that she will not run for re-election in November.

Kessler has been in the Legislature for 18 years and served in the majority leadership team for about a decade. As majority leader, she is the second-ranking Democrat in the state House.

But even that position would not have protected her from the voters - the very real families and businesses she targeted with a multimillion-dollar package of tax hikes she helped pass.

So for Kessler it was tax and run...before November.

Not Enough Doctors

The very real concern of a shortage of doctos was raised in this Wall Street Journal article today:

The new federal health-care law has raised the stakes for hospitals and schools already scrambling to train more doctors.

Experts warn there won't be enough doctors to treat the millions of people newly insured under the law. At current graduation and training rates, the nation could face a shortage of as many as 150,000 doctors in the next 15 years, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

That shortfall is predicted despite a push by teaching hospitals and medical schools to boost the number of U.S. doctors, which now totals about 954,000.

The greatest demand will be for primary-care physicians. These general practitioners, internists, family physicians and pediatricians will have a larger role under the new law, coordinating care for each patient.

The U.S. has 352,908 primary-care doctors now, and the college association estimates that 45,000 more will be needed by 2020. But the number of medical-school students entering family medicine fell more than a quarter between 2002 and 2007.

A shortage of primary-care and other physicians could mean more-limited access to health care and longer wait times for patients.

Click here to read the rest of this article.

"Hardly Surprising" Americans Personal Income Down Since Obama/Biden Took Office

Real personal income for Americans - excluding government payouts such as Social Security - has fallen by 3.2 percent since President Obama took office in January 2009, according to the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis.

For comparison, real personal income during the first 15 months in office for President George W. Bush, who inherited a milder recession from his predecessor, dropped 0.4 percent. Income excluding government payouts increased 12.7 percent during Mr. Bush’s eight years in office.

“This is hardly surprising,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, an economist and former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. “Under President Obama, only federal spending is going up; jobs, business startups, and incomes are all down. It is proof that the government can’t spend its way to prosperity.”

According to the bureau’s statistics, per capita income dropped during 2009 in 47 states, with only modest gains in the other states, West Virginia, Maine and Maryland. But most of those increases were attributed to rising income from the government, such as Medicare and unemployment benefits.

Two of the most populous states in the country reported dramatic declines: Per capita income in California dropped 3.5 percent to $42,325; in New York, the drop was 3.8 percent to $46,957.

“The evidence from New York and California reinforces a basic lesson: Where government gets too large, prosperity suffers. Let’s hope that the Congress learns this lesson before it is too late for the country as a whole,” said Mr. Holtz-Eakin, who also served as chief economic policy adviser to Sen. John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign.

On the campaign trail, Mr. Obama often derided Mr. Bush for what he said were dramatically falling incomes for workers.

“American families, since George Bush has been in office, have seen average family incomes go down $2,000,” Mr. Obama said in a September 2008 speech on the economy in Green Bay, Wis.

The bureau, which doesn’t compile statistics on “family” income, reported that per capita income rose during Mr. Bush’s two terms, from $29,159 to $32,632 (using 2005 dollar values as a base). During Mr. Obama’s 15 months in office, per capita income has dropped nearly 1 percent to $32,343.

The dropping numbers show that the $862 billion stimulus package has not turned the tide on dropping incomes.

Washington Times

Democrats Give Us The Largest Tax Increase In State History

Today Democrats in Olympia did the only thing they know how to do - raise our taxes.

Not a reform or restraint in sight, they only had eyes for our paychecks proving once again they are perfectly willing to hurt and even destroy employers and working families with the largest tax increase in state history.

Taxes include:

• A 0.30% increase in the B&O tax on all services except hospitals and scientific R&D = $242 million;
• DOT foods = $155 million;
• Cigarette($1 per pack) and other tobacco products = $101 million;
• B&O tax on economic income (Nexus) = $84.7 million;
• 50-cent per gallon (28-cents per six pack) beer tax = $59 million;
• Sales tax on bottled water = $32.6 million;
• Sales tax on candy/gum = $30.5 million;
• 2-cent per 12-ounce soda tax = $33.5 million;
• Taxes on business structure transactions = $8.5 million;
• B&O tax increase on property management salaries = $6.9 million;
• B&O increase on certain canned meat products = $4.1 million;
• B&O tax increase on mortgages = $3.6 million;
• B&O tax increase on corporate officer salaries = $2.1 million;
• Tax increase on bad debts = $1.7 million;
• Tax increase on livestock nutrient management = $1.3 million;
• Tax increase on PUD electric bills = $1.2 million;
• Personal liability for tax debts = $1.1 million.

“Families and small businesses are being targeted by new tax increases that will kill jobs and come at the worst possible time in a down economy. These new tax increases highlight an approach that refuses to reform state government in meaningful ways and embraces business as usual in Olympia.

“There have been solutions on the table since day one of the legislative session that would have created jobs, prioritized government and reformed the budget process. Nearly all of these solutions were pushed aside in favor of new tax increases.” Rep. Doug Ericksen

November is coming.

Imagine All Your Purchases Costing 20% More...

VAT = Very Abominable Tax

President Obama is vetting a new national sales tax (commonly referred to as a VAT) to extract more wealth from the private sector to sustain his insatiable hunger for more government spending.

Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker and current Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke have commenced a vetting strategy to convince Americans that they need to give more and more money to an every-expanding and bloated federal government. Congress needs to just say no to a VAT — and increased taxation — as part of any pitch by this Administration to balance the budget.

Volker and Bernanke have used a two pronged strategy to vet the VAT. First is fear mongering. Bernanke argues that Americans need to choose between higher taxes or massive cuts in critical government programs.

He mentioned Social Security, Medicare, Education and Defense as areas of government spending that would be targeted if we don’t raise taxes. This is a false choice. The federal government needs to reform entitlement programs, needs to root out waste fraud and abuse and should eliminate programs like the National Endowment for the Arts.

The deficit incurred by the federal government has reached about $12.8 trillion and next year’s projected deficit is record breaking at $1.6 trillion. Obama’s solution? Not cutting government, not ending bailouts, not entitlement reform, and not stopping the Stimulus.

Instead, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke yesterday commenced a debate on higher taxes yesterday, see the Washington Post: To avoid large and ultimately unsustainable budget deficits, the nation will ultimately have to choose among higher taxes, modifications to entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, less spending on everything else from education to defense, or some combination of the above.

White House economic advisor Paul Volcker, and former Chairman of the Fed, urged the United States to follow Europe and impose a Value Added Tax (VAT). The Washington Examiner has this description of a VAT:

A VAT is a national sales tax that would be collected by retailers. But it can also be imposed on products as they make their way through the manufacturing process. That is, the tax for a single product is paid by manufacturers, producers, and business that add value to the product, as well as by the consumers. Critics argue that the VAT is a regressive tax that unduly places the burden on the poor.

The reason why elites in Washington would look to a VAT before increasing income taxes (and, believe me, higher income taxes are coming) is because not enough of the population even pays income taxes to make it worthwhile for the government to use the income tax structure to balance the budget.

According to the Tax Policy Center, only about 47 percent of Americans will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Meanwhile, the government can extract the most amount of your wealth from a national sales tax (VAT) and Volker’s statement yesterday evidences a will on the part of this Administration to start the fear mongering process to tee up higher taxes.

Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric on the part of the agents of President Obama when they try to downplay the effort to impose higher taxes on all Americans. Volker and Bernanke would not be messaging for higher taxes if this Administration did not want them to.

A VAT, national sales tax, would be the end of economic freedom as we know it, because the federal government would then have the power to tax all aspects of our lives. Until Washington can restrain spending, we should not entrust it with the power to create a brand new tax.

by Brian Darling

An Obamanation Against Free Enterprise

The Wall Street Journal is reporting the Obama administration is banning internships within private businesses.

Barack Obama is telling teenagers and college students, who are now suffering through a 26% unemployment rate, that they are not allowed to volunteer their time in the free market in exchange for acquiring valuable and relevant job skills that might, just might, get them off the unemployment line — and that ignores the ability to make valuable connections through networking in the workplace and build relationships for future careers and opportunities.

“If … you want to pursue an internship with a for-profit employer, there aren’t going to be many circumstances where you can have an internship and not be paid and still be in compliance with the law,” the Labor Department’s Nancy J. Leppink tells the New York Times.

Since the nation was formed and even before that, apprenticeships and then internships have been a key way for students to acquire valuable jobs skills.

Companies would, frequently through college programs, agree to put a student to work teaching the student a trade. The company would get free labor and the student would, at no cost, get job skills.

It is a tried and true method of acquiring skills in this country. But the Obama administration is declaring such an act against the law.

If you want to work as a Congressional or White House intern, for Organizing for America, or any other non-profit, they’ll let you do it.

But if you want to actually work for a business that produces goods and services in the free market? You’re screwed as is the business.

And guess what? Existing workers will be spread more thinly and college kids will wait longer and longer for jobs.

Barack Obama is opposed to the American free enterprise system. Barack Obama is opposed to an individual’s right to make the individual’s own decisions about what is in the individual’s own best interest.

by Erick Erickson

Where Is My Free Health Care?

By Margaret Talev, McClatchy

Two weeks after President Barack Obama signed the big health care overhaul into law, Americans are struggling to understand how — and when — the sweeping measure will affect them.

Questions reflecting confusion have flooded insurance companies, doctors' offices, human resources departments and business groups.

"They're saying, 'Where do we get the free Obama care, and how do I sign up for that?' " said Carrie McLean, a licensed agent for eHealthInsurance.com. The California-based company sells coverage from 185 health insurance carriers in 50 states.

McLean said the call center had been inundated by uninsured consumers who were hoping that the overhaul would translate into instant, affordable coverage.

That widespread misconception may have originated in part from distorted rhetoric about the legislation bubbling up from the hyper-partisan debate about it in Washington and some media outlets, such as when opponents denounced it as socialism.

"We tell them it's not free, that there are going to be things in place that help people who are low-income, but that ultimately most of that is not going to be taking place until 2014," McLean said.

You can read the rest of this article here.

Democrat Showdown in Olympia

In Olympia Democrats are in a showdown with Democrats (they have all the power there) over how to raise your taxes. It's getting kind of interesting as reported by Austin Jenkins:

Today marks the start of week three of a legislative special session that, when Gov. Chris Gregoire declared it, was only supposed to last seven days. Each day that passes, Gregoire ratchets up her rhetoric. She’s moved from simply frustrated to now “disgusted” that lawmakers have yet to resolve their differences.

Majority Democrats in the House and Senate are locked in a stare-down over whether to hike the sales tax. The Senate says yes, the House and Gregoire say no. But the governor refuses to flash her veto pen.

Both chambers are so dug in that lawmakers have been sent home to resume their normal lives. Left behind to negotiate are Speaker of the House Frank Chopp and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown. On Friday, reporters staking out the third floor of the Capitol witnessed Chopp and his chief of staff cross the rotunda to meet with Brown.

Half an hour later, Chopp emerged with little more to say than he still opposes the sales tax. Brown then invited reporters into her office and offered the first hint that the Senate may blink first. She said she’s begun looking for $200 million in taxes that could replace the Senate’s proposed two-tenths-of-a-penny sales tax increase.

What those alternative revenue sources might be, Brown isn’t saying...yet.

Obama Month-by-Month

If They Succeed We Will Be Less

by Aaron Gardner

Today I was reading an article [make sure to read the whole thing] from National Review’s print edition written by Richard Lowry & Ramesh Ponnuru. In this article Ponnoru and Lowry do well in explaining the roots of American exceptionalism, and how the same has become a part of the core of our culture.

Here is the definition of American exceptionalism distilled to a single paragraph.

The late Seymour Martin Lipset defined it as liberty, equality (of opportunity and respect), individualism, populism, and laissez-faire economics. The creed combines with other aspects of the American character — especially our religiousness and our willingness to defend ourselves by force — to form the core of American exceptionalism.

After their brief history, the National Review duo then pivot their focus to the Obama administration’s agenda and it’s discomfort with American exceptionalism.

As is pointed out, this feeling of discomfort is mutual …

The popular revolt against Obama’s policies is a sign that Americans are not prepared to go gentle into that good night. Other factors are of course in play — most important, the weak economy — but the public is saying “No” to a rush to social democracy.

Although the conservatives, libertarians, and independents who oppose Obama’s health-care initiative may not put it in quite these terms, they sense that his project will not just increase insurance premiums but undermine what they cherish about America.

Those Americans who want to keep our detention facility at Guantanamo Bay think it necessary to protect our security — but they also worry, more profoundly, that our leaders are too apologetic to serve our interests.

Americans may want change, even fundamental change, but most of them would rather change our institutions than our national character.

We are engaged in a battle of permanence versus change, in which the object of conquest is nothing less than our national character, the idea of American exceptionalism.

Russell Kirk lays out, in more verbose form than Buckley’s “Standing Athwart History Yelling Stop”, the role of the conservative in this battle.

The intelligent conservative endeavors to reconcile the claims of Permanence and the claims of Progression. He thinks that the liberal and the radical, blind to the just claims of Permanence, would endanger the heritage bequeathed to us, in an endeavor to hurry us into some dubious Terrestrial Paradise.

The conservative, in short, favors reasoned and temperate progress; he is opposed to the cult of Progress, whose votaries believe that everything new necessarily is superior to everything old.

Surely, if we do not take up this battle and challenge this cult of Progress, we will, as Lowry and Ponnoru note, be less.

It is madness to consider President Obama a foreigner. But it is blindness to ignore that American exceptionalism has homegrown enemies — people who misunderstand the sources of American greatness or think them outdated.

If they succeed, we will be less free, less innovative, less rich, less self-governing, and less secure. We will be less.

Reading, Writing and Abortion

When she signed a consent form, Jill figured it meant her 15 year old could go to the Ballard Teen Health Center located inside the high school for an earache, a sports physical, even birth control, but not for help terminating a pregnancy.

"She took a pregnancy test at school at the teen health center," she said. "Nowhere in this paperwork does it mention abortion or facilitating abortion."

Jill says her daughter was given a pass, put in a taxi and sent off to have an abortion during school hours all without her family knowing.

"We had no idea this was being facilitated on campus," said Jill. "They just told her that if she concealed it from her family, that it would be free of charge and no financial responsibility."

Swedish Medical Center runs the clinic at Ballard High and protects the students' privacy.

KOMO News

Bill to Repeal ObamaCare

Today, U.S. Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) introduced legislation to fully repeal the Democrats’ government health care takeover that President Obama signed into law Tuesday morning. 12 Republicans have already cosponsored this bill including Senators Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), Robert Bennett (R-Utah), Kit Bond (R-Missouri), Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), John Ensign (R-Nevada), Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Texas), James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), George LeMieux (R-Florida), James Risch (R-Idaho), Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) and David Vitter (R-Louisiana).

“This fight isn’t over yet, Republicans are standing with the American people who are demanding we repeal this intolerable act,” said Senator DeMint. “We must repeal this bill and start over. There are commonsense solutions we can implement to expand health care freedom and choices, lower premiums, and increase quality. But this bill will force taxpayer funding of abortions, raise health costs, hike taxes, cut Medicare, raid Social Security, and put bureaucrats between patients and their doctors.

“In ramming through a bill that forces government into the most personal aspect of our lives, the President and his Democrat Party have revealed themselves as being radically to the left of the American people. They will lose this fight in the end; the American people cherish their freedom and will defend it this November,” said Senator DeMint.

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.

Another Three Days in Olympia, Another Teacher

Go home already. That is the sentiment of citizens as they watch Democrats spend another $14,000 per day keeping the Washington State Legislature in session.

Enough! You had an entire sixty day regular session to spend our money and raise our taxes. This special session is ridiculous, and the amount of money it takes everyday to be in Olympia is double ridiculous.

“Every three days they keep us in session equals the cost of a teacher,” said State House Republican Leader Richard DeBolt, who is among the lawmakers choosing NOT to collect his daily financial allowance for being in session."

“This is a family quarrel right now among Democrats over which taxes to increase. Once they agree on the tax increases, we can come back to Olympia and wrap up the session in a day or two.”

Taxing us the only option being considered by Democrats, and they hold all the legislative cards to raise them.

“When the time comes to debate these bills, we will do our best to provide a voice for the citizens who cannot afford higher taxes during these tough economic times."

"In the meantime, however, the taxpayers should not be paying the price for the Democrats’ inability to get their work done.”

With one week in to this "not-so-special" session, and no end in sight, we agree with Rep. DeBolt.

Go home already! At least attempt to save taxpayers THAT money.

WA to Challenge Democrat Health Care Bill

KING 5 - Washington state Attorney General Rob McKenna says Washington will be one of at least ten states that will file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the health care reform bill.

"The individual insurance mandate is unprecedented in American history in requiring the American people to go out and buy a product in the private market," said McKenna.

The House voted 219-212 late Sunday to approve the overhaul, which would extend coverage to 32 million uninsured Americans and make a host of other changes.

No Republicans voted for the bill and 34 Democrats voted no. McKenna is a Republican.

Obama could sign the bill as early as Tuesday.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said he planned to file the complaint "the moment Obama signs the bill."

What Didn't Change With Last Night's Vote

59% Of Americans Oppose The Health Bill, 70% Believe The “Budget Deficit Will Go Up”

CNN: “Do You Generally Favor It Or Generally Oppose [Healthcare Legislation]: “Favor 39% Oppose 59%.” “As you may know, the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate are trying to pass final legislation that would make major changes in the country’s health care system. Based on what you have read or heard about that legislation, do you generally favor it or generally oppose it? Favor 39% Oppose 59%.” (“CNN Opinion Research Poll,” 3/19-21/10, P.2)

• “From What You Know Of That Legislation, Do You Think You And Your Family Would, In General, Be Better Off, Worse Off Or About The Same If It Becomes Law? Better off 19% Worse off 47% About the same 33%.” (“CNN Opinion Research Poll,” 3/19-21/10, P.5)

• “From What You Know Of That Legislation, Do You Think Senior Citizens Who Are Currently On Medicare Would, In General, Be Better Off, Worse Off Or About The Same If It Becomes Law? Better off 20% Worse off 45% About the same 34%.” (“CNN Opinion Research Poll,” 3/19-21/10, P.6)

• “From What You Know Of That Legislation, Do You Think The Federal Budget Deficit Will Go Up, Go Down, Or Stay The Same If It Becomes Law? Go up 70% Go down 12% Stay the same 17% No opinion 1%.” (“CNN Opinion Research Poll,” 3/19-21/10, P.6)

SRG

Never Despair by NRO

‘Nil desperandum” — never despair. That is a sentiment that conservatives need to take to heart now that Congress has narrowly passed a bill that simultaneously undermines life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

It takes some ingenuity to add to the costs, inefficiency, and dysfunctions that government has already bequeathed to our health-care system, but the Democrats have proven themselves up to the challenge.

Almost nothing about this legislation is free of dispute, but we are convinced that it will increase taxes, increase premiums, and increase debt, while decreasing economic growth, job growth, and the quality of health care.

The Democrats had no mandate to take these steps. In 2008, the president campaigned both against forcing people to buy insurance and against taxing their benefits. The legislation runs counter to the campaign on both points.

NRO Editors

The president promised to change Washington. He has made its stench more noisome, winning this vote by using every kind of deceit and (legal) corruption, and over the objection of a bipartisan coalition representing most Americans.

We are now being told that the campaign to repeal this legislation is over before it has even begun, that Americans will come to appreciate the benefits that a bountiful government is giving them, and that the growth of the welfare state can never be reversed.

We understand the odds against repeal. We understand, indeed, that complete repeal of every provision of the bill is impossible. The doughnut hole — a gap in Medicare’s prescription-drug coverage designed to encourage seniors to economize — has been filled, and it is not going to be re-opened.

But the larger thesis seems as superficially plausible, and as ultimately convincing, as were earlier predictions that state socialism or secularization were our inevitable future.

It is quite possible that the majority of America that rejects this legislation will get its way in the next few years — if it is given the right leadership. And it is worth the effort to try.

It is possible, for example, that the results of the legislation will turn out to be unpleasant more quickly than most observers realize.

The bill requires insurers to charge people with pre-existing conditions the same as everyone else, and the only reason for people not to game the system — dropping their insurance until they get sick and the insurer has to take them — is because the law requires them to buy insurance or pay a fine.

For many people, the fine will be a cheap price to avoid premiums that could run around $8,000 a year for a family of four. The effect of the legislation could be to cause the number of healthy people with insurance to fall dramatically — and for premiums to rise, which would cause more people to drop their insurance.

If this happens, we can expect liberals to agitate for a single-payer system; but we can also expect the public to blame the Democrats whose health-care system it will now be. A less lopsidedly Democratic Congress is not going to respond to this chaos by enacting single payer or strengthening the fines.

For that matter, the lengthy legislation could turn out to have little time bombs, the nature of which cannot currently be guessed. Nothing about the process that produced the legislation, after all, suggests that it was put together with careful consideration.

Conservatives will be able to capitalize on the discrediting of Obamacare, however it takes place, only if they campaign this fall on a pledge to replace this government-heavy system with true reform.

Republicans running against Democrats who voted for this legislation will have the easiest task. But even Republicans running against Democrats who voted against it can advance the cause by challenging those Democrats either to advocate repeal and replacement themselves or to expose themselves as false opponents of Obamacare.

Nor have pro-lifers lost the war. Pro-lifers should campaign this fall on a pledge to make the Hyde amendment — the partial ban on government funding of abortion, which now applies to portions of federal spending and has to be renewed each year — a permanent feature of law that applies to all federal spending.

The Obama administration and most of liberaldom have pretended over the last year to favor both the principle in general and the Hyde amendment in particular. And the principle is popular. Their posturing, disingenuous though it was, has handed pro-lifers a winning issue.

The Democrats have abused the system, ignoring both the Founders’ design and public opinion. The first step toward undoing that abuse is to make them pay a political price for it.

by NRO Editors

219-212

The Reality of an Executive Order

1. An executive order can be rescinded any time. President Obama could reverse it next week, next month, or next year. Should another pro-abortion president be elected in the future, it could be rescinded on inauguration day.

2. An executive order will not prevent insurance companies that provide abortion from participating in the exchanges.

3. Abortion funding in the health care legislation can be only be removed using the legislative process. An executive order not only doesn’t fix the problem, it isn’t needed to fix the problem, and could not stand a legal challenge. If Democrats are serious about protecting taxpayers from funding abortion in the health care bill, they must use the legislative process to fix the problem.

Marjorie Dannenfelser

Happy Warriors

“This is a historic day, and we are happy warriors. We will be a part of history, joining Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s passage of Social Security, Lyndon Johnson’s passage of Medicare and now Barack Obama’s passage of healthcare.”

Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.)

Battle By Phone

Members continued to be inundated with phone calls from constituents and interest groups Friday thanks to an impending vote on health care reform this weekend.

Calls to the House numbered close to 100,000 an hour, creating a bottleneck in a phone system only meant to handle 50,000 calls an hour.

The chamber has been similarly overloaded for four consecutive days, beginning on Tuesday when radio host Rush Limbaugh told viewers to call the Capitol switchboard phone number.

Roll Call

Here are the numbers if you still want to call:

877-762-8762 or
202-224-3121 or
202-225-3121

Consequences of the Democrat Health Care

President Barack Obama and members of Congress received a letter on Thursday signed by more than 130 economists predicting the health care legislation they are pushing through will discourage private sector businesses from hiring more workers causing both a reduction in hours and wages for those currently employed.

Caterpillar Inc. is but one real-life example of the consequences which will be brutal to many businesses in the privates sector, and fatal to even more.

They know this legislation will increase their company's health-care costs by more than $100 million in the first year alone. The Peoria-based company said its insurance costs will increase by at least 20 percent, more than $100 million.

Caterpillar also expressed it's concerns in a letter sent directly to House Speaker Pelosi.

"We can ill-afford cost increases that place us at a disadvantage versus our global competitors," said the letter signed by Gregory Folley, vice president and chief human resources officer of Caterpillar.

And why would we purposely put businesses providing good living wage jobs in the position of being unable to compete anyway?

It isn't that this message hasn't been given to legislators, it has...repeatedly! What the message hasn't been is heard.

Both citizens and business owners are discouraged that concerns raise to Democrat legislators have fallen on deaf ears, and it appears that despite harm to the private sector they remain committed to passing their damaging health care reform legislation.

Speaking Fluent "Democrat"

In Olympia the majority party has just announced this special session will likely last more than a week. Senator Ed Murray, chairman of the Senate Democratic Caucus, made several comments to the press about this speaking fluent "Democrat". No worries, I'll translate for you:

"We are in an unprecedented economic crisis," .

Translation: We spent way more money than we've taken from you...yet.

"Sixty days and probably 67 days is not going to be enough to solve this problem."

Translation: We're going to need more time to figure out how to take more of your money.

"The thorniest issues really are about revenue. That's sort of, what I would say, the major sticking point."

Translation: The word "revenue" used by any Democrat is always to be translated "taxes" or "other people's money".

Murray said general agreement has been reached on an $800 million revenue package but "there is not agreement over the pieces."

Translation: It's really quite difficult for us to decide what "pieces" of your money to take.

Never forget, YOU are the only "revenue" they have.

Administration Removes American Flag

You might want to sit down for this story. USA Today reported this week that the Obama Administration has ordered U.S. military personnel in Haiti not to fly the American flag.

Here’s the official explanation for this outrageous decision, “We are not here as an occupation force, but as an international partner committed to supporting the government of Haiti on the road to recovery.”

That’s the most absurd statement I’ve heard in a long time. Everyone knows why we are there, what we are doing there and why the United States of America is shouldering the overwhelming majority of the burden. By the end of January, the United States had given $180 million in aid to Haiti.

And what about our “international partners”? Well, they’re all still proudly flying their flags. Apparently, the French, British and the Croatians aren’t worried about being perceived as occupiers.


Gary Bauer

90 Seconds to Government Run Health Care

">

Fellow Patriots, Stand Firm For Liberty

Pulling the Plug on our Constitution

By Mark Alexander

"If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people ... must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify." --Federalist No. 331

Our Constitution is on life support2, and House Democrats are about to pull the plug.

Leaders of the Democrat Party ("Progressives" as they call themselves, Leftists as we call them) have been unable to garner popular or even Democrat Party support for their plan to socialize our health care system. Fortunately, Republicans are united in their opposition to this one issue.

Barack Obama3, titular head of the Demos, proclaimed, "I want some courage. I want us to do the right thing."

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi concludes, "Nobody wants to vote for the Senate bill."

She is proposing to overtly circumvent our Constitution by way of the "Slaughter Solution." Rep. Louise Slaughter, chairman of the House Rules Committee, proposes to pass legislation using the "self-executing rule," which will allow the House to accept the already-passed Senate health care bill by presumption alone, thus negating a formal up-or-down vote by House members.

Pelosi confessed, "I like it because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill."

Unfortunately, there is precedent in invoking the "self-executing rule" -- by Republicans, no less -- concerning "mundane" legislation agreed to by House leaders of both parties. Unconstitutional as these precedents are, there is nothing "mundane" about ObamaCare.

"Slaughter" and "self-executing" may describe both the process and the electoral future of many Democrats in the House.

Most of the Leftist-controlled political and popular debate about the Democrat proposal to turn over to the central government control of more than 17 percent of the U.S. economy, is focused on one question or another -- what will it cost or save, who will pay and who won't, who will be covered and for what, will there be enough physicians to support this in 10 years, will federal funds be used for abortion, can our economy afford another trillion dollar boondoggle, does it really address the entitlement cost tsunami we're facing, ad infinitum.

These might be interesting topics for debate, but none are germane.

The only relevant debate must begin with First Principles4, our Constitution and Rule of Law.

Does our Constitution allow the Executive and Legislative branches to collaborate to confer authority upon the federal government over, in this case, so-called "health care reform"?

Those who laid the Foundation of our Constitution were crystal clear about its enumeration of both the authority and limits upon the central government.

James Madison, our Constitution's primary author, wrote, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined [and] will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce."

Madison continued, "If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions."

To that point, Thomas Jefferson asserted: "[G]iving [Congress] a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole [Constitution] to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. Certainly, no such universal power was meant to be given them. [The Constitution] was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect."

Clearly, our Constitution, does not authorize Congress to nationalize health care, anymore than it authorizes Congress to do most of what it does today.

That notwithstanding, Obama and his Leftist cadres in the House and Senate are moving forward with their endeavor to inflict socialized medicine upon the United States.

They have again, one and all, abandoned their oaths to "support and defend5" our Constitution.

Democrat "leaders" have all been questioned about constitutional authority, and have uniformly asserted6 that the question is irrelevant.

Typical of their non-responses was this indignant question from Speaker Pelosi: "Are you serious? Are you serious?"

Such utter contempt for our Constitution explains why Democrats refuse to support any measure to cite constitutional authority for legislation. For example, the Enumerated Powers Act (HR 1359) would require that "Each Act of Congress shall contain a concise and definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment of each portion of that Act," but for years, insurmountable obstacles have prevented passage of HR 1359 -- and you know who they are.

As for the Slaughter Solution, Article 1 Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution stipulates, "Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, and that in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively."

Typical of Republican protests about this effort to evade the Constitution's prescription for passage of legislation, Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI) called the ruse "the acme of arrogance" and the "shredding the U.S. Constitution."

Unfortunately, more than a few Republicans have dabbled in such unconstitutional chicanery. Thus, I am reminded of the admonition regarding hypocrisy in Matthew 7:4-5. In contemporary terms, Republicans must first demonstrably abide by First Principles before calling on Democrats to do the same.

The only silver lining to this cloud: If Democrats pass ObamaCare, every medical complaint by a Democrat constituent will be hung around their necks.

Fellow Patriots, stand firm for Essential Liberty7 for we still hold these Truths8.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Links
1.http://patriotpost.us/document/federalist-papers/federalist-33/
2.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2009/10/15/our-constitution-is-on-life-support
3.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2008/04/11/obama-pathos-part-1-barack-who
4.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2010/03/11/when-debating-a-liberal-start-with-first-principles
5.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2008/11/14/our-sacred-honor-to-support-and-defend
6.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2009/10/29/nobody-questions-that
7.http://essentialliberty.us/about/introduction/
8.http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2009/07/02/we-still-hold-these-truths

Code Red on Health Care

Contact Your Rep, Tell Them To Vote NO On Obamacare

Capitol Switchboard: 877-762-8762 or 202-224-3121

CODE RED - LIST OF REPS WHO ARE UNDECIDED

40,000 Calls an Hour

House Getting 40,000 Calls an Hour

House administrators estimate that Capitol switchboard operators are fielding roughly 40,000 calls per hour from constituents and that perhaps just as many callers are experiencing busy signals a full day after radio host Rush Limbaugh gave his listening audience the Capitol switchboard phone number and encouraged them to call it.

That means that in an eight-hour window, the Capitol is being deluged with more than 300,000 phone calls, said Jeff Ventura, spokesman for the Chief Administrator’s Office. The barrage is about 10 times what the switchboard usually receives, he added.

“This doesn’t surprise me. It’s going to be that way all week, until they vote [on health care reform]. No doubt about it,” he said. “For everyone who doesn’t get through, they’ll just say to themselves, ‘I’ll try again tomorrow.’”

Limbaugh continued his efforts to encourage constituents to call Congress, posting an article to his Web site called, “Pedal to the Medal: It’s Time to Flood Congress with Calls, E-mails.” The article includes the switchboard number and a link to a National Republican Congressional Committee list of Congressmen that should be targeted as potential swing votes on the health care reform bill.

The telecommunications onslaught comes as the House prepares to vote on a health care reform bill as early as this weekend.

By Daniel Newhauser

The Very Real Pain of Progressive Rule

Yesterday our community was greeted with one more consequence of Progressive majority rule - the pain of unemployment as reported by Dave Gallagher of the Bellingham Herald:

Whatcom County's unemployment rate reached 10 percent for the first time in more than 20 years as private sector industries reported job losses across the board.

The rate has risen significantly the past two months.

In January the unemployment rate was 9.4 percent, according to the Washington State Employment Security Department. In December, it was 8.3 percent. Since 1990, when the ESD started using the current method for tracking unemployment, Whatcom County has not had double-digit unemployment.

In February 10,540 people were actively seeking work locally, up more than 2,000 compared to February 2009. There are also a number of discouraged workers - those that have given up looking - whom the ESD doesn't track at the county level.

Jim Vleming, regional labor economist for the state, reiterated what many economists across the country have been predicting: Jobs will be one of the last areas of the economy to recover.

"This is going to be a recovery that will happen one job at a time; there won't be a sudden rise," Vleming said. "It's going to start with a small-business owner becoming confident enough to hire one or two more employees because sales have picked up, not from big companies significantly adding jobs."

While all Whatcom County private industries had decreases, Vleming was particularly concerned about the local leisure and hospitality sector. He expected at least some ramping up for the Winter Olympics last month, but instead the industry employed 8,600 people, down by 700 compared to February 2009.

Construction continues to be one of the hardest-hit sectors. In February the industry employed 5,500 people in Whatcom County, matching the January total, which was the lowest monthly total in eight years...

Nearby counties continued to be hit hard. Skagit County's unemployment rate rose to 12.4 percent in February, while Snohomish was at 10.5 percent.

Meanwhile across Washington State similar headlines reveal the depth of the pain. Here are a few more headlines:

• Kitsap County unemployment at highest rate in two decades (Kitsap Sun)
• Thurston jobless rate hits 9% (The Olympian)
• Lewis County jobless rate hits 15 percent in February (The Chronicle)
• Washington state unemployment rate rises to 9.5 percent (Puget Sound Business Journal)

Special Session? Hasn't Legislature Done Enough Damage?

Excerpted from the Yakima Herald-Republic Editorial

Lawmakers are in the process of spending more money than they did last year. That's not a misprint. It's thanks to an expected windfall of $500 million from the federal government and a laundry list of tax increases, from a possible sales tax boost to taxes on bottled water and cigarettes.

Instead of making systemic reforms to how this state is run and pays for its priorities, the Legislature, led by the Democratic majority, has stuck to spending models that have remained unaltered despite coming into this session with a $2.8 billion shortfall.

And guess what? If Congress fails to come forward with yet another bailout for states, and if the economy keeps slogging along in first gear, the state could face a $2 billion shortfall when lawmakers return to Olympia next year to craft another budget. We wonder how many more times lawmakers will slap a $1 tax on a pack of cigarettes to balance the budget.

The majority also seems intent on keeping state employees happy regardless of the economic realities. While private employment in Washington has dropped by 7.5 percent, the decrease in the total number of state workers, outside of higher education, amounted to just 0.7 percent, according to The Seattle Times.

And what happened to taking a tough stand on state employee contracts and asking them to share some of the pain? That never happened. State employees contribute only a 12 percent share of their health care premiums. By raising the level to 20 percent -- still below the national average in the private sector -- the state could have saved $50 million over the next two years.

Instead, we get lawmakers telling voters that after cutting education funding by siphoning off money for smaller classrooms, they will allow cash-strapped school districts to raise their levy lids and get more revenue through local property taxes.
That may look good on paper, but in reality it's a pipe dream. Rural districts like those in Central Washington can't ask property owners to pay more. The levy lids have peaked. Richer districts, though, have much lower rates and could benefit from the legislation.

The end result is that rich school districts will get richer and poorer districts will be left behind -- as they too often seem to be.
Don't expect lawmakers to suddenly mend their ways during this special session. Taxes will rise, spending will increase and the next budget shortfall will be set in motion.

May the gavel finally drop on the Legislature and end this tortured process. We can't afford lawmakers to be in session one minute longer.

Tipping Point Ahead for the Republic

Tipping Point Ahead for the Republic

Here are two data trends that should concern all Americans. First, from The Heritage Foundation’s recent Index of Dependence on Government, we see the long-term rise in dependency on government programs. Note that the data used by the Index runs only through 2008 (and thus does not measure the impact of the federal government’s 2009 spending binge on dependency). The Index reached its highpoint in 2006, but the long-term upward trend is clear.

Meanwhile, the Tax Foundation reports that in 2008 more Americans than ever earned an income without paying any income taxes at all: 51.6 million—36 percent of all filers.

If these trends continue, it won’t be too long before the better part of the population can simply vote itself more and more benefits at the expense of a wealth-creating minority. That is not a formula for self-government that can last.

by Alex Adrianson