In the course of the first three days of the Nevada County Fair, I have been asked no less than 10 times about our lawless President and what can be done. Well, the first obstacle is that one must show that the President has been lawless. Let's take the example of the lawsuit by the House of Representative and a comment from Michael Chertoff. Imagine that in four years a Republican president decides by executive order that his administration is only going to enforce the tax code up to 10% - meaning that if you owe 28% of your income in taxes but only pay 10% of your income to the IRS, the IRS will not audit you or otherwise enforce the laws of the USA. Is this legal? Well, this example is exactly what Obama has done with the individual mandate. Obamacare states that if you do not obtain health insurance, you owe the IRS a tax. By executive order, Obama has decided to forego collection and ordered the IRS not to enforce such collection of this specific tax that is by law due and payable to the IRS.
I think that we can all agree that these examples demonstrate behavior that is lawless. Further and on the merits, the lawsuit by the House of Representatives (which addresses he individual mandate) is very difficult for Obama to defend and Obama would likely lose on the merits. This lawsuit is not the first example of Obama's overreach, as his administration's position on recess appointments was soundly rejected in the Supreme Court in a 9-0 decision. Unanimous Supreme Court decisions are kind of like a no-hitter in baseball. They do not happen very often, and you do not want to be the team that could not get a single hit. That being said, my personal opinion is that the House of Representatives does not have standing to sue the president, because they were not aggrieved. This case will never see the light of day, and it is going no where.
So what is the remedy? The fact of the matter is that Constitution offers two remedies - term limits and impeachment.
The question proposed to me at the Fair is whether impeaching Obama is the right thing to do. There are two answers to this question. First, is whether impeaching Obama the right thing to do for the health of our democracy. In my opinion, the answer is a resounding yes. See the example above in connection with enforcement of the IRS code. Once the Pandora's box of selective enforcement of the laws created by Congress and the president is opened, amazingly ridiculous things can start happening. If Rick Perry is the president, he could get rid of the EPA and the Department of Education (and all of the statutes and regulations associated therewith) by the stroke of his pen. No more enforcement of the Clean Water Act or the Endangered Species Act or Common Core. Done. If Ted Cruz is the president and as discussed above, Ted Cruz could effectively lower the income tax rate to 10% without consultation of Congress. This Pandora's box opened by Obama is dangerous to our democracy in that it vastly weakens congressional power and vastly expands the power of a single man (whoever the president is), and Congress has a duty to future congresses to not abdicate its power to a totalitarian executive.
The second question is whether there is the political will to impeach a lawless Obama. The answer to this question is a resounding no. By the republicans attempting to impeach former President Clinton for lying under oath in a civil matter, they expended all of their political capital (and that of any party attempting to impeach the president) for decades. Truth be told, people lie in depositions all of the time, and I do not think that lying in a civil deposition was what the founding fathers considered "high crimes and misdemeanors." Now, fast forward 20 years to a time when an impeachment would be based on a true constitutional crisis instead of petty partisan politics, there is no political capital with which to impeach the president. Shame on the republicans 20 years ago for overreaching, but also shame on Obama for overreaching on executive authority now. This lawless precedent set by Obama will most certainly come back to haunt the democratic party for years to come when a republican is the president with democrats in control of only one chamber of Congress.
We are founded as a country of laws, and if the president of the USA can choose which laws to enforce, how is our country any different than the tyranny against which our founders fought?
The Pandora's box is open. The next 20 years of presidential authority will be very interesting to watch. Will the democrats have the political capital to stop a republican president who exercises executive authority like Obama? Doubt it.
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Saturday, August 9, 2014
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Eric Cantor's Primary Loss an 'Apocalyptic Moment' for the GOP
"U.S. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia lost to a Tea Party challenger on Tuesday in a stunning Republican primary upset that sent shockwaves through Congress and gave the conservative movement a landmark victory.
"Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, was easily beaten by college economics professor David Brat, who accused Cantor of betraying conservative principles on spending, debt and immigration.
"The result could halt efforts to craft a House immigration reform bill, as nervous Republicans hustle to protect themselves against future challenges from the right ahead of the Nov. 4 midterm elections.
"It could also make Republicans even more hesitant to cooperate with President Barack Obama and Democrats for fear of being labeled a compromiser.
"Cantor had been seen by many as an eventual successor to House Speaker John Boehner, and his defeat will mean a shake-up in the Republican leadership at the end of the year among House members nervous about the depth of public anger toward Congress.
"A seven-term congressman with ties to the financial industry, Cantor had spent more than $5 million to head off the challenge from Brat, a political newcomer who teaches at Randolph-Macon College.
"Brat spent only about $122,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, and was not seen in the media or national Republican circles as a danger to Cantor.
"The victory also emboldened conservative leaders, and could encourage a challenge to Boehner when the new leadership team is chosen.
"'Eric Cantor's loss tonight is an apocalyptic moment for the GOP establishment. The grassroots is in revolt and marching,' said Brent Bozell, a veteran conservative activist and founder of the Media Research Center and For America. The rest of this article is here.
The conservative movement is certainly in revolt and marching. Each time an establishment congressional incumbent that goes down to a conservative two things happen. First, conservatives in real number increase. Second, the remaining incumbents become more conservative out of fear of a primary. We are nearly $18 trillion in debt. Increased regulation has put a wet blanket on our economy. We need leaders who do what they say and mean what they say.
Some say that this race was good for liberals. My response is that which a friend of mine uses. "Politics follows culture." As the generational pendulum swings, our culture is currently changing towards fiscal responsibility and personal responsibility. We have seen generations of leaders attempting to control everything from the people to the economy altruistically trying to help all people - certainly a laudable goal. The evidence over the past 50 years is that we are no better off with government intervention and in far greater debt. The culture is becoming fed up, and Mark Levin sums it up well below.
"Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, was easily beaten by college economics professor David Brat, who accused Cantor of betraying conservative principles on spending, debt and immigration.
"The result could halt efforts to craft a House immigration reform bill, as nervous Republicans hustle to protect themselves against future challenges from the right ahead of the Nov. 4 midterm elections.
"It could also make Republicans even more hesitant to cooperate with President Barack Obama and Democrats for fear of being labeled a compromiser.
"Cantor had been seen by many as an eventual successor to House Speaker John Boehner, and his defeat will mean a shake-up in the Republican leadership at the end of the year among House members nervous about the depth of public anger toward Congress.
"A seven-term congressman with ties to the financial industry, Cantor had spent more than $5 million to head off the challenge from Brat, a political newcomer who teaches at Randolph-Macon College.
"Brat spent only about $122,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, and was not seen in the media or national Republican circles as a danger to Cantor.
"The victory also emboldened conservative leaders, and could encourage a challenge to Boehner when the new leadership team is chosen.
"'Eric Cantor's loss tonight is an apocalyptic moment for the GOP establishment. The grassroots is in revolt and marching,' said Brent Bozell, a veteran conservative activist and founder of the Media Research Center and For America. The rest of this article is here.
The conservative movement is certainly in revolt and marching. Each time an establishment congressional incumbent that goes down to a conservative two things happen. First, conservatives in real number increase. Second, the remaining incumbents become more conservative out of fear of a primary. We are nearly $18 trillion in debt. Increased regulation has put a wet blanket on our economy. We need leaders who do what they say and mean what they say.
Some say that this race was good for liberals. My response is that which a friend of mine uses. "Politics follows culture." As the generational pendulum swings, our culture is currently changing towards fiscal responsibility and personal responsibility. We have seen generations of leaders attempting to control everything from the people to the economy altruistically trying to help all people - certainly a laudable goal. The evidence over the past 50 years is that we are no better off with government intervention and in far greater debt. The culture is becoming fed up, and Mark Levin sums it up well below.
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Carl DeMaio for Congress - Endorsed by McClintock
Editor's Note: Carl DeMaio is a conservative Republican running in California's 52nd congressional district. The Wall Street Journal noted DeMaio, one of three openly gay Republicans running for Congress in 2014, made history by featuring a shot of him with his same-sex partner in a campaign ad.
In the fall of 2013, U.S. Congressman Tom McClintock, conservative leader in Congress, endorsed Carl DeMaio for United States Congress.
"'Carl DeMaio is a rare find in politics – because he actually has a record of getting big reforms done,' said McClintock."
"'Time after time, Carl DeMaio has stood on principle to take on the special interests and protect taxpayers – and he’ll continue to do that as San Diego's voice in Congress,' McClintock continued."
"During his time on the San Diego City Council, DeMaio effectively led the way on numerous fiscal and government reforms, including putting an end to pension spiking, opening city services up to competitive bidding, cutting red tape on small businesses, and defeating the largest tax increase in the history of San Diego."
"DeMaio’s results for taxpayers: hundreds of millions in savings during his time on the City Council and billions projected over the next 20 years."
"'I’m grateful to have the endorsement of Congressman McClintock, a leader who sees the success we’ve achieved in San Diego by working together and standing on principle to get things done,' said DeMaio."
We wish Carl DeMaio the best of luck this election season!
In the fall of 2013, U.S. Congressman Tom McClintock, conservative leader in Congress, endorsed Carl DeMaio for United States Congress.
"'Carl DeMaio is a rare find in politics – because he actually has a record of getting big reforms done,' said McClintock."
"'Time after time, Carl DeMaio has stood on principle to take on the special interests and protect taxpayers – and he’ll continue to do that as San Diego's voice in Congress,' McClintock continued."
"During his time on the San Diego City Council, DeMaio effectively led the way on numerous fiscal and government reforms, including putting an end to pension spiking, opening city services up to competitive bidding, cutting red tape on small businesses, and defeating the largest tax increase in the history of San Diego."
"DeMaio’s results for taxpayers: hundreds of millions in savings during his time on the City Council and billions projected over the next 20 years."
"'I’m grateful to have the endorsement of Congressman McClintock, a leader who sees the success we’ve achieved in San Diego by working together and standing on principle to get things done,' said DeMaio."
We wish Carl DeMaio the best of luck this election season!
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Ryan: New House Republican budget includes ObamaCare repeal
"Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, said Sunday that his new budget includes the repeal of President Obama’s health-care reform law known as ObamaCare."
"Ryan told 'Fox News Sunday' that the new proposal will make enough cuts to balance the federal budget in 10 years, compared to his previous one that tried to achieve that goal in 25 years."
"'We think we owe the American people a balanced budget,' the Republican congressman said."
The rest of the article is here.
Usually, congressional consideration of the federal budget begins once the President of the United States submits a budget request. The budget request includes funding requests for all federal executive departments and independent agencies.
As required by the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, President Obama was supposed to submit a budget request to Congress no earlier than the first Monday in January, and no later than the first Monday in February. To date, President Obama has failed to follow the law and submit a budget to Congress. In fact, Obama has missed the budget deadline more than any president since the 1920s.
Failing to follow the law (again) is simply another political move by President Obama, as President Obama likely does not want to have his budget taken as an opening offer in the coming fight over raising the nation's $16.4 trillion debt ceiling.
"Ryan told 'Fox News Sunday' that the new proposal will make enough cuts to balance the federal budget in 10 years, compared to his previous one that tried to achieve that goal in 25 years."
"'We think we owe the American people a balanced budget,' the Republican congressman said."
The rest of the article is here.
Usually, congressional consideration of the federal budget begins once the President of the United States submits a budget request. The budget request includes funding requests for all federal executive departments and independent agencies.
As required by the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, President Obama was supposed to submit a budget request to Congress no earlier than the first Monday in January, and no later than the first Monday in February. To date, President Obama has failed to follow the law and submit a budget to Congress. In fact, Obama has missed the budget deadline more than any president since the 1920s.
Failing to follow the law (again) is simply another political move by President Obama, as President Obama likely does not want to have his budget taken as an opening offer in the coming fight over raising the nation's $16.4 trillion debt ceiling.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Sam Aanestad's Radio Advertisement
Editor's Note: On KNCO, I heard this advertisement from Sam Aanestad for Congress. I could not agree with you more Sam...we must live within our means and stop excessive government spending!
LaMalfa's response is that he will not give up the subsidies to become a Congressman.
Here is the long and the short of Aanestad vs. LaMalfa.
If you want a conservative in Congress who will vote 10 out of 10 times with Congressman McClintock and the other fiscal hawks, Aanestad is your guy. If you want a consummate campaigner who will vote with the Republican leadership and tow the Republican line 10 out of 10 times like Wally Herger, vote for the corporate welfare recipient.
It is just that simple.
"Did you know you're $49,000 in debt? So are each of your kids and grandkids. That's because Congress has run up a $16 trillion national debt, and we're the ones stuck paying for it.We have discussed the $4.7 million in farm subsidies taken by LaMalfa in detail here and here.
"I'm Sam Aanestad, and I'm running for Congress to stop this spending. I oppose adding even one more dollar in new debt. We need to stop spending.
"Now I know some disagree. One of my opponents [Doug LaMalfa] has taken millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded farm subsidies. He's running for Congress to protect the $200 billion farm welfare program.
"The problem is we can't afford it. Our kids and grandkids will be stuck paying the bill for the millions he's taken from the taxpayers. It's time we say no to government debt.
"I'm Sam Aanestad, and I approve this message paid for by Sam Aanestad for Congress because I am serious about ending government debt. To find out more, please visit SamAanestad.com.
LaMalfa's response is that he will not give up the subsidies to become a Congressman.
Here is the long and the short of Aanestad vs. LaMalfa.
If you want a conservative in Congress who will vote 10 out of 10 times with Congressman McClintock and the other fiscal hawks, Aanestad is your guy. If you want a consummate campaigner who will vote with the Republican leadership and tow the Republican line 10 out of 10 times like Wally Herger, vote for the corporate welfare recipient.
It is just that simple.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
LaMalfa faces fire in congressional debate held in Redding
"Doug LaMalfa found himself on the defensive Monday night about the millions of dollars his family has received in federal farm subsidies over the years."
"At a debate organized by the Redding Tea Party Patriots featuring seven of the eight candidates in the 1st District Congressional race, one of LaMalfa's Republican challengers, Michael Dacquisto, asked the state senator if he would pledge to give back the subsidies should he be elected."
"LaMalfa's family has received $4.7 million in federal subsidies between 1995 and 2010, according to the Environmental Working Group, an organization that tallies federal farm aid. The subsidies have been roundly attacked by LaMalfa's opponents, who say it's hypocritical for a small-government Republican to accept the aid. LaMalfa says the payment program is necessary for 'breadbasket' farmers like him to offset the costs of burdensome regulations, government-imposed costs and trade agreements that put American farmers at a disadvantage."
"LaMalfa said should he be elected he would work to reduce those burdens so the subsidies are no longer necessary."
The rest of this article from the Redding Searchlight is here.
Sometimes it is interesting to listen to what candidates do not say. LaMalfa never said that he would work to get rid of subsidies.
While LaMalfa endured attacks from most of his competitors, Dr. Sam Aanestad did not criticize LaMalfa but focused instead on establishing himself as the more experienced and most conservative member of the group.
Dr. Aanestad noted he also has the endorsement of U.S. Rep. Tom McClintock.
"At a debate organized by the Redding Tea Party Patriots featuring seven of the eight candidates in the 1st District Congressional race, one of LaMalfa's Republican challengers, Michael Dacquisto, asked the state senator if he would pledge to give back the subsidies should he be elected."
"LaMalfa's family has received $4.7 million in federal subsidies between 1995 and 2010, according to the Environmental Working Group, an organization that tallies federal farm aid. The subsidies have been roundly attacked by LaMalfa's opponents, who say it's hypocritical for a small-government Republican to accept the aid. LaMalfa says the payment program is necessary for 'breadbasket' farmers like him to offset the costs of burdensome regulations, government-imposed costs and trade agreements that put American farmers at a disadvantage."
"LaMalfa said should he be elected he would work to reduce those burdens so the subsidies are no longer necessary."
The rest of this article from the Redding Searchlight is here.
Sometimes it is interesting to listen to what candidates do not say. LaMalfa never said that he would work to get rid of subsidies.
While LaMalfa endured attacks from most of his competitors, Dr. Sam Aanestad did not criticize LaMalfa but focused instead on establishing himself as the more experienced and most conservative member of the group.
Dr. Aanestad noted he also has the endorsement of U.S. Rep. Tom McClintock.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Local Politics Summary
Election season in Nevada County is starting up again. Let's take a look at the local races and see how things are shaping up.
Congress
With Tom McClintock, who won this congressional district by a huge margin in 2008, running in the newly created district just south of here, Wally Herger is a possibility to be our congressman again. This race is proving to be very interesting. As of September 30, 2011, Herger only has a little over $200,000 on hand. There has been a long-standing rumor that Herger will not run again, and Democrat candidates, sensing an opportunity, are lining up to run for the seat. Should Herger decide not to run, we will likely see a Republican scrum for the congressional seat in this very conservative and very Republican district. Stay tuned on this one!
California Assembly
Dan Logue is our current assemblyman. Logue is a Nevada County resident and works tirelessly to preserve and protect our north state conservative values. The National Federation of Independent Business has awarded Logue a perfect score based on his voting record and support of small business. His widespread efforts have also drawn the attention of media outlets across the nation, including the New York Times, FOX News, and the Los Angeles Times. He is being challenged, but none of the challengers are serious contenders.
Nevada County Supervisor
In District One thus far, we have lifelong resident Sue McGuire running against Nate Beason. It is pretty clear that the local hard-left will also run a leftwing environmentalist candidate. Sue McGuire is a lifelong Nevada County resident, and Beason is running for an unprecedented third term (I think that the last three term supervisor was Eric Rood). As a former supervisor told me recently, two terms are plenty for anyone as, over the terms, a supervisor starts to become less a representative of the people and more an employee of the county. While I have my own opinions, I will leave it up to the reader and the District One voter to decide whether two terms are enough for Beason.
Ted Owens, who is likely running for an unprecedented third term, would have a challenger from the very far-left in the name of Michael Rogers. He is an relatively unknown in Truckee, as lifelong residents do not even know who he is. Should he declare a third run at supervisor, the widely popular Owens will likely have a fairly easy race.
Congress
With Tom McClintock, who won this congressional district by a huge margin in 2008, running in the newly created district just south of here, Wally Herger is a possibility to be our congressman again. This race is proving to be very interesting. As of September 30, 2011, Herger only has a little over $200,000 on hand. There has been a long-standing rumor that Herger will not run again, and Democrat candidates, sensing an opportunity, are lining up to run for the seat. Should Herger decide not to run, we will likely see a Republican scrum for the congressional seat in this very conservative and very Republican district. Stay tuned on this one!
California Assembly
Dan Logue is our current assemblyman. Logue is a Nevada County resident and works tirelessly to preserve and protect our north state conservative values. The National Federation of Independent Business has awarded Logue a perfect score based on his voting record and support of small business. His widespread efforts have also drawn the attention of media outlets across the nation, including the New York Times, FOX News, and the Los Angeles Times. He is being challenged, but none of the challengers are serious contenders.
Nevada County Supervisor
In District One thus far, we have lifelong resident Sue McGuire running against Nate Beason. It is pretty clear that the local hard-left will also run a leftwing environmentalist candidate. Sue McGuire is a lifelong Nevada County resident, and Beason is running for an unprecedented third term (I think that the last three term supervisor was Eric Rood). As a former supervisor told me recently, two terms are plenty for anyone as, over the terms, a supervisor starts to become less a representative of the people and more an employee of the county. While I have my own opinions, I will leave it up to the reader and the District One voter to decide whether two terms are enough for Beason.
Ted Owens, who is likely running for an unprecedented third term, would have a challenger from the very far-left in the name of Michael Rogers. He is an relatively unknown in Truckee, as lifelong residents do not even know who he is. Should he declare a third run at supervisor, the widely popular Owens will likely have a fairly easy race.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Debt Deal: "Spitting in the Ocean"
"'The ink hasn't even been printed on the paper yet, let alone signed into law,' complained White House Press Secretary Jay Carney hours before the House approved a last-minute deal to raise the debt ceiling and rein in federal deficits, 'and we're already talking about how it's not substantial enough.'"
"Indeed, budget experts contacted by Fox News universally hailed the $2.5 trillion deal as a step in the right direction, and a noteworthy shift for a capital long accustomed to spending without restraint. But they also agreed the measure falls far short of the drastic action needed to address America's massive and long-term structural debt problem."
"A drop in the bucket, or even spit in the ocean," chuckled Maya MacGuineas, president of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
"In an interview with Fox News conducted after she spent Monday afternoon traversing Capitol Hill to brief senators on the terms of the deal, MacGuineas called the proposed savings -- to be enacted in at least two rounds of action between now and early next year -- 'nothing to sneeze at.'"
"'But this is nowhere close to the amount of savings we need to really get on top of this deficit and debt challenge,' she said. 'We're on course to borrow about $10 or 11 trillion over the next 10 years. ... .And $2.5 trillion in savings over 10 years is not going to fix the problem. It's not even going to set us on the right course quite yet.'"
"There was also skepticism that the deal, which culminated months of partisan bickering and anxious backroom negotiations, did not even contain real cuts to deficit spending."
The rest of the article is here.
Reality check from a good friend...everyone keeps saying "Cut" when they should be using the phrase "grow a bit less than normal."
The plan adds at least $7 trillion to our debt over the next 10 years and it NEVER BALANCES.
Spit in the Ocean.
"Indeed, budget experts contacted by Fox News universally hailed the $2.5 trillion deal as a step in the right direction, and a noteworthy shift for a capital long accustomed to spending without restraint. But they also agreed the measure falls far short of the drastic action needed to address America's massive and long-term structural debt problem."
"A drop in the bucket, or even spit in the ocean," chuckled Maya MacGuineas, president of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
"In an interview with Fox News conducted after she spent Monday afternoon traversing Capitol Hill to brief senators on the terms of the deal, MacGuineas called the proposed savings -- to be enacted in at least two rounds of action between now and early next year -- 'nothing to sneeze at.'"
"'But this is nowhere close to the amount of savings we need to really get on top of this deficit and debt challenge,' she said. 'We're on course to borrow about $10 or 11 trillion over the next 10 years. ... .And $2.5 trillion in savings over 10 years is not going to fix the problem. It's not even going to set us on the right course quite yet.'"
"There was also skepticism that the deal, which culminated months of partisan bickering and anxious backroom negotiations, did not even contain real cuts to deficit spending."
The rest of the article is here.
Reality check from a good friend...everyone keeps saying "Cut" when they should be using the phrase "grow a bit less than normal."
The plan adds at least $7 trillion to our debt over the next 10 years and it NEVER BALANCES.
Spit in the Ocean.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Rep. Ryan Is Republican Point Man
"When Rep. Paul Ryan delivers the Republican response to President Barack Obama's State of the Union address Tuesday, many viewers will get their first look at a man whom GOP leaders are trusting to manage a central policy issue—how to cut the federal budget—that could shape the party's image for years.
"While unknown to most Americans, Ryan, 40 years old, has established himself as a leading conservative thinker on federal spending, shaped in part by his early work for supply-side icon Jack Kemp.
"Now, Republicans not only have made Ryan chairman of the House Budget Committee, but on Tuesday the House is expected to vote to give him unprecedented powers to force spending cuts for the current fiscal year. That authority will allow Ryan to act unilaterally in setting an overall spending level for the rest of the year, a job usually handled by his full panel.
"Hours later, Ryan will speak to the nation in a televised address following Obama's remarks to a joint session of Congress. He was chosen for the role by House Speaker John Boehner and Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell.
The rest of the article is here.
Ryan was a classmate of mine at Miami University, and for the past three days, he is the Senate Democrats' new villain.
lately, liberals have highlighted GOP efforts to cut as much as $50 billion from the federal budget and a “roadmap” to create private accounts for Social Security and Medicare (which Ryan created) in an effort to attack and discredit him.
“This is an initial volley in a three-day effort — 72-hour window — to try to muddle Paul Ryan’s foray onto the national scene,” said a senior Senate Democratic aide. “We want to make the House Republicans or Republicans at large own his roadmap and what it would entail for Social Security.”
It is politics as usual with the liberals. The fact of the matter is that we have huge unfunded liabilities that liberals do not have the guts to tackle. They would rather play "political chicken" with the unfunded liabilities, while Republicans are trying to deal with real issues.
I am proud to say that the Republicans are finally seeing the light. Look for the Democrats to become the party of "no" in the House and the Senate.
"While unknown to most Americans, Ryan, 40 years old, has established himself as a leading conservative thinker on federal spending, shaped in part by his early work for supply-side icon Jack Kemp.
"Now, Republicans not only have made Ryan chairman of the House Budget Committee, but on Tuesday the House is expected to vote to give him unprecedented powers to force spending cuts for the current fiscal year. That authority will allow Ryan to act unilaterally in setting an overall spending level for the rest of the year, a job usually handled by his full panel.
"Hours later, Ryan will speak to the nation in a televised address following Obama's remarks to a joint session of Congress. He was chosen for the role by House Speaker John Boehner and Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell.
The rest of the article is here.
Ryan was a classmate of mine at Miami University, and for the past three days, he is the Senate Democrats' new villain.
lately, liberals have highlighted GOP efforts to cut as much as $50 billion from the federal budget and a “roadmap” to create private accounts for Social Security and Medicare (which Ryan created) in an effort to attack and discredit him.
“This is an initial volley in a three-day effort — 72-hour window — to try to muddle Paul Ryan’s foray onto the national scene,” said a senior Senate Democratic aide. “We want to make the House Republicans or Republicans at large own his roadmap and what it would entail for Social Security.”
It is politics as usual with the liberals. The fact of the matter is that we have huge unfunded liabilities that liberals do not have the guts to tackle. They would rather play "political chicken" with the unfunded liabilities, while Republicans are trying to deal with real issues.
I am proud to say that the Republicans are finally seeing the light. Look for the Democrats to become the party of "no" in the House and the Senate.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
The Prosperity Congress - Tom McClintock
Editor's Note: Freedom equals prosperity - you cannot say it more clearly than that.
Tom McClintock (R), House Chamber, Washington, D.C. January 6, 2011
M. Speaker:
I rise to express the hope that historians will look back on the 112th Congress as the session that restored American prosperity – and to express my strong agreement with the new leaders of this House who have declared that every action of this body must be measured against this goal.
We speak of “jobs, jobs, jobs,” but jobs are a product of prosperity. And prosperity is the product of freedom.
Government does not create jobs or wealth – it merely redistributes them. Jobs and wealth can only be created through the free exchange of goods and services in a free market. Government’s role is to create and protect the conditions which promote prosperity.
If I give you a dollar for a cup of coffee, what’s going on in that transaction? I’m telling you that your cup of coffee is worth more to me than my dollar. And at the same time, you’re telling me that my dollar is worth more to you than your cup of coffee. We make that exchange and both of us go away with something of greater value than we took in – each of us goes away richer.
That is the freedom that creates prosperity. That simple exchange – whether for a cup of coffee or for a multi-billion dollar acquisition – is what creates wealth.
But now suppose some third party butts its nose into this transaction. “The coffee must be between 110 and 130 degrees; it has to include a swizzle stick; it must be covered if it is to be consumed more than 25 feet from the point of sale” – and on and on. Every one of these restrictions reduces the value of that exchange for one or both of us.
That’s the fundamental problem that we face today. Our government has not only failed to protect the freedom that creates prosperity, but it has become destructive of that freedom.
To create jobs we must restore prosperity and to restore prosperity we must restore freedom.
We must restore the freedom of choice that gives consumers the ultimate say over the output of our economy. In a free and prosperous society, consumers vote every day with their own dollars on what kind of light-bulbs they prefer, on how they wish to get to work, on what foods they like, on how much water they want in their toilets, on what kind of cars they want or on what kind of housing they desire. These consumer choices signal – every day – what things are actually worth and what our economy will actually produce. Government is destroying the elegant simplicity of this process, and this Congress must reverse that destruction.
We must restore the freedom of individuals to enjoy the fruit of their own labor so that they can make these decisions for themselves once again.
That’s why excessive government spending is so destructive to prosperity – it destroys the freedom of individuals to make their own decisions over what to spend and where to invest their own money. It robs them of both the ability and incentive to create prosperity.
Presidents like Coolidge, Truman, Reagan and Clinton who have reduced government spending relative to GDP all produced dramatic increases in productivity, prosperity and the general welfare of our nation.
And Presidents like Hoover, Roosevelt, Bush and Obama who have increased government spending relative to GDP all produced or prolonged or deepened periods of economic recession, hardship and malaise.
Our government is embarked on the latter course, and this Congress must reverse that direction.
Government has an important role to play in the marketplace. It is there to assure that representations are accurate and that contracts are enforced – in other words, you have to tell the truth and you have to keep your promises. Government exists to assure that the currency is stable and reliable and that property rights are secure.
When it fulfills this fundamental role, it maximizes the freedom that a buyer and a seller have to assess their own needs and resources and to make those exchanges that allow both to go away better off than they were. When it steps beyond this role, it destroys the conditions that maximize prosperity.
M. Speaker, let us together revive and restore the freedom and prosperity of this nation and fulfill that sacred command inscribed on our Liberty Bell: “To proclaim liberty throughout ALL the land, and unto ALL the inhabitants there of.”
Tom McClintock (R), House Chamber, Washington, D.C. January 6, 2011
M. Speaker:
I rise to express the hope that historians will look back on the 112th Congress as the session that restored American prosperity – and to express my strong agreement with the new leaders of this House who have declared that every action of this body must be measured against this goal.
We speak of “jobs, jobs, jobs,” but jobs are a product of prosperity. And prosperity is the product of freedom.
Government does not create jobs or wealth – it merely redistributes them. Jobs and wealth can only be created through the free exchange of goods and services in a free market. Government’s role is to create and protect the conditions which promote prosperity.
If I give you a dollar for a cup of coffee, what’s going on in that transaction? I’m telling you that your cup of coffee is worth more to me than my dollar. And at the same time, you’re telling me that my dollar is worth more to you than your cup of coffee. We make that exchange and both of us go away with something of greater value than we took in – each of us goes away richer.
That is the freedom that creates prosperity. That simple exchange – whether for a cup of coffee or for a multi-billion dollar acquisition – is what creates wealth.
But now suppose some third party butts its nose into this transaction. “The coffee must be between 110 and 130 degrees; it has to include a swizzle stick; it must be covered if it is to be consumed more than 25 feet from the point of sale” – and on and on. Every one of these restrictions reduces the value of that exchange for one or both of us.
That’s the fundamental problem that we face today. Our government has not only failed to protect the freedom that creates prosperity, but it has become destructive of that freedom.
To create jobs we must restore prosperity and to restore prosperity we must restore freedom.
We must restore the freedom of choice that gives consumers the ultimate say over the output of our economy. In a free and prosperous society, consumers vote every day with their own dollars on what kind of light-bulbs they prefer, on how they wish to get to work, on what foods they like, on how much water they want in their toilets, on what kind of cars they want or on what kind of housing they desire. These consumer choices signal – every day – what things are actually worth and what our economy will actually produce. Government is destroying the elegant simplicity of this process, and this Congress must reverse that destruction.
We must restore the freedom of individuals to enjoy the fruit of their own labor so that they can make these decisions for themselves once again.
That’s why excessive government spending is so destructive to prosperity – it destroys the freedom of individuals to make their own decisions over what to spend and where to invest their own money. It robs them of both the ability and incentive to create prosperity.
Presidents like Coolidge, Truman, Reagan and Clinton who have reduced government spending relative to GDP all produced dramatic increases in productivity, prosperity and the general welfare of our nation.
And Presidents like Hoover, Roosevelt, Bush and Obama who have increased government spending relative to GDP all produced or prolonged or deepened periods of economic recession, hardship and malaise.
Our government is embarked on the latter course, and this Congress must reverse that direction.
Government has an important role to play in the marketplace. It is there to assure that representations are accurate and that contracts are enforced – in other words, you have to tell the truth and you have to keep your promises. Government exists to assure that the currency is stable and reliable and that property rights are secure.
When it fulfills this fundamental role, it maximizes the freedom that a buyer and a seller have to assess their own needs and resources and to make those exchanges that allow both to go away better off than they were. When it steps beyond this role, it destroys the conditions that maximize prosperity.
M. Speaker, let us together revive and restore the freedom and prosperity of this nation and fulfill that sacred command inscribed on our Liberty Bell: “To proclaim liberty throughout ALL the land, and unto ALL the inhabitants there of.”
Monday, January 3, 2011
The First Day of High School at the US Capitol
Today is the day that the new freshmen Congressmen got the keys to their new offices.
Early this morning when we arrived at the Cannon office building there were new staffers sitting outside locked offices amongst the scattered furniture jammed in the hallways. Young and fresh staffers asked more seasoned staffers for directions, and others shopped in the Congressional office supply shop in order to stock the new offices. It reminded my a lot of the first day of high school!
It has been nice to get away from California for a few days and to talk to people from somewhere else to get some perspective aside from our local perspective.
Among the local DC population and the halls of Congress, the mood in Washington DC is very good. From the waiter at Ruby Tuesday to my roommate from Russia to staffers in Congress, the mood is one of cautious optimism. Our freedom loving country is truly at a crossroads - do we continue to live beyond our means or do we start to cure the burden that we are placing on our descendants?
The general consensus is that our current fiscal path is unsustainable.
Our local liberal contingent which is always trying to seek the "middle of the road" in conservatives need to open their eyes. Fiscal responsibility, decreasing the national debt, and balancing the budget are about as "middle of the road" as you can get. In 2010, conservatives ran on these principles and won overwhelmingly decisive victories with conservative and independent support. Liberals need to reach across the aisle and work with conservatives to cure the ills of American fiscal policy, or risk being further marginalized from the American public and become the high school nerd that could not get a date.
Aside from politics, Kim and I took a Capitol dome tour. The tour consisted of walking stairs to the top of the Capitol dome. We stood at the top of the dome a mere feet from the fresco painted at the top. Afterwards, we went above the fresco and stood outside of the Capitol at the very top of the building. Needless to say, it was really cool.
I could go on and on about the air and space museum, but that will have to wait for another day.
Early this morning when we arrived at the Cannon office building there were new staffers sitting outside locked offices amongst the scattered furniture jammed in the hallways. Young and fresh staffers asked more seasoned staffers for directions, and others shopped in the Congressional office supply shop in order to stock the new offices. It reminded my a lot of the first day of high school!
It has been nice to get away from California for a few days and to talk to people from somewhere else to get some perspective aside from our local perspective.
Among the local DC population and the halls of Congress, the mood in Washington DC is very good. From the waiter at Ruby Tuesday to my roommate from Russia to staffers in Congress, the mood is one of cautious optimism. Our freedom loving country is truly at a crossroads - do we continue to live beyond our means or do we start to cure the burden that we are placing on our descendants?
The general consensus is that our current fiscal path is unsustainable.
Our local liberal contingent which is always trying to seek the "middle of the road" in conservatives need to open their eyes. Fiscal responsibility, decreasing the national debt, and balancing the budget are about as "middle of the road" as you can get. In 2010, conservatives ran on these principles and won overwhelmingly decisive victories with conservative and independent support. Liberals need to reach across the aisle and work with conservatives to cure the ills of American fiscal policy, or risk being further marginalized from the American public and become the high school nerd that could not get a date.
Aside from politics, Kim and I took a Capitol dome tour. The tour consisted of walking stairs to the top of the Capitol dome. We stood at the top of the dome a mere feet from the fresco painted at the top. Afterwards, we went above the fresco and stood outside of the Capitol at the very top of the building. Needless to say, it was really cool.
I could go on and on about the air and space museum, but that will have to wait for another day.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Washington DC
Kim and I are in Washington DC this week. It has been a great trip so far. We had dinner with my former roommate in Moscow, Russia...so Kim got to hear the same stories from somebody else's mouth!
Today, we went to the Arlington Cemetery. It was far more moving than I had anticipated. I thought that we could go the Tomb of the Unknown then head to President Kennedy's site then head out quickly. Needless to say, we walked about two miles in Arlington Cemetery. The number of tombstones was heart-wrenching and deeply moving. Words cannot express the gratitude we feel for those who have sacrificed for our freedoms.
Afterwards, we went to the Lincoln Memorial and the American History Museum.
Tomorrow, we are going to the Capitol and will be hooking up with Mark Meckler at some point.
I hope that our new electeds can get a handle on this mess and start filling the hole - the last crew of electeds just kept digging.
Today, we went to the Arlington Cemetery. It was far more moving than I had anticipated. I thought that we could go the Tomb of the Unknown then head to President Kennedy's site then head out quickly. Needless to say, we walked about two miles in Arlington Cemetery. The number of tombstones was heart-wrenching and deeply moving. Words cannot express the gratitude we feel for those who have sacrificed for our freedoms.
Afterwards, we went to the Lincoln Memorial and the American History Museum.
Tomorrow, we are going to the Capitol and will be hooking up with Mark Meckler at some point.
I hope that our new electeds can get a handle on this mess and start filling the hole - the last crew of electeds just kept digging.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Analysis of the New Republicans on the Congressional Budget Committee Members
Let's take a look at who will be in control of the federal budget!
Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) was a classmate of mine at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. In 2010, The Daily Telegraph ranked Ryan the 9th most influential US conservative.
Todd Akin (MO) earned a Master of Divinity degree at Covenant Theological Seminary and also earned a 96% rating from the American Conservative Union in 2008, and 100% in 2007.
Tom McClintock (CA) - enough said.
Justin Amash (MI) was backed by the Tea Party in the 2010 election. He ran on a platform of pro-life, less government and lower taxes.
Bill Flores (TX) supports limited government and lower taxes, an end to the spending of the ARRA, pro-life abortion positions, and stronger enforcement at the U.S. Mexico border.
Tim Huelskamp (KA) sponsored or co-sponsored in Kansas a bill limiting property tax increases and an amendment to create a budget stabilization fund.
Mick Mulvaney (SC) will be the first Republican to represent South Carolina's 5th district since 1883. Mulvaney is a GOP Young Gun. The race was highlighted by Mitt Romney's Free and Strong America PAC's "Take Congress Back: 10 in 10" initiative as one of the top 10 House challenger races.
Jim Renacci (OH) was a Tea Party backed candidate.
Reid Ribble (WI) attended Grand Rapids School of Bible and Music to become a full time minister and identifies himself a conservative more than a Republican.
Todd Rokita (IN) introduced Voter Identification in Indiana after purging the state voter rolls. He is a member Knights of Columbus and the National Rifle Association.
David Schweikert (AZ) describes himself as a fiscal conservative and supports severe cuts to government programs, including education, health, and transportation.
Marlin Stutzman (IN) consistently receives 90% ratings or above from the Chamber of Commerce and other small business associations for his support of pro-business legislation. In 2008 he won the Small Business Champion Award from the Indiana Chamber of Commerce.
Todd Young (IN) a former Marine, earned his law degree from Indiana University, where he was President of the school’s Federalist Society chapter. He also worked at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative public policy think-tank.
James Lankford (OK) believes that the "no earmark pledge" should be extended indefinitely and the earmark process should be abolished from the House rules.
The last eleven are all freshmen congressmen.
Happy sailing...looks like we have a whole committee of "Tom McClintocks"
Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) was a classmate of mine at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. In 2010, The Daily Telegraph ranked Ryan the 9th most influential US conservative.
Todd Akin (MO) earned a Master of Divinity degree at Covenant Theological Seminary and also earned a 96% rating from the American Conservative Union in 2008, and 100% in 2007.
Tom McClintock (CA) - enough said.
Justin Amash (MI) was backed by the Tea Party in the 2010 election. He ran on a platform of pro-life, less government and lower taxes.
Bill Flores (TX) supports limited government and lower taxes, an end to the spending of the ARRA, pro-life abortion positions, and stronger enforcement at the U.S. Mexico border.
Tim Huelskamp (KA) sponsored or co-sponsored in Kansas a bill limiting property tax increases and an amendment to create a budget stabilization fund.
Mick Mulvaney (SC) will be the first Republican to represent South Carolina's 5th district since 1883. Mulvaney is a GOP Young Gun. The race was highlighted by Mitt Romney's Free and Strong America PAC's "Take Congress Back: 10 in 10" initiative as one of the top 10 House challenger races.
Jim Renacci (OH) was a Tea Party backed candidate.
Reid Ribble (WI) attended Grand Rapids School of Bible and Music to become a full time minister and identifies himself a conservative more than a Republican.
Todd Rokita (IN) introduced Voter Identification in Indiana after purging the state voter rolls. He is a member Knights of Columbus and the National Rifle Association.
David Schweikert (AZ) describes himself as a fiscal conservative and supports severe cuts to government programs, including education, health, and transportation.
Marlin Stutzman (IN) consistently receives 90% ratings or above from the Chamber of Commerce and other small business associations for his support of pro-business legislation. In 2008 he won the Small Business Champion Award from the Indiana Chamber of Commerce.
Todd Young (IN) a former Marine, earned his law degree from Indiana University, where he was President of the school’s Federalist Society chapter. He also worked at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative public policy think-tank.
James Lankford (OK) believes that the "no earmark pledge" should be extended indefinitely and the earmark process should be abolished from the House rules.
The last eleven are all freshmen congressmen.
Happy sailing...looks like we have a whole committee of "Tom McClintocks"
Congressman Tom McClintock Appointed to House Budget and Natural Resources Committees
Congressman Tom McClintock, CA-04, has been appointed to serve on the House Budget Committee and the Natural Resources Committee for the upcoming 112th Congress.
McClintock will begin his second term on the Natural Resources Committee where he served as ranking member of the Water and Power sub-committee during the 111th Congress. “The Natural Resources Committee is absolutely vital to the economy of the 4th Congressional District, and I am delighted to have been re-appointed,” McClintock said. During the last session, McClintock was an outspoken advocate of restoring abundance of water and power as a central objective of federal policy and vowed to continue that work in the upcoming session.
In addition, McClintock will leave the House Education and Labor Committee to take on new responsibilities on the Budget Committee, which will play a prominent role under Chairman Paul Ryan in bringing federal spending under control. McClintock was a prominent voice for many years in the California legislature warning that the state was on an unsustainable fiscal path. During those years he introduced hundreds of specific budget reforms, including tax, spending and borrowing limitations; contracting out of state services; pension, welfare and education reform and bureaucratic streamlining.
“I am deeply gratified by this appointment,” McClintock said. “The nation’s fiscal crisis is one of the most serious threats our government has ever faced, and the opportunity to assist in setting things right is truly the most exciting assignment I have ever had.”
About the House Budget Committee
As the first panel to examine the President’s annual budget message, the Budget Committee’s chief responsibility is to draft a concurrent resolution that reconciles spending details with the overall comprehensive budget package. The committee is required to draft a budget resolution, agreed to by April 15 of each year, which establishes total targets in five budget areas: authority; outlays; revenues; surplus or deficit; and public debt. The resolution also sets budget authority and outlay targets for each of the 21 spending categories. Finally, the committee prepares guidelines in the annual budget resolution for cutting programs to meet spending targets
About the House Natural Resources Committee
The House Natural Resources Committee considers legislation about American energy production, mineral lands and mining, fisheries and wildlife, public lands, Native Americans, irrigation and reclamation, and oceanography.
McClintock will begin his second term on the Natural Resources Committee where he served as ranking member of the Water and Power sub-committee during the 111th Congress. “The Natural Resources Committee is absolutely vital to the economy of the 4th Congressional District, and I am delighted to have been re-appointed,” McClintock said. During the last session, McClintock was an outspoken advocate of restoring abundance of water and power as a central objective of federal policy and vowed to continue that work in the upcoming session.
In addition, McClintock will leave the House Education and Labor Committee to take on new responsibilities on the Budget Committee, which will play a prominent role under Chairman Paul Ryan in bringing federal spending under control. McClintock was a prominent voice for many years in the California legislature warning that the state was on an unsustainable fiscal path. During those years he introduced hundreds of specific budget reforms, including tax, spending and borrowing limitations; contracting out of state services; pension, welfare and education reform and bureaucratic streamlining.
“I am deeply gratified by this appointment,” McClintock said. “The nation’s fiscal crisis is one of the most serious threats our government has ever faced, and the opportunity to assist in setting things right is truly the most exciting assignment I have ever had.”
About the House Budget Committee
As the first panel to examine the President’s annual budget message, the Budget Committee’s chief responsibility is to draft a concurrent resolution that reconciles spending details with the overall comprehensive budget package. The committee is required to draft a budget resolution, agreed to by April 15 of each year, which establishes total targets in five budget areas: authority; outlays; revenues; surplus or deficit; and public debt. The resolution also sets budget authority and outlay targets for each of the 21 spending categories. Finally, the committee prepares guidelines in the annual budget resolution for cutting programs to meet spending targets
About the House Natural Resources Committee
The House Natural Resources Committee considers legislation about American energy production, mineral lands and mining, fisheries and wildlife, public lands, Native Americans, irrigation and reclamation, and oceanography.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)