Dana Loesch at Big Government makes an important point this morning as conservatives soon head back to Washington with more skin in the game. Although conservatives do need leaders and mentors across the United States, we are in no way in need of a figurehead for a “new” movement. I’m fine with our Founding Fathers thank you very much.
We really don’t. The previous one was OK I guess, but as a conservative, I figured the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the following Amendments make a pretty good contract. Heck, the congress-critters even swear an oath to support and defend it.
Only a few shirts left and then they are gone forever! If you were thinking about purchasing one of our US Constitution – It’s a BFD (big friggin’ deal) T-shirts, you can now pick one up for $10 plus shipping and handling.
Yes, tax policy and President Obama’s agenda are part of the TEA Party’s driving force, but more important is the realization that the expanding role of the federal government creates an increased dependency on government.
“Most of what Congress does is not authorized by the Constitution, but they do it anyway.” That was the comment made by Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) and referenced by Fox News host Andrew Napolitano in a Freedom Watch segment. He’s right of course.
Part of the Obama administration’s stimulus program included a plan to weatherize 600,000 homes in three years – and “save or create” jobs of course – has only completed somewhere between 9,000 and 22,000 homes during it’s first year. The program cost is $5 billion.
The Mount Vernon Statement is set to be signed today by 80 leading conservatives on the eve of the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) event in Washington this week. Some call it a manifesto, some a resurgence of the Contract with America. May I remind readers of the true conservative manifesto?
Ever wonder what happens when you loudly proclaim your moral stand on an issue and then sell out your putative values, all whilst in the glare of the national media?
“The good news for Senator Ben Nelson is that he doesn’t have to face Nebraska voters until 2012.
If Governor Dave Heineman challenges Nelson for the Senate job, a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows the Republican would get 61% of the vote while Nelson would get just 30%. Nelson was reelected to a second Senate term in 2006 with 64% of the vote.
Nelson’s health care vote is clearly dragging his numbers down. Just 17% of Nebraska voters approve of the deal their senator made on Medicaid in exchange for his vote in support of the plan. Overall, 64% oppose the health care legislation, including 53% who are Strongly Opposed. In Nebraska, opposition is even stronger than it is nationally.”
It would appear that the other show is dropping and the people of Nebraska have seen Senator Nelson new face and are less than impressed.
And, speaking of his “grand compromise,” what has the nation at large made of his thirty pieces of silver, this “Cornhusker kickback“?
“Republican attorneys general in 13 states say congressional leaders must remove Nebraska’s political deal from the federal health care reform bill or face legal action, according to a letter provided to The Associated Press Wednesday.
“We believe this provision is constitutionally flawed,” South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster and the 12 other attorneys general wrote in the letter to be sent Wednesday night to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
“As chief legal officers of our states we are contemplating a legal challenge to this provision and we ask you to take action to render this challenge unnecessary by striking that provision,” they wrote.”
So, a man sells out his beliefs, or at least his putative beliefs, for other people’s money. His voters, shockingly, see this as a betrayal, not merely of his own beliefs, but their own as well. Oh, at that pay-off that he accepted in their names may well prove to be less than Constitutional.
Good thing that Ben’s re-election isn’t for a couple of year, now isn’t it?
Well, at least for Ben…
Update (Jim)– Senator Lindsey Graham agrees with SOS. It’s a must watch below.
While Senator Ben Nelson (D. Neb.) is basking in the glow of his hard fought victory to make changes to the Senate health care bill, let me throw a bit of cold water on the celebration.
By now, you know that the good Senator has decided to leap off the fence and support the health care legislation because Senator Harry Reid (D. Nv.) has made changes in the legislation at Senator Nelson’s request. Earlier this week, Nelson had proclaimed that he could not and would not support the bill unless the language prohibiting the expenditure of federal funds on abortion was strengthened, and certain other “unspecified” changes, were made.
On the abortion front, what Senator Nelson agreed to was, in fact, a weakening of the abortion language, but, we now know what “unspecified changes” he was really after, and those “concessions” he got for tumbling off the fence.
Under the bill, the bulk of the uninsureds in this country will now be covered by expanding Medicaid, and, although the federal government will pay for those increased costs initially, beginning in 2017 the states will have to do so…that is, all states except Nebraska. As of 2017, and into the foreseeable future, you will get to pay for all increased Medicaid costs in Nebraska.
But, I wonder whether this provision will withstand constitutional muster, and, here is why. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to tax, but it also states,
…all Duties, Imposts, and Excises [i.e. taxes] shall be uniform throughout the United States.
Under this provision, Congress could not pass a law saying, for instance, that the lowest income tax bracket is, for example, 15%, except in Nebraska, where it it 10%. And yet, albeit through the back door, that is exactly what Nelson negotiated. Although Nebraskans will pay the stated 15%, they will receive an instant “rebate” of their tax dollars to cover whatever their increased Medicaid costs are, thus, effectively lowering the federal income tax rate in Nebraska. Or, perhaps better said, increasing the taxes on everyone in this country more than they would have increased, just to cover the federal government’s new obligation to Nebraska.
To be sure, tax dollars spent by the federal government in states are not directly proportional to the tax dollars collected from the citizens of that state, nor need they be. For example, Oklahoma may well receive more tax money for federal highways than it’s proportionate share of the national highway budget.
But, what Senator Nelson pulled off is unprecedented. Everyone else, but those living in Nebraska, gets to pay for Nebraska’s share of Obamacare.
Yes, Nebraska, there is a Santa Claus.
Update (Jim): The SOS was way ahead of the game on this one … now backed by none other than Senator Lindsey Graham this morning on CNN.
Several weeks ago I wrote two posts dealing with the constitutionality of Obamacare based upon the remarks of Mr. Hoyer (D. Md.) and Ms. Pelosi (D. Ca.). Mr. Hoyer insisted that the mandate that all have insurance was clearly constitutional based upon Congress’s power to tax, while Ms. Pelosi insisted the mandate was constitutional based upon Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.