Cincinnati Tea Party

A Sense of Urgency

Approximately one year has passed since the President and his associates rolled-out the first incarnation of their new government health care takeover plan, designed to place 17% of our economy under federal administration. Their progress has slowed and sometimes stalled, thanks in no small part to groups across the country like the Cincinnati Tea Party. But the big government crowd is persistent; twisting arms, making deals, and changing the intent of rules (reconciliation) to secure the necessary votes for passage. The next few weeks appear to be the final surge of this hard fought battle. To those Americans who believe in the possibility of limiting government and holding on to some scraps of personal liberty this would be the moment to make your stand.

As Columnist Mark Steyn noted in a recent National Review column, http://article.nationalreview.com/427119/its-about-government-not-health-care/mark-steyn, “the governmentalization of health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture. It redefines the relationship between the citizen and the state in fundamental ways that make limited government all but impossible.” Mr. Steyn understands what most of our elected officials in Washington fail to grasp; nationalized health care will make conservative or progressive elected officials irrelevant. The powerful unelected bureaucracy of health care becomes the power and the politicians are only bit players who come and go, but the health care apparatus will just keep growing.

So the details about this bill are secondary to the creation and funding of this vehicle that permits thousands of statists in Washington to constantly grow and alter their mandates for our lives and quite possibly for our deaths. Constitutional challenges to several provisions will be filed, but the legal road is slow and works to the advantage of the bureaucrat. If it is not already obvious, the health care bill (both the House and Senate version), are the antithesis of all the Cincinnati Tea Party core values.

Individuals and groups fighting for (and against) limited government realize that nationalized health care is the crossroads of our civilization. This blog is offered to those diligently working toward a change in leadership and direction for the country in November 2010 and again in 2012. Electing fiscal conservatives with backbone who wish to reduce government’s influence in American life are desperately needed in many state offices and in Washington, but the health care bill must be stopped here and now. And it must be done with the D.C. players who are on the field. The clock is running, there are no time-outs, and “we the people” must put up a goal-line stand.  So, call, fax, visit, and if necessary, camp outside the office of your Representative. Your children and grandchildren will thank you.

Editable  letters in opposition to the health care bill with check boxes for describing your relationship to your Congressional Representative from each district in Ohio are available in MS Word and PDF formats at:  www.OHcongress.com.

Contesting Your Property Value

Dusty Rhodes (D), Hamilton County Auditor and voice for Hamilton County fiscal conservatism has agreed to complete a regular running “insiders” view of Hamilton County’s financial situation.  His articles will be published regularly through the CTP blog site, to illustrate his views of fiscal conservation, limited government, and free markets in government action (or inaction). 

The Cincinnati Tea Party does not (and cannot) endorse any specific candidates.  Dusty’s second installment is below, entitled, “Contesting Your Property Value”, which provides instructions on how you can save property tax dollars in 2010, if you act soon.

Participation in government usually involves making your opinion heard on public issues.  But there is another form of participation which can directly affect the taxes you pay.

While voter approved tax levies have the major impact on property taxes, your property’s valuation is the foundation on which the rate you pay is figured.  Our office is required to reappraise (revalue) Hamilton County properties every three years by state law.

The legal requirements of the reappraisal process mean we are always behind the market.  That may be more apparent now than it was when real estate values were rising.  The effective date of the appraisal currently in force is January 1, 2008.

If you believe the value we have for your property is inaccurate you can do something about it and you should.  No one should pay any more than they have to in taxes.  If you are not certain about your value one way to get an independent, impartial third party opinion of your value is to ask a Realtor who works in your area.

There is no cost to file a complaint with the Board of Revision.  The Board’s requirement this year is to look at your value as of January 1, 2009.  Based on the evidence presented, the Board can raise or lower a value or leave it unchanged. 

This is especially important if you have purchased a property during the past year and the price you paid is less than our 2008 value.  An arms length sale is the best evidence of value and presenting that information is usually sufficient to achieve a change in your value to what you paid. 

To file a complaint, call 513-946-4035 and we will send you the State’s form and instructions, rules and guidelines.  Read them carefully to prepare for your hearing.  Complaint packets may also be downloaded and printed from our website, www.hcauditor.org.  Click on “Departments” and then “Board of Revision”.

Time is running out.  Complaints must be RECEIVED in our office (the postmark is irrelevant under state law) by 4:00 p.m. on March 31 so if you are not in a position to mail in plenty of time we suggest you play it safe and hand-deliver to room 304 of the County Administration Building, 138 E. Court Street, downtown Cincinnati. 

At your hearing you will need to make your case for the value you seek. 

Our office’s only goal is to get your value right.  Even if we summarily reduced all Hamilton County property values, it would have a minimal effect on taxes.  The millage of most levies is reset after a reappraisal.  Taxing entities get the amount you voted.  So, if values overall go down, millages increase.

Our work in setting values is controlled by state law and overseen by the State Tax Commissioner.  While we do our utmost to get it right, we welcome your help and participation.

State of the State

Matt Mayer, the new president of the Buckeye Institute, just released their anxiously awaited analysis of the jobs climate in the state of Ohio.  It is a somewhat depressing read in that it highlights the very serious challenges we face as a state moving forward.

To GOOOH Independent, or not to GOOOH Independent… that is the question!

The big question on many people’s minds is whether the current Conservative/Tea Party movement should culminate in third-party runs, or if we should work within the two-party system.  Many want to go 3^rd party if only because they’re just completely disgusted with Democrats and Republicans alike.

GOOOH (pronounced “Go”) may be in the center of this issue, so I will address, here, the topic of GOOOH  along with the broader issue about whether it is wise for “Tea Party”, GOOOH, or other Conservative candidates to run as Independents, or if it is wiser to work within the two-party system.

If you don’t know what GOOOH is, you can learn more at www.GOOOH.com.  In general, GOOOH’s intent is to replace all existing US House members with citizens chosen through the GOOOH process.  To most of us, that sounds like a good thing, but there are concerns.

This blog entry is quite long because I have found there are many points to be addressed when debating these issues.  So, I’ll attempt to provide a brief summary for those who just want the quick look and the long version for those not yet convinced or who want to be prepared for their own discussions on the topic.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Summary of Position

1. The CTP supports GOOOH’s intent to replace career politicians with “real people” who will function as statesmen as opposed to politicians.
2. In our early contacts with GOOOH we were informed GOOOH candidates would run as Independents exclusively.
3. We have since been informed that GOOOH will permit, and even encourage, candidates to run as Democrats or Republicans, including primary bids, where and whenever possible.
4. GOOOH still, however, has not been able to provide specifics on how it will mitigate the risk of splitting the conservative vote in general elections when it is not able to run as Rs or Ds, as seems will primarily be the case in 2010, since GOOOH does not appear ready to field candidates in the 2010 primaries.
5. It is the position of myself in specific, and the CTP leadership in general, that running Independent Conservative candidates in general elections is a recipe for disaster in that it could lead to wide-spread Liberal victories.
6. The CTP’s position is that a wise plan has two parts.
   1. Part A: Remake/Reform the parties through greater citizen involvement from the precinct level on up (this takes time).
   2. Part B: Meanwhile, avoid splitting the vote with factious third party runs and continue to vote with practicality in mind until part A can provide us with candidates we can believe in and be happy to vote for.  (Yes, in the short run, that means continuing to vote for the “least worst”.  It may not be what we want, but we have to recognize that change will take some time and we don’t want to make things worse before then.)
7. I do, (and I believe so does the CTP at large) favor the idea of GOOOH, or other Conservative candidates, either running in Primaries (within the two-party system) or running as Independents only in states that have runoff election provisions (which eliminates the split vote risk).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A more detailed look follows (better get some coffee first).

 The following is from GOOOH’s website in the “Learn” section.

“In some states, we will form a party, call it the GOOOH party for now. In states like Washington and Texas that is not presently an option. In some states our candidates may run as Independents. In others we may run as a Republican or Democrat, even competing in the primary if time allows. We may run on some other Party’s ticket, such as the Libertarian Party or the Constitution Party.”

 As you can see, while GOOOH indicates they may run as Democrats or Republicans, they are also indicating they will run as Independents, Libertarians, etc.

 This appears to leave the door wide open to the possibility of wide spread instances of splitting the Conservative vote… something that I’m sure makes any Liberals reading this gleeful in the extreme.

 I want to be clear that in my correspondence with Tim Cox, he has made it clear that he is serious about not wanting to cause split vote scenarios.  I believe he is sincere.  However, he has not been able to provide specifics on how this will be avoided, given the above paragraph.  I have also found little or no evidence that a commitment to avoiding this risk has been well communicated within the ranks of GOOOH.

 This issue is at the crux of why I, and the CTP, have not endorsed GOOOH.

Our position is that we must work within the two party system, not because the two party system is great, but because we simply recognize the reality that 3^rd party victories are, and are likely to remain, rare.  The much more common and likely scenario, when a 3^rd party Conservative candidate is involved, is to split the Conservative vote resulting in the most Liberal candidate winning.

Below, I will address a series of arguments that I have heard for why to go with Independents and abandon the two parties.

Note: Since I am Conservative along Tea Party values, and Republicans are typically (at least in theory) more Conservative in these areas than Democrats (exceptions given), I will speak from that perspective to avoid a bunch of “Democrat or Republican” references, below, that will muddy things further.  That said, I believe the same points hold true from a Democrat perspective for those with that leaning who wish to see changes in that party.

The Arguments

I have encountered numerous arguments in favor of abandoning both Ds and Rs and running as Independents.  These are presented, below, with counter points.  Please note, these are not all specific to GOOOH or arguments from GOOOH supporters but are mostly more about the 3^rd party topic in general.

Argument 1

This is a historic time.  Unlike when Perot split the vote in 1992, helping Clinton win, more people than ever are “fed up” with Democrats and Republicans and will look to Independent Candidates for the answers.

Answer 1

Perhaps that’s true, but is this time so different that not even 10% to 20% of people will still vote Republican?  I don’t think so.  I contend that some percentage will always vote Democrat or will always vote Republican, if only because they remember the lesson of Ross Perot.  I believe the best we are likely to do by running Independent candidates in general elections is to go from scenario A to scenario B, below.

Scenario A:  Typical past result in a 3 party race with a Conservative Independent.

Democrat:  45%

Republican:  35%

Conservative Ind:  20%

 Scenario B:  A possible new result in these “historic times”

Democrat:  45%

Republican:  20%

Conservative Ind:  35%

 The times may allow the Conservative Independent to turn the tables on the Republican but, either way, the more Liberal Democrat wins even in a case where the majority of the electorate wanted a Conservative.  Is that the desired result?

The CTP believes that the opportunity presented by these historic times is that real people can and will make a difference through massive involvement in the political parties leading to, more on the Republican side, the selection of true “Tea Party” style Conservatives that people will be happy to vote for instead of just voting against the other side. 

Becoming impatient, and jumping into Independent runs, could plunge us into more Liberal rule and destroy the chance for the long term plan, of citizen involvement in the parties, to have a chance to succeed.

Argument 2

If the Republican is polling at fewer votes than the Conservative Independent, it is the Republican who should drop out to prevent splitting the vote! 

Answer 2

Okay, let’s say that’s true.  So what?  Is that going to happen?  When someone makes this argument I can’t help but wonder if they’ve forgotten why we’re in this mess.  We’re in this mess because Republicans (as well as Democrats) have NOT been doing the right things.  What makes us think they’ll start now?

As a Conservative, you have to ask yourself this.  When the Liberal Democrat wins will being able to point to the Republican as the person who “should have” dropped out, make you feel good about it? 

Argument 3

There’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans anymore.  They’re all just career politicians playing the game for their own power.  So, running Independents really poses no risk since one is as bad as the other among Ds and Rs.

Answer 3

Okay, we’re all disgusted with politicians in both parties.  I get it!.  I agree!  The Republicans have been awful!  But, if there is no difference at all, where does the term RINO come from?  You need only look at the votes on healthcare reform in the Senate to see that Ds and Rs do make a difference.  Again, remember, there are two parts to the wise plan.  Vote practically to maintain the nation while doing the long term work of party reform.

Argument 4

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results… Therefore continuing to support Republicans or Democrats is insane!

Answer 4

I’m not advocating doing the “same thing”. 

Doing the same thing would mean continuing to vote for the “least worst” candidate while HOPING that someday the Republican party will give us a candidate to actually vote FOR.  That’s not the plan.

The fact is that real change will take time.  Continuing to vote with practicality in mind is a critical, stop loss action that must be maintained until that real change can take root.

Real change comes with getting and staying involved and getting more and more people to do the same.  It comes with getting involved in the Republican and Democrat parties from the ground up, remaking them over time. 

It is said that “parties are people.”  This is fact.  If we replace those who have been running the parties, then the parties will be different.

I believe it is important to stop here and make two critical  points.

1)      When I mention Tea Partiers remaking the two parties, I am absolutely not advocating that Conservatives who feel most closely tied to the Republican party run as Democrats.  We’ve all heard the term RINO (Republican in Name Only).  I, personally, believe that DINOs are just as bad.  People should act with integrity.  If the Democrat platform is closest to your belief system, or the most important pieces thereof, then you should work within the Democrat party.  If feel more closely tied to Republican values (at least as they are supposed to be), I believe you should work within the Republican party.  I do not (nor does the Cincinnati Tea Party leadership) advocate for covert style operations to try to take over or unduly influence the Democrat party as some have accused.

2)      Not everyone already in the Republican and Democrat parties should be replaced.  As the new kids on the block, many who are just now getting involved feel like those already involved are “bad” or have simply failed and should be replaced.  But, the fact is that many good people have been fighting the good fight for a very long time.  They’ve just been outnumbered.  That’s our fault.  We are the ones who are “late to the party.”  Now, we can barge in like bulls in china shops or we can try to take the effort to identify those of “like mind” who are already in the game.  Our attitude can be “look out, here we come” or it can be “we’re here to help.”  I choose the latter. 

Argument 5

You just can’t continue to have faith in the Republican party after they have repeatedly proven they will let us down.

Answer 5

I agree!  No one at the CTP is talking about propping up the Republican party as it exists today.  What we are talking about is reforming it through greater citizen involvement.  I’m not sure if he was the first, but Dan Lillback of the CTP has said it this way.  “People have been consumers of the Parties. This must stop and people must be the parties”.. (or something like that)

Here’s another way of looking at it.

Let’s agree that being on board a sinking ship is better than being in the shark infested waters.  Now, let’s say we have given up faith that the ship will get us where we want to go and so, while still on board, we have started to build a new boat that will allow us to continue our journey without being eaten by sharks.  Clearly, we have little or no faith in the sinking ship, but do we jump off the ship before our new boat is ready?

This analogy isn’t perfect because we’re not talking about creating an entirely new party, but we are talking about creating a new and improved Republican party through greater citizen involvement.

Staying on the sinking boat until the new boat is ready just means continuing to vote for the best of what we have available just until we can get what we really want.

Never one to waste a good analogy; I’m also reminded of the Green movement.  Many of them want to abandon fossil fuels now even though the new technologies aren’t ready.  Realistic Conservatives, though, want to make the most of the fossil fuels we have now while ALSO working to develop new energy technologies. 

In the same way, the wise approach here is to live within the reality of the present while working for the future we desire! 

Argument 6

George Washington warned against the party system so we should reject it by not supporting Ds or Rs.

Answer 6

I can’t be sure, but I do not believe that what Washington intended was for people to take action such that the person elected was not wanted by the majority of the people as happens when we split the vote in a two party system with a 3^rd party candidate as shown in scenarios A and B of argument #1 above.

Argument 7

I’m running as an Independent in the General election to give the people a “real” choice.

Answer 7

People can exercise their “real” choice in the primaries without the great risk of splitting the Conservative vote.  Rationalizations such as this, in the face of losing, or anticipating a loss, in the primaries are, in my opinion, more about pride and/or frustration than logic.

Argument 8

When the Republicans lose because they ran RINOs leading to a Conservative Independent run that split the vote, that will teach the Republicans a lesson that they should have chosen true conservative candidates!

Answer 8

Really?  Is it the Republican establishment who will learn the lessons?

I believe that is the voters who will be taught a lesson, in such circumstances, leading them to vow to never again support Conservative Independents because this leads to Liberal victories. 

Further, it can damage the efforts of Tea Parties, GOOOH, and other Conservative organizations because people may blame these groups for spawning the Conservative Independents who split the Conservative vote.

Argument 9

(This one is specific to GOOOH and is an argument I’ve heard on their behalf)

GOOOH is a non-partisan group.  Therefore, they will actually draw votes from across the political spectrum and not just split the Conservative vote.  Therefore, they pose no specific threat of spitting the Conservative vote.

Answer 9

I agree that GOOOH will pull votes from people who consider themselves Republicans, Conservatives, Independents, and Moderates.  But, I do not believe anyone truly thinks that GOOOH will pull anything more than a trace amount of Liberal votes, if any.  So, we can readily conclude that the only voting block left in tact by GOOOH is the Liberal block. 

Further, it seems logical to assume that among the Independents, moderates and other undeclared, it will be the conservative-leaning among these who will tend to support GOOOH candidates.

I’m not trying to say that GOOOH does not intend to be non-partisan and even ideologically neutral.  However, like any other new “product”, the early adopters of the product are those who are least satisfied with their current situation.  There is no doubt that Conservatives (who traditionally vote Republican, if only because Democrats are even less Conservative) are the most dissatisfied with things at this time and, therefore, are the early adopters of GOOOH.

If there is any doubt, then I challenge GOOOH to poll their members and ask them to report whether they voted for Democrats, Republicans, or Independents in the last 2 or 3 presidential elections.  If I were to bet, I’d bet that no fewer than 90% of GOOOH members who voted in those elections voted Republican (even if they had to hold their noses, and maybe felt a bit ill, in doing so).

In closing

I know that we’re all frustrated.  I know that Democrats and Republicans alike have let us down.  I know that putting Ds and Rs behind us and voting for Independents might “feel good” in the short run.  And, I know that we want to scream and shout and teach them a lesson.  But I also know that, as I believe George Herbert said, “Living Well is the Best Revenge”.

We simply cannot go off the deep end and pretend there is no difference between Ds and Rs as we try to keep this boat afloat long enough to implement the real changes that will take time and patience.

I believe my friends at GOOOH also know this.  I anticipate that they will ultimately make most of their impact in the 2012 primary elections, because they were not able to get far enough fast enough to do so in 2010, and I wish them well in that. 

Meanwhile, I strongly caution GOOOH supporters, voters, and candidates, to beware letting frustration lead you to split-the-vote losses that will sink all our efforts.

Old “New Jobs” bill is dead

This quick note follows up on a previous post about the “New Jobs” bill, which has been scrapped because …. well, it contained too much pork and non-jobs-creating-related items.

My Way news quoted it this way:

The original bill had won support from across the political spectrum, from President Barack Obama as well as conservative Republicans in the Senate, offering the promise of a rare bipartisan package in a Congress that has been gripped by partisan fights. To get that support, however, the package had morphed into a 361-page grab bag of provisions that included extending benefits to the unemployed and tax breaks for businesses.

Stay tuned for a “New New Jobs” bill, one that is sure to be “better” than the “Old” one.

Hamilton County Financial Mess – How Did We Get Here?

Dusty Rhodes (D), Hamilton County Auditor and voice for Hamilton County fiscal conservatism has agreed to complete a regular running “insiders” view of Hamilton County’s financial situation.  His articles will be published regularly through the CTP blog site, to illustrate his views of fiscal conservation, limited government, and free markets in government action (or inaction). 

The Cincinnati Tea Party does not (and cannot) endorse any specific candidates.  Dusty’s first installment is below, entitled, “Hamilton County Financial Mess – How Did We Get Here?”

There are two main reasons for Hamilton County’s stadium related financial situation.

The first was an ill-advised and wildly optimistic projection of future revenues when the stadium projects began.   At the time, in 1996, we had been seeing five to seven percent annual growth in sales tax revenues over the preceding ten to twenty years. 

This let County Commissioners claim they were “conservative” in estimating a three percent annual future sales tax revenue growth for the stadium bonds.   When I questioned this at the time and suggested zero growth might be more realistic one of the Commissioners called me “Chicken Little”. 

The rosy scenario was projected by a financial firm which apparently failed to consider that no economic trend ever continues forever.  The County paid $750,000 to this out-of-town consultant.  And then, in spite of being so spectacularly wrong, the County continues to use this firm, mostly recently with a $590,000 contract for their economic counsel over the next two years. 

The failure of annual sales tax revenue growth to even come close to these projections has put the stadium fund “in the red” as early as next year.

The second reason is an extravagant example of “mission creep”.  Recall that the original stadium proposal – which a majority approved at the ballot box – was to build two stadiums, provide a sales tax related property tax credit and give some money to the Cincinnati Public Schools. 

There was no mention of remaking the City of Cincinnati’s riverfront or building underground (and still unused) “intermodal transit centers” and parking garages.  That did not come until after the voters approved the half-percent sales tax.          

Only then we began hearing of plans for the riverfront, known as “The Banks”, which would be the greatest and most successful retail and residential development in the history of mankind.  And best of all, it would be funded by all the “excess” sales tax revenues plus the usual state and federal grants. 

The “excess” sales tax revenues never materialized.  Today after millions of dollars in legal fees and millions more in construction, “The Banks” has not announced a single signed tenant.      

The Commissioners still claim this “economic development” will be an immense benefit to our area.  The expected benefits are so far in the future that no one will ever be called to account if the expectation is wrong.  And the taxpayers will be left holding the bag.

I believe if “The Banks” made any economic sense private developers would be all over it.  They are not.  It is not a proper role of government to subsidize private development and create competition for businesses not so blessed.  
  
It is easy to blame the recession for the problems, but the truth is the County’s fiscal nightmare was totally self-inflicted.   Both wildly optimistic revenue projections and excessive expansion of the original mission have created the mess.

It is hard to see how the voters will ever pass another sales tax to make up the shortfall while Commissioners persist in funding “The Banks” project.

Digging in to the new “Jobs Bill”

Here we go again.  More obtuse and lengthy legal / legislative language that is a honey pot of provisions for special interests, pet projects, features directly or indirectly related to jobs (created by hiring or “saved” by “retaining”).  The creativity of the word smiths to make dead fish smell like fillet mignon continues to amaze.

Bill text at: http://thehill.com/images/stories/whitepapers/pdf/jobs%20bill%20draft.pdf

This short little ditty is only 362 pages long, so someone either ran out of pet things to put in it, or they are not done yet.  With tongue in cheek, we need legislation that limits the length of bills coming out of Congress: “Be it resolved that any bill that exceeds 50 pages will not be considered or will be broken up into smaller parts, each of which will be voted on separately.”

A quick glance through the Table of Content reveals some interesting seemingly wild ideas about areas of “jobs creation”.  Remember, this work will be shouted from the rooftops as evidence that this President and this Congress are for “the little people”.  They get it.  Jobs, jobs, jobs.  That is all they were ever interested in.

Right.

The front end contains such things as Payroll tax forgiveness and business credits for “retention of newly hired individuals”, something sure to make more senior people upset if they get let go so companies can game the system by keeping the least senior people.

We then surf into “Surface Transportation Programs”, including things like National Safety Administration Programs, various urban and otherwise grants, and authorizations (is that a phrase for money?) for public transportation, as well as several sections on the Highway Trust Fund.

We get an extension of various expiring provisions, meaning perhaps, that money outflows that were going to stop or expire, will now have new life and live on…helping fuel job growth in some manner.  Oh, yes, and the deficit.

As we drift down into the further reaches of the proposed law, we see Individual Tax Relief, including the all important aspect of worrying about deductions for “certain expenses” of primary and secondary school teachers, deducting local and state taxes, property related to conservation purposes, and low income housing credits.  Hope springs up as we reach “Business Tax Relief”, because this is where job creation will be helped the most.  We cheer as we see “Research credit”, but groan as we come across “Indian employment tax credit”, “Railroad track maintenance credit”, “mine rescue team training credit” (which Senator calls this one an earmark?), “7-year recovery period for motorsports entertainment complexes” (another earmark for sure, without even reading the specific language), and (it is hard to pick from the long list of adjustments) “timber REIT modernization”.

There is more, but surely readers here have started to “give up” on this catalog of more of the same, business as usual, “we have heard this same song sung before”.  But do not be deceived, the Sections and Titles roll on, covering insurance, health and other provisions, pension funding relief, offset provisions, satellite television extensions, and a final Title of “Emergency Designations”.

Yes, the next step is to ferret out the details buried in these various Titles, Sections, Subsections, and items.  But all we expect to find is more special interest items, more earmarks, more aid for favored groups.  Maybe there are some items that might genuinely give some incentives to grow some jobs, but as far as driving demand higher for basic things in society that would result in business confidence, market optimism, consumer eagerness to demand more goods and services—these fundamental changes are seemingly missing, as judged by the above rendering of just the Table of Contents.

Recall, this satiric piece is not based on a detailed reading of the early “work in progress” law that has been leaked.  Rather, the examination of the phraseology of just the Table of Contents leads one to suspect if not conclude that this Democratic led Congress is all about pandering to special constituencies and posturing as being for “the little guy”, when in fact, it is business as usual.

Remember this core principle as you read this and similar “work products” of this current flock of so-called legislators: LIMITED GOVERNMENT! Is what we want, demand, and will have, sooner rather than later.

Snow Day!

Thanks to Sophie and Abby for making constructive use of a snow day.

Galluping to Socialism

Anyone who has attended or viewed a Tea Party rally over the past year witnessed numerous signs equating current government policy objectives with a move toward “socialism.” There has always been an assumption that only a fringe percentage of Americans would embrace socialism voluntarily, but a Gallup Poll released on February 4 offers a surprising result when this question was posed to American citizens: “Just off the top of your head, would you say that you have a positive or negative view of socialism.” Gallup offers a condensed statement of results: “More than one-third of Americans (36%) have a positive image of “socialism,” while 58% have a negative image. Views differ by party and ideology, with a majority of Democrats and liberals saying they have a positive view of socialism, compared to a minority of Republicans and conservatives.”

Those results are disheartening and one could hope those being asked this question simply had no idea how socialism has destroyed lives and freedom over the course of history. It is also possible the 36 percent figure parallels the 40 plus percent of Americans who receive the benefits of our country yet pay no net income tax. Citizens who are not contributing to the revenue of America will always accept a paternalistic government providing ever greater benefits from the public trough. The survey also noted that 33 percent of Americans looked unfavorably on capitalism. So, far the results make sense; better than a third of people like socialism, don’t care for capitalism and probably have no real income tax burden, but reading deeper into the results we discover that these same people, in fact 95 percent of all respondents have a positive view of small business. Entrepreneurs fared almost as well with an  84 percent positive polling. There must be a disconnect in basic economic education for America’s youth, as socialism’s growth is in direct conflict with providing an incentive to starting and growing a small business.

The insurmountable debt that we now face can be laid at the feet of politicians who have pandered to the citizen’s desires. This transfer from the private (productive) to the public sector adds new unionized government jobs while decreasing private sector employment. Public employees and the non-taxed form a powerful voting block . All of this damage is done at the expense of America’s long-term survival. Fiscal responsibility and limited government are rendered impossible as more people except the flawed premise and promise of socialism.

The complete results of the Gallup Poll are provided at this link:  Http://www.tinyurl.com/ykstldp

Hear Ye, Hear Ye, We Want Our Freedom Back

Punxsutawney Phil, newly appointed Climate Change Czar

The following organizations do hereby present a joint proclamation in the public interest:

Center for the Choice of Liberty
Center for the Prevention of Parody as Public Policy
Americans United Against Hubris in Government

WHEREAS the administration has promised to create or save green jobs,

WHEREAS the administration has created or saved districts in Philadelphia,

WHEREAS the administration has promised to regress the US economy to equalize emissions,

WHEREAS global warming is now referred to as climate change,

WHEREAS officials, such as Obama, Pelosi, and Gore are hypocritical in carbon emissions,

WHEREAS carbon emissions can naturally be released via flatulence and breathing,

WHEREAS Punxsutawney Phil releases carbon dioxide via flatulence and breathing,

WHEREAS Punxsutawney Phil is responsible for predicting climate change,

WHEREAS Punxsutawney Phil has never filed taxes,

WE NOW THEREFORE appoint Punxsutawney Phil to the office of climate change czar.

____________________________________________________

Special Advisors on the Economy

WHEREAS the new Three Stooges movie has been cast with Obama as Curly, Pelosi as Larry, and Reid as Moe,

WHEREAS the title of the new movie is “The Three Stooges Go to Washington,”

WHEREAS the plot of the movie involves the Three Stooges taking control of the White House and Congress,

WHEREAS the Three Stooges promised to fix the economy, and then destroyed it with their antics,

WHEREAS the Three Stooges promised to create jobs, then destroyed millions of jobs,

WHEREAS the Three Stooges have used a Health Care Takeover bill in their attempt to enslave all Americans,

WHEREAS the Three Stooges promised transparency then hid behind closed doors,

WHEREAS they haven’t given up and are still trying to take control of our lives through our health care,

WHEREAS Curly promised to tax only the rich, then decided that “rich” means over $35,000 per year income,

WHEREAS Curly has filled the White House offices with Communist Clowns called Czars,

WHEREAS the antics of the Three Stooges have long ago ceased to be funny,

WHEREAS Americans all over the country are beginning to wake up and realize that IT’S NOT JUST A MOVIE,

NOW, THEREFORE, we demand that someone TURN OFF THE PROJECTOR and TURN On THE LIGHTS!!!

A special thanks for the contributions of Anne Marie Harpen and Nick Noel.