Absolute Power Corrupts

The Tenth Amendment Center, after demonstrating how both Republicans and Democrats campaigned on limited government, then discusses why neither political party actually fulfilled those promises:

What has gone wrong? In Federalist 51, James Madison wrote,

But the great security against a gradual concentration of those several powers in the same department consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional and personal motives to resist the encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of the attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions… (emphasis added)

We have written about incentives here. Unfortunately, today the incentives are wrong. The Seventeenth Amendment has misaligned the interests of our Senators and our state legislators have forgotten their role as one of Madison’s “auxiliary precautions”. A century of consolidation later, our government has become so powerful that it corrupts nearly everyone who arrives there. Further, we the people have forgotten our own role as the primary control on government.

As the e-mails, blog posts and articles counting down the days to the November elections appear, 100 days, 99 days, 98 days, …., it is important to be consider that November is not the solution to our problems. Remember Lord Acton,

“All power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

The solution to our problem is not to find the right people and send them to Washington. By all means, vote the bums out, but if that is the end of it, the new crop of bums (from both parties) will forget their limited government rhetoric just as surely as their predecessors did. We have a continued role to play as an informed and active citizenry.

When people have faith in the intentions of a party or a politician, they don't care about the methods. Centralizing power requires an audacity of hope that only good people will have the opportunity to exercise that power. We have to recognize that those in power will not always have the best of intentions, and the best solution is to limit the power of government regardless of who is in charge at the moment. A limited government will naturally result in limiting the incentive for corrupt people to pursue government power.

DNC attack: GOP = Tea Party

DNC attack: GOP = Tea Party; NBCNews

Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine and several Democratic House members today unveiled the new Democratic midterm attack plan against Republicans: GOP = Tea Party.

In an effort to demonstrate what they see as the dangers of Republican Congressional control, Democrats will spend the next few months until Election Day trying to tie all Republicans to policies advocated by some members of the Tea Party, including repealing the health care and Wall Street reform laws, abolishing the Departments of Labor and Education and the EPA, and ending Medicare.

Kaine said the DNC has an "aggressive" plan, along with the White House "to make sure the American people know what the Republicans really believe what their blueprint for governing is," tracking candidates' comments on the campaign trail, distributing research, and airing commercials nationwide.

He said what he sees as the Tea Party's extreme agenda is reflected in the beliefs of most of the GOP House leadership. As evidence of mainstream Republicans' acceptance of Tea Party policies, Kaine pointed to the decisions of some members of Republican House leadership to join the new Tea Party Caucus -- the first official iteration of the movement within the halls of Capitol Hill. ...

The ten agenda items on the DNC's "Republican Tea Party Contract On America" are privatizing Social Security, ending Medicare, extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, repealing the financial regulation overhaul and the health care reform law, protecting those responsible for the oil spill, abolishing the departments of Education and Energy, as well as the EPA, and repealing the 17th Amendment, which provides for the direct election of senators. ...

One reporter at the event pointed out that some of the "Contract On America's" more extreme policies, like repealing the 17th Amendment, do not reflect the beliefs of the Republican leadership. Kaine said, "We welcome anybody on the other side coming forward and disabusing Americans that this is what they plan to do. ... If they violently disagree with any of them, I'm sure that we'll hear that." ...

Read the whole article here.

Comment: In my humble opinion the time has come to support a third party and break the lock the two main parties have. As folks across the country begin to understand the ramifications of the 17th Amendment, coupled with the 16th, one can expect the DNC and RNC to work much harder to block and prevent any repeal. It's within both of these amendments (17th and 16th) the two parties derive a substantial amount of power and influence.

The whole of our nation's power should rest not in parties, special interest groups, bankers, or Washington bureaucrats, rather in the people and the states. This how the founders intended it to be.

Illinois voters face confusing, simultaneous Senate elections

Illinois voters face confusing, simultaneous Senate elections; STLToday

Even for Illinois, the paragon of political peculiarity, this one is weird.

It is virtually certain that the state's voters will elect two people to the same U.S. Senate seat in the Nov. 2 election. The winners could be the same person, or candidates from different parties or even different candidates from the same party.

As required by a recent federal court decision, one will serve just until Jan. 3. The other will serve from Jan. 3 to early 2017.

As crazy as this sounds, it could have been much worse. Lawyers and the judge in the middle of this mess appear to be forging a path that would spare taxpayers the cost of holding a special election, or two, at upwards of $20 million each.

And despite a natural inclination to blame former Gov. Rod Blagojevich on general principle, it's not really his fault.

The roots reach back two years, to the election of Sen. Barack Obama as president. The right to fill the Senate vacancy fell to Blagojevich, who would later be accused in federal court of trying to sell it for a bribe. He denies it, and the jury on that is out — literally.

Just before the tainted Blagojevich was impeached and tossed from office in early 2009, he even considering naming himself to the Senate, according to FBI surveillance recordings. Instead, the governor picked Roland Burris, a former state attorney general who reinforced his lightweight political reputation with a fawning acceptance of the appointment that other Democrats felt was too tainted to touch.

Sated by the title and perhaps aware of his scant chance of election, Burris did not file for a full term in the Feb. 2, 2010, primary. Democrats nominated state Comptroller Alexi Giannoulias that day, and Republicans chose U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk. So far, so good.

Lurking in the background was an activist lawsuit insisting that the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, while allowing a temporarily appointed senator, demands a special election eventually. The state fought the suit, as I presume Gov. Pat Quinn was not eager to set up the potential for $40 million worth of special primary and general elections.

A federal judge ruled that the 17th Amendment does indeed require an election, and an appellate court recently affirmed it. ...

Read the rest here.

Comment: Thank a progressive because this is democracy folks! However if we just followed the plan the founders gave us we wouldn't need judges being involved and special elections costing $40 million.

Let's return to the founders plan and repeal the 17th Amendment.

Neoconservatives, Republicans, and John McCain

Neoconservatives, Republicans, and John McCain; By Jack Kerwick; Intellectual Conservative

The overthrow of this old, crusty, opportunistic politician in favor of a younger, more charismatic, and more conservative candidate is what is needed in order for American conservatives to convince themselves and others that the neoconservative Republican is about to be relegated to the dustbin of history.

As Rachel Alexander recently reminded us, National Review has cast its vote for John McCain over J.D. Hayworth in Arizona's Republican primary race for the United States Senate. That a publication long recognized by friend and foe alike as the staple of American conservatism would endorse a politician like McCain definitively confirms what some of us have known for quite some time: National Review is decidedly and emphatically not a genuinely conservative outlet at all.

This isn't to say that there wasn't a time when it was. Yet for a great many years now NR — not unlike The Weekly Standard, Wall Street Journal, FOX news, and virtually all of so-called "conservative" talk radio — has become but an appendage to the Republican Party. To put this point a bit differently, NR is a venue, not for conservative, but neoconservative thought.

As I have argued in past articles, "neoconservatism" is not, as some of its more defensive exponents have asserted, a pejorative term; rather, it designates a distinctive political-moral orientation that differs in kind from conservatism as it has been traditionally understood by those over the centuries who have contributed to its self-image. The formal epistemological, moral, and political philosophical presuppositions underwriting neoconservatsm are the inheritance of what is fashionably referred to as "Enlightenment liberalism," "Enlightenment liberal Rationalism," or, as I prefer to say, just plain "Rationalism." The substantive policy prescriptions — particularly, his prescriptions regarding foreign policy — contributes in no small measure to the formation of the neoconservative's identity, but from the specific substance of those positions it is not at all difficult to discern a more or less internally self-consistent constellation of assumptions regarding the natures of reason, morality, and a modern state. ...

Read the rest here.

Sen. Kerry: Tax-Dodger?

Senator John Kerry (D-MA) may be in tax trouble for docking his new $7M yacht at his Massachusetts home.

The Friendship yacht [was] designed by Ted Fontaine of Portsmouth but built in New Zealand... Under law, if a boat owner berths the vessel in Massachusetts waters within six months of purchasing the boat, there’s a “presumption of use,” and the owner must fork over the 6.25 percent sales tax to the commonwealth. Local excise taxes also are due.

Sources said Isabel - with its Edwardian-style, glossy varnished teak interior, two VIP main cabins and a pilothouse fitted with a wet bar and cold wine storage - sold for something in the neighborhood of $7 million. That means Kerry would owe approximately $437,500 to his cash-strapped home state. Nantucket, his summer playground, would be due annual excise taxes of about $70,000.

Lugar is 2d Republican in Senate to back Kagan

Lugar is 2d Republican in Senate to back Kagan; The Boston Globe

Senator Richard Lugar, breaking with the GOP on an election-year Supreme Court nomination, yesterday became the second in his party to say he would vote to confirm Elena Kagan as a justice.

The Indiana Republican’s announcement could lead to a trickle of support among the Senate’s band of GOP moderates. Kagan is already on track to be confirmed early next month, with Democrats having more than enough votes to push through her nomination. Republican foes have shown little inclination — despite pressure from conservative groups — to block the move through a filibuster on President Obama’s choice to succeed Justice John Paul Stevens, who retired.

In a statement, Lugar said he had carefully followed Kagan’s confirmation hearing testimony and the debate about her nomination, including recommendations from his constituents, and said she is up to the job.

“I have concluded that Solicitor General Elena Kagan is clearly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court and that she has demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of court history and decisions,’’ Lugar said.

He also said Kagan has had a “distinguished career’’ in education and public service and is well regarded by the legal community and her peers.

Most Republicans argue that Kagan, former dean of Harvard Law School and current US solicitor general, would seek to impose a liberal political agenda on the Supreme Court, moving to expand abortion rights, sanction gay marriage, and curb gun rights, among other things.

On Tuesday, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina became the first Republican senator to say he would join Democrats in backing Kagan.

The Secret Behind Federal Government Power

The Secret Behind Federal Government Power; Bob Woods; Pinnacle Blog

The author lays out a nice concise history in his blog post; here is a short snippet I wanted to share.

Now both the House and the Senate are elected by the people with no one looking out for the powers of the states. This opened the door for the federal government to slowly absorb the state’s powers contrary to the intentions of the founding fathers. The U.S. Constitution provides no authority for the federal government to control education, agriculture, social security and healthcare to name a few, but they have successfully done so by eliminating the state’s watchdogs.

The United States of America now looks more like one big state with the federal government setting all the rules. This is another contradiction to the intent of the founding fathers. States were supposed to be test beds for political ideas. States would learn from each other what worked and what did not. Most importantly, the people could vote with their feet. They could choose to live in the states that best met their personal needs and beliefs. This power is not completely gone, with many people moving to states without state income tax as an example. But the options are slowly becoming very few. ...

Sen Sherrod Brown (OH-DEM) Railroad to Nowhere

The statement below is the latest installment newsletter from Senator Sherrod Brown (my congress-critter) updating the Citizenry of Ohio on the goings on from statist central.

Railroad Investment Means Jobs in Ohio

Ohio workers know how to build big things. Every day, a plane flies powered by parts built by Ohio workers. Cars and trucks are driven with engines and brake pads built by workers in Defiance and Lordstown. Up and down the Ohio turnpike, manufacturers are building the parts for next-generation clean energy vehicles and technologies. And today, Ohio manufacturers rank fifth in the nation in building the components for our nation’s trains.

If we want to be number one in the nation – and if we want to create more jobs – then we need to make the right investments in rail. Last January, President Obama announced an $8 billion investment in a national rail network – the largest investment in public transportation since President Eisenhower established the national highways system in the 1950s.

Ohio received $400 million of this historic investment, which recognizes our state’s critical role in connecting the nation’s passenger rail system. The proposed 3-C-D line – connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, and Dayton – is one of the most densely populated corridors in the country without passenger rail. More than half of all Ohioans – nearly six million people – live within 15 miles of the proposed 256-mile passenger line.

And when the line is finished, Ohioans will not only be able to connect to the great cities of our state, but also to Chicago in the west and New York City in the east.

European countries and China already have committed hundreds of billions of dollars in rail spending – connecting workers with new jobs, expanding the markets of businesses, and making travel efficient and more affordable for millions of people. We can do the same thing in our country. Instead of sending our dollars to foreign manufacturers, we can ensure that manufacturers are building the trains right here in Ohio.

Earlier this month, I was in Dayton visiting a company that has been manufacturing parts for freight and passenger locomotives for more than 70 years. Another company, based in Columbus, wants to build rail cars in Ohio using Ohio-made component parts. Governor Ted Strickland has met with more companies across Ohio who are ready to do the same.

Ohio’s $400 million in federal rail investments can help these companies – and companies across Ohio – create thousands of jobs for engineers and construction and factory workers. It would help these companies expand their markets and supplier network – as more states invest in rail, they can turn to Ohio manufacturers to meet their demand for rail technologies and products.

Simply put, investing in rail would increase economic opportunities for our manufacturers and create the kind of 21st century manufacturing jobs that Ohio’s workers are prepared to handle. And it would mean tens of millions of dollars in economic development not only in our large urban cities, but also in smaller towns along the route lines.

Our state can’t afford to miss out on these jobs and opportunities. We cannot let other states reap millions of dollars of federal benefits at our expense. That’s what would happen if Ohio decides to turn away its $400 million investment in our transportation future – states like Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois will happily accept our share of the investment.

Ohio needs a long-term vision when it comes to one of our strongest selling points: our transportation infrastructure and the manufacturers behind it. And our state’s progress depends on creating jobs, promoting economic development, and ensuring our businesses have the resources they need to compete with anyone.

With rail construction moving ahead across the Midwest and the nation, Ohio cannot afford to be left at the station.

Comment: If Ohio moves forward with this silly rail project we'll be left with is a whole lot of train track, no one riding it and higher state taxes to pay for the scheme when the federal government abandons the program.

When you consider that Ohio is 48th in the country concerning overall business climate, then what we really need is tax and business regulation reform. However, if Senator Brown had understood the problems festering in our state he'd see this. But instead he's willing to spend federal tax dollars taken from people in Vermont, Idaho, Texas, Georgia, to name a few, to fund a wasteful project that is destine to fail, just like every mass transit program current being run in Ohio.

This is why we need to repeal both the 17th and 16th Amendments. We need to take away the power of the few and return it to states and the citizens.

Sen. Dorgan Thinks High Taxes Equals More Income

Senator Byron Dorgan (D - N.Dakota) on Senate floor just now: a vote for tax cuts is a vote to “reduce this country’s income.”

Because it's not your money anyways; it's the government's money.

Senate climate bill coming in two weeks, Reid says

Senate climate bill coming in two weeks, Reid says; AFP

Harry Reid. (D-Nev.) said Tuesday that he and other senior lawmakers had drawn up a "rough draft" of climate and energy legislation to be introduced in two weeks.

"I now have a rough draft of what we're going to do," he told reporters. "I hope to be able to have a bill introduced [the] week after next."

President Obama has pushed Congress to pass a comprehensive bill to battle climate change and foster alternative and renewable energy sources this year, despite partisan tensions ahead of November midterm elections.

But his Republican foes offered no sign they would water down their opposition to an approach they have branded an "energy tax" on struggling consumers mired in a sour economy.

Reid said he had met with top Senate committee leaders and would consult with Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and the top White House official on fighting climate change, Carol Browner.

Reid said he was working with Senate Finance Committee Democrats to craft legislation that would curb pollution from the utility sector in a way that helps consumers, but declined to say whether it would cap the greenhouse-gas emissions that cause global warming.

The Senate leader also said the bill would include provisions to deal with cleanup and recovery from the catastrophic Gulf of Mexico oil spill, promote clean energy and job creation, and reduce consumption, "which is vital to anything we do."

Comment: Not only is this going to be an energy tax, but it will certainly kill jobs, or what remains of them, and will be the greatest corporate welfare give away to companies like General Electric and BP making the banker bailout look like chump change.

Americans of every ideology must stop the stupid and insane party politics and wake up to one significant fact; OUR US SENATORS WORK FOR SPECIAL INTERESTS GROUPS, NOT US!

If we haven't learned one thing during all of the war and bailouts and successive recessions is that we are getting screwed and the special interest are getting rich off of our tax dollars.

Only by repealing the 17th Amendment can we stop this criminal activity dead in its tracks.

Judge Napolitano Poll

I can't embed it, so you'll just have to go here to take it, but here are the questions:

What would you most like to see repealed?

The 16th Amendment to the Constitution, which permits the federal government to impose a tax on personal incomes.

The 17th Amendment to the Constitution, which provides for the popular election of senators, instead of their designation by state governments.

The Legal Tender Laws, which permit the federal government to print all the money it wants.

The 1973 War Powers Act, which permits the President to wage war against any country for 180 days without congressional authorization.

Decisions, decisions. But I think the 17th Amendment is the one most in need of repeal.

Everyone Should Own A Senator

On the very day the Senate passes major bank reform, we learn dozens of senators or Senate employees received VIP loans from a company hip-deep in the subprime loan mess that the bank bill fails to address.

As the top Republican member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Rep. Darrell Issa has been looking at Countrywide Financial Corp.'s VIP mortgage program. What the California lawmaker recently found is a strong appearance of impropriety:

Countrywide has made 30 cut-rate loans to senators or Senate employees. A dozen of the VIP loans were made to customers who named the office of Sen. Robert Bennett, a Utah Republican, as their workplace. The remainder went to borrowers whose place of employment was designated as "U.S. Senate" or "U.S. senator."

None of these loans with their favorable, below-market terms is available to the public.

Will The GOP Seize The Senate?

The Wall Street Journal says, "It's possible."

Leaders of both parties have believed for months that Republicans could win the House, where every lawmaker faces re-election. But a change of party control in the Senate, where only a third of the members are running and Republicans must capture 10 seats, seemed out of the question.

But perhaps a better question is "Would it even make a difference?" 62 percent of voters think the government does not do what the people want it to do. Not surprisingly, this has led to a lot of disaffection among Americans.

There have been several occasions when the American people have voted for smaller government; most notably in 1972, 1980 and 1994. But it really doesn't matter. You can vote for limited government, but you can't get it; the political class won't let you.

This is because, as this American Spectator article points out, America's ruling class gets its way regardless of the party in power.

As over-leveraged investment houses began to fail in September 2008, the leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties, of major corporations, and opinion leaders stretching from the National Review magazine (and the Wall Street Journal) on the right to the Nation magazine on the left, agreed that spending some $700 billion to buy the investors' "toxic assets" was the only alternative to the U.S. economy's "systemic collapse." In this, President George W. Bush and his would-be Republican successor John McCain agreed with the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama. Many, if not most, people around them also agreed upon the eventual commitment of some 10 trillion nonexistent dollars in ways unprecedented in America. They explained neither the difference between the assets' nominal and real values, nor precisely why letting the market find the latter would collapse America. The public objected immediately, by margins of three or four to one.

When this majority discovered that virtually no one in a position of power in either party or with a national voice would take their objections seriously, that decisions about their money were being made in bipartisan backroom deals with interested parties, and that the laws on these matters were being voted by people who had not read them, the term "political class" came into use. Then, after those in power changed their plans from buying toxic assets to buying up equity in banks and major industries but refused to explain why, when they reasserted their right to decide ad hoc on these and so many other matters, supposing them to be beyond the general public's understanding, the American people started referring to those in and around government as the "ruling class." And in fact Republican and Democratic office holders and their retinues show a similar presumption to dominate and fewer differences in tastes, habits, opinions, and sources of income among one another than between both and the rest of the country. They think, look, and act as a class...

Our ruling class's agenda is power for itself. While it stakes its claim through intellectual-moral pretense, it holds power by one of the oldest and most prosaic of means: patronage and promises thereof. Like left-wing parties always and everywhere, it is a "machine," that is, based on providing tangible rewards to its members. Such parties often provide rank-and-file activists with modest livelihoods and enhance mightily the upper levels' wealth. Because this is so, whatever else such parties might accomplish, they must feed the machine by transferring money or jobs or privileges -- civic as well as economic -- to the party's clients, directly or indirectly. This, incidentally, is close to Aristotle's view of democracy. Hence our ruling class's standard approach to any and all matters, its solution to any and all problems, is to increase the power of the government -- meaning of those who run it, meaning themselves, to profit those who pay with political support for privileged jobs, contracts, etc. Hence more power for the ruling class has been our ruling class's solution not just for economic downturns and social ills but also for hurricanes and tornadoes, global cooling and global warming. A priori, one might wonder whether enriching and empowering individuals of a certain kind can make Americans kinder and gentler, much less control the weather. But there can be no doubt that such power and money makes Americans ever more dependent on those who wield it. Let us now look at what this means in our time.

By taxing and parceling out more than a third of what Americans produce, through regulations that reach deep into American life, our ruling class is making itself the arbiter of wealth and poverty. While the economic value of anything depends on sellers and buyers agreeing on that value as civil equals in the absence of force, modern government is about nothing if not tampering with civil equality. By endowing some in society with power to force others to sell cheaper than they would, and forcing others yet to buy at higher prices -- even to buy in the first place -- modern government makes valuable some things that are not, and devalues others that are. Thus if you are not among the favored guests at the table where officials make detailed lists of who is to receive what at whose expense, you are on the menu. Eventually, pretending forcibly that valueless things have value dilutes the currency's value for all.

No matter what happens, this election won't change anything. The ruling class merely shifts parties in Congress in order to make the people think they're being heard. Any real change will be structural, but I'm becoming less and less inclined to think that such a thing is possible.

Ad Blitz Accompanies Senate Push on Climate, Energy

Ad Blitz Accompanies Senate Push on Climate, Energy; The New York Times

Senate Democrats' effort to pass climate or energy legislation before the August recess has spurred a flurry of advertising as companies and their lobbying groups work to sway votes.

Diverse interests, from the trade group for oil and natural gas to an alliance of renewable power interests, pumped money into television and newspaper ads. The influence efforts accelerated after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he would bring a bill to the floor. More ads are planned for next two weeks, and many are running across the country. One targets Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), chairman of the Senate Energy Committee and sponsor of one of the bills that could reach the floor.

"We see this happen on most major pieces of legislation," said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, a watchdog group. "This type of AstroTurf lobbying is very effective."

Ever since the ads in the 1990s featuring "Harry and Louise" helped derail health care reform, Holman said, "companies have realized they can wield as much, if not more, influence on Congress" through advertising than they can through lobbying.

Groups funding the ads hear the legislative clock ticking.

"We really want to drive the message home to Congress that if they're going to be submitting a bill, then that bill should create supports for the alternative energy sector," said Stephanie Dreyer, spokeswoman for Growth Energy, a group that represents ethanol interests and is part of a coalition sponsoring a new ad.

"This is our time, if we're going to have a chance of impacting energy legislation," Dreyer said. "This is our week."

This week brought a new ad from a coalition that includes Growth Energy. Others in that alliance are American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), Alliance to Save Energy, Covanta Energy, National Hydropower Association and Business Council for Sustainable Energy. AWEA took the lead, asking others to contribute financially, others in the alliance said. AWEA declined to make anyone available to talk about the ad campaign.

Read the rest here.

Comment: Next to the banker bailout and the fascist health-care debacle, this will be the greatest theft in US history by the private sector and special interests groups. It's sad that most American's don't realize that the only groups that will benefit from this fraud are oil and energy companies and the leftist environmental groups. The cost associated with this will go well above the cost the health care sector and we'll sink further into a depression when American's won't have anything to spend because the taxes we'll incur will be so high discretionary items won;'t be bought. furthermore the remaining industrial jobs will dry and move because of the added energy costs.

Without any accountability our Senate is sending us down the road of serfdom. However if the 17th Amendment was repealed we most certainly would not be faced with the illict legislation we have witnessed in the last few years, which has been conducted through the backroom collusion of the two main parties.

It's time we got the checks and balances put back into our government. It's time folks, if not, it's time to lower the flag my friends.

Manchin taps aide to replace Byrd in Senate

Manchin taps aide to replace Byrd in Senate; USAToday

The Senate's oldest member is about to be replaced with its youngest.

West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin just made it official: He's appointing one of his former aides, Carte Goodwin, 36, to take the seat that the late Robert Byrd occupied for more than a half-century in the U.S. Senate -- but only temporarily.

The West Virginia legislature is debating a bill that would setting up a special election to fill the remainder of Byrd's term, which ends in 2012. That bill, once passed,will trigger a potentially competitive race if Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, the GOP's best hope, decides to take on Democrat Manchin.

Byrd, the longest-serving member of Congress, was also the Senate's oldest member when died last month at the age of 92. Goodwin will become the Senate's youngest member, a title currently held by Sen. George LeMieux, R-Fla. LeMieux is 41.

Goodwin's appointment will give Democrats a boost in the Senate: Byrd's death has made it difficult for Senate Democrats to obtain the 60 votes necessary to pass legislation, including much-needed unemployment benefits.

Update, 3:23 p.m. ET: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., says Goodwin will be sworn in Tuesday. Reid said he's anxious to "move forward on many important policies to help middle-class families, including creating jobs, extending unemployment insurance and strengthening small businesses."

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., is already welcoming his new colleague-to-be. In a statement from his office, Rockefeller says Goodwin "is unquestionably among West Virginia's best and brightest." Rockefeller should know: Goodwin's wife, Rochelle, works for the senator.

Goodwin has been in private practice since leaving the governor's office. He is a graduate of Marietta College and earned his law degree at Emory University. He's from a big West Virginia political family:

• His late father, Steve, was a prominent Charleston lawyer and member of the West Virginia University board of trustees;
• His uncle, Joseph R. "Joe Bob" Goodwin, is a federal judge in Charleston.
• His aunt, the judge's wife, is Kay Goodwin, West Virginia's Secretary of Education and the Arts-- meaning she's a member of Manchin's cabinet.
• Goodwin's cousin, Booth, was just named U.S. attorney for the southern district of West Virginia.

And, according to The Hill newspaper, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee tried unsuccessfully to lure soon-to-be Sen. Goodwin into running for Congress this year -- against Capito.

West Virginia Attorney General Darrell McGraw recently ruled that the state could hold a special election to fill the vacancy, saying state law was unclear on the point. He said state officials had to interpret the U.S. Constitution in this case and "the people's right to vote." The state legislature this week also upheld McGraw's ruling, clearing the way for Manchin to make the interim appointment and to call the special election for November.

Read the rest here.

Comment: Once again we see how the 17th Amendment has done nothing to prevent cronyism and backroom dealings. Had the 17th not been enacted the West Virginia state legislative body would have elected the most qualified person to the seat from their body. Certainly politics would be involved but the candidate would have had significant legislative experience and would have been well versed in the views of West Virgina, unlike Manchin's choice of Johnny Upstart.

Cato On The 17th Amendment

Caleb Brown and Todd Zywicki. I've embedded the discussion below:

Specter Endorses Kagan After White House Considers Job For Him

Via Jake Tapper:

Specter, who was defeated in his March primary by Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Penn., is a close friend of Vice President Joe Biden and someone praised for his leadership in pushing for greater funding for the National Institutes of Health.

Sources said the job discussions are far from anything other than preliminary, and were not part of any "deal" when Specter switched parties and began supporting President Obama's agenda in earnest. Neither the White House nor Specter had any comment.

Talk of such a job, however, has raised eyebrows among Specter’s Republican Senate colleagues who are now eyeing his votes with added scrutiny. For instance, Specter seemed not particularly impressed with Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, whose nomination as Solicitor General Specter opposed last year. This week he announced support for her Supreme Court nomination.

They're not even trying to hide their corruption anymore. Why should they when the voters don't care?

Vast Government Overreach: Congress Sends Obama Sweeping Wall Street Bill

Congress Sends Obama Sweeping Wall Street Bill; YouTube;The Associated Press

Vitter's Response is Foolish

Republican senator says he backs birther lawsuits; The Associated Press

Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana says he supports conservative organizations challenging President Barack Obama's citizenship in court.

Vitter, who is running for re-election, made the comments at a town hall-style event in Metairie, La., on Sunday when a constituent asked what he would do about what the questioner said was Obama's "refusal to produce a valid birth certificate."

Such claims about Obama's birth certificate have been discredited. But with the crowd applauding the question, Vitter responded that although he doesn't personally have legal standing to bring litigation, he supports "conservative legal organizations and others who would bring that to court," according to a video of the event.

"I think that is the valid and most possibly effective grounds to do it," Vitter said, although he later cautioned that the matter could distract from policy issues.

"I think if we focus on that issue and let our eye off the ball ... I think that's a big mistake," he said. "I'm not dismissing any of this. I think first and foremost, we need to fight the Obama agenda at the ballot box starting this fall."

So-called birthers have challenged Obama's standing as president by arguing that he was not born in the United States.

Comment: While I have my doubts about Obama's birth place the bigger issue is the road Obama is taking the US down and with Congress abdicating their responsibility to protect the citizenry and the Constitution.

Focusing on issues like Obama's birth detracts our attention from the real issues; loss of liberty, the economy and our sovereignty. That should be the focus!

Sen Cardin Wastes Tax Dollars in Norway

What do Sen. Cardin, Norway and the Red Hot Chili Peppers have in common? Washington Post

From the Department of Press Releases You Don't Get Every Day comes this dispatch, courtesy of Sen. Benjamin Cardin's (D-Md.) office: "Red Hot Chili Peppers Arrive in Sub-zero Arctic Seed Vault."

What's that you say? The seminal Los Angeles alterna-rock-funk band is playing ... in a seed vault? In the Arctic? Well, no. But it's almost that interesting.

Cardin is the chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, otherwise known as the U.S. Helsinki Commission. The agency is best known for its work on human rights issues but also works on economic development and other topics. And so Cardin is leading a seven-member congressional delegation to the Svalbard Global Seed Vault "deep in a mountain on a remote Norwegian archipelago near the North Pole," as the release describes it.

Their mission: To deliver the seeds of chili peppers -- the kind you eat, not the kind on your iPod -- and the seeds of many other plants to the vault, which is designed to serve as a backup system and preservation site in case some man-made or natural disaster destroys a large portion of the world's crops.

"The world is interdependent when it comes to crop diversity, the essential raw material needed for a healthy and robust food supply," Cardin said in the release. "As we manage the impact of climate change and other natural and man-made disasters around the world, the seed vault in Svalbard will be the safety deposit box that ensures we can keep that food supply intact."

The seed vault is roughly 4,000 miles from Washington, D.C., but Cardin did not mention what kind of music the members listened to on their flight.

Comment: Here's another great example of the tremendous need to repeal the 17th Amendment. Our country is in the middle of a depression that gets worse by the day and this jackass Cardin is over in Norway wasting our tax dollars.

While the overall bill for the trip might be small in comparison to the $1 trillion deficit, what does the trip say about Cardin's concern for the economy or our country; not much.

Let's repeal the 17th Amendment and get the jackasses, no the dumb-asses, out of the Senate.

Reid pressures Manchin for Byrd replacement

Reid pressures Manchin for Byrd replacement; Washington Examiner

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is apparently getting a little impatient with West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin, who has yet to appoint a Democrat to take the place of the late Sen. Robert Byrd.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who is holding down the fort as Senate’s lone Mountain State lawmaker, said Reid wants Manchin to get moving on the appointment.

“The White House may be putting pressure on him, I don’t know,” Rockefeller told the Washington Examiner. “But I know the leader is.”

While Democrats managed to round up three Republicans to help them pass a sweeping financial regulatory reform bill, other legislation has stalled, including an unemployment benefits extension that fell one vote short of passage earlier this month.

Rockefeller said he has also asked Manchin to move faster.
“I’d like to have someone up here tomorrow,” he said.

But he also defended Manchin, who has put off picking a placeholder until he can secure approval from the state legislature to hold a special election in November to fill the remaining two years of Byrd’s term. Manchin plans to run for the seat.

Rockefeller said the state’s laws regarding succession are ambiguous and being questioned by state government lawyers.

“My guess is we will have somebody up on Friday of this week,” Rockefeller said. “I just put pressure on him to get someone up here.”

Comment: How about someone from West Virginia taking a poll among the state legislators and see who they would choose! Any Mountaineers up for the task?

Obama to huddle with top Senate Dems on legislative plans ahead of recess

Obama to huddle with top Senate Dems on legislative plans ahead of recess; The Hill

The Senate's top Democrats will head to the White House on Tuesday to huddle with President Barack Obama on remaining legislative priorities.

Obama and Vice President Joe Biden will meet in the Roosevelt Room of the White House today with 15 of the Senate's top Democrats, more than a fourth of the party's entire Senate delegation.

The purpose of the meeting is to "discuss legislative priorities before the August recess," according to White House guidance for the meeting.

Indeed, a number of items remain on the Senate's plate before lawmakers break for their traditional August recess.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said he hopes to finish work on Wall Street reform "this week," and move to other top priorities. Those include a long-stalled extension of unemployment benefits and a campaign finance reform bill that Democrats had hoped to bring to the floor before the Fourth of July holiday.

More broadly, Obama may press the senators on other top priorities, like an energy and climate bill, and immigration reform legislation, which the president has said he would like to see set into motion this year. Obama has also called on senators to ratify the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) with Russia before November. ...

Read the rest here.

Comment: A new cap and trade tax plus illegals getting amnesty could send this country into a deeper tailspin, yet the states sit back idly with their collective thumbs in their mouths as Obama pushes the leftist/statist agenda.

Our success rests in our states and local communities, not with our federal representatives. Call and write your state representatives voice your concern about this maddening agenda.

Senators Fundraising In Canada

Good lord:

The Vancouver fund-raiser was sponsored by the American Association for Justice's Committee for a Better Future. The price ranged from $43,200 to $250. The haul from the event was divided between 12 Democratic Senate candidates, according to the invitation (see the text of the invite at the click.). Foreign nationals cannot contribute to U.S. federal campaigns.

Trial lawyers overwhelmingly contribute to Democrats.

Here's the breakdown on how the proceeds of the Vancouver Democratic Senate fund-raiser will be divided:

(Michael) Bennet for Colorado: 9.30%
(Richard) Blumenthal for Senate: 7.07%
Robin Carnahan for Senate: 7.07%
Roxanne Conlin for Senate: 7.07%
(Jack) Conway for Senate: 7.07%
Chris Coons for Delaware: 7.07%
(Brad) Ellsworth for Indiana: 7.07%
(Lee) Fisher for Ohio: 7.07%
Alexi (Giannoulias) for Illinois: 7.07%
(Paul) Hodes for Senate: 7.07%
Charlie Melancon Campaign Committee, Inc.: 7.07%
Friends for Harry Reid: 20.00%

Foreign nationals cannot contribute to American campaigns, but they can buy stuff at highly inflated prices from Americans who will then donate to their preferred candidate. The "fundraising" is done by Americans, but that's practically meaningless in this context. This system is utterly broken. Repeal the 17th Amendment and throw these corrupt officials out of office.

Hat tip: Hot Air

Federal budget gap tops $1 trillion through June

Federal budget gap tops $1 trillion through June; The Associated Press

The federal deficit has topped $1 trillion with three months still to go in the budget year, showing the lasting impact of the recession on the government's finances.

In its monthly budget report, the Treasury Department said Tuesday that through the first nine months of this budget year, the deficit totals $1 trillion. That's down 7.6 percent from the $1.09 trillion deficit run up during the same period a year ago.

Worries about the size of the deficit have created political problems for the Obama administration. Congressional Republicans and moderate Democrats have blocked more spending on job creation and other efforts. Republicans also have held up legislation to extend unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless because of its effect on the deficit. ...

The heads of the panel told the National Governors Association on Sunday that everything needs to be considered including curtailing popular tax breaks, such as the home mortgage deduction.

"The debt is like a cancer," Democrat Erskine Bowles told the governors. "It is going to destroy the country from within."

Read the whole article here.

Comment: It wasn't tax breaks that got us into this problem, it was irresponsible spending.

Restoring responsibility in government will only occur when the citizenry wakes up and checks and balances are restored.

At this point I would normally make a pitch for repealing the 17th Amendment, which is critically needed, but the truth of the matter is until America wakes up nothing is going to save us from these statists.

Man Sued For Emailing His Senator

Nat Hentoff writes:

As reported by Arthur Delaney ("Bruce Shore, Unemployed Philadelphia Man, Indicted For 'Harassing Email to Jim Bunning" (huffingtonpost.com, May 25), Shore, watching the Senate in inaction on C-Span, was angered when Bunning (R-KY) complained that, gosh, he has missed the Kentucky-South Carolina basketball game because he had to be in Congress to debate an unemployment benefits bill. (Bunning's contribution by being there was to delay the bill from being voted on.)

"I was livid, I was just livid," recalled the 51-year-old jobless Shore. "I'm on unemployment, so it affects me.")

Here is part of his Feb. 26 messages to Bunning staffers: "Are you'all insane. No checks equal no food for me. DO YOU GET IT?"

The next month, FBI agents came calling to Shore's home in Philadelphia. They read him excerpts from his citizen's complaints and asked whether he was the author, which Shore readily admitted. Apparently these agents had heard something about the First Amendment, and told this indignant American, "All right, we just wanted to make sure it wasn't anything to worry about."

I would love to copy it all, but you should really go read the whole thing. Bruce Shore is put through hell.

The 17th Amendment and States Rights

The 17th Amendment and States Rights; By Marc Knauss; Red County

The question is often raised in conservative circles, “Why does the 17th Amendment matter?” and “What happened to states rights?”

The 17th Amendment was passed in 1913 to change how Senators were elected to congress. Prior to 1913, Senators were elected by State Legislators (thereby tying a Senator’s allegiance to their State rather than to national influences), with the adoption of the 17th Amendment, Senators had to be elected by popular vote, much the same as Congressional Representatives are in the House. So it is that today, most Americans see very little difference between the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The framework of our government was intended to give a voice to the people through the House of Representatives, and a voice to the States through the Senate. ...

Read the rest here.

JPMorgan Hires Ex-Senator Martinez

JPMorgan Hires Ex-Senator Martinez; The New York Times

JPMorgan Chase said on Monday that it has hired Mel Martinez, the former senator and secretary of housing and urban development, as a senior executive for the Florida, Caribbean and Central America region.

Mr. Martinez, a Republican who served in the Bush administration cabinet from 2001 to 2003 and as senator from 2004 to 2009, was most recently working as a lawyer in the Orlando office of the law firm, DLA Piper.

He will become a member of JPMorgan’s executive committee and work as a senior adviser to the firm’s clients in the region, including corporations, nonprofit organizations and governments.

Comment: It should be interesting in a year from now to see the sweet deal Chris Dodd gets on Wall Street and compare it with one Martinez got.

Republican Senator Sees Wall St Bill Passing

Republican Senator Sees Wall St Bill Passing: KGMI-AM (Reuters)

A Republican senator said on Monday that he expects Democrats to win enough support to pass a broad financial regulation bill. ...

Comment: The news article title says it all; this is a Wall Street bill. Basically it's going to give even more unregulated governmental authority, which should reside in Congress, to a group of cretins far worst than any group of lawyers...Wall Street bankers.

Dodd Financial Bill Delayed

For a few days, anyways.

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) explicitly told reporters this evening he's not committed to voting for the legislation, citing a handful of measures, and concern about potential future directors of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

"You don't know who's going to be head of the consumer protection bureau," Nelson said after a vote. "You can't just send a rogue agency out on its own."

The suggestion is that Nelson wants input behind the scenes on who the White House might nominate to run the new agency.

Between the death of Robert Byrd, and the opposition of Sen. Russ Feingold, Democrats had been down to 57 votes for the bill within their own party. But by winning votes from Republicans Snowe, Scott Brown, and Susan Collins, they would have been at 60. Nelson once again leaves them a vote shy. If he remains undecided for more than a few days, Dems will have to wait on Manchin, who said he's likely to appoint a new senator by the beginning of next week.

Maybe next week.

Al Franken Lost

Al Franken is not a legitimate Senator, therefore any votes he cast as Senator are not legitimate. Any law that would not have passed without his vote is, therefore, not a legitimate law.

That's the finding of an 18-month study conducted by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group, which found that at least 341 convicted felons in largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul voted illegally in the 2008 Senate race between Franken, a Democrat, and his Republican opponent, then-incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman.

The final recount vote in the race, determined six months after Election Day, showed Franken beat Coleman by 312 votes -- fewer votes than the number of felons whose illegal ballots were counted, according to Minnesota Majority's newly released study, which matched publicly available conviction lists with voting records.

Will Al Franken be relieved of his duties since his election has been revealed to be fraudulent? Not likely. This government is lawless. Repeal the 17th Amendment and get all these fraudulent politicians out of the Senate.

Senate To Vote On Frank-Dodd Financial Bill This Week?

According to Bytestyle TV (Who got it from Downsize DC):

The Senate will vote on the Frank-Dodd financial (non)reform bill (H.R. 4173) this week and possibly as soon as today. Although it has the votes to pass, it doesn't yet have the 60 votes needed to break a filuster.

This bill will only strangle our already-ailing economy, and will do nothing to prevent future financial collapses or bailouts. Please tell your Senators to support the filibuster and oppose Frank-Dodd through our Reduce Regulations campaign.

You may borrow or copy from this letter . . .

Reducing regulations would actually be the best reform of the financial system. The fraudulent Dodd-Frank bill will only create powerful new armies of regulators who won't actually reform anything.

As David C. John and James L. Gattuso of the Heritage Foundation point out:

* At 2,300 pages, none of you will have read the bill or know what, exactly, is in it
* The bill empowers regulators to seize private property and "wind down" firms they, and they alone, judge to be "failing."
* A Committee to guard against "systemic risk" won't possibly possess all the knowledge to do their job, and will only discourage and stifle innovation
* The Consumer Protection bureau will reduce the number of options and choices of informed, responsible customers
* The new bureau will also issue supposedly "consumer-friendly" regulations that will conflict with the goal of other regulators of protecting the safety and soundness of financial firms
* By abolishing retail debit card fees (a practice that had nothing to do with the crisis), banks will be forced to raise revenue other ways such as eliminating free checking (and some banks have already begun to do this)
* The bill does nothing to reform Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, two firms that played a huge role in causing the financial crises - which makes future bailouts probable

It gets worse . . .

* A provision to audit the Federal Reserve was gutted in the final bill
* Section 342 seems to require quotas for women and minorities for government agencies and contractors, as if current laws and current departmental civil rights enforcers weren't enough http://tinyurl.com/3997jfu

I don't see how this bill provides ANY benefit to me or to the nation. Instead of reforming our financial system, it just empowers politicians and bureaucrats to reward your friends and punish your enenemies.

A REAL reform bill would . . .

* require greater accountability in the market by forcing even large firms to face the threat of bankruptcy
* abolish "government sponsored enterprises" like Fannie and Freddie
* provide a real and thorough audit of the Fed, whose decisions did so much to cause the crisis.

The Senate's Destructive Foreign Policy

There's a lot of attention paid to the fact that the Senate needs 60 votes in order to overcome a filibuster. But when it comes to ratifying treaties, the Senate needs 67 votes.

I suppose it ought to be obvious that if our broken Senate can scarcely manage to find 60 Senators to agree on anything, finding 67 is a near impossibility, even on an issue that seems to have attracted as much centrist support as this one. This is doubly true if not just unelected posturers like Romney or Sarah Palin, but also elected Republican leaders, decide to politicize this issue.

A situation where it is impossible for the United States to enter into formally binding international agreements is one where the president has one hand tied behind his back anytime he seeks to engage with another country, friend or foe -- how can any president assert U.S. leadership abroad if world leaders realize that there is no way his political opponents at home will allow him or her to make a deal? While the president's unfettered authority to act destructively in foreign affairs merits a rethinking of the executive's legal authorities, the reverse situation -- the inability of the president to act constructively abroad -- is just as worrisome.

We desperately need Senate reform. Repeal the 17th Amendment and limit the partisanship in foreign policy.

Gay Marriage Ruling Sparks Federalism Debate

A judge’s decision on Thursday declaring that a state law allowing same-sex marriage in Massachusetts should take precedence over a federal definition of marriage has exposed the fractures and fault lines among groups working to bolster states’ rights.

The decision, by Judge Joseph L. Tauro of United States District Court in Boston, supports and echoes a central tenet of the Tea Party, 9/12 and Tenth Amendment movements, all of which argue that the authority of the states should trump Washington in most matters not explicitly assigned by the Constitution to the federal government.

Congress, the judge said, had infringed on a question that was the province of local voters and legislators.

But in using the argument to support gay marriage in Massachusetts, where the case arose, the judge created an awkward new debating point within the less-government movement about where social goals and government policy intersect, or perhaps collide.

Some people involved in the campaigns to limit Washington’s reach cheered what they said was a states’ rights victory.

“The Constitution isn’t about political ideology,” said Michael Boldin, the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, a group based in Los Angeles. “It’s about liberty, and limiting the government to certain divisive issues — I applaud what I consider a very rare ruling from the judiciary.”

The debate is good, and we should be encouraging people to think about the Constitutional limits of the federal government. But as Ralph Rossum pointed out in his great book, Federalism, the Supreme Court, and the Seventeenth Amendment:

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote a concurring opinion [in United States v. Lopez] with decidedly more activist overtones; he emphasized the need for the Court to "ensure that the federal-state balance is not destroyed." He found it strange that, "of the various structural elements in the Constitution, separation of powers, checks and balances, judicial review, and federalism, only concerning the last does there seem to be much uncertainty respecting the existence, and the content, of standards that allow the Judiciary to play a significant role in maintaining the design contemplated by the Framers." However, had he understood that the framers depended not on the Court but on Constitutional structure, i.e., the mode of electing the Senate, to protect federalism, he would have found it less strange. And, further, had he understood that the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment removed the structural protection of federalism and therefore fundamentally shifted the federal-state balance, he would have appreciated both the futility and the inappropriateness of his efforts to protect the framers' design, now amended out of the Constitution.

The debate over federalism is one we need to have, but we should recognize that the Supreme Court isn't capable of fulfilling the role the Constitution originally designed for the Senate.

Who Is Dr. Donald Berwick?

Here's the guy that President Obama was so eager to put into place but didn't want subjected to any scrutiny:



This guy now has one of the most important jobs in the country, and yet the President was so scared of him being subject to scrutiny that he bypassed Senate confirmation without even bothering to attempt to schedule a hearing. The Democrats own the Senate. They could have scheduled a hearing for him at any time.

But they didn't. Will the media give this appointment any of the scrutiny that the Senate didn't?

Repeal the 17th Amendment and send people to Washington who will do the job that these corrupt demagogues won't do.

DOJ Promotes Voter Fraud

A whistleblower at the Department of Justice claims that the government is keeping ineligible voters on the voter registry:



Repealing the 17th Amendment would reduce the power of voter fraud because Senators would be incentivized to limit the power of the federal government in favor of the states. Thus, states would be incentivized to have policies that people actually want to live under, rather than jamming the policies that the elite want us to have down our throats.

Those who claim that the 17th Amendment made America more democratic are using a bad definition of "democracy". In that great book The Party System, Hilaire Belloc and Cecil Chesterton point out that "Votes and elections and representative assemblies are not democracy; they are at best machinery for carrying out democracy."

Federalism works better than elections to protect and promote individual freedom. The only way to restore federalism is to repeal the 17th Amendment.

The 17th Amendment Revisited

The 17th Amendment Revisited; By Thomas E. Brewton; Intellectual Conservative

The Senate was intended to be the bulwark against unwise political actions that infringed upon the rights and powers reserved to the states and to the people by the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Bill of Rights.

Original provisions of the Constitution intended to prevent Congress from enacting "dumb" laws were vitiated by ratification of the 17th Amendment.

Before ratification of the 17th Amendment it's unlikely that a Senate committee would have needed to raise the sort of question posed by Senator Coburn during confirmation hearings on Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court. A Wall Street Journal editorial reports:

If Congress passed a law saying Americans were required to eat three fruits and three vegetables a day, Mr. Coburn asked, would that be legitimate under the Commerce Clause? It sounds like a "dumb law," Ms. Kagan wisecracked, which is true enough, but then she added that "courts would be wrong to strike down laws that they think are senseless just because they're senseless." In other words: Congress could do it.

The real question here is whether Ms. Kagan recognizes any limits on the Commerce Clause, which legislators have used as justification to regulate or mandate just about anything, and which the Obama Administration is eyeing as its golden ticket to defend ObamaCare. Some 20 states are challenging the law on the grounds that forcing people to buy health insurance shreds the Constitution.

. . . Ms. Kagan maintained that in recent years the Commerce Clause has been read broadly, to suggest "that deference should be provided to Congress with respect to matters that affect interstate commerce" and that "the principal protector against bad laws is the political branches themselves."

That one would have made James Madison howl.

I must disagree, however, with the Journal's understanding. Abundant evidence from James Madison's notes on the 1787 Constitutional Convention debates, as well as from the Federalist Papers and correspondence and speeches by prominent political leaders of the founding era, make clear that the Senate's role was to prevent Congress from passing laws that infringed upon powers traditionally reserved to state governments.

Delegates to the Constitutional Convention explicitly recognized that the broad language of a constitution cannot prescribe limits upon Congressional legislative power for every one of the myriad occasions in which regulatory questions can arise. Such questions, the delegates noted, are political in nature, not judicial issues. Ms. Kagan is correct that the courts have no constitutional authority to reject Congressional enactments solely because judges regard them as "dumb." Deference to Congress in such matters is a position of proper judicial restraint.

The Senate was intended to be the bulwark against unwise political actions that infringed upon the rights and powers reserved to the states and to the people by the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Bill of Rights. Because Senators were originally elected by their state legislatures, they had to be attendant to the wishes of the individual states and could not, as now under the 17th Amendment, respond primarily to pressure from national political parties to conform to the dictates of special interest groups such as public employees labor unions or "green" fanatics.

Ratification of the 17th Amendment thrust upon the Supreme Court the burden of attempting to play the role originally intended for the Senate, a role that the courts simply cannot fulfill. Since 1913 the Supreme Court has twisted and turned, seeking constitutional justifications, however indirect, to impose restraints upon egregiously damaging and unwise legislative action. It should not have to assume that role. Without the 17th Amendment, Federal courts would not be the centers of bitter political fights, litmus tests, and poisonous confirmation hearings that destroy reputations and careers.

The 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913, was one of many initiatives championed by liberal-progressives to facilitate transformation of the Federal government from one limited by constitutional constraints into one with almost unlimited powers to impose new sociological standards. It was a key piece in the push to neuter states' rights and to collectivize power at the Federal level.

The commerce clause of the Constitution has been stretched since 1913 to confer upon Congress the power to regulate any action or event anywhere in the universe on the grounds that it might, however indirectly, affect interstate commerce. The birth of every new baby, for example, indirectly affects interstate commerce, because the parents will need to buy food, clothing, and other items. Some of such items will surely have been manufactured, warehoused, or shipped from states other than that of the baby's residence, bringing the birth of a child within the purview of the commerce clause. There is thus theoretically no constitutional limitation upon Federal power to regulate the number of children a family is permitted to have.

It is noteworthy that very few issues of judicial activism arose prior to ratification of the 17th Amendment, because the Senate generally did its job, which was preventing passage of power-grabbing legislation. It is also noteworthy that growth of the Federal bureaucracy accelerated only after the 17th Amendment.

Not all Republicans going along with GOP 'loyalty oath'

Not all Republicans going along with GOP 'loyalty oath;' Idaho Statesman

Rep. Mike Simpson is another Republican with no use for the Republicans' "loyalty oath."

The 12-year congressman, running for a seventh term in November, criticized the oath, approved at the state GOP convention two weeks ago. The oath requires all GOP candidates to endorse the party's platform in full, or publicly state their areas of disagreement.

"I take one oath, and that's to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, period," Simpson told the Statesman editorial board Thursday.

During their convention, Republicans also favored language that would urge the state to withhold tax payments to the federal government; language to allow Idahoans to pay taxes in gold and silver; a plank favoring the repeal of the 17th Amendment, which allows voters to elect their U.S. senators; and language opposing Simpson's top legislative priority, the Boulder-White Clouds wilderness bill.

Conventions typically reflect the will of a party's activists, Simpson said, and the GOP gathering was no exception. But he said the GOP platform gives Democratic candidates an opening to criticize Republican opponents, in the same way that Republicans would mine the Democrats' platform.

"You're putting more bullets in the gun with some of the resolutions that were passed," Simpson said.

Comment: I think it would be a fair bet to say that if those elected to Congress supported the "one" oath we wouldn't have all the problems we do today, but at least in my life time that hasn't been the case and probably will never be.

Problems Posting

Posting today and yesterday has been next to impossible because my Internet access is limited. I work through a satellite provider and when I go over my fair usage amount the pipeline gets constricted.

I had to reformat our home computer and now I have to get those hundreds of Windows security updates to support my base XP program resulting in going over the fair usage quota. Hopefully tomorrow I should be back online.

Obama Bypasses Senate Confirmation

President Barack Obama intends to use the congressional recess to bypass the Senate and appoint Dr. Donald Berwick, an expert on patient care who’s drawn fire from the GOP, to oversee Medicare and Medicaid, the White House announced late Tuesday...

The decision means Berwick can assume the post of administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services without undergoing confirmation hearings in the Senate. Republicans have indicated they’re prepared to oppose him over comments he’s made on rationing of medical care and other matters. Democrats want to avoid a nasty confirmation fight that could reopen the health care debate. Berwick was nominated in April but no confirmation hearing had been scheduled.

The Senate is not even doing its job! Who can argue that the Senate is less corrupt than it was before the 17th Amendment? Repeal it and let state legislators put in Senators who will fight to decentralize power.

* THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF OZ: A Monetary Reformer’s Brief Symbol Glossary

I received this link today and thought it was worth posting considering the US Senate is about to give more federal government financial authority and put it right into the hands of the "private" Federal Reserve.

Inhofe: Dems Continue To Press For Cap-and-Trade

Comment:No one ever thought the health-care bill would have passed yet it did. A couple of years ago Congress tried to give blanket amnesty to the 25 million illegal aliens until Americans rose up in an unprecedented response, and yet Obama and Congress are trying to slide it through again today. So saying the cap and trade is dead is crazy. I respect Senator Inhofe but he is completely wrong; the globalist statists want this and will not stop pushing for it until they succeed.

The surest way we can protect this country and prevent the cap and trade tax is to take power away from the federal government and from the legislative body that works tirelessly for special interest, the US Senate, and repealing the 17th Amendment is the first major step needed.

Senate Republicans Block Investigative Power for Oil Spill Commission

More grandstanding in the Senate.

McConnell Opposes Kagan

McConnell Opposes Kagan; The Caucus; New York Times

Republicans are starting to line up against Elena Kagan. The latest no vote is the party leader, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

In a statement released Friday afternoon, Mr. McConnell said Ms. Kagan had not convinced him that she could take off her political adviser’s hat and replace it with a judge’s robe. Mr. McConnell issued his decision just hours after Senator Orrin Hatch, the Utah Republican, said he would cast his vote against Ms. Kagan.

Their decisions are not a surprise; both voted against the confirmation of Justice Sonia Sotomayor last year. They join Senator James Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican, who said shortly after Ms. Kagan was nominated that he would not vote for her.

Read the rest here.

This commenter from the site struck a cord with me:

I think it is pretty obvious to an objective observer that Kagan is not cut out to be a justice in the traditional sense of being someone who protects and defends and applies the U.S. Constitution as it is written. She sees a role on the Supreme Court as an opportunity to move the nation into the same Marxist socialist direction that she fought for in her Princeton thesis. Putting her on the Supreme Court would put our nation in grave risk of becoming another socialist failure in the world.

Comment: With the election of President Barrack Obama we are witnessing a similar description concerning his administration's intent and actions. So surely this should be grounds enough for the Republicans and Democrat or two filibuster Kagan's nomination.

...no I'm not high, can't a person just hope?

....you are right, these are Republicans were talking about; I see your point.

Senator Lindsey Graham's Dangerous Blend of Stupidity And Arrogance

Senator Lindsey Graham's Dangerous Blend of Stupidity And Arrogance; WEBCommentary; JJ Jackson

So here I am, getting ready for a nice long weekend with my family and preparing to take a break from politics when wouldn't you know it? Something happens that is just so stupid, so arrogant and so off the wall that I am drawn to scrap my plans not to write an article this week and hit the keyboard running. Thank you Senator Graham for helping to add to my workload.

Mr. Graham, I have come to find, is one of those Republicans that has always been rather full of himself. He is one of those elitists that just don't belong in Washington waving his finger at the people with a scalding tone as if to children that they need to settle down and let him just rule them. He doesn't take criticism at all well and he certainly doesn't take it from us common folk at all.

His flirtations with progressivism are numerous and his willful disregard for the Constitution is quite clear. He has, for example, supported giving law breakers crossing our borders illegally (hence making them criminals by default) amnesty and he has never taken a serious stand against government spending that falls outside of Congressional powers. Sure, every now and again he might stand up against some token unconstitutional spending but, like most Republicans, he has never, not once, seriously worked to end any of the major programs from the Department of Education to Medicaid, Medicare, Unemployment Benefits and Social Security which are eating up sixty percent or more of our federal budget and the real reasons our children and grandchildren will be slaves to Washington for generations to come. He supports Cap and Trade and voted proudly for TARP.

Of course Lindsey Graham does not ever admit that he is a progressive, socialist liberal and he finds all the ways in the world to add words to the Constitution and lie about what it says to justify his quest for power. No, he claims he is a moderate. If moderate means that one violates the Constitution on a weekly basis then perhaps he is right. However that is not what a moderate is.

It is our Constitution that is moderate. It strikes a fine balance between lawless anarchy and oppressive, tyrannical government. By violating it and helping to accrue powers not assigned to the federal government to Washington based politicians and bureaucrats Senator Graham however is on the left side, the tyrannical side, of the federal Constitution. He is, to be blunt, on the same side as Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and President Obama are. Sure he may not be as far to the left as they are but let us face facts, he is to the left. ...

Read the rest here.

Happy Independence Day!

Two hundred thirty-four years ago, thirteen colonies seceded from the Kingdom of Great Britain. Thomas Jefferson had primary responsibility for summarizing the reason why the new Americans had the right to do so. The Declaration of Independence is not as well-known today as it should be. Take the time to read it again, and understand what it is that we're celebrating today.

"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

Cantwell Flips Vote On Financial Reform Bill

Maria Cantwell Flips Vote On Financial Reform Bill, Senate Nears Margin Needed For Cloture; The Huffington Post

One of the two Senate Democrats opposed to the pending financial reform bill flipped Thursday and announced that she would back a bill she had until now steadfastly opposed for being too weak, potentially bringing Democrats to within one vote of the 60 needed to end Senate debate and secure passage.

A spokesman for Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) exclusively told HuffPost that the senator planned to back the bill. She later said in a statement that after reading the final version of the legislation -- and receiving a letter of assurance from a top derivatives regulator -- she would now support the overhaul "because of tough new regulations of derivatives added in final conference negotiations."

Cantwell had previously opposed the bill for its perceived laxity in dealing with firms that try to evade its requirements for derivatives trading, as well as the discretion it affords regulators who may seek to weaken its provisions.

Read the rest here.

Tom Woods: Interview With A Zombie

This is hilarious!



I've stated before that I'm not particularly fond of nullification. I'd much prefer that states be able to nullify unconstitutional federal laws through the Senate. However, until that's possible, we should do everything we can to fight off the federal leviathan.

More Illinois Senate drama: A special?

More Illinois Senate drama: A special? POLITICO.com

As if there hasn’t been enough drama surrounding the Senate seat once held by President Barack Obama, here’s some more: According to a recent federal court ruling, Illinois might have to hold two Senate elections on Nov. 2 so that an elected senator, rather than appointed Democratic Sen. Roland Burris, can fill the seat.

In an under-the-radar June 16 ruling, a federal appeals court ruled that the 17th Amendment requires that the state hold a special election to elect a senator to represent the state until the end of the 111th Congress.

It’s still in litigation — Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan has filed a motion to reconsider with the appellate court, and District Judge John Grady will hold a July 21 hearing to consider any new rulings and figure out how to proceed.

But absent any changes, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals told Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn to call for an election that, by law, must be held Nov. 2.

Read the rest here.

America's Real War

America's real war; Craige McMillan; WorldNetDaily

The 20th century was a horrible litany of absurd experiments and atrocities committed by intellectuals, or by elite groupings that claimed a higher knowledge. Simple folk usually have enough common sense to avoid the worst errors. Sometimes they need to take very stern action to stop intellectuals leading us to ruin.

– Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

Gen. McChrystal was wasting his time in Afghanistan. The real war is going on here, in America. It's the war the ism-infatuated intellectuals and East Coast elitist thieves have been waging against America since the days of the 16th and 17th amendments to the Constitution.

The 16th Amendment (do it for the war, don't you know) gave the federal government a reliably massive source of coercive funding, free of constitutional constraints, which enabled it to grow far beyond anything the Founding Fathers could have imagined (or perhaps they had – which is why they took such pains to limit their federal creation).

Don't miss Ron Paul's best-selling book, in which he urges citizens and elected officials alike to "End the Fed"

The Federal Reserve was created almost immediately afterward that same year (Dec. 23, 1913 – Merry Christmas, America). This gave the federal government the power to control banks, regardless of where they were located, and thus the flow of money nationwide. It was also a reliable purchaser of federal government debt – in case "enough" tax money to feed the beast could not be collected from the nation's newly indentured servants (formerly known as citizens).

The 17th Amendment broke the back of states' power over the federal government by removing state legislatures' ability to appoint United States senators to represent them in Congress. It centralized power in urban areas, destroyed rural areas and made the power of the press to manipulate public opinion during election time a very valuable commodity. ...

Read the rest here.