| |||||
Last month Montana passed the “Firearms Freedom Act”that exempts firearms,and ammunition manufactured in Montana from all Federal regulation. It cites the 2nd,9th,and 10th amendments of the US Constitution as authority and is a direct challenge to the federal government. See text at:http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm Essentially identical laws are currently being acted upon by the legislatures of Utah and Texas as well. The effect of these if upheld are tremendously wide sweeping. There is likely to be a challenge pushed to the Supreme Court very quickly,and with the current configuration of the court it is highly likely that it will be upheld. This goes far beyond the law’s effect on firearms. The right to “regulate”firearms by the federal government is claimed under the “commerce clause”of the constitution. This clause allows congress to regulate “interstate”commerce. The original intent of that clause was to promote commerce between states,not to control it. Its prime focus was to to prevent states from placing state tariffs on such goods passing between states. That clause has been used as excuse for possibly more than 3/4 of the federal regulations passed since the FDR years. This would put all those regulations under doubt! (See: The Commerce Clause ) The 10th amendments states,“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,nor prohibited by it to the states,are reserved to the states respectively,or to the people.” The rights of the states to control intrastate commerce (within their borders) has always been acknowledged. However,congress has used a very loose definition of what is “interstate commerce”to include virtually anything it wants. The 9th and 10th amendments have been ignored since Rosevelt’s time. Montana is now pressing their claim to what has been their rights under the constitution since they became a state in 1889. Should this be upheld that would remove the authority of the federal government to “regulate”things such as minimum wage,national speed limits,union regulations,drug laws and a host of other things that have userpted the rights of the states for the last 60 years. Way to go Montana! This week (March 11th) the “Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA)”was introduced into both the House and the Senate. The name is an Orwellian term for a bill whose purpose is to strip workers of the right to a secret ballot to decide on whether to form a union. Under this legislation union bosses could pass out cards to workers and intimidate them into signing by requiring them to publicly fill out a card with no right to a secret or private ballot. This places workers into the position of receiving peer pressure, ridicule,intimidation,or outright physical threats to force them to sign the cards. If they can pressure 50% plus one of the workers to sign the cards it would force a union on the workers without giving them having the right of a private ballot. This removes the seventy year old rights of workers to have a private ballot to decide such issues. Businesses,economists the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the vast majority of members of the American public oppose this. Recent polls have shown that a vast majority of Americans of all political backgrounds oppose this type of legislation,but unless we contact our representatives and senators it is going to be forced on us. The poll conducted by “The Polling Company Inc”conducted in March of last year asked 1000 people if they agreed with the statement,“Every worker should continue to have the right to a federally supervised secret ballot election when deciding whether to organize a union.” The results indicated agreement by 82% of Democrats,77% of Republicans,and 79% of Independents. More recent surveys have shown even slightly higher opposition to this proposal among the American public. When you consider that most elections in this country are decided by a majority of 55% or less,having nearly 80% united in opposition to something is an amazing majority! Under the “Card Check”system,union organizers would be able to go into any small business,construction work site,or hospital and pressure workers into signing cards. They can continue harassing these people until they accumulate 50% plus one cards and the workers are at that point forced into a union. Then if the union and the management are unable to agree on a contract within a set period of time,the federal government will step in and impose one upon them. This coerced unionization is just a new form of enforced taxation on the workers. Workers will lose a portion of their wages to union bosses who can then use it as they see fit. This includes political donations to parties and candidates that the workers oppose. This is an amazing violation of individual rights. No vote,no secret ballot,no right to freely negotiate an acceptable contract and they have the nerve to call it the “Employee Free Choice Act”. A more appropriate name might be the “Employee Forced Choice Act”or perhaps even the “Employee No Choice Act”! Even Warren Buffet,an Obama supporter opposes it and has gone on record in a recent CNBC interview saying “I think the secret ballot’s pretty important in the country. I’m against card check to make a perfectly flat statement.” (Link toVideo) In addition to the loss of worker rights comes a very possible of loss of jobs. According to an economist at the University of Chicago,Dr. Anne Layne-Farrar for every three workers coerced into joining a union under Card Check,one job will be eliminated. That means that about 600,000 jobs could be lost due to Card Check is just the first year. To view Dr. Layne-Farrar’s full report visit http://ssrn.com/abstract=1353305. We do not need an increase in unemployment at this time of recession and we certainly do not need to force more jobs overseas. Why would there be a push to take away the rights of workers? Very simple. Promises made to union bosses in exchange for their support in the recent elections. VP Joe Biden said it very effectively in a meeting with AFL-CIO leadership last week. He stated, “You all brought me to the dance a long time ago,and it’s time we start dancing.” This is nothing more or less than political pay back without any regard to the will of the people who have consistently opposed such propositions. More information is available at Saul Anuzis’website. Saul is a former teamster and a former Michigan Republican Chairman. He is currently leading the opposition to this bill for American Solutions. Contact your U.S. senator and representative and tell them what you think of the card check proposal and what it will mean to the American worker and the American economy. Please do not delay as these bills are currently being debated in the house and the senate. Pushed through as essential to the survival of the nation as we know it,this bill is nothing other than an amalgam of pork and pet projects that will indebt our great-grandchildren. This is the largest spending bill in history and the thing was passed without even one member of the house reading it in its entirety!! It is putting a lien of about $30,000 on every household in the US! It also carries another extremely disturbing provision. The creating of a “RAT Board” is very reminiscent of the famous Shakespearean quote about smelling “a rat in Denmark”. This one however is in Washington DC. The new Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board — the RAT Board,as it’s known by the few insiders who are aware of it would oversee the “Inspectors General”who’s job is supposed to be acting as independent watchdogs of the various federal agencies. Now the supposedly independent watchdogs are stripped of their independence of the politics of Washington. According to the DC Examiner:‘In the name of accountability and transparency,Congress has given the RAT Board the authority to ask “that an inspector general conduct or refrain from conducting an audit or investigation.”’ This was apparently included at the request of the Obama administration. Now why in the world do you think a politician would want to control the investigative agencies that investigate he and his buddies? For “openness and accountability”? Come on people,you know this one!! This is like having Al Capone hand pick the applicants for new police detectives. Read more about some of the “crisis averting”pieces of this bill and see if it doesn’t make you want to fire your congressman who voted for this garbage. Contact your congressman and senators and let them know what you think of their actions as your representatives in Washington. | |||||
| Copyright ©2013 The Coffee Shop - All Rights Reserved | |||||
Liar,Liar,Pants on Fire!!
Wednesday’s Presidential address to a joint session of congress was interrupted by an unusual shout by Rep Joe Wilson of SC. When Obama stated that illegal aliens would not be given coverage under Obamacare,Joe shouted,“You lie!!”The following day,under pressure from the party leadership he called the White House and apologized for his lack of civility. He may have had a slip in civility,but was he correct in his assessment?
We have been listening to claims and counter claims repeatedly over the summer about what is and what is not part of the healthcare proposals before congress. There have been a lot of “bait and switch”tactics about the various bills,but the only bill currently presented and released by committee is the one crafted in the house. This 1000+ page monstrosity has been accused of containing most every onerous proposal possible by its opponents while the supporters claim none of these things exist in the bill. For example,some say there is no “death panel”in the bill although that has been claimed by numerous opponents. Can both claims be right?
First the illegal aliens claim. Obama is right in that the bill does have a small provision that states that persons not legally in the US are not authorized care under its provisions. Unfortunately Joe Wilson is more correct that under that bill millions of illegal aliens would receive healthcare under its provisions. How could this be? Well,although the bill specifically excludes the illegals it also specifically denies the right of healthcare providers to check for illegal status or eligibility under the plan.
Two provisions were proposed by Republicans in the house to require proof of legal residency for care under the bill and both were defeated by the Democrats in pure party line votes. Why,if illegals were not to be eligible for care,would anyone specifically want to deny the right of providers to determine if persons were legally here in this country in order to receive such care?
Well,the simple answer is that the claims that illegals would not be authorized care is disingenuous at best,and an outright lie at worst. It is obvious that the crafters of this bill intended,1) to allow illegals to receive care under its provisions and 2) to be able to deny that they did so.
What? Does this mean our Democratic leadership is actually lied to us? Yes Dorthy,politicians do lie from time to time and this tome is full of such distortions that are designed specifically to mislead the American public. Why do you suppose there was such a push to approve it without even reading it back in late July? It is plain and simple. The writers did not want this thing exposed to the “light of day”.
How about death panels? If illegals will indeed be treated under the bill,do they also exist? Well,yes and no. There is mandatory “end of life counseling”required under the bill,but nothing says anything about denial of treatment for elderly or terminal patients. However,the “footprints in the sands”indicate just such panels will exist.
Rahm Emanuel,Obama’s chief of staff,has stated as much on occasions. Even more revealing are statements of his brother Dr Ezekiel Emanuel who has been appointed to two key positions:health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. According to him in an article in last years “Health Affairs,Feb 27,2008,“Vague promises of savings from cutting waste,enhancing prevention and wellness,installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely ‘lipstick’cost control,more for show and public relations than for true change.”In other articles he outlined how to control costs by denying treatment to the elderly infirm and the very young,both of whom are not of the same value to society as youthful basically healthy adults. Since Obama has promised to control the cost,and these are the persons he has employed to show him how to do so,what do you think? Yes Dorothy,right again.
Then Obama wants you to believe that he will not cut care to the elderly,and he will find enough savings from eliminating abuse in current Medicare and Medicaid to pay for it. And are we to believe the tooth fairy and the easter bunny are going to pop up and give you a check for a zillion dollars too?
If the federal government can find the aproximately 20% of waste and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid why haven’t they already done so? If he is not planning to cut care to the elderly why is he citing to remove 500 Billion from those two programs to fund Obamacare?
The federal government came up with Social Security back in the 30s and promised it would never be the monster that it has become. It is currently bankrupt and has had to be rescued by additional taxes repeatedly. Same for Medicare and Medicaid,and the good old U.S. Post Office as well. The truth is that government has no profit motive and is thus inept at doing anything in a fiscally effective manner. After all,when they overspend they can simply raise taxes or borrow money that they have no intent on ever repaying.
Government has no money to do anything for anyone that they do not first steal from someone else through taxation or deficit spending. Why would an alert American public want to turn over one seventh of our economy to them? Answer. We wouldn’t,that’s why they hid it in a 1000+ page monster bill and pressed the congress to pass it without reading it. John Conyers,chairman of the House Judiciary Committee,even ridiculed anyone advocating they “Read the bill!”saying it would take “two days and two lawyers”to do so.
Keep firmly in mind what the people that push this bill are doing. They are playing the American public for fools and trying to push what they know is an abomination (or perhaps Obamination?) on us. Why do you think Obama is pushing for immediate action on something that will not take place until 2013,conveniently right after his reelection campaign?
There is no emergency requiring fast action to buy a product produced by proven snake oil salesmen America. The fact that they are trying to push this off on us is reason enough to remove them from office at the first opportunity. Thank you Joe Wilson for having the guts to recognize a shell game for what it is and call,“Liar,Liar,Pants on Fire!“