No Law Like Obamacare

No major legislation has ever been passed like Obamacare — and I’m using the word “passed” pretty loosely.

It became law without both houses ever voting on the same bill. (Say, is the Constitution considered “settled law”?) Not one Republican voted for it — and a lot of Democrats immediately wished they hadn’t.

Historically, big laws have been enacted with large, bipartisan majorities. In 1935, President Roosevelt enacted Social Security with a 372-33 vote in the House and 77-6 in the Senate.

In 1965, Medicare passed in the Senate 70-24 and the House 307-116, with the vast majority of Democrats supporting this Ponzi scheme and Republicans roughly split.

Reagan’s magnificent tax cuts in 1981 — which Democrats now denounce as if they’d been appalled at the time — passed with a vote of 89-11 in the Senate and even 323-107 in the hostile Democratic House. read more

Another Demonstration of Congressional Stupidity

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

 

I recently read an article from the Hill’ s Blog Briefing Room regarding an interview Democrat congressman from Illinois, Rep. Luis Gutierrez gave to Salon.com.

 

I can’t help but to comment on the article and particularly representative Gutierrez’s silly nonsense regarding illegal immigration.

 

As always, my comments will be bracketed [ ].

 

 

President Obama “has the responsibility” to stop deportations of illegal immigrants if Congress proves unable to pass a comprehensive immigration bill, Rep. Louise Gutierrez (D-Ill.) argued in an interview published Friday. [First, I want to congratulate the blogger for at least calling the “immigrants” what they are… illegal. But I am wondering what authority Mr. Gutierrez thinks the president has to do such a thing. Constitutionally, he has only the authority to dutifully carry out the laws charged by Congress.]

 

Gutierrez told Salon, “There are devastating effects if the Congress of the United States cannot enact comprehensive immigration reform – then the president of the United States has the responsibility to act to defend those immigrants, which he says he wants to provide safety and justice for”. [We have been living with the same immigration system for years. Now all the sudden, the effects of “inaction” are devastating. And never fall for the whole “comprehensive” plea. In Washington, comprehensive just means, big, fat, bloated, thousands of pages to hide crap you want but don’t want the public to know, omnibus, money wasting bill. And in no way does the president have any responsibility to act to defend criminals. That would be like me having a responsibility to defend someone who broke into my own house.]

 

In 2012, the Obama administration announced it would stop deporting some illegal immigrants who entered the United States as children under certain circumstances. Gutierrez, who has helped lead the Democrat legislative effort in the house, said the president should “definitely look at” expanding that policy to all 11 million immigrants who have entered the country illegally, if efforts to reform the nation’s laws remain stymied in the Republican-controlled House. [I have heard Obama on more than one occasion lament the fact that he is not a king; that he can’t just do what he wants. By the way, as demonstrated by his actions, he doesn’t really believe that. But congressmen like Gutierrez seem to give no thought at all to granting Obama such power. It appears that he’s never read the Constitution he swore to uphold. And he certainly has given no thought of the consequence of relinquishing the power of the legislature to the executive branch. Ignorant people like him are very dangerous.] read more

House Republicans Work Immigration Behind Scenes

As long as these RINO’s remain in power they will not give up on this issue. This is the way these progressives work. While everyone is distracted by a seemingly major issue like the government shutdown, backroom strategies are being crafted to advance another, no doubt to simply change the color of the lipstick on this pig.

 

from ABC News/AP:

Immigration overhaul legislation has been dormant in the House for months, but a few Republicans are working behind the scenes to advance it at a time the Capitol is immersed in a partisan brawl over government spending and President Barack Obama’s health care law.

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, has been discussing possible legal status for the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally. He’s also been working with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, a fellow Virginia Republican, on a bill offering citizenship to immigrants brought illegally to the U.S. as children.

Reps. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, and Ted Poe, R-Texas, are working on a plan to create a visa program allowing more lower-skilled workers into the country.

Goodlatte and the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Mike McCaul, R-Texas, hold out hopes for floor action by late October on a series of immigration bills that already have passed their committees. read more

Work is a Four Letter Word

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

The AP reported, “The House is poised to vote on cutting $4 billion a year from food stamp assistance, now used by one in seven Americans.”

 

To that, Nancy (Bella, I vant to suck your wallet) Pelosi said, “Maybe I’m just hoping for divine intervention, but I really do believe that there are enough Republicans that will not identify themselves with such a brutal cut in feeding the American people.” (Thanks to Jay Severin for the Bella Pelosi reference)

 

Well Bella, I’m sure you’re right. There will most likely be plenty of squishy, scared of their own shadow Republicans to kill or seriously watered-down the proposed bill. And as for the “brutal cut” as you describe it; proposing a one-dollar cut would be considered brutal for money-grubbing statists such as you. And another thing: what would Pelosi know about “divine” intervention? Always remember the progressive creed: government can never do with less… ever.

 

What the Democrats and RINOs won’t tell us is that the cuts are targeted. They are targeted at those recipients who are able-bodied and without dependents. The bill will actually have work requirements similar to the welfare reform act of 1996 that forced those who were able, back to work. Shocking! How mean-spirited.

 

But worry not all you bleeding heart liberals and big government progressives. Regardless of what happens in the House, the bill will die in the Senate. Harry Reid has assured us of this.

 

But what of us real conservatives? Those of us who don’t think the House reforms go nearly far enough. Is there any model, any state that is trying to do something about the well-known waste and abuse of the entitlement system?

 

Funny you should ask. The state of Michigan, of all places, is attempting just that.

 

The Michigan Senate recently passed a bill that will make those on public assistance do, at minimum, volunteer work. The Michigan House has upped the ante. Their bill will require benefit recipients to be drug tested. Those testing positive will have their benefits revoked and new applicants, or those current recipients who refuse testing will be denied benefits.

 

State Senator Joe Hune, the work bill sponsor said: “The whole intention is to make some folks have some skin in the game and I don’t feel there’s any problem with making folks go out and do some kind of community service in order to receive their cash assistance.”

 

There was of course the typical Democrat response saying that the bill was intrusive and mean. Vincent Gregory, a Senate Democrat, explained that, “a lot of people are embarrassed to even be there (asking for benefits) and they have this put on them. It’s this feeling that this is what the public wants, but the public doesn’t want to see people beaten down.”

 

You’re absolutely correct Senator. Speaking for myself, I don’t want to see anyone beaten down, but when an applicant for employment at my company tells me, “I make more in benefits than I could working for you”, where is the incentive to work?!

 

I agree with Sen. Hune. Everyone needs a little “skin in the game”. What’s wrong with drug testing them and having them go out and clean up a park or something?

 

Once again we can count on one of the founders to provide us guidance.

 

Ben Franklin’s famously said: “I am for doing good to the poor, but…I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed…that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

Regulate the Regulators

The House approved legislation on Thursday that would give the Department of Energy the right to block the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) energy-related regulations when it believes those rules would hurt economic growth.

The Energy Consumers Relief Act, H.R. 1582, passed the House in a 232-181 vote. As expected, most Democrats rejected the bill, but nine joined Republicans to pass it.

The legislation is meant to stop EPA rules that Republicans say will hinder economic growth.

The bill arrives as the EPA is preparing rules including carbon emissions standards for power plants and a measure that would force refiners to further cut the sulfur content of gasoline.

During Wednesday debate, Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) noted that the EPA has already completed rules under the Obama administration — such as air toxics standards for power plants and auto emissions standards — that will impose billions of dollars in costs.

Continue Reading

Republicans Afraid to Shutdown

There is a lot of talk these days about how the GOP cannot afford to shut down the government like they did in 1995. “Remember,” they the chattering class say, “the GOP got destroyed at the polls in 1996.”

That talk has everything to do with the Democrats winning the message battle in the media, but has nothing to do with anything else. Let’s roll the tape, shall we?

In 1995, Republicans in Washington shut down the government. They got creamed by the media and Democrats. The Democrats were interested in scoring points. The media was interested and remains interested in “good government,” never mind what that may or may not be.

But what actually happened?

Continue Reading

I Read the Bill…Well, Not Quite

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

I had a goal this past weekend. It was rather ambitious but one I thought I could tackle. It was to read the Immigration Bill, but after finding a copy online, I quickly discovered if I wanted to not have my eyes bleed or head explode I’d better develop a new tact.

I also concluded that due to the bills length, 1274 pages, there isn’t a government official, elected or otherwise that know what is in this monstrosity.

As a matter of fact, a member of Congress, representative John Carter (R-TX) admitted just that last Friday. He said: “there are things in the bill that I don’t know what they mean because I’m not an immigration lawyer.”

As a matter of principle, all these politicians should be thrown out on their derrières for not reading these bills or understanding them, yet still voting for them. The sad truth is that most of them simply don’t care.

Back to it. So back online I went and found a summary of the bill. The summary was 72 pages, 4803 sections!

I knew early on I would not get through the whole document. Frankly I wanted to prove to others and myself wrong; that the bill wasn’t as bad as I had heard.

I was wrong. It’s worse and I only made it to section 2551 out of 4803.

Here are some of the gems I found. Some you may have already heard, some not. Due to the language, I will paraphrase. My comments will be italicized.

Section 3: No one will be granted RPI (Registered Provisional Immigrant) status until Big Sis (Sec. Napolitano) submits a border security plan to Congress.

So nothing actually has to be done – just a plan submitted. Rubio already admitted that.

Section 4: If after five years high risk border sectors haven’t been controlled, a “Southern Border Security Commission” will be established.

After five years? Oh, and the commissioners are appointed by Obama (or the next president), Reid and Boehner. Terrific! I feel safer.

Section 1105:… The secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture must conduct an environmental impact study of security activities.

That way they can provide cover for Big Sis to shut down border security due to environmental concerns.

Section 1107: DHS will provide sat phones (satellite phones) to those in high-risk rural areas without cell service.

For what? Who will they call? Some law enforcement entity that couldn’t get to them in time to do anything? And if they tried to defend themselves they would probably be charged with a hate crime.

Section 2101: an alien granted RPI status may be issued a Social Security card.

Is it just me, but aren’t Social Security cards reserved for American citizens only? This section states that they receive the card so that they may enlist in the armed services. It does not specify any other purpose. Use your imagination; they will.

Observation: while reading this summary, I noticed throughout the bill, the “Secretary” has a lot of discretion to do things or not, to change things or not and to waive requirements as she sees fit. I thought it interesting.

Section 2104: if an aliens RPI application is denied (not that it ever would be) they can appeal the decision in US District Court or an appellate court.

That won’t clog up and already overburdened court system much.

Section 2106 you have probably heard. DHS doles out millions of dollars to liberal nonprofits like La Raza to teach aliens English, the Constitution and American history (and register them as Democrats). What you may not have heard is the same program is repeated in section 2535 under a different program name.

The newly named “Office of Citizenship and New Americans” heads it up.

Section 2232 allows the feds to tell the agricultural industry how much they must pay their workers and the USDA Secretary is charged with forcing annual pay raises between 1.5 and 2.5% per year – regardless of the economy.

At this point I started running out of gas, but I couldn’t resist this one last gem.

Section 2551: waiver of English requirement for senior “new Americans”. If you’re over 60 and have lived in the US for 10 years or more – you don’t have to learn English.

10 years and they can’t speak our language? That’s an immigrant that will really help our economy. I also noticed about halfway in, the word “alien” disappeared and was replaced with “new Americans”.

Well that’s about as much as I could stand. Just know that these examples were just a fraction of what is wrong with this bill. This Bill from front to back is a disaster, chock-full of benefits and no enforcement. Don’t be fooled by any of the rhetoric!

Ryan v Levin on Immigration

 

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Paul Ryan was on Mark Levin’s show on Tuesday discussing immigration. You know, the same Paul Ryan that with his tag team partner Marco Rubio, have been pushing for a “comprehensive immigration” bill. I’ll give him props for his courage at least.

Levin told Ryan that some new immigration numbers were just-released. He said that new CBO estimates are that the Senate bill will only reduce illegal immigration by 25%. Ryan responded by saying that the House will not focus or discuss the Senate bill and will only focus on their own bill.

Ryan said that “this problem” has to be dealt with. The “problem” being illegals but would not say the words illegal alien or illegal. He called them undocumented workers.

Ryan continued saying that we had a law in 1986 and it didn’t work nor did the ‘96 or 2006 laws. Ryan claimed, as Levin laughed out loud, that they in Congress want to get it right this time.

Naturally Mark asked him: “Why should we trust you [guys]?” Ryan said that this time they would have “real metrics” that would have to be met to secure the border. Not just DHS’s promise. He said the GAO would make the determination of border security. He then went on to explain the metrics that must be met regarding the undocumented workers.

Levin asked: “What if the illegal doesn’t meet your requirements. Are you going to deport them?” Ryan’s answer: “Yeah, then they are deportable, that’s the whole point.” Levin interrupted rather emphatically by saying that they’re not going to be deported!

Notice that Ryan said they are deportable, not that they would be deported. One has to listen very carefully as politicians throw out these code words.

Levin added that the president is in charge of who is deported and he simply won’t do it no matter what Congress insists on.

And of course Levin is correct. That’s why this argument is so specious. It sounds like tough talk but that’s all it is. I’m reminded of the Bumble Snow Monster that looked scary but was harmless after his teeth were removed.

Ryan’s response was if you write a law and they break the law, they are deportable. It can’t be fought or adjudicated. Huh? They already broke the law just getting here. What the heck do they care if they break another?

Could someone as intelligent as Paul Ryan really be this naïve, or is it something else?

Ryan then asked Levin: “Do you believe we will find 11 million or more people, round them up and kick them out?” Levin’s answer: “no, under this administration we won’t round up a half million people.” Ryan said that no administration could do that, even if they tried.

Frankly, how would we know? We’ve never tried. And I beg to differ. You won’t get them all, but you can get 70% within a few months time with the will and a few thousand agents. I live on the outskirts of a northeastern city. It’s a small city but a city nonetheless. I guarantee, you give me 1000 agents and a few days and I could find 75% of all illegals in my city. Why? Because they all settled in about 10-block area downtown and I’ll bet every city is the same. That’s why! 

All of what Ryan continued to promote was in the 1986 amnesty bill. Levin pointed this out to Ryan. Ryan didn’t really acknowledge it. He continued to drone on about metrics that have to be met regarding security and legal status of the undocumented workers. It didn’t convince Mark and it didn’t convince me.

Look, the bottom line is that all the metrics, the rules and new laws are not going to solve the illegal problem. We have been debating this current problem for over 25 years.

If they, Congress, were serious, they would simply state that we can live with our current situation for another year or two. Therefore Congress’s proposal should be to secure the border…period. Each border State would then verify to its security. When that is completed, we can revisit the rest. It’s that simple and that’s why it will never be done. It’s not “comprehensive” enough!

Pelosi: Pay Cut Would Diminish The Dignity Of Her Job

Speaking in the context of the sequester cuts that would have a measly effect  on Congressional pay, Nancy Pelosi said that even though a pay cut wouldn’t  effect her as much as it would others, she is still opposed  to the idea:

”I don’t think we should do it; I think we  should respect the work we do. I think it’s necessary for us to have the dignity  of the job that we have rewarded.”

Politicians talk an awful lot about shared sacrifice and “fair share.” But they don’t want to be the ones sharing any sacrifice or giving up their fair  share.

Pelosi’s opposed to doing the same thing to herself that she is in favor of  doing to every American citizen. She thinks a congressional pay cut would make  her office less “dignified.” I suppose she would argue that a citizen pay cut in  the form of higher taxes would accentuate the dignity of those jobs. She  would talk about how wonderful our jobs were and how great it was that we were  all willing to sacrifice our income for the betterment of society later. Continue Reading

 

Sequestration Fraud

Defending the United States is one of the very few constitutionally mandated functions of the federal government; maintaining an army and navy.

For that reason our country must be able to properly fund the military via a defense budget. The left and right have been debating the balance between defense and other domestic unconstitutionalspending it seems like forever, or at least since LBJ’s Great Society. The right, or constitutional conservatives maintain that nothing is more important than funding defense. The left however, believes that domestic spending is as or more important than defense.

The fact is, constitutionally it doesn’t matter what the left or right feels or thinks. Most of the spending the federal government does is unconstitutional. There is no article, section, clause or amendment that allows the feds to take our tax money to spend on college loans, illegal immigrants, mortgages, welfare, Social Security, food stamps, etc. The list isn’t endless, but it’s darn close. None of these programs are truly legal.

Yet here we are – collecting around $2 trillion in taxes and spending over $3.5 trillion every year.

Last year our spineless Congress was once again faced with a decision. Cut spending, increase taxes, raise the debt ceiling. As is their usual M.O., rather than make an actual decision, they decided to punt the ball. After all, is this not what we elected them to do? Off they go to Washington, collect a good salary with endless perks, benefits and lifetime retirement after a few short terms. I know that’s what I’m looking for in an employee; and overpaid primadonna that can decide not to make a decision on any issue.

That brings us to the 800-pound gorilla in the room. My apology to any gorillas reading this. The dreaded sequestration; the automatic spending cuts that Congress didn’t think we would ever have to deal with.Sequestration

As I stated, last year Congress kicked the spending can down the road once again, figuring, somehow, that a magic fairy would come and solve it for them; maybe a blue ribbon commission of ex-politicians that were unable to make a decision while they were in office.

The right figured it would never get to this point due to drastic cuts in defense spending. See all Republicans are warmongers, ya know. The left figured this would never come to pass due to the potential of draconian domestic spending cuts.

Notice I haven’t mentioned our King. That’s because, I don’t think Obama gives a crap either way. If he really wants something done, he’ll just write an executive order.

Anywho, if you have been watching anything other than TMZ or Entertainment Tonight, you’ve heard of the dreaded sequestration. Among the two, the drastic automatic cuts of $500 billion from the defense budget have garnered the most attention. This is of course purposefsequestration-2ul, for the left feels it can pressure the right into caving because of the right’s precious defense budget.

And that’s all we hear. How will we survive? A cut of $500 billion from Defense will cripple us, they say. Yes it would if it were all taken at once. But that $500 billion cut is spaced out over 10 years. It’s not all up front, but it sounds scarier if the 10-year thing isn’t mentioned.

The sequestration cost for this year from Defense is $45 billion. Now, don’t get me wrong, that’s a lot of cabbage (money, for you who don’t speak gangster), but with a total governmental budget of over $3.5 trillion, it’s an accounting error.

I am a diehard supporter of the military, but total defense related spending is over $820 billion per yeanever_let_a_serious_crisis_go_to_waste_r. That includes the military, homeland security, State Department and the like. Is anyone really naïve enough to think that any government agency can’t cut a little over 5% from their budget? Hell, we gave away $47 billion in foreign and military aid in 2012 alone and it’s projected top $56 billion next year. There is so much pork built into every government budget, 5% wouldn’t be missed.

Oh, and by the way; with the scam called government base-line budgeting, the budget will always increase, and the sequestration cuts (after the first year) is merely a decrease in the automatic increase in every departments budget. It’s like marking up a product from $20 to $30 and then offering a $5 discount. What a bargain.  

Once again, in my opinion, this is another purposely-created emergency. If you recall, our country was going to collapse if we didn’t spend $1 trillion on TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) under the progressive George W Bush administration.

Then we had to have the trillion-dollar useless stimulus program, lest the world end. Then son of stimulus, second cousin of stimulus, Bernanke’s buyback stimulus, etc. See, a good crisis never does go to waste (thanks Rohm). Everything is always and purposefully pushed off until the 11th hour by both sides allowing for rash decisions to be made by one side and cover for the other.

And does anyone truly believe these cuts will continue for 10 years? They can’t even decide what to do next year. The federal budget will increase as it always does, unfettered and unpinned from economic reality.

So fear not, all you warmongering hawks. Our military will prevail as it always has.

Let the sequestration happen and let the chips fall where they may.