Mr. Simpson And The Cow

Author's Note - July 15th 2011

When I originally posted this in September 2010, President Obama's deficit commission had just published their report. I'm bringing it out again in response to the president's assertion that we're not paying attention out here. I'll be so forward as to say I've probably given his deficit commission report more thought than he has. Some of the figures are somewhat dated, as cost of tax code compliance has apparently more than tripled since the 2009 report cited here. America is experiencing record-breaking deficits and unemployment, and is far worse off than when Mr. Obama was elected. Recognizing that our out-of-control federal government is the problem, not the solution is the first step on a long, long road back to prosperity and liberty.

Alan Simpson, esteemed Republican co-chair of PBHObama's deficit commission, recently found himself in hot water for his colorful, and possibly vulgar (according to some government/media outlets) description of Social Security as a very, very, very well-endowed cow, and something about a rude remark to a lobbyist. Now, all kinds of leftists are calling for his ouster from this commission, because he told the truth, under the guise of his rudeness to the lobbyist. At least he didn't describe the lobbyist as a well endowed cow....

I don't envy Mr. Simpson his job. Assuming he survives this, he and the members of the commission have the unenviable job of making non-binding deficit reduction recommendations to the executive and legislative branches, recommendations they're free to ignore. What follows is my view of the problem and what I believe they should do, not just to reduce the federal deficit, but to radically transform the federal government and the tax system that funds it.

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." Nowhere does it say Congress shall enable/encourage home ownership through a mortgage interest deduction. Or guarantee a federal minimum income floor with the minimum wage, egged on by the Earn Income Tax Credit and child care tax credits. Or design schizophrenic tax tables that favor singlehood over opposite marriage, while encouraging the creation of children with a per child income tax deduction. Or substitute America's traditional generosity with tax deductions for charitable giving. Or limit free speech under the guise of "tax exemption" for non-profits (religious organizations). Or expand the police powers of the Internal Revenue Service to levy fines or new taxes to compel private citizens to enter into contracts with health insurance providers for the purposes of Obamacare. I know, despite what we hear from the "living" Constitution crowd, that these things aren't there. This scheme of credits and deductions might lead some to believe this is the government giving back, but that view begs the question, "Whose money is it to begin with"? The federal government doesn't have any money. In the face of reckless federal spending, and the future crises it portends, the current tax structure is a severe impediment to sound fiscal policy and fiduciary responsibility. No serious effort to reach entitlement reform and government reform should be undertaken without addressing the tax problem at the root of it all.

The deficit commission should point out the imaginary Roe-style penumbras and emanations that have morphed the thirty words of the 16th Amendment into the 3,700,000 word (2009) US Tax Code. The vast tax bureaucracy and regime are more dedicated to social engineering than to raising government revenue. Congress has codified incentivized behavior, redistributive transfer payments, financial and personal manipulation, and punitive police measures which force otherwise free Americans, "under the penalty of perjury", into compliance with this purportedly voluntary system of taxation. The Internal Revenue Service's own National Taxpayer Advocate, Nina E. Olson, released a 2009 report calling on Congress to reduce the complexity of the tax system. She also described the $193bil (2.66 billion hours at the $7.25 federal minimum wage) in compliance costs, and 7.6bil hours spent on paperwork, equivalent to the hours worked by 3.8mil full-time employees or 190,000,000 40-hour work weeks.

The tax commission should recommend a single flat tax rate. No marginal rates. No loopholes or deductions. No more rebates, prebates, tax credits or stimulus checks. No tax "shelters" or death taxes, so that you and I, and Warren Buffet, all devote the same percentage of our treasure to meeting our individual tax burden. End the class warfare by extending the obligation to pay taxes to 100% of all working Americans, not just those whom the elitist radical progressives in Congress and the Obama administration would like to soak. For some Americans, it might result in fewer cartons of cigarettes. For others it might mean taking fewer vacations. Would this make my tax bill go up? Probably, but that just means I've got courage and a little more common sense than most of the politicians and lobbyists in Washington.

Any tax increase must be accompanied, not by cuts in growth of spending, but real reductions in spending at the federal level. The commission should recommend an immediate freeze in entitlement spending at current levels until 2016, and further recommend the repeal of Obamacare, the remainder of Stimulus and Son of Stimulus, labor union buyouts and the dissolution of FannieMae, FreddieMac and all other government sponsored enterprises. The commission should acknowledge Mr. Simpson's candor and require government functionaries and politicians to tell the truth about entitlement programs, which takes us back to the well-endowed Social Security cow.

The truth is that 1/6 of all Americans receive some kind of federal assistance. Social Security and Medicare alone consume 10% of GDP, right now. Barring drastic action by the next Congress, spending on all entitlement programs will continue to grow exponentially because more Americans then ever before believe the progressive lie that they're actually entitled to them. This, and the fact that America is now governed by a cabal of elitist radical progressives whose own sense of entitlement drives them to accrue more power by expanding the scope and influence of the federal government. Their ascendancy and ever-expanding entitlements have coincided to become a vicious and self-perpetuating cycle of dependency, which reaches beyond the permanent underclass of the New Deal and Great Society, into the boardrooms of business and industry with federally subsidized long-term unemployment and government stakes in trade union pensions, banking, insurance and manufacturing. Now they have granted themselves a permanent seat at our kitchen tables with Obamacare. Obamacare alone imposes nearly $100bil in new taxes just for itself beginning in 2011, three years prior to the delivery of a single service.

At the end of its life PBHObama's deficit commission may be just another turkey in the political theater which is Washington, DC. Given courage and a little common sense, it could be so much more, with real reductions in federal spending on entitlement programs and the possibility of real tax reform. One can always hope....

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

A Simple Majority for Obamacare

An optional title would be " How the Senate Democrats blew up Obamacare".

I was holding forth today on a social networking site as to the corrupt nature of politicians and how they come up with all the arcane rules of the respective houses of Congress to govern their behavior because they can't or won't follow the United States Constitution. I was subsequently asked if, since the filibuster isn't mentioned in the Constitution, did that mean I thought a simple majority of the Senate should be able to pass Obamacare. My response to that query follows below.

The Constitution permit both houses of Congress to set their own rules. Senate rules permit the filibuster. The Senate could change the filibuster rule if they wanted. Since it would take a 2/3 majority to change the rule, it appears the Senate prefers to leave the filibuster in place.

As to the question of how it should be passed, I think health care legislation and ALL legislation should be able to pass the United States Senate on a majority vote, unless otherwise proscribed by the Constitution, or their own rules. That does not mean that the Republicans should roll over just because you and Harry and President Obama want them to. The Senate Democrats themselves just didn't want a simple majority vote.

If I recall correctly, the Senate democrats created the supermajority scenario for Obamacare, because they 1. shut the Republicans out of the legislative process, and 2. couldn't even muster the votes in THEIR OWN CAUCUS (of 60 Senators or 3/5 of the body) to sustain cloture, so they had to set about buying votes to get to 60 before bringing the bill to the floor.

A lack of transparency and integrity among the Senate democrats sealed their fate, and the fate of Obamacare. They could have had an up or down vote. Unfortunately, democrats and Republicans view politics as a zero-sum game. In this instance the radical progressives in the Senate were going to pass this bill no matter what. And they blew themselves up in the process.

Try as you might, you're not gonna get away with blaming the Republicans for this mess.

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, especially when radical progressives blame everyone else for their failings.

Hail Caligula and His Horse, Incitatus!

Dear Abby,

I had a friend who, when they were with me, made me believe that I was the most important thing to them. They told me that their most highest goal was to help me be the best I could be, that they would help me take care of my family, that they would make sure we had the best of everything. They said if I would help them move to another city, that they would be able to do more for me, to make my life even better than before. I believed them, got my friends to help them too, working day and night to make sure they had what they needed for the move.

Then they moved away....

Now they never call or write unless they need something, which, in their case, is all too often. They're guilting me and my friends into doing more for them, frightening us too, telling us if we don't help them someone might hurt them, even hurt us. What kind of person would promise to give us everything, then work as hard as they can to take it away?

They say they know what's best for me and my friends. Something just doesn't feel right. I can’t trust them anymore. Abby, what should I do?

Signed,

Failed by a Friend

This sentiment expressed in the fictional letter above has been given voice millions of time in the last year, but not about a faithless friend. It is an indictment of the political class in America.

People in elected office all over the country have broken faith with their constituents. Politicians turned starry-eyed crowds of admirers into believers in the unbelievable, in the hope that, if they were elected to office, things would change. If they got power they could improve our schools and roads, make our children safer, not raise or cut taxes, grow the economy, strengthen our nation at home and make us more respected abroad, make health care available to everyone, slow the rise of the oceans and fundamentally transform the United States of America.

What do the starry-eyed crowds have to show for the time, toil and treasure, all the promises? Graft and corruption - dissipation and venality - millions spent for liquor, junkets and junk - democrat degeneracy, progressive profligacy, and Republican reprobacy. It's not for nothing that most Americans believe the country is on the wrong track.

The central problem is not the country, but the government. Very few Americans approve of Congress. In fact, that anyone in America approves of their actions indicates that there is something wrong with that segment of the population.

The government/media enterprise is working overtime to convince people that their best hope for social, economic and ecological justice is a second-world remake of our enduring institutions. Know-nothing politicians cite the general welfare clause from Article 1 section 8 of the U.S. Constitution as the source of the penumbra from which emanates the "right" to health care, and then proceed to ram the legislation through the Congress and down our throats. They justify their actions by claiming a majority support this, when the truth is that 61% of Americans believe the current proposals need to be scrapped. President Obama says we will recognize the value of his plan once health reform is passed and the furor dies down. Yet, while hosting the Republicans at a heath care summit at Blair House, he has a proposal ready for passage via reconciliation in the Senate.

Long ago in the health care or health insurance "reform" debate, Obamacare was derided as a trojan horse for socialism. I would submit that, based on their imperious attitude toward the American people, the imperial House, Senate, and Obama administration are more like the dissolute Roman emperor, Caligula. Obamacare is more like Caligula's horse, Incitatus who, according to legend, was put forward by Caligula as a member of the Roman senate. Hail Caligula and the horse, Incitatus!

Like Caligula, Congress and the administration require homage and tribute from their subjects. They name bridges, parks, post offices and office buildings after themselves. They memorialize themselves in airports, universities, and even statues. Like Caligula, who worshipped Incitatus the horse as the embodiment of at least six Roman deities, and provided him a gold and ivory stable encrusted stable, President Obama (“sort of god… above the country….”, according to Newsweek Magazine editor Evan Thomas) and Congress have wrapped Obamacare in the gilded box of social and economic justice and deficit reduction. They demand obeisance and fidelity to Obamacare and command Republicans and C-SPAN to summits in its name.

Jeers to President Barack Obama and the progressive majority of the 110^th Congress for fiddling with health care while the economy burned! Their legacy will be written in the red ink of profligacy and crushing debt. Their squander of American treasure would make even Caligula blush. Incitatus, too....

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

An Immodest Absolutely Immoderate Proposal...

...for Preventing Progressives from Burdening the Taxpayers and Their Country While Benefitting the Public by Their Absence from Public Life.
With thanks to Jonathan Swift. No children were consumed in, or as a result of, this post.

Once principled progressives Mary Landrieu, Louisana and Ben Nelson, Nebraska pragmatically sold their Obamacare votes to Harry Reid, Nevada for $300,000,000 Medicare pads for their respective states. You see a pattern, right?

In total there were 278 progressive votes for Obamacare - House(218) Senate(60).

Our immodest proposal - assuming that Senators Landrieu and Nelson are typical of progressives in the Senate, as well as the House, and further assuming that $300,000,000 is the going rate for a progressive politician in Washington, DC - is as follows:

Offer all 278 House and Senate progressives conditional early retirement packages comprised of one-time payments of $300,000,000. This payment would naturally be subject to capital gains tax at the rate they proposed while in office, unless the prevailing rate is higher than they proposed - which is highly unlikely.

Total cost of the package to taxpayers in the United States - exactly $83,400,000,000.

The conditions attached to the package will also define some offsets, not including the election surtax, which go toward reducing the overall cost of the package. Those conditions are as follows:
Recipient waives all lifetime pension/perks associated with their service.
- waives all Social Security payments
- agrees to enroll in Medicare or their state health plan, or moves to Canada, Cuba, or England.
- assumes liability for all out-of-pocket expenses not covered by their health plan.
- signs a 25-year binding agreement barring them from seeking any elected office, anywhere.

Further cost savings can be realized in reduced jet fuel consumption, staff headcount reduction, reductions in waste, fraud and abuse, reductions in franking, deficit reduction, and by other such sums as may be required.

All that's left is to find sponsors for the bill. Senators Boxer, Landrieu, Nelson and Reid and Representatives Lincoln, Pelosi, Brady, Frank, Hoyer and Markey can carry the bill in their respective chambers. Mr. Markey's global warming committee won't get a chance at this one.

Once the proposal has been scored by CBO and returned to both the House and Senate, we can then expect a quick, near-unanimous vote in both chambers, because as Mary Landrieu, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Christopher Dodd and Harry Reid have all clearly demonstrated, every progressive has their price.

While $83,400,000,000 may seem like a large sum of money, it is:
2.38% of President Obama's proposed $3,500,000,000,000 proposed Federal budget for 2010.
1.67% of the 10-year estimated $5,000,000,000,000 cost of Obamacare and cap-and-trade.

Beyond the obvious benefit to the economy and the taxpayers, consider this:
Eliminating the single greatest domestic threat to the Republic - PRICELESS!!!!

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty - but 278 progressives are cheap at twice the price....

A Fait Accompli?

The buzz in the American news media is that Obamacare seems to be a fait accompli.

The Obama administration and democrat partisan hacks in the federal legislature are apparently negotiating on Fox News, and also print and broadcast organs of the government/media enterprise in advance of the House-Senate conference next month, which is normally where competing bills would be reconciled before a concluding final vote in each body. They are planning and refining their "ping-pong" strategy to work out their differences behind closed doors, without C-SPAN and out of the public view.

Eternal Vigilance has already been in contact with our senators, as well as with other key Republican senators. We will also be contacting the members of our state delegation in the House of Representatives, both Republican and democrat. We have asked, and will continue to ask that, our elected representatives in both parties work to defeat the socialist/progressive/government takeover of American health care.

We have contacted with the Republican Governors Association. As many governors have taken to the airwaves to denounce the Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker Kickback and the Florida Flim-Flam as "unfair", this raises the spectre of chief executives supplicating on behalf of their states for a place at the ping-pong table with Nancy and Harry. They will have our unwavering support if they use every constitutional means at their disposal to thwart this disaster. Conversely, any use of their office to support or advance this flagrant subornation of the United States Constitution and the legislative process will be duly noted and reported here.

Health care is but one part of the scheme that has been launched since the election of President Obama. From his czars, to climate change, to foreign relations, to domestic policy, President Obama seems determined to roll back decades of real progress under the rubric of "change" and "progress". Matthew Spalding with the Heritage Foundation rightly points out that change and progress are virtually useless as metrics. The 2008 election of Barack Obama is an example of "change". The inexorable march toward "health care reform", with its irrevocable clauses binding future Congresses, regressive taxes, debt-busting expenditures, and second-world rationing of care is "progress".

In the Senate bill the backdoor repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funding of abortion, is an example of the lengths to which the socialist/progressives will go to pander to their base. They would subvert three decades of established law and the moral conventions which inform our society. We applaud the Stupak-Pitts amendment offered with the House version, which restricted government insurance plans under the bill from paying for abortions. That amendment passed on a floor vote with a solid majority of members.This may be a major problem for the conferees and the ping-pong players.

We no longer accept the idea that writing and passing legislation is one of two things that should never be seen. We call on Congress and the Senate to deal justly with the American people. When there is a fair and open legislative process, free from corruptive pandering and influence-peddling and fully dedicated to good governance and sound fiscal policies, only then will Congress be able to regain any measure of trust and respect from the American people.

President Lincoln at Gettysburg called on the Americans of his day to take the measure of their devotion, on behalf of those who had given "their last full measure of devotion". These times are just as perilous to the Republic as the Civil War was then. They fought to preserve the Union. We strive today, once again, to save the Republic.

Millions of everyday, otherwise unremarkable Americans have taken the measure of their devotion and have decided that enough is enough. We have drawn a line in the sand in 2009.

When we voted for McCain/Palin in 2008 we said no to radical socialist/progressivism.

We voted no on cap-and-tax.

We voted no on deficit and debt-busting budgets, regressive taxation and the expansion of the welfare state on April 15, 2009.

We voted no on government-run universal health care on August 22, 2009 and at townhall meetings all summer. Many of us have been reviled and sorely abused for the stand we've taken, some even physically abused for refusing to bow to the "inevitability" of it.

We voted no on the unbridled expansion of government and a radical socialist/progressive agenda on September 12, 2009 with a million or two million Americans in the streets of Washington, D.C.

We have voted no again and again and again with emails, faxes, phone calls, letters and petitions. Because the Left have had the street to themselves too long, we have taken to the streets in record numbers, with signs and anger, and a little fear.

Every elected Republican representative and senator has the support of the electoral majority in their district and state. Why haven't they all taken advantage of their bully pulpit to explain the health care bill and why they opposed it? We would ask that they come out of their offices and out of the TV studios, and take the lead on this issue.

Gentlemen and gentleladies, enough with the civil and stentorian tone! There is no comity out here in the real world! A talk radio listener wanted to know why the senators from his state, who voted against the Senate bill, weren't running around like their hair was on fire over this.

We are not satisfied with press releases from your office or tweets from the party or the campaign. It is long past the time for sound bites and emails, or speeches from the floor to empty chambers and C-SPAN cameras. We don't have time to watch anyway. We may not all be the deep-pocketed contributors who will help pay for your re-election campaign, but we are the voters at whose pleasure you serve. You have heard from us - it's high time we hear from you!

A fait accompli? We the People don't think so. Do you?

Thomas Paine offered three alternatives to the leaders of his day - "Lead, follow, or get out of the way".

SO SAY WE ALL!!!!

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty....