The “Internet kill switch” bill was promoted by Senators Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins in the last Congress. The bill would have granted President Obama the power to shut down much of the Internet in the event of a “cybersecurity emergency.”

The good news is that Congress adjourned before passing it.

The bad news is that, on the very same day Egypt’s dictator Hosni Mubarak imposed an Internet blackout on his country, Collins announced her intention to re-introduce the bill.

But as the letter below indicates, giving the President this power is extremely dangerous and won’t protect us from cybersecurity attacks.

Please tell Congress to defeat this bill using DownsizeDC.org’s Hands Off the Internet campaign.

You may borrow from or copy this letter . . .

I oppose the Collins-Lieberman bill giving the President a “kill switch” that can cut off most Internet traffic.

This bill . . .

* Authorizes the President to issue a declaration of a national cyber emergency to “critical infrastructure”
* Empowers the President to force the owners and operators of the infrastructure to implement the President’s response plan – including shutting down parts of the Internet
* Exempts the President’s actions from challenge or judicial review

This power isn’t even necessary to prevent or stop cyber attacks. Private operators of the Internet infrastructure already have an incentive to keep their systems safe. It’s called the profit motive.

As a report from Oxford and the London School of Economics reveals, the chances of a “cybersecurity emergency” are slim . . . http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/57/44/46889922.pdf

* Cyber attacks will be localized and have short-term impacts
* A successful prolonged attack is highly implausible, because it would mean the attacker knows methods and means not known to the information security community
* A “cyberwar” involving computer viruses and worms is highly unlikely, because these attacks can boomerang on the attackers

Giving the President this “kill switch” is also dangerous to the First Amendment . . .

* In a crisis, people need information that may be kept from them because of the kill switch
* Activists employing their free speech rights could be censored and punished because of the actions of “hacktivists”

Supporters of this bill claim that the President already has god-like power over the Internet under the 1934 Communications Act. But that’s not a good argument for a new law. You should instead repeal the old law and OPPOSE the Kill Switch bill.

END LETTER

You can send your letter using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System.

And we encourage you to tell this to your friends. Follow us on Twitter and re-tweet: http://twitter.com/DDCDispatch

James Wilson
Assistant Communications Director
DownsizeDC.org

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Official email newsletter of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation.

That’s why DownsizeDC.org is introducing our Hands Off the Internet campaign.

If you like what the free market version of the Internet has done for you, then please take action to protect it from interference by The State.

In the coming weeks and months we’ll use this campaign to address specific issues. But Congress should also be told right now where you stand on the issue as a whole. That’s why we’re asking you to send a letter to your Representative and your two Senators telling them that you value Internet freedom.

The hard-wired letter says . . .

Please oppose any attempts to undermine Internet freedom.

You may borrow from or copy these additional remarks, or write something of your own . . .

I know Congress will deal with many Internet-related issues this year. In any bill that you consider, I demand that you protect my rights . . .

* to contract with the Internet Service Provider of my choice
* to speak and publish freely on the Internet, including my right to remain anonymous

I also demand that you oppose . . .

* government monitoring of emails and web activies without a search warrant
* any bill allowing the President to take over the Internet under the pretense of “national security”
* the FCC or international agreements from regulating the Internet
* all taxation on Internet transactions
* the creation of a State-issued and State-controlled Internet ID.

The free market, State-free Internet works. Leave it alone.

END LETTER

You may send your letter using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System.

And check out these new posts at the Downsize DC Foundation . . .

Tax the Rich? The Tale of Warren’s Money

Lilliputian Liberty

Quote File: Gun Prohibition vs the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

How to Create a Local Free Market Currency

For more great quotes, factoids, and insight, go to the Downsize DC Foundation Home page.

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Official email newsletter of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation.

This coming tsunami is the new requirement that every business must fill out 1099s forms for every company with which it spends more than $600. This new burden was a provision of the Obamacare bill.

Everyone hates it. Both parties CLAIM they want to repeal it, but they can’t agree about where to fit it in their tight schedule, or whether or not to “pay” for the lost revenue with spending cuts elsewhere.

Well, they SHOULD cut spending. But let’s be clear: There’s NO revenue loss to contemplate. The 1099 requirement will cut into profits. That would mean less, not more revenue for our bloated government.

Please tell Congress to stop delaying and to please repeal the 1099 requirement immediately.

You may borrow from or copy this letter . . .

Don’t blame the other party for not getting a repeal bill passed. The new requirement will cause . . .

* Confusion: Should the 1099 be sent to the local chain store, or to corporate headquarters?
* Excessive paperwork: Buying a single ounce of gold could trigger a 1099
* Identity theft: The self-employed who use their Social Security number as a Tax ID will be at greater risk from the new tracking systems
* More audits and loss of privacy
* Havoc in the private economy that will offset any revenue it will raise

This means you don’t need to offset any “lost” revenue from a repeal. Just pass a clean, simple repeal bill. Pressure Congressional leaders of BOTH parties to get this done . . .

* Introduce a repeal bill in the House
* Pass it in the House
* Pass it in the Senate

If this can’t be done, I won’t blame one party or the other. I will blame BOTH.

END LETTER

You may send your letter using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System.

And if you want to spare the nation from being buried in paperwork, please tell your friends and share this on Facebook. http://www.facebook.com/downsizedc

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Official email newsletter of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation.

Representative Anthony Weiner, a Democrat from New York, plans to hold Congressional hearings to investigate gold dealers who advertise on TV.

Is it a coincidence that these gold dealers just happen to advertise on shows like Glenn Beck that tend to oppose Democratic polices? Of course not. This hearing is clearly intended to intimidate. Representative Weiner wants to chill speech for a partisan purpose. But it get’s worse . . .

Weiner is also proposing legislation that would require gold companies to disclose “the reasonable resale value of items being sold (so that the companies) would no longer be able to hide behind false promises of profitability.” This makes it perfectly clear that Mr. Weiner has no idea how a free market works.

Prices rise and fall. No future price can be guaranteed by anyone for anything. Imagine what would happen if, for instance, Mr. Weiner’s idea was applied to the stock market, or . . . to the future price of government bonds?

Would people like Representative Weiner go to prison if the government’s promises about the future value of its bonds turned out to be overly optimistic? Of course not. But this is exactly how he wants to treat gold dealers.

This is typical of politicians. They apply impossible standards to honest citizens while holding themselves and the government to no standard at all. Unfortunately, Mr. Weiner may have the power to turn his hypocrisy and economic ignorance into law, given his position on the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.

Mr. Weiner’s hearing is set to happen this Thursday. The time to oppose him is now. Tell Congress we need more freedom for the buying and selling of gold, not less. Send Congress a letter in support of the “Free Competition in Currency Act” (HR 4248), which would allow you to use gold the same way you use Federal Reserve Notes.

Use the personal comments section of your letter to oppose Representative Weiner’s hearing and legislation.

You can borrow from or copy this sample letter . . .

I strongly oppose Representative Weiner’s proposed hearings (and legislation) threatening to force gold dealers to guarantee the future value of the gold they sell. This idea is economically ignorant and hypocritical. Will the government guarantee the future yield of its bonds? Will the Federal Reserve print inflation projections on Federal Reserve Notes? Will Ben Bernanke be fined, or go to jail if inflation turns out to be higher than his projection? Please oppose this insanity.

END LETTER

You can send your letter to Congress using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System.

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Official email newsletter of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation.

First up, is the first money bomb for Rand Paul’s General election campaign. Pledge here and donate tomorrow (or beginning at midnight tonight) here. He’s going to need a significant amount of money to defend the attacks that are now coming at him from national progressives and Obamatons.

Next, it is the official release day for Tom Woods’ latest and perhaps greatest book entitled, “Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century“. I consider his previous book “Meltdown” one of the best economics books I’ve ever read. Given Woods’ track record his new book will be mind-opening to those willing to give it a read. The book and Tom were recently featured on Glenn Beck’s TV show about Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom” (see the video below).

So that’s my To-Do list for Monday, June 28th, 2010. I hope it is yours as well.

httpvp://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=57C327D079811600

However, it is generally thought by most in society that corruption need not be a direct function of power, but rather an unfortunate coincidence of these systems of power over a period of time. As part of his best-selling Road to Serfdom (which has gained renewed interest in light of its recent feature on television pundit Glenn Beck’s show), Nobel Prize winner F.A. Hayek sought to discredit this notion of coincidence in a chapter he entitled “Why the Worst Get on Top.” In his own words, Hayek initiates the discussion in this way:

“It is the belief that the most repellant features of the totalitarian regimes are due to the historical accident that they were established by groups of blackguards and thugs … Why should it not be possible that the same sort of system, if it be necessary to achieve important ends, be run by decent people for the good of the community as a whole? … [Yet] There are strong reasons for believing that what to us appear the worst features of the existing totalitarian systems are not accidental by-products but phenomena which totalitarianism is certain sooner or later to produce.”

Those “strong reasons” were the substance of a chapter whose message can give pause to even the most well-intentioned of progressives in today’s political climate: perhaps the expansion and concentration of power attracts those who would plunder the population and take advantage of the weak in society, rather than those who would use such power for any perceived benefit. Specifically, Hayek noted three crucial points that lead socialist regimes into the hands of ruthless totalitarian dictators as a predictable consequence.

1. The person/party perceived as “strong” will be desired by the greatest number in society. By “strong,” Hayek means “able to make action quickly”; most opportunities for expansions of government power or regime changes happen due to a discontented, impatient populace. Typically, the largest group in society is the one which is in such a position to affect change in their direction; but (a) the largest group is the one that is least original and independent due to their lack of education and/or intelligence; (b) a potential dictator can most easily convert those who are docile and gullible from outside this group, further weakening the constituents who bring a leader to power; and (c) it is easier to unify people in a negative program (hatred of an enemy or envy of the rich) than any positive course.

2. All collectivist programs serve a limited group by nature. Collectivism (the opposite of individualism) groups people and treats those groups as one coherent entity. Since socialists regard capital as belonging to the nation, rather than belonging to humanity, the totalitarian program will serve the ruling elite as its advantaged “collective.” From the opposite perspective, the individuals in such a collectivist society – which, Hayek is clear, all centrally planned economies are indeed collectivist – feel inferior to those in the groups that are advantaged by the state, and will join the group if they feel that membership will confer superiority over outsiders. Consequently, these individuals are free of the many moral restraints that they feel when acting on their own behalf, because they need only act on behalf of the group (the party in power). These are the people who are naturally in position to receive leadership assignments in the party.

The most important corollary to the distinction between collectivist and individualist society is that in order to achieve the “ends” in central planning, the would-be leaders must create centralized power, which infinitely heightens that power. Hayek explicitly states that the competitive (i.e. free market) system is the only system designed to minimize, by decentralization, the power exercised by man over man.

3. Collectivist morals contrast with individualist morals. Collectivist “morals” view the ends as the only noble goals, whereas individual ethics teaches us that ‘the end justifying the means’ is the denial of all morals. Anyone in a position within the elite/ruling class must be willing to do things which are “bad” on an individual level, but good for the nation as a whole. As such, these positions attract people who are largely immoral in the individual sense to begin with.

Hayek’s three-pronged approach demonstrates why “the worst getting on top” is systematic and inevitable, rather than subject to random chance – in a socialist or communist system. However, Hayek’s analysis ends there: an effective argument against the specific form of government which he was combating in Serfdom (published in 1944 at the height of WWII), but an argument that stayed within that realm. Applying the argument against centralized power in the form of idealistic socialist/communist states ignores the bigger picture, which can be traced throughout the history of government and politics: Centralized power is, in and of itself, an attraction to the worst elements of society, regardless of the political system in which it is contained.

In his influential work Common Sense, Thomas Paine echoes Hayek’s unspoken theme, applying the corrupting influence of concentrated state power to the monarchy of England while appealing for independence:

“Sir William Meredith calls [England] a republic; but in its present state it is unworthy of the name, because the corrupt influence of the crown, by having all the places in its disposal, hath so effectually swallowed up the power, and eaten out the virtue of the house of commons … Of more worth is one honest man to society, and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived.”

Here, again, Paine conflates the power with the specific political system and ruling class with which he is familiar. A monarchy, being a system with a highly visible leader entrusted with the power of the state, is similarly affected by the influence of power as Hayek’s examples of Germany and Italy so many years later.

Today in America, we face a government that utilizes collectivism perhaps to a greater extent than did Hayek’s totalitarian Germany. We face a government which taxes us to a far greater extent than did Paine’s English crown. We face a government which has sold our rights to the highest bidding lobbyist, a government which creates laws and agencies at the whim of its bureaucratic agents regardless of its Constitutional authority to do so. And despite the best efforts of the Founders to diffuse and limit the powers of the state in America, we find ourselves facing a state with one of the most concentrated centers of power in the world: Washington, DC, the Mecca of corporatists, statists, and fascists alike. This, despite the American form of government being a republic.

Perhaps, as Paine once remarked about England, “it is unworthy of the name.” Or perhaps no entity should be trusted with the myriad duties which our government now claims as its responsibility.

by Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital and author of Crash Proof 2.0: How to Profit from the Economic Collapse

During the 1990s, inflationary Federal Reserve policy fueled a tech stock bubble. When that bubble burst, the Fed inflated a larger one in real estate. Now that the real estate bubble has burst, the Fed is inflating the biggest bubble of them all – a bubble in government. While the earlier booms at least provided the illusion of prosperity and some fun while they lasted, the government bubble will cripple the economy and deliver widespread misery to the vast majority of Americans.

Of course, there will be winners in the government bubble, at least for a while. As was the case with the stock and real estate bubbles, plenty of money will be made by the well-connected and parasitic classes. Government employees will continue to enjoy pay raises at our expense, as will anyone benefiting from the new wave of subsidies, such as Wall Street investment bankers, financial speculators, and those working in health care or education.

These gains will come at the expense of the taxpayers who foot the bill and the consumers who face higher prices. As government grows, it deprives the private sector of the resources it needs to survive and grow. The result is a lower overall standard of living. Not only are government jobs less productive than private sector jobs, but bureaucratic interference actually makes the remaining private sector jobs less efficient as well.

Our economy is being transformed from a mostly capitalistic one to a mostly socialistic one. More decisions are being made by politicians and lawyers in Washington and fewer by entrepreneurs. The motivation behind this shift is the mistaken belief that the financial crisis of 2008 was caused by too much capitalism and a lack of proper government oversight. This conclusion is self-serving for those in power, and couldn’t be more economically misguided. Through corruption or just plain ignorance, Congress and this Administration have embraced an ideology that has failed every time it has been tried.

Take the recent student loan reforms that were slipped into the health care bill. Obama wants to reduce the cost of providing student loans by taking the profits out of the industry. According to Obama, student loans are too expensive because banks profit from making them. If the government nationalizes the function, we would apparently bring down costs by eliminating those pesky profits.

This is a Marxist argument, pure and simple. If true, it would apply to all industries, not just banking. States like Cuba and North Korea would be the envy of the world, as they prohibit profits across the board. The truth is that profits, earned from free-market competition, keep cost down. By taking the profits out and putting the bureaucrats in, any incentive to provide better service or lower costs is eliminated. It’s not hard to predict that student loan costs will now rise faster than ever.

That is clearly not the result we want. To solve the problem, people must understand that college tuitions are so expensive specifically because the government has guaranteed student loans (see my video blog on this topic for a detailed explanation). Guaranteed loans don’t mean more access to education, but rather that universities are free to charge more per pupil than if their customers were paying out-of-pocket.

Obama’s plan only serves to remove more market forces and creates an even bigger moral hazard.  Under the new rules, students will be required to repay a much smaller portion of what they borrow. As a result, students will be willing to borrow even greater amounts of cash to pay inflated tuitions, making it that much easier for colleges and universities to raise them.

Also, since the government will actually be loaning the money directly, rather than simply guaranteeing private-sector loans, the Treasury will actually have to borrow the money itself before it can re-lend it to students. I suppose the irony of going into debt to loan money never registers in Washington. Further, as this bill will cause tuitions to rise even faster, it will necessitate even larger loans that will produce even greater taxpayer losses when the loans end in default or forbearance.

Whether it is in education, housing, health care, automobiles, insurance, or banking, greater government involvement in the economy means higher prices, lower productivity, more bailouts, bigger deficits, increased taxes, diminished industrial capacity, fewer private sector jobs, less freedom, and a falling standard of living.

In the end, when runaway inflation and skyrocketing interest rates burst the government bubble, there will be no more bubbles to replace it – just one hell of a hangover.

Originally published March 22, 2010 at http://towneforcongress.com/economy/freedom-from-fascism-1

Recent events not only with the current healthcare bill, but also on the economic front are waking up more and more Americans to the sad truth that the federal government is out of control. A fascist state is quickly developing in America, one of the few rare places in the history of the planet where “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” was not an unattainable dream but instead a mission statement. I first fully graspedwhere the misguided actions and ideology of the Republocrats would lead America during the Banker Bailout of 2008, and I returned home to fight against the Establishment by running for United States Congress as soon as I could.

Now when I use the term “fascism” in this piece, I do not mean its typical connotation with physical brutality, murder, and torture – though this is the easily recognizable final product. Fascism by Benito Mussolini’s originally intended economic meaning was symbolized by the “fasces” – bound sticks used as a totem for state power in ancient Rome. Here are my definitions – which by and large agree with most literature – for four socioeconomic systems:    

1. Free Enterprise – a social system based on the private ownership of the means of production.
2. Interventionism – a social system where the means of production is privately owned, but the government intervenes by passing regulations and orders.
3. Fascism – a social system where on paper the means of production is still privately owned, but the government has de facto control through the passing of a multitude of regulations and orders, accompanied by corruption.
4. Communism – a social system based on government (or “public”) ownership of the means of production.

Many today confuse the evils of government-sponsored corporatism, “crony” capitalism, or “disaster” capitalism as free enterprise, when in reality rarely do even local farmers’ markets pass as free enterprise today.

Many examine the current state of rampant interventionism and soft fascism, conclude the free market failed and incorrectly decide that the solutions must be yet more centralized government control of the economy, as seen in many respects with corporate bailouts of AIG, GM, Citibank, and others. Unfortunately, more fascism will cause a downward spiral as can be predicted by reading my article “The Government’s “War” on Main Street” and the campaign’s Jobs plank.

Case in point is the healthcare takeover where a tax of almost $1 trillion dollars will be levied upon the American people in new taxes over the next several years to provide coverage – not necessarily actually providing healthcare as pointed out in the campaign’sHealth Care plank. Congress, via the HMO Act of 1973 and other acts, has created a government-sponsored insurance cartel that does not serve consumers best. A system of free enterprise would deliver the most affordable, best-quality healthcare to consumers with the most features while naturally regulating the upcoming medical worker shortage as baby boomers attempt to retire. (photo)

The solutions to the healthcare situation are to remove state mandates that dictate 15-40% of premiums in Pennsylvania, destroy insurance portability barriers over state lines, pursue tort reform on the state level, enact federal tax relief legislation, remove state restrictions on licensing and seats in the medical school system, and provide a sound currency to stop price inflation. Note that all these solutions call for LESS government intervention, not more. Also note that while Republican politicians may seem at first to support my line of reasoning, at heart they seek control just like the Democrats, as the incumbent in my race, Charlie Dent, demonstrated in his healthcare bill last summer.

Besides the healthcare tax bill, Congress has been hard at work creating new barriers for businesses on the economic front. Senator Dodd introduced legislation markedly similar to HR 4173, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009. I dubbed this bill the Automatic Bailout Bill in November 2009 as the bill grants sweeping new powers to the Federal Reserve and creates more central planning unelected bureaucrats with the Financial Services Oversight Council.  (Photo courtesy Michael Kubel of The Morning Call)

Section 1105 gives this council vast powers to takeover transactions of all financial holding companies that pose a “grave threat to the financial stability or economy of the United States” which of course is let undefined.

Section 1701 gives the Federal Reserve “in unusual and exigent circumstances… that a liquidity event exists that could destabilize the financial system” power to authorize immediate bailouts and assistance to any “individual, partnership, or corporation.” This enables the FED to neatly bypass Congress when the next crisis occurs. The dollar limit on the FED’s new bailout authority? A cool $4 trillion dollars.

Section 1405 is a tragic comedy. It brazenly stipulates that the FDIC deposit insurance fund (DIF) reserve ratio must be higher than 1.15% for bank accounts. Unfortunately, the DIF is ALREADY at negative 0.39% and iscompletely insolvent by nearly $21 billion. While the government is intent on printing its way to prosperity, down this route only lies madness.

Fascism, communism, and even much of interventionism that violate individual liberties are just varying degrees of central planning, aka socialism. As America installed more interventions in the economy, the great Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises in 1950 delivered a lecture “Midde-of-the-Road Policy Leads to Socialism” which warned that interventionism, over the long run, would still lead to socialism. Mises was correct, and the impending dollar currency crisis that will make the current situation pale in comparison remains unheeded by the money-printers in Congress and the FED.

If America is to have freedom from fascism, the current healthcare and economic takeovers must be firmly rejected. The greatest threats to America’s prosperity, liberties, and way of life do not tread in forsaken deserts but instead infest the halls of Washington, D.C.  The choice between the two economic – the failed status quo or the solution that will create prosperity – is stark, but easy to make once the facts are understood.  America must leave the Road to Serfdom or pay its eventual consequences.

As I pledged on the healthcare bill, so do I pledge on any economic takeover Congress passes to immediately act to revoke it once I take office in January 2011 as an independent private citizen, beholden not to lobbyists and special interests, but to the people in my district who I will faithfully serve by delivering true transparency and real accountability.

For Liberty!!

Jake Towne

_______________________________

Jake Towne is running for U.S. Congress in Pennsylvania’s 15th District in the 2010 election as a citizen unaffiliated with any political parties.

_______________________________

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

As always, unlike the NFL, the author grants full permission to allow any accounts of, rebroadcasts, retransmissions, repostings of this article to your blog or anywhere else in order to promote the Restoration of our Republic.

Veritas numquam perit. Veritas odit moras. Veritas vincit. Truth never perishes. Truth hates delay. Truth conquers.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito. Do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it.

Flash forward several decades from these grand government schemes and these proclamations seem dubious at best. The average cost of attendance at a public university has increased from $950 per year in 1965 to $2,165 in 1980 to $11,034 in 2007 – to say that the federal loan program has failed to make college a more attainable goal for lower-class families would be an understatement. This rising cost spiral has been discussed at length elsewhere, however; the other issues inherent in the federal micromanagement of education are less often mentioned and are perhaps of more importance in our society.

For starters, the massive “free” public education system, combined with the plethora of after-school programs provided by the government, remove parental responsibility and the familial structure of our society. Rather than encouraging parents to be actively involved in the education of their children – probably the most important aspect of raising a child – subsidized government schooling encourages parents to send their kids to a building where they will be taken care of (and, naturally, shielded from “offensive” viewpoints or material). For families who lack the funds or resources to generate active involvement with their children in other ways, such as athletics or the arts, the destruction of this intimacy in education is ultimately damaging to the very families that public schooling claims to help. Combine this with the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies, which has substantially increased the number of dual-income families in America, and the traditional American family is quickly becoming a thing of the past.

Additionally, mandated national standards such as the unconstitutional No Child Left Behind program started under George W. Bush have transformed America’s education system from one that focuses on the student to one that focuses on the school districts, teachers, and principals. While each student’s needs are different, the Department of Education’s one-size-fits-all testing forces teachers to “teach to the test,” discouraging creativity and intellectual genius in young people who might have prospered by receiving the information differently. Yet even if one were to consider the education of a state or region as a whole, standardized education simply makes no sense. A student in West Virginia, for example, might need to learn about the mining industry to open up employment opportunities above basic labor; however, in a state like Delaware, which has no mining industry, this would be nonsensical. Similarly, a student in Delaware might need to learn about the food processing industry, while this would prove relatively useless for the West Virginian. A student in a major metropolitan area may not need any such information, but could benefit from a more thorough curriculum in economics or business.

Finally, there is the obvious moral hazard of allowing an authoritatve government the power of educating its own citizens. Rather than presenting the objective truth, many textbooks used in public schools today blatantly mislead its impressionable students with propaganda or half-truths that support the government’s case (and, thus, its own security). For example, did you know that the Federal Reserve has essential purposes and functions that “provide the nation with a safer, more flexible, and more stable monetary and financial system?” Perhaps you’d be absolutely stunned to learn that such a textbook was “revised by staff members of the Federal Reserve Board.” The conflict of interest is obvious.

Another common fallacy peddled by the historical revisionists is that the free-market capitalists of the early 20th century laid the groundwork for, and caused, the Great Depression. In Lawrence W. Reed’s essay, Great Myths of the Great Depression, he characterizes it this way:

“Old myths never die; they just keep showing up in economics and political science textbooks. With only an occasional exception, it is there you will find what may be the 20th century’s greatest myth: Capitalism and the free-market economy were responsible for the Great Depression, and only government intervention brought about America’s economic recovery…

…But those who propagate this version of history might just as well top off their remarks by saying, “And Goldilocks found her way out of the forest, Dorothy made it from Oz back to Kansas, and Little Red Riding Hood won the New York State Lottery.” The popular account of the Depression as outlined above belongs in a book of fairy tales and not in a serious discussion of economic history.”

It only makes sense that the government would want to protect its own interests in the areas of political science or economics: the justifications for the overreaching programs of the state are always along the lines of “helping the poor” or “keeping inflation low” or “caring for the sick.” How would the state ever expand its power if its citizens were to learn that the market can take care of its sick, provide sound money, and advance the prosperity of the entire society?

Of course, we can only hope that the fate of our federal education program does not follow the lead of one of the clearest historic examples of this conflict of interest: Nazi Germany.

The evil triumvirate killing machine aimed at America is made up of:

1. The progressive agenda.
2. Bipartisanship.
3. The so-called “war on terror”.

Ever since Obama’s inauguration we’ve all become hyper-aware of the progressive agenda thanks to commentators like Glenn Beck. The progressives don’t even want the Constitution to be a “god-damned piece of paper“. That would mean it actually exists to them. They’d much rather it never have existed. Sure, Obama is a “constitutional scholar”, but all the evidence suggests he only studied the constitution in order to figure out methods to betray it.

For instance, this week the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the 1st Amendment by overturning an old law that barred companies from funding advertisements specifically supporting or opposing a candidate for office. This is clearly the Supreme Court doing it’s job by upholding the 1st Amendment. But Obama and his progressive friends are quite unhappy about this. Obama vowed to fight the 1st Amendment in his weekly address this week:

Obama said the decision will make it harder to enact financial reforms, close tax loopholes, promote energy independence and protect patients from insurance company abuses — key elements of his domestic agenda.

“We don’t need to give any more voice to the powerful interests that already drown out the voices of everyday Americans,” he said. “And we don’t intend to.”

He said he has instructed his administration to work with Congress to “fight for the American people” and develop a “forceful bipartisan response” to the decision.

I’m not quite sure how dumping on freedom of speech is the right way to “fight for the American people”. His other comment about a “forceful bipartisan response” is equally troubling and brings us to the next evil force against our once great Republic.

I like to say, “Give me gridlock, or give me death” whenever I hear political Party drones tout bipartisanship like it is some universal good. We are a country of individuals, a great many of which wouldn’t be caught dead being called a Democrat or a Republican. The word “bipartisanship” to an independent is offensive and exclusionary. On top of that it’s bad for the American people.

There’s too much bipartisanship for bipartisanship’s sake. It gives politicians a nicely wrapped talking point and implies that the people were well-represented. How can this be when everyone knows that a horse designed by a committee ends up being a giraffe. Lawmakers start out with the intention of creating a bill that “helps” everyone and the law that comes out on the other end winds up helping some and hurting the rest. Isn’t it time to clean up all this “bipartisanshit” in DC? Lawmakers should have principles and stick to them.

The final evil element working to destroy America is the so called “war on terror”. The bottom line is that the terrorists are winning. How can this be true you may ask? After all, there hasn’t been a successful terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11 (that is if you exclude the Fort Hood massacre).

Terrorists don’t measure success by body count. They measure success by the erosion of liberties that result following their targeted attacks whether they are successful or not. They are kicking butt on that account. Here’s a short list of some of the evidence:

1. The Patriot Act
2. The Military Commissions Act
3. The TSA’s ever-changing regulations
4. “Report Suspicious Activity” signs on the interstates
5. Illegal FBI Wiretaps
6. Strip-search machines at airports
7. Fusion centers
8. The No-Fly list

All of these are under the guise of “making us safe” yet they also give the U.S. government, famous for its extreme ineptitude, way too much power over our lives. The U.S. Constitution becomes an obstacle rather than a clear guiding path. This plays directly into the hands of terrorists. In fact, with all of this going on, Osama probably feels like the game is over and he already won.

Our policy toward fighting terrorism is the primary contributing factor to making us less safe at home, not more. Every attack, successful or not, is followed by evidence that the attack was attempted due to our own interventions overseas. It’s akin to a never-ending gang war where each gang is seeking revenge for the latest murder. It’s expensive, both in blood and money. America can’t afford it. In short, it’s killing us slowly. Shifting focus to a true defensive strategy would save lives, liberties, and money. Why isn’t this obvious by now?

America’s ideas of individual freedom and natural rights are fundamental concepts of humanity that function in any era if given a chance. It is our duty to ensure these concepts remain essential  in our own lives and get passed down to future generations of American patriots.

Read more details at the Huffington Post.

The latest example is the 1,900 page healthcare monstrosity the House leadership unveiled last week. They want a vote on it this week!

I believe they’re overreaching, and helping to build our movement.

Please send Congress a letter demanding that they introduce and pass DownsizeDC.org’s Read the Bills Act.

This is what I wrote in my personal comments . . .

Congress passed the Patriot renewal bill in 2006, only to discover later that someone had inserted a provision allowing the President to appoint U.S. Attorneys without Senate approval. This year, Congress passed the stimulus bill with the AIG bonuses.

Nearly everyone in Congress was shocked when they learned what they had passed. This happened because Congress didn’t read these bills before they voted on them. This is irresponsible.

Will you ever learn?

Now the House leadership wants a rapid vote on a 1,900 page health care bill. This isn’t just irresponsible, it’s crazy. This so-called health care bill has become a cancerous tumor. Plus, as usual, I’m sure there will be last minute insertions that will surprise everyone once they’re exposed to the light of day.

The best protection against all this insanity is DownsizeDC.org’s Read the Bills Act (RTBA). Unlike watered-down proposals currently being considered in Congress, the RTBA will allow the people to read the final versions of bills for seven days before a vote. It will also require each member of Congress who votes yes for a bill to swear that they’ve read it — goodbye to the claims of shock when the actual contents of a bill are actually implemented.

Behind the “read the bills” movement is the understanding of the American people that the legislative process is un-representative, ignorant, and distasteful. Members of Congress who continue to ignore this problem will fuel a bigger and louder backlash.

END LETTER

You can send your letter to Congress here.

We also invite you to add your website or blog to the Read the Bills Act Coalition. Membership will help build awareness about RTBA, and in return we will list your site on our main page. You can learn more at the DownsizeDC.org site.

Today we welcome 2 new members to the Coalition:

• Reboot Congress
• Titusville Patriots

Finally, last week Congress passed a total of 15 bills amounting to 525 pages. You can see what bills were passed below my signature in the blog version of this Dispatch:

http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/healthcare-and-read-the-bills-will-you-survive-the-1-900-page-tumor

Thank-you for being a DC Downsizer.

James Wilson
Assistant Communications Director
DownsizeDC.org

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation