Liberty

Republicans are losing the health care debate

October 30th, 2009 7:33 pm  |  by Marc Gallagher  |  Published in Big Government, Civil Liberties, Commentary, Free Market, Health Care, Liberty, Market Regulation, Maven Commentary, Socialism  |  2 Responses

The House Democrats released their latest attempt at a health care bill yesterday. Feel free to read all 1990 pages of it here in PDF form. I’ve been perusing it all day long because I, apparently, enjoy pain. So much pain that I’m starting to feel sick. Man, they better pass this bill soon or I may die.

Well, that’s what they want you to think. I want to know why the debate is now all about whether or not there should be a public option and little else? This shows us how Obama and his fellow looters are now firmly in the lead on this debate. The argument is no longer about whether we should have the government more involved in health care, but whether the government should provide health care.

The question is no longer “why are we doing this?” Instead, the question is “how do we do it?”

If Pelosi has her way, this is how:

The new House proposal is similar to one drafted by Democrats months ago. It requires Americans to buy health insurance by 2013 or pay a fine, creates a government-run program similar to Medicare to compete with private insurers and lets 15 million additional people enroll in Medicaid by easing eligibility requirements.

But in an effort to make the bill more appealing to moderates in her party, Pelosi altered some of the fine print. The proposed government-run “public option,” for instance, would negotiate for how much to pay doctors and hospitals rather than relying on government-set rates, as Medicare does.

Echoing concerns raised by his Republican colleagues, Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan said the bill’s heft, at 1,990 pages, indicated how it would expand the government’s role in health care: “Families will face higher taxes,” he said.

Replacing the above word “higher” with “astronomical” would be more honest. One need not read past page 4 (3d) to find the most offensive words to free market liberty loving Americans:

initiates shared responsibility among workers, employers, and the Government; so that all Americans have coverage of essential health benefits.”

The word “initiates” should be replaced with the more honest word, “forces”. This phrase is a pure unadulterated call for socialism. When you force someone to share, it’s no longer sharing. It is theft, well-intended theft, but theft nonetheless.

Why do we get put in jail if we steal money to give to the poor yet it is perfectly fine for the government to do it without repercussions? I suppose the answer is: they own the jails.

Why do we get put in jail if we murder someone yet it is perfectly fine for government troops to kill people?

Are government humans more special than civilian humans? They seem to be able to operate outside the scope of morality.

The bill would establish a new federal government department inappropriately called the “Health Choices Administration” with the “Health Choices Commissioner” at the head. I can’t wait for their ad slogan to come out: “The Health Choices Administration: Be Nice, we can choose whether you live or die!”

Under this bill the Health Choices Commissioner has the power to regulate a new “market” they call the “Health Services Exchange”. This is the so-called new “free market” where the government public option health care is to compete with private health insurers. Yet somehow this is supposed to allow private insurers to compete on a level playing field? Please.

This bill becoming law would signal the end of private health insurance. It is only a matter of time before the public option will be the only option.

The government owns the jails now. The government tells you what you can put in your body. With socialized medicine the government is just continuing its assault on individual liberty. There is no “I”, only “We”.

Remember why the Patriot act needs to be abolished

October 30th, 2009 1:56 pm  |  by Mike Miller  |  Published in Big Government, Liberty, Politics, congress, law, privacy, terrorism  |  0

With the USA Patriot Act set to expire at the end of this year, and Congress mulling around even more nefarious replacements for it, it’s time to keep in mind the major items in it that make it evil (as compiled by the ACLU):

  1. Search your home and not even tell you… by conducting secret “sneak and peek” searches of your home or office, without informing you that a warrant was issued.  (SECTION 213)
  2. Collect information about what books you read, what you study, your purchases, your medical history and your personal finances … without probable cause.  (SECTION 215)
  3. Label you a “terrorist” if you belong to an activist group … and the USA PATRIOT Act broadly expands the official definition of terrorism, so many domestic groups that engage in certain types of civil disobedience could very well find themselves labeled as terrorists.  (SECTIONS 411, 802)
  4. Monitor your e-mails and watch what internet sites you visit … by monitoring Internet traffic and e-mail communications
    on any Internet service provider — *without* probable cause. (SECTION 216)
  5. Take away your properly without even a notice or a hearing if the government merely says a person or organization has engaged in or is planning an act of “domestic terrorism.” The government could thus effectively bankrupt an organization with which it disagrees.  (SECTION 806)
  6. Spy on innocent Americans by allowing a vast array of information on U.S. citizens to be collected and shared with the CIA (and other non-law enforcement officials) without proper judicial oversight or other safeguards.   (SECTIONS 203 AND 901)
  7. Put immigrants in jail indefinitely.  The USA PATRIOT Act permits indefinite incarceration of immigrants and other non-citizens without the government having to show that they are, in fact, terrorists.  (SECTION 412)
  8. Wiretap you under a warrant that doesn’t even have your name on it. Judges are required to approve a wiretap without even knowing who is to be wiretapped or where the wiretap is to be placed.  (SECTION 216)

Read more here and here.

Government outlaws free health care

October 30th, 2009 1:37 pm  |  by Mike Miller  |  Published in Big Government, Health Care, Liberty, Market Regulation, Politics, law  |  0

As noted in a story by James W. Harris at The Advocates for Self-Government, a group that wants to provide free medical care to out nation’s poor is being blocked by government bureaucrats:

An organization of volunteer doctors and other health care professionals wants to provide free medical care to tens of thousands of poor people across America.

But — incredibly — government bureaucrats won’t let them.

That’s the extraordinary story told by journalist David Freddoso in the Washington Examiner newspaper.

The article begins this way:

“Stan Brock just wants to help. The former co-star of ‘Wild Kingdom’ wants to deliver free medical, dental and vision care to the poor. … Brock simply wants to provide care free of charge, at the hands of unpaid volunteer doctors and dentists using donated equipment.

“Brock’s group, Remote Area Medical, wants to bring its services to Washington [D.C.], and soon. He wants his volunteer eye doctors to grind new glasses on the spot for those having trouble seeing.

“He wants his dentists to pull rotten teeth and perform root canals in badly neglected mouths. He wants to give checkups and HIV tests to the uninsured and the underinsured. No questions asked.

“The only question is whether the bureaucrats will let him do it.”

Continue the story

Ron Paul vs. Michael Moore on Larry King

October 29th, 2009 11:08 pm  |  by Marc Gallagher  |  Published in Big Government, Civil Liberties, Commentary, Constitution, Foreign Policy, Free Market, Health Care, Liberty, Market Regulation, Ron Paul, War, congress, terrorism  |  23 Responses

Ron Paul appeared on Larry King Live tonight following Michael Moore to refute (and agree) with some of what Moore said. It was a very good appearance by Paul. He spoke about health care, foreign policy, and the difference between capitalism and corporatism.

Check it out below.

The End of Statism (after its rise)

October 29th, 2009 1:33 pm  |  by Mike Miller  |  Published in Big Government, DownsizeDC.org, Economics, Health Care, Liberty, Market Regulation, Obama, Politics, REAL ID, Socialism, congress, government spending  |  0

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h


Quotes of the Day:

“The State is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.” — Frederic Bastiat, French economist of the 19th Century

“How did I go bankrupt? Two ways. Slowly, and then all of a sudden.” — paraphrased from “The Sun Also Rises” by Ernest Hemingway

“May you live in interesting times.” — a proverbial Chinese curse


President Bush and the Republican Congress expanded government more than any administration in history. They also laid the basic foundations for a future police state. Now, President Obama and the Democratic Congress have . . .

  • Retained, and in some cases expanded, all the Bush-era policies — the wars, the PATRIOT Act, warrantless spying, REAL ID, imprisonment without due process, extraordinary rendition, etc.
  • Begun to extend the already existing foundations for a future socialist state with things like direct government ownership of businesses, the health care bill, cap and trade, and a host of other measures big and small

Put the Bush and Obama policies together, sprinkle in a couple more terrorist attacks, and one or two more state-caused financial calamities, and you have a recipe for . . .

  • The destruction of American liberty
  • The blossoming of a Leviathan State

Read the signs . . .

We are living through a Statist revolution.

Statism is a mindset that prefers coercion to cooperation. Statists love the State because they are blind to its fundamental nature . . .

  • The State is a monopoly that you cannot easily fire, replace, or even control
  • Everything the State does relies on coercion

If you decide that . . . Read More »

Ron Paul on Iran: “Sanctions are an act of war.”

October 28th, 2009 10:22 pm  |  by Marc Gallagher  |  Published in Blowback, Foreign Policy, Liberty, Ron Paul, War, congress  |  1

Ron Paul participated in a House Foreign Affairs committee today regarding Iran and a bill that would “enhance” energy sanctions on Iran put in place in a 1996 bill.

Ron Paul uses his 5 minutes quite well as he declares that sanctions are an act of war and attempts to educate his peers on the unintended consequences of these types of sanctions.

(Thanks to Minnesota Chris for the video, check out his blog)

Ron Paul Supporter and Former NM Governor Gary Johnson Preparing For 2012?

October 28th, 2009 8:00 am  |  by Marc Gallagher  |  Published in Commentary, Drugs, Election, FOX news, Liberty, Maven Commentary, Politics, Ron Paul, gary johnson  |  11 Responses

Immediately after Barack Obama won the election last November I published an article revealing my own rather cursory investigation of former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. I wanted to know more about him because I thought he had the potential to be a viable liberty-loving Presidential candidate in 2012. While I did discover some potential chinks in his armor, I concluded with the following:

It would be very difficult for me to not support Johnson if he were to run for President in 2012. As of right now, In my view he is the best positioned candidate to carry forward the message of liberty within the Republican Party. He may not be perfect on specific issues here or there, but Ron Paulians would be hard pressed to find another Republican candidate with his record and political viability. He served as a Governor for eight years. He didn’t raise taxes as Governor once. He promoted private business and free markets over government corporatism and regulation. Finally, and perhaps most pertinent, he enthusiastically endorsed Ron Paul for President.

There has been very minimal evidence for a Johnson 2012 bid until now. Jason Pye at UnitedLiberty.org reports that Johnson has formed a PAC and is set to release a book in December entitled “Seven Principles For Good Government”.

A few web sites have been set up by supporters in an effort to coax Johnson into running for President such as JohnsonForAmerica.com.

With this latest news it appears that Johnson is warming up to jump in the fray. I can see it now at the first GOP primary debate sometime in 2011:

Fox News Debate Moderator: Governor Johnson, you’ve been an outspoken critic of the drug war and support the decriminalization of marijuana. These positions don’t seem like Republican positions. This raises questions about your electability. Do you have any sir?

Gary Johnson: Who am I, Ron Paul?

Let us hope so, but this time, let us hope he wins.

Do you prefer a real Fed audit, or a fake one?

October 27th, 2009 11:14 am  |  by Mike Miller  |  Published in Activism, BJ Lawson, Big Government, DownsizeDC.org, Federal Reserve, Liberty, Politics, congress, law  |  0

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h


We’re pleased to welcome BJ Lawson to the pages of the Downsizer-Dispatch as a Commentator.

Here’s BJ’s first call to action . . .

Your success promoting the Audit the Fed bills has scared the banking cartel into offering a fake alternative, the so-called Federal Reserve Accountability Act (S 1803).

Please send Congress a letter opposing S 1803, and favoring the real Audit the Fed bill, S 604.

You can use my letter to Congress as a guide to your own . . .

I want my Senators to oppose S 1803, and support S 604 instead. I also want my House Rep. to reject any attempt to foster a bill similar to S 1803 in that chamber.

S 604 would perform a real audit of the Federal Reserve, but S 1803, the so-called Federal Reserve Accountability Act, would actually help the Fed avoid accountability! It would . . .

* Severely limit the scope of any audit,
* Set unreasonable time-frames that will delay or postpone certain audits indefinitely,
* Permit some audits to be performed only one year after a program has been terminated.

Give me a break!

It should be perfectly obvious to any reasonable person that active Federal Reserve programs need the most accountability. And what about programs that are never terminated? Focusing audits on terminated programs is like closing the proverbial barn door after the cow is gone, while giving on-going programs a permanent pass.

Frankly, it seems to me that S 1803 is a fraud designed to preserve the status quo while fooling some Americans into thinking you’ve enacted a real reform. Where did this idea come from anyway? The banking lobby?

You politicians constantly claim that citizens who aren’t doing anything wrong have nothing to fear from their government. Well, if the Federal Reserve isn’t doing anything wrong then it too has nothing to fear. S 1803 actually enhances my suspicion that the Federal Reserve is probably doing lots of bad things!

The cure for this is transparency.

The self-serving political claim that Federal Reserve transparency would disrupt the financial markets is simply wrong. Financial markets require honesty and transparency for the efficient allocation of capital, and for systemic stability. The lack of transparency for Federal Reserve actions is actually the source of market disruption, and creates constant chaos in our international financial relationships.

Please audit the Fed! And make sure it’s a real audit, not a fake one.

Believe me, I’m paying close attention to how you represent me.

END OF SAMPLE LETTER

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

Read More »

Jake Towne to Nancy Pelosi – Are YOU Serious?

October 26th, 2009 10:15 pm  |  by Jake Towne  |  Published in Big Government, Constitution, Health Care, Liberty, Politics, congress, jobs  |  0

“All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to stand by and do nothing.” - Edmund Burke

My rebuke to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and my comments on the Constitution and federal powers of Congress in regards to health care and the “Commerce Clause.”

Originally published October 26, 2009 at http://towneforcongress.com/economy/to-nancy-pelosi-on-health-care-are-you-serious-1

Last week, the U.S. Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, responding to a reporter’s question of whether the Constitution gave Congress the authority to enact individual health insurance mandate, kept repeating, “Are you serious?”

Now, let’s give Speaker Pelosi the benefit of the doubt and attribute her impolite reply to simple disbelief. In fact, from her point of view her authority is unchallenged per a September press release, and many others such as Politico’s Erwin Chemerinsky and even the contemporary Supreme Court agree. From her press release, Pelosi states:

“The Constitution gives Congress broad power to regulate activities that have an effect on interstate commerce. Congress has used this authority to regulate many aspects of American life, from labor relations to education to health care to agricultural production. Since virtually every aspect of the heath care system has an effect on interstate commerce, the power of Congress to regulate health care is essentially unlimited.

The Speaker is certainly correct that federal Congress has certainly legislated on “many aspects of American life.”  In fact, there is a lot more at stake with the Commerce Clause than “just” our health care – the entire authority for economic central planning rests on this single clause. I strongly disagree with Pelosi that the Constitution allows Congress broad power in this respect. First, the exact language from my job description in Powers of Congress, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:

The Congress shall have Power… to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”

Pelosi believes that she has the power to “regulate Commerce… among the several States” and I suggest that in blunt language she instead literally means to “control the economy… of the States.”  Pelosi and her ilk accomplish this by confusing the modern meanings with the legal meaning and contemporary context of the founders.

Read More »

Copenhagen Treaty, Cap and Trade… Will international organizations govern you?

October 22nd, 2009 3:47 pm  |  by Mike Miller  |  Published in Activism, Big Government, DownsizeDC.org, Environment, Liberty, Market Regulation, Politics, congress, energy, globalism  |  0

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h


Will President Obama sign a treaty in Copenhagen this December that will give international bureaucrats control over the U.S. economy?

Our own James Wilson has analyzed this issue on our blog.

The good news is that President Obama isn’t going to Copenhagen to sign a treaty, but he may sign a proposal that could lead to a treaty at a later date. The Copenhagen proposal is designed to create an international scheme to control carbon emissions (and the entire world economy in the bargain).

President Obama wants to have the “cap and trade” (cap and tax) bill passed before he goes to Copenhagen.

Our goal should be to send him to Denmark empty-handed.

Cap and trade should be defeated because . . .

  • It hasn’t worked in Europe
  • It probably isn’t the best way to control carbon emissions, assuming you believe that’s important
  • The climate models that supposedly justify cap and trade have been consistently wrong

Cap and trade needs 60 votes to come to the floor in the Senate. If we can stop that from happening now then there’s no way that 67 Senators will come together later to ratify a treaty for the same purpose, especially if that treaty cedes American sovereignty to international organizations.

We must defeat cap and trade. We must send Obama to Denmark empty-handed.

Please send Congress a letter opposing cap and trade.

You can use my letter to Congress as a guide . . .

Read More »