-
The Man With the Plan: April 2010
August 11, 2012 | 0 comments
-
A Wonk in Sheep’s Clothing
March 25, 2011 | 293 comments
-
Scapegoating Mitch Daniels
March 17, 2011 | 150 comments
-
Money Train
March 1, 2011 | 109 comments
-
The Race for Comparative Advantage
February 14, 2011 | 87 comments
The Health Care Spectator
Starving ObamaCare
Could a new GOP majority win a government shutdown battle over defunding the national health care law? From our July-August issue.
One of the most popular debates in Washington these days is whether this year’s midterm elections will be a repeat of 1994, when Republicans rode a wave of anti-big government sentiment to retake Congress, delivering a blow to a young liberal president. But the natural follow-up question is whether a new Republican majority could produce an encore of 1995.
When the Republican majority set out to slash government spending that year, it encountered stiff resistance from the White House that ultimately triggered a government shutdown.
Ever since Democrats rammed through President Obama’s overwhelmingly unpopular national health care law, conservatives have been grappling with ways to undo it. One problem is that the strategy of repealing the law isn’t viable until 2013, when there’s a chance to inaugurate a Republican president. In the meantime, other conservatives are pinning their hopes on a successful legal challenge to the law’s mandate forcing all Americans to purchase government-approved health insurance policies. But however strong the constitutional arguments may be, that strategy leaves ObamaCare’s fate in the hands of judges who have already discarded federalism and stretched the Commerce Clause to the point of meaninglessness.
With tremendous uncertainty surrounding both these avenues, another strategy is emerging that would give the GOP an opportunity to deliver a more immediate blow to the health care law. Should Republicans regain control of Congress, they could theoretically use their new power of the purse to deny Obama the funding needed to administer his signature accomplishment. This prospect is already gaining steam among opponents of the law. The new group DeFundit.org has gotten more than 90 candidates and current members of Congress to sign a pledge supporting stripping ObamaCare of money.
There are a lot of scenarios for how a defunding push could play out, especially based on whether Republicans gain control of one or both chambers of Congress. But in the end, such a strategy could result in a replay of late 1995, when a budgetary standoff led to a government shutdown.
Newt Gingrich, who as House Speaker was a central figure in the standoff leading to that shutdown, has been one of the most vocal proponents of the defunding strategy, and he presented the idea during an April breakfast hosted by TAS.
“A simple majority can refuse to fund,” Gingrich said. “So if [John] Boehner is Speaker and Mitch McConnell is majority leader, all you have to do is write it into the appropriations bills. If the president vetoes the appropriations bills, you repass them. The president has got to go to the country and convince the country…to spend money on a program that has a 20 percent margin of disapproval.”
He continued, “So the president has to somehow make it into a positive political issue to veto the appropriations bills. The only person who can close the government is the president. If you’re determined to pass the appropriations bills, he has to decide to veto a bill you have passed.”
The idea would be to gut ObamaCare by denying the money needed to implement its sweeping provisions. “There are 159 new offices, agencies, and commissions in this new bill,” Gingrich explained. “All you say is, we’re not gonna fund them. And you have in effect, stopped the project.”
REP. TODD TIAHRT OF KANSAS is the ranking member on the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education. The spending bill that emerges from his committee would ultimately be the one that would include the funding associated with the new health care law.
Shortly after the signing of the new law, Tiahrt called for House-Senate talks on how to defund the legislation. In a phone interview with TAS, he agreed it was theoretically possible to stop ObamaCare in its tracks through the appropriations process. Even spending that is considered “mandatory” still needs to be implemented by an agency.
“If there’s no money to administer it, nothing gets done,” Tiahrt said, echoing Gingrich. “If the money is not there to write the regulations, the regulations won’t be written.”
Logistically, a member could offer an amendment to the committee that targeted a provision of the law, adding the language, “No funds shall…” The amendment would have to pass out of committee to be included in the bill that goes before the larger chamber. Tiahrt said he used this method last year to strip the Environmental Protection Agency of funding needed to regulate live-stock emissions, which he said would have crippled cattle production.
While he said he supports presenting an amendment that would defund the law in its entirety, his comments suggested it would be more likely that Republicans would target specific aspects of the bill.
In May, the Congressional Budget Office released a new analysis estimating that $115 billion in discretionary spending has been authorized under the new law for the next decade. But the office cautioned that it couldn’t issue a more thorough estimate because in many cases the legislation simply says that Congress shall allocate whatever sums it deems “necessary” to implement given provisions, without specifying how much those sums would be. One Republican staffer on the Hill described discretionary spending as the “low-hanging fruit” for defunding.
About the Author
Philip Klein is The American Spectator’s Washington correspondent. You can follow him on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/Philipaklein
Letter to the Editor View all comments (107) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Philip Klein
More Articles From The Health Care Spectator
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/08/06/starving-obamacare
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Louis Jenkins| 8.6.10 @ 8:15AM
"The only thing that could change the dynamics, Cannon said, would be a Greek-style financial crisis that would make it easier for Republicans to publicly defend more drastic steps. "
And who dosn't think that the good old USA isn't headed for a Greek styled financial crisis? I for one do. We've overspent, and even with monitarization of the money market we're in it up to our armpits.
Alan Brooks| 8.6.10 @ 8:14PM
Why do you have to show Gingrich's photo? he has proved himself a megalomaniac by recently announcing he is considering a run for president in '12.
Alan Brooks| 8.6.10 @ 8:21PM
... Newt is inaugurating the Metamucil Party.
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:10AM
9.5% and climbing.
geokster from TX| 8.7.10 @ 8:13AM
Allen,
I, for one, rather like the idea of electing a president with some age on him/her. At least, unlike Obama et al, we wouldn't face the likelihood of having to support, entertain, and protect them on the taxpayer's dime for the next 30-40 years.
Newt might not be your cup-o-tea, but liberals, sooner or later, are going to have to face the reality that tax money is a finite resource. Dems have gone to the well one time too many now, and the well is drying up.
'Sway it is...
Alan Brooks| 8.7.10 @ 1:53PM
If Gingrich would lay off the Tofflerism, Newt's age wouldn't matter so much. I have read all of Toffler's books, it is "Marxism for computer geeks" (Brookhiser, '96).
So think of it, geokster, an elderly guy roped in by Tofflerism is going to be elected POTUS in 2012?
Bet you 2 acres of land in the Panhandle he wont.
Alan Brooks| 8.7.10 @ 1:58PM
9.5% and climbing.
(Beat you to it, Carnot)
geokster| 8.9.10 @ 8:52AM
"Bet you 2 acres of land in the Panhandle he wont."
I won't take that bet, as much as I admire Newt, I personally feel he has too much personal baggage to make a successful run for POTUS, and I'm sure he knows it.
Besides, I live on the other side of the moon from the Panhandle. Unless those 2 acres were in downtown Amarillo, it wouldn't be worth the 12 hour drive from Corpus. ;-)
Alan Brooks| 8.11.10 @ 11:13AM
Newt's conservative futurism is positively unsanitary! for a brilliant old guy, what a fake he is.
Ken (Old Texican)| 8.6.10 @ 9:37AM
I like the "shut down the federal government strategy". Let the damned bureaucrats go without some paychecks, like millions of other Americans have.
Scott| 8.6.10 @ 11:41AM
Only hardcore whackjobs like yourself Ken like to call for the sufferring of other Americans because you have such a hatred for the government.
Doctor Right| 8.6.10 @ 12:11PM
Add me to that list. I'm proud to stand with Ken!
Please get a clue, Scott. The public sector is GROWING during this recession.
Bureaucrats produce NOTHING. It's high-time they understood how the world actually works, and how money is made.
If it was up to me, I'd fire 90% of them.
Scott| 8.6.10 @ 12:47PM
Which 90% would that be? Of the roughly 1.6M Fed employees that work in the executive branch, nearly 70% work either in Defense, Homeland Security, or the VA.
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:12AM
you mean the ones that show up at 0830-0930 every morning and have empty parking lots by 1530 in the afternoon?
Florida University.
Scott| 8.6.10 @ 12:51PM
Oh, and by the way Doctor, your wish has been coming true. State and Local governments have cut 120,000 jobs over the last 3 months due to budget constraints. Maybe it will include some of your local first-responders when your house is burning down.
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:13AM
we were kinda hoping it would include you.
Dagny Taggert| 8.6.10 @ 12:20PM
You got it wrong Scott: Ken's calling for the suffering of members of the political class. As their tentacles grow into every nook and cranny of the country, anyone NOT connected to the political class are the "other Americans."
What's your connection to the political class?
Scott| 8.6.10 @ 12:39PM
There are millions of middle-class Americans that work for the gov't. Fed, State and Local. They all make middle-class salaries, they aren't "political class" by any stretch of the imagination.
Warrior | 8.6.10 @ 1:34PM
Bleeding heart bullshit. Always the liberal tear jerk response of how it hurts the little person and middle class America suffers. Middle class America is only suffering because the size and scope of government is way too large. The bloated mess in Washington needs a hard core Constitutional diet. Under your philosphy, we should all work for the government, then the pain would go away. Thank you Karl Marx.
Conservative Bob| 8.6.10 @ 4:46PM
Exactly what do they produce?
I understand what they are paid, I am trying to figure out is what they add to the country and its economy?
Retire at 50 and get 75% of your highest salary for life plus insurance?
In excahnge for what exactly?
antidote| 8.6.10 @ 6:24PM
CB - I am one of those federal employees you want to see get screwed. I have worked for 23 years in the federal judiciary, I conduct presentence investigations in criminal cases for the district court judges. Not that I expect you to know what that means. I have two teenage daughters to support and I am solidly middle class. Your venom and spitefulness is appalling. Please direct it to someone who deserves it, not hard working, self supporting, tax paying, contributors to the economy like me.
But FYI, when I retire after 27 years of federal service, I will get only 40% of my three highest years. Please check your facts before you go off half cocked.
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:15AM
congrats to you. might I suggest you band with others to make the Federal system/workers more accountable? too many of the rest of us have spent lifetimes inside the same system and understand just how dysfunctional and incompetent it truly is.
chuck| 8.7.10 @ 8:36AM
I'm crying for you. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.
Gee, the rest of us, who have paid your salary and benefits, so by extension, your house, your wife, your kids, your vacations, etc., work until we're 70, that's about 50 years, then retire with social security, and/or our own privately funded retirement accounts.
You're killing me....... and the country.
geokster from TX| 8.7.10 @ 8:44AM
"But FYI, when I retire after 27 years of federal service,"
27 years is not a lot of career service years compared to the number of years most of us have to work to earn our retirement. Most Americans labor for an average of 45+ years before retirement, you, OTOH, will be sucking at the government teat after only 27 years.
I can only hope that your 40% retirement will be a sufficiently low number that you will have to go out and get a real job before you can rest on Easy Street.
dillon| 8.7.10 @ 11:01AM
wow, 27 years. I want that. I've worked 21, have 32 more to go...
Igor| 8.7.10 @ 10:51PM
Hi Antidote,
I'm also a public sector worker. (Public schools, if it matters.) I show up for work and do my best most days, too. Yup, got three kids.
The difference is that I understand how incredibly blessed we both are to work in our little cocoon. Our salaries come directly from the pockets of people who have to produce something of real value every day or they get canned. I recognize that the money we get in our paychecks gets extracted from the foks who created that wealth at gunpoint (think IRS).
Thought for raising those girls: when tempted to puff up with pride, try grovelling in gratitude instead. Many blessings.
CommonSense| 8.7.10 @ 11:08PM
Igor, I wish I could shake your hand.
The Clintidote| 8.7.10 @ 11:47PM
You sound like an apologist for the parasite class. Or, possibly, a parasite.
If the latter, time's growing short for you to learn how to do something productive, or starve.
Dave | 8.6.10 @ 3:28PM
Hey Scott, the suffering that "other Americans" are experiencing have been caused, in large measure, by the very government you seem to defend . Start off with a government education system that indoctrinates, but does not teach; a government that tries to instill dependency but not responsibility, and a government that lies to rather than tells its citizens the truth about its goals (which are transparent to thinking individuals). The growth of employment in the public sector is bad for our freedoms. You are the "whackjob" Scott and obviously an Obama Zombie! Take care you don't hurt yourself by thinking too much...
Osamas Pajamas| 8.6.10 @ 4:18PM
If I have to choose between keeping my money and liberty versus funding a bunch of bloodsxcking, tax-eating Democrats, the choice is obvious. I hope they all starve to death.
Alan Brooks| 8.6.10 @ 11:52PM
"Only hardcore whackjobs like yourself Ken like to call for the sufferring of other Americans because you have such a hatred for the government."
You must excuse him, Texas isn't the best state to live in, except the Western counties. Farther West you go, the better.
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:16AM
9.5% and climbing
bill| 10.1.10 @ 12:17PM
Alan Brooks wrote:
"Texas isn't the best state to live in"
Really? I think it is, along with 20 million other folks. Oh and further east is where the money is.
The Clintidote| 8.7.10 @ 11:45PM
Scotty boy, screw the parasites. Strangle the cashflow, starve the beast, starve the socialists, starve the parasites.
Otherwise, they are facing revolution. And guess who's never feared being armed and knowing how to shoot?
One way or another, we're done with the parasites; they need us a whole lot more than we need them.
Alan Brooks| 8.6.10 @ 8:19PM
Gingrich's "conservative futurism" is (or was) the greatest crock of intelleckshuel hog drippings since Leninism.
Alan Brooks| 8.6.10 @ 8:28PM
This is how Gingrichism is translated into redneckese:
"Someday yore younguns will drink Budweiser on the Moon,
yore wife'll use one o' them thar nucular dishwashers that'll kill ever germ on the dishes.
Defense? no problem, everbody will have their very own at-omic cannon in the backyard."
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:17AM
9.5% and climbing
Alan Brooks| 8.7.10 @ 1:43PM
Carnot,
You don't want to admit Gingrich is a Tofflerite?
Reply: 9.5% and climbing.
Gerald Stephens| 8.7.10 @ 3:09PM
KEN - One for you!
FLASH…KAGAN CHALLENGED for PERJURY
Larry Klayman, constitutional scholar, attorney, and author of WHORES: Why and How I Came to Fight the Establishment acted in the matter of Elena Kagan by filing a complaint before the U.S. Supreme Court.
July 28, 2010
Clerk of the Court
U.S. Supreme Court
1 First Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20543
R: COMPLAINT TO DISBAR ELENA KAGAN FROM PRACTICE BEFORE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT AND FOR REFERRAL TO THE U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND FOR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
The full complaint is found at www FreedomWatchUSA.org If ever there was an apple cart overturned, this is the BIG ONE!
Rmm| 8.6.10 @ 9:39AM
If indeed the Republicans take back the House, they assuredly better have a viable plan that works, lest they look like their cronies in the Democratic party. The key here is halt the insidious Federal's power grab binge. Like Newt before, not funding O's agenda would be a big kick in his groin. But the conservatives have to stand strong. Lets get this party started.
Alan Brooks| 8.7.10 @ 2:06PM
Newt caved in in the late '90s, he didn't have to; yet he felt he was no match for Clinton-- and he was shown to be correct, Newt didn't have what it takes, his mind was filled with outmoded '60s- '70s futurist gobbledygook, which affected his thinking.
(9.5% and climbing)
David W| 8.6.10 @ 9:58AM
Do you actually think the Republicans would have the guts to defund anything? After all, they appear to have rolled over on the Kagan nomination (who was as qualified to be on the Supreme Court as someone who passed their LSAT is qualified to be a lawyer). I can't imagine them doing anything that would actually help.
Clinton nee Publius | 8.6.10 @ 12:18PM
Corruption ensures the outcome you fear will always be the reality. You hit it on the head, sir.
Impeach Don't Wait| 8.6.10 @ 11:31PM
Yeah, that Kagan thing... Don't remind me.
Blackwatch| 8.7.10 @ 1:47AM
Draft Palin for Speaker of the House in 2011.
She pisses off every stinking Democrat and National Socialist Media goon already. She can control the legislative agenda and prove to America she can lead. there would be a national ground swell of conservatives if we could actually accomplish something like starving the Federal beast.
Let her lead the charge in trimming the fat out of the budget before we hack some appendages: post office, Dept of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Developement---WTF are we spending money building housing that is condemned in less than a generation? Dept of Education? Talk about inefficient. Depart of Agriculture---seriously--how many new bugs appear to eat our crops every year? How many new cantalopes are we developing. Do need to spend money on monkees getting high on Cocaine. There is tons of waste in our government.
Start with Congress. No more discounted booze or free lunches. No more per diem. No more lifetime retirment plans. How about an extra $15k per year into your personal 401K for every year you serve in Congress. They are all wealthy anyway why must we kiss their asses and shower them with gold for being our "leaders."
The Rebellion is comming folks.
then move on to the executive branch. 15% across the board pay cuts. abrogation of all collective bargaining contracts. no more federal employee unions. no sweetheart early retirement. you want to leave early? fine. your pension starts being paid out at age 65. I don't care if you got a job work for the division of mines when you were 18 and you are now 49 and want to retire. Fine get out. But you don't get retirement money until you are 65. From age 49 to age 65 find someone else to work for or start your own small business and see what kind of pain the government causes.
I'm self employed and I have no retirement plan given to be me others. You want money and things to buy--then work. Work Work. Work.
The free lunch boat left of candyland in Nov. 2008 pal.
Blackwatch| 8.7.10 @ 1:50AM
sorry about the typo's folks I so pissed off right now I could scream.
chuck| 8.7.10 @ 8:45AM
I'm with you, Black. Why the hell to these MOSTLY(from my own experiences from dealing with them) lazy-assed, incompetent pricks get to retire early on our dime, and the rest of us serfs, who really make the country work, get a little check from S.S. when we're 70, IF we make it that long, and IF its still there by then.
MAD AS HELL; IS IT TIME TO REVOLT YET??
sasob| 8.6.10 @ 10:28AM
Republicans rode a wave of anti-big government sentiment to retake Congress, delivering a blow to a young liberal president.
Clinton wasn't a "young" president in '94. He was in his late 40's - middle-aged.
carnot| 8.6.10 @ 10:53AM
Out of 44 Presidents only 2 were younger (not including Obama) than Clinton at inauguration. That is what is meant.
Alan Brooks| 8.7.10 @ 2:08PM
9.5 percent and climbing
spyder| 8.6.10 @ 10:39AM
Starving the beast is why during the Bush administration our soldiers families qualified for food stamps, the numbers of border guards were cut, the budget for the FDA was cut ,and a long list of other agencies were hobbled. It is a tremendoius waste of tax payer money to have agencies and not fund them enough to do their jobs. If the majority of the people don't want the government function then close it.
Ken (Old Texican)| 8.6.10 @ 3:13PM
Spyder,
There you go...Obama d sucker...blame Bush!
Starve in the dark.
Maddox| 8.7.10 @ 10:28AM
It is a tremendous waste to fund programs that are nothing more than projects that support political pawns and family members or create regulations that strangle our economy. Cut them out completely and the funding for Constitutionally mandated programs will be there.
Gerald Stephens| 8.6.10 @ 11:29AM
A Matter of Life and Death
Weather you like or even admit to it the Nation is in an active state of domestic warfare. The identities of the combatant forces are fully transparent. Progressive socialists agents commenced a combined blitzkrieg assault on our constitutional democracy leading up to and culminating with the election of Mr. Obama. With this strategic victory a wholesale rape and pillage of the legal system, government process, and critical capitalist mechanisms commenced.
The results are catastrophic. The national debt has purposely skyrocketed with the intent to debase the currency to a level whereat repayment is severely suspect, this for the purpose of deflating the dollar value permitting global monetary harmonization, that is, removing the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. . Front line rating authorities, Moody included, state factually the U.S. rating will fall from AAA to AA if deficit spending is not stopped. This downgrading will add billions to the cost of borrowed money through higher interest on the loaned money, and on an already massive deficit, now in trillions and growing with the passage of each new co-opted congressional unpaid expenditure.
The standard of living and consumer confidence, generally the highest in the world, is decimated and staggered by the reality that the full measure of unemployment approximates the numbers seen in the ‘great depression’ with expectations that this tragic condition will last a decade. Real estate values have plummeted and home foreclosures endemic and rising. Business stagnation and failures herald continued bad tidings.
The federal, state and local governments are bankrupt and broken with no hope of improvement unless deficit spending is severely slashed. Rather than facing up to the politically induced problem, congress just approved yet more deficit spending to bail out states allowing them to pay for the previous deficit spending that caused state government bankruptcies in the first place.
Foreign relations have been upended by the Obama progressive socialist new world order scheme wherein declaring allies to be superfluous is policy, and in the case of Israel even less important and a determent to his key focus “Outreach” to the Muslim world. This too is in shambles as determined by University of Maryland professor Shibley Telhami in conjunction with the polling firm Zogby International. The Arab Public Opinion Poll recorded in 2009 only 29 percent viewed Iran’s goal of a nuclear bomb positively. Now 2010, following Obama’s “Outreach” to the Muslim world nearly double, 57 percent, think Iran with a nuclear bomb as a positive goal.
How has all this been allowed to happen? It occurred because vermin have been permitted to scurry about the grain storage silos conducting their insidious destruction of the stores. The baseline knowledge and fabric of what America is and stands for has been systematically destroyed. Personal responsibility for control of ones life and that of the country was slowly transferred to the progressive socialist vermin. Some fools went for the free bait and are hooked.
The people have clearly awoken to the devastation and danger of allowing this progressive socialist plague to progress further. Just being awake will not save our country as the disease within all levels of government has so putrefied the system, including an honest count at the ballot box, that We the People must insist that the bloody bastard politicians who broke the system SHALL fix it. They must be constantly made aware that a mid-term numbers correction is only the beginning of a very long and tough road back to constitutional governance. They must understand that anyone of them not up to the work will be terminated. And if We the People fail to enforce the dictum the swamp scum will run wild again.
A new dictionary is required. America has been bullied into accepting revisionist word crap insisted on by the progressive socialists. Henceforth, being Christian and Jewish is a badge of intellectual honesty, professing moral and ethical standards reviled by progressive socialists. Not having any and preaching that not having any is a laudable achievement is precisely why we are in piles of garbage up to the eyes.
The ‘language reality awareness’ program will eliminate the use multiple words now in vogue by the progressive socialists. Examples shall include the term ‘illegal’ when applied to an alien in the country of course illegally. Likewise use of the word ‘sanctuary’ for a city that harbors illegal aliens shall no longer be accepted as existing. ‘Racist’ is the new catch all for the progressive socialists to slander opposition. Those using it improperly are committing hate speech and should be prosecuted criminally, if it occurs in a jurisdiction were the ‘Hate Crime’ law is faithfully enforced, or civilly for slander/libel where the use is defamatory (we have a lot of trial attorneys who could profit handsomely).
“Gay” when used by a homosexual has always seemed as a source of confusion. I am confident there are many homosexual people, men and woman, who in fact are not gay about anything just as one would expect to find members of the heterosexual population of similar mind. The brainwashing has been so incessant that even people who understand the difference between being “gay” and being homosexual continue to use the word gay improperly. I dare say that the brainwashing has been so effective that if one were to suggest that homosexuals are not universally gay on any university campus, institutions of intellectual pursuit, you would be verbally if not physically assaulted and accused of being a hate speech racist.
Without belaboring the point what is to be done in reclaiming the English language from the progressive socialists is nothing more than refusing to use co-opted definitions, for example, ‘marriage’ as reflecting anything other than the religious or civil union of a man and a woman. Never retreat from saying exactly what you mean in standard English.
Equally, if not more important, is to not believe or accept that the November election will in and of itself save our nation. Confirmation of the creature Kagan is yet another repugnant example of the clear and present danger of RINOs in congress. Never forget their names or faces! Never forget they must be eliminated at the next primary.
I am of the conviction that if the current governmental disease is not corrected through the ordinary political processes, the ultimate mechanism prescribed by the Founders for the defense of the nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic, will be employed…force of arms. Should you find such a redress of grievances frightening, it can be well imagined that the Colonials had no great love for it either but fight and died they did.
Clinton nee Publius | 8.6.10 @ 12:22PM
Nice rant! Yet our economic emancipation will not be delivered by the conservatives either and that escaped your ire. The modern era has taught us that they will never emancipate us from their corruptions no matter which of the parties is in power. A better solution would be a system that would render their machinations irrelevant and transparent, don't you think?
Impeach Don't Wait| 8.6.10 @ 11:43PM
They can deliver emancipation from Obama for starters. Then we can move on from there.
Scott| 8.6.10 @ 12:33PM
If you comments about monetary policy were true, why do worldwide investors continue to flock to US Treasurires everytime there is a crisis anywhere in the world?
The reality is monetary policy is entirely relative to the monetary policies of other developed nations, and those other nations face even more dire economic circumstances that we do.
Blackwatch| 8.7.10 @ 2:05AM
If investors world wide are flocking to buy american bonds, please explain why then we are now monetizing T-bills? Since there are not enough buyers, the treasury is printing money for the Fed to buy T-bills with. Thats the equivalent of this government counterfeiting its own money.
Fiscal policy and monetary policy are two legs on a stool. A disparity in one causes instability in the economy. We don't have a monetary policy problem we have insane spending. A 1.4 Trillion dollar deficit is insane. Put it another way--a $1400 billion dollar deficit is insane. Let's break it down for the folks who did not get a degree in Economics.
A $14,000 million dollar federal deficit in ONE year, to be follow by the same deficit the following year is COMPLETELY INSANE.
The DEMOCRAT CONGRESS AND THE KENYAN USURPER INDONESIAN CITIZEN PRESIDENT ARE INSANE OR THEY ARE DEVILS.
This is the crime of the century folks.
Blackwatch| 8.7.10 @ 2:05AM
If investors world wide are flocking to buy american bonds, please explain why then we are now monetizing T-bills? Since there are not enough buyers, the treasury is printing money for the Fed to buy T-bills with. Thats the equivalent of this government counterfeiting its own money.
Fiscal policy and monetary policy are two legs on a stool. A disparity in one causes instability in the economy. We don't have a monetary policy problem we have insane spending. A 1.4 Trillion dollar deficit is insane. Put it another way--a $1400 billion dollar deficit is insane. Let's break it down for the folks who did not get a degree in Economics.
A $14,000 million dollar federal deficit in ONE year, to be follow by the same deficit the following year is COMPLETELY INSANE.
The DEMOCRAT CONGRESS AND THE KENYAN USURPER INDONESIAN CITIZEN PRESIDENT ARE INSANE OR THEY ARE DEVILS.
This is the crime of the century folks.
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:19AM
9.5% and climbing
Mimi| 8.6.10 @ 2:03PM
TO.. Gerald Stephens. .....WOW! I think you hit on it all. When and where are you running for office ??? The NATION needs you!!!
rald Stephens,
dillon| 8.7.10 @ 11:34AM
Just so you know, there are non christian/jewish conservatives out here. Being agnostic or atheist does not automatically mean liberal, or non moral. Religion is never going to be a 'badge of intellectual honesty'.
George S| 8.6.10 @ 12:04PM
I don't know it de-funding would survive a court challenge. What is Congress de-funded the Executive or the Supreme Court? That would be running afoul of the Necessary and Proper clause. If the congress duly passes legislation and the president signs the bill, congress has to fund it, the president has to enforce it and the courts have to review disputes. The only way to undo a law is by legislative action, not shirking responsibility (i.e., not funding border enforcement).
What if the Republicans attempt to de-fund. Obama does his concert tour and claims the Republican action is encouraging insurance companies to drop and gouge y'all and will prevent ObamaCare from keeping down insurance costs. After January, a lot of policies change per ObamaCare, rates will go up and coverages change (remember: pre-existing conditions don't count). Will this pressure Republicans in any way? Could Republicans stand firm in the face of runaway premium hikes while Obama smiles and says de-funding is the cause and the only way to cure this is the Public Option?
By the way, someone ought to tell this Cannon guy that you never argue the merits of a liberal program or try to be cute with liberals. You have to repeal ObamaCare, not dance around the edges with clever abortion tactics. What winds up happening is: a) you are accepting the big picture and, b) the only way to resolve a legislative dispute is by compromise. If you so much as do any compromising, the legislation lives and the roots grow.
Clinton nee Publius | 8.6.10 @ 12:24PM
I notice the conservative solution is to defund the debacle and yet to not realize that they have already lost the battle and war is what is really at odds here. The liberal-progressives will be happy to argue and debate whether it should be funded or not as it allows the current system and status quo to be sustained at our sole expense and risk. This is the equivalent argument of throwing the rabbit in the briar patch.
David| 8.6.10 @ 12:53PM
George S, your comment that "If the congress duly passes legislation and the president signs the bill, congress has to fund it, the president has to enforce it and the courts have to review disputes."
Hmmm, I don't think that is true. Look at immigration. Congress passed the laws, Reagan signed the law, yet congress has underfunded border security and every president has failed to secure our borders. I don't think that part of your argument holds water. If Congress were REQUIRED to fund Obamacare you wouldn't have so many who support that course of action. Now, who knows what a federal judge will do.
George S| 8.6.10 @ 2:01PM
I sure hope that it doesn't hold water, but I always wondered what kept Congress obligated to fund the other branches and would that extend to properly executed laws. But a better example than immigration would be the Democrats cutting funding for the Office of Labor-Management Standards (the union political funding watch-dog). So this is really not unprecedented. But on the whole, I think that Congress is obligated to see that all Necessary and Proper functions of government proceed smoothly. But remember: federal courts have ordered state legislatures to raise taxes in order to fund federal mandates -- the excuse that they were broke didn't relieve them of the obligation to fund. Very unpredictable territory here.
Oldefarte| 8.6.10 @ 1:33PM
I disagree with the idea that a government fight of defunding healthcare will make those congresspersons appear mean spirited and hostile toward the poor. We have now reached a stage in this country where governmental benefits assistance to the underclass is simply no longer affordable. The economic/financial burdens upon American taxpayers to fund/support the indigent population is dragging them/taxpayers down to the poverty level also. Collectively, it is just too much, and it has been building up to this level since the 1960's and Johnson's Great Society fiasco [which benefits have been increased annually since then within the federal budget]. We now are in such overload that somethings are going to necessarily have to be eliminated and cut. Government has simply gotten too large and its social spending has become bankruptcy-level. We have to '''''GREECE''''' our governmental budgets 200%, or we will economically/financially die!!!!
Dixie Pixie| 8.6.10 @ 3:55PM
The problem with Newts strategy is that it is tactically brilliant but strategically stupid.
The problem with the defunding idea is simple. Since the original legislation is still on the books, even if defunded, it can be reactivated at a later date.
Newts strategy is certain to let ObamaCare stand while pretending to oppose it.
The outcome will probability look like this::::::
[1] The Republicans compromise with the Democrats in not repealing the legislation, but only to defund it.
[2] The Republicans do so in the belief they got the best deal possible and insist the people rally around the leadership.
[3] The Democrats and their media minions go into full propaganda mode decrying the republicans slaughter of the innocents due to the heartlessness of the Republicans.
[4] The Republicans fold unconditionally, admitting the Democrat charges could be true.
[5] The original legislation is implemented in full with only a few token adjustments. The Democrats celebrate another “In Your Face” victory over the stupid party.
The TEA Party and the Republican membership should insist the full repeal of ObamaCare is nonnegotiable. Otherwise the Republicans will betray us and call it a reasonable compromise.
David | 8.6.10 @ 4:08PM
The no funding argument is made only because when the repubs do vote to repeal it, Bam Bam will veto it. So, either the repubs need a veto-proof majority, which they won't have in 2010, or they wait until a repub can win the presidency in 2012.
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:33AM
good! keep the first prevaricator busy with these actions so he can't do more damage elsewhere.
Oldefarte| 8.8.10 @ 11:19AM
Considering his legislative/congressional experience, I really think it is imbicilic to say that Ginguich's theory is 'stupid'. He's just facing facts and telling the truth of the situation presently. If anyone wishes to label anyone as 'stupid', then they should point their collective fingers at their friends, neighbors, work/chruch mates, etc who voted to elected EL CHOSEN ONE in November of 2008. They [or at least most of them] are the ultimate defination of STUPIDITY. As stated in this article, while THE SUPREME ONE and his Robin Hood band are in control, full repeal is laughable and ludicrous, as these crooks will simply turn right veto same. The one and only solution is to CORRECT AMERICA'S STUPIDITY IN NOVEMBER OF 2012 [and to begin that process in November of this year by electing non-domestic terrorists to federal offices throughout the country]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
solo| 8.6.10 @ 4:13PM
I will NOT vote a 2nd time for any republican who is not dedicated to total and complete repeal of this government monstrosity of a health care bill.
I'm done with these wishy-washy, half-assed weasels.
De-fund ALL OF IT. It will be Obama who will shut down government by virtue of his refusal to sign the budget. Let the Obamessiah defend it to the American public.
Then work towards total repeal after 2012.
Osamas Pajamas| 8.6.10 @ 4:22PM
Investors won't flock to buy US Treasury bills if the privately-employed American taxpayer defunds the government by force of arms.
jstwndring| 8.6.10 @ 4:44PM
Alright, this jackass Todd Tiahrt, cannot be trusted. He likes certain parts of this legislation? WTF!? There are free market solutions to fix health care. We don't need this wrecklessly dangerous piece of legislation hanging over our heads for the Democrats to abuse in the future! This is the exact reason NO politician can be trusted to do the right thing. REDUCE THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT, you moron! You belong to the Republican Party. You people need to start acting like you actually believe in limited government. If not, we can throw your ass out as well in the primaries whenever they come around via the TeaParty. No more compromise. Compromise with the left has gotten us to this point. Start viewing politics in terms of warfare and eliminate your opponent's legislation. Defunding is a good start, but, be aggressive and defund the whole damn thing. Then, in 2013, repeal it all. If that's unrealistic, then so is the continuation of the free Republic. The public is overwhelmingly oppossed to ObamaCare. Get rid of it. This should be a slam-dunk.
Louis Jenkins| 8.6.10 @ 5:10PM
Today twenty states took the Obama Care Debacle to court in Panama City, Fla. Among their complaints was the Medicaid fiasco. The current level of spending cannot be met, and it is 2014 before the package goes in effect. In addition, they are suing the Federales to make the US population buy a health care plan, or taxing us, which is their claim. Never before has an insurance plan been mandated by Fed Decree, and they argue that it is outside of reason to do so. While the above article speaks of Starving the Health Care Plan the states are already on life support and they've got to shoulder a large part of the investiment. This is getting interesting.
MR. JOE| 8.6.10 @ 5:13PM
The only real answer to our out of control government is to begin electing Independents who have no ties or loyalties to either corrupt party, PACs, unions, or money grubbing lobbyists.
These true citizen legislators should then begin to redesign our entire federal government with a slow but steady common sense approach that will either replace or totally eliminate every agency and department. This must be done correctly, by having re-designed any of these agencies or departments first. Then, present the plan to the people and see what they think. If they approve, then on with it. If they do not, then back to the drawing board.
The point of course is to see what is really needed and to have a "shovel ready" new agency or department that will supplant the old one. With this process, we can return to the original intent of the founders, a limited federal government properly designed for the modern world. Simply tinkering at the edges will leave us with the same old same old, ESPECIALLY if we once again do the same thing, elect elites from either corrupt party, and then expect a different result.
It is going to be hard to accomplish this, but there really is no other choice. If we cannot wean ourselves from the corrupt two parties, we will never restore Constitutional Self Government. We might just as well throw in with the internationalists and say hello to the New World Order/One World Government Socialist hellhole that they call Utopia.
Every business must occasionally undergo a re-designing or re-interpreting of its business plan. America is a Family Business and we are all part owners. As the rightful owners, it is time we took back the reins of control from the management team we have been using for the last 100 years. It is time for us to reassert our authority and take a hands on postion as to how the business is to be run. Sure its inconvenient to have to put in some time watching out for the company, but it should be clearly evident that leaving the running of the company to others was a disaster.
If you disagree, then please explain how we are going to restore Constitutional Self Government with the bloated federal/state/local governments we now have that are run by the elites of the two corrupt majors. I have been considering this approach for three years now, and I haven't figured out a better way. I have also presented it on other blog sites from time to time but no one has refuted it or come up with a better answer. Unfortunately, we are running out of time. By the way, if you think you can't be bothered serving your country as a citizen legislator, may I humbly suggest you sit your kids and grandkids down around the family table and explain to them how life will be in the New World Order and how you are sorry about that, but you just couldn't be bothered doing anything yourself. Tell them to trust the politicians just as you have done, and get used to Big Brother. Don't worry kids, BB has your best interests at heart. Spreading the wealth around is good for everyone, really. Just ask President Obama, because that is exactly what he is doing, spreading America's wealth around the world.
If you have a better idea, now would be a good time to say so, much as Captain Kirk would often say when the s--- hit the fan.
Thanks, Joe
Ken (Old Texican)| 8.6.10 @ 5:49PM
God bless you, Joe
Some darned fine thought there. When you thunk it, it was pretty darned sharp. Sir, we have run out of time to effect it this go-around.
Keep your eye peeled for my new novel. I shall be announcing its publishing here.
Ken
Mimi| 8.7.10 @ 10:39PM
JOE...great post. Just one thing....We are in too much disruption right now, bordering on emergency status...no time to go third party. Best to work within the Republican party to edge it to the conservative side in 2010 and 2012.
gene hauber| 8.6.10 @ 5:19PM
if we ever expect to stand tall and proud again, as AMERICANS, we MUST repeal and repudiate EVERYTHING this mongrel administration has passed or thinks of passing....off with their heads!
Impeach Don't Wait| 8.7.10 @ 12:34AM
Hey, good news on Arizona's immigration law and other State activities!
http://www.americanthinker.com.....tates.html
carnot| 8.7.10 @ 8:27AM
look...the immediate answer i pretty simple? want to get rid of these folks? then just don't buy "stuff" unless you absolutely have to. very ugly, painful, untargeted way of cleaning house. but everyone knows that is exactly what is going on now - the Dems/Libs suffered no compunction at all in their complicit actions vis soldiers in the field in the run-up to the last election.
got the word business? we aint buying your stuff.
Mimi| 8.7.10 @ 12:11PM
I read somewhere that 61% of households are living ...paycheck to paycheck. Thats why there is no spending on frivolous consumer goods! People are paying the monthly bills....going to the grocery store and any extra either paying off credit cards or saving it, for God knows what the future holds. The rest of , the better off among us are also on hold...choosing to wait and "see how things go ". My take.....After November 2, " The Dam spikes a hole" and pent up MONEY will flood the market-place. Regardless what Obama does, he's cooked, because he has lost the trust and can't ever recover!!!
Mimi| 8.7.10 @ 12:39PM
Soon after November we'll be looking for a new President. This quote, so well written by Victor Davis Hanson, at National Review online on that subject...caught my eye.
"The public is waiting for an articulat conservative reformer who will quietly keep promises to balance the budget more through spending cuts than taxes, close the border to illegal immigration, either win or get out of long wars abroad, respect federal law and apply it equally, and restore American confidence and American exceptionalism." Now....I ask you :Just who can fill that bill????
Ken (Old Texican)| 8.7.10 @ 4:57PM
Well Mimi,
It ain't November yet.
Obviously, I think the world of Victor Hanson, but who we pick will depend upon the results of the election in November.
We may need a "barn-burner" to get elected...THEN...quietly goes about doing what Hanson said.
If the Repubs don't win The House in November...all bets are off in my mind. (Yech!)
Houston Rao| 8.7.10 @ 1:45PM
If the Repubs were to have a set, they would include an amendment that required all government officials, elected or otherwise, to be covered by Obamacare only. After all, they think private insurance is evil, Obamacare is best.
geokster| 8.7.10 @ 4:53PM
I'm so pi$$ed I can't see straight, the 2010 elections can't come soon enough for me, maybe we can start to turn the ship around after that. Repeal, repeal, repeal, is all I have to say. We have had enough of the; "fundamental change of America". I rather liked it the old way.
geokster| 8.7.10 @ 5:18PM
"This quote, so well written by Victor Davis Hanson, at National Review online on that subject...caught my eye.
"The public is waiting for an articulate conservative reformer who will quietly keep promises to balance the budget more through spending cuts than taxes, close the border to illegal immigration, either win or get out of long wars abroad, respect federal law and apply it equally, and restore American confidence and American exceptionalism." Now....I ask you :Just who can fill that bill????
I've tried for years, and failed,,, if you can convince VDH to run, he will have my vote. There are few political observers around, IMHO, who have the insights and the intellectual will to tell it like it is like Dr. Hanson. Actually,,, there are few who have the intellect to compete with VDH. Can you imagine a debate between Obama and Hanson? VDH would wipe the floor with Debuma.
Alas, I've been trying to interest VDH in a political run for several years, he always declines. Please turn his head around for me.
Just imagine,,, a president who has the interests of the America people in the forefront, not his own. A president who isn't interested making America look like the other 3rd world nations,,, Mexico, get in line~! A president who is not interested in apologies to dictators, nor bowing and scraping... Wow~! What a concept.
VDH,, you are my guy, anytime, anyplace.
Mimi| 8.7.10 @ 10:48PM
Ken...We Will Win in November...a given, don't doubt it.....Will the sun come out tomorrow?....Will it set at night?
Mimi| 8.7.10 @ 10:58PM
GEOKSTER: WOW what a thought! I'm sorry I don't have the pleasure of knowing the GREAT ..V.D.H.....only read and treasure the great articles he writes. Full of truth and sees things going on in the nation as you said with insight. There may be : The Dark Horse!!!
KDW| 8.7.10 @ 6:33PM
Mr. Cannon is wrong about the budget standoff
of 1995. If Republicans had lost that battle in the
eyes of the public, they wouldn't have kept control
of Congress for the next 10 years! Ticked off
voters would have bounced the Republicans
irregardless of the fact incumbents usually
win. The reason Republicans held power in
1996 was that the voters were not ticked off
at them. Clinton did survive the 1996 elections
but he was essentially politically neutered, which
lead to some of the successes Gingrich noted
(balanced budget, welfare reform).
Defunding Obamacare next year would force
Obama to continue defending a piece of
legislation a majority of the population
absolutely hates. This would keep the issue
alive and kicking, something Obama would
like to desperately avoid. Done right, this
could almost assure Obama's defeat in 2012.
Why would anyone who hates Obamacare
think it is uncompassionate not to fund it?
The Republican base would be absolutely
stoked, the Democrats would be in a tizzy.
Obama can be blamed for all of the resulting
fallout - after all he was the one who pushed
thru this steaming pile of legislation, on a
hyper-partisan basis, that voters didn't want
and legislators couldn't even be bothered to
read.
If voters really want Obamacare fully funded, Republicans aren't likely to win back control of
Congress in the first place.
Master Sergeant| 8.7.10 @ 9:28PM
antidote, tell us what; exactly; you contribute (or produce) as a government employee. Government does not produce, it consumes. Everything in sight of late.
Answers1| 8.8.10 @ 5:29AM
What a great way to reduce out of control spending- shut down the government.
Paul Clare| 8.8.10 @ 7:37AM
Good article. BUT we must not only starve Healthcare, but every other program and edict (Executive Order) imposed by our dictator,BHO. Makes no difference, directed by law or discretionary!
Remember, the Executive Orders and other edicts by BHO & his gang are much more insidious than most of the laws congress passed. And congress either has to pass laws overturning the Executive orders or edicts issued such as the EPA's latest stupidity or wait until a new president takes office. Defunding now is the easiest!
This will also make a big dent in our deficit.
David| 8.9.10 @ 1:09PM
Joe, every time there is a 3rd party/independent candidate, the dem wins. That's the math. Look at what happened to the huge margin Marco Rubio had over Charlie Crist in Florida.
We simply need to work to nominate and elect the most conservative candidates and then hold repubs' feet to the fire when they are in office.
Another thing, there is a constitutional way to remove federal judges, who wreak havoc in every area of life, and we ought to insist that our elected repubs start putting some of them out to pasture.
bywhatright| 8.18.10 @ 2:57PM
The Republican controlled house will, after the midterm elections, include in the appropriations bills for every agency a standard restriction prohibiting the use of the funds to implement or carry-out Obamacare that also confers on any member of the public the right and standing to sue and enjoin the executive department from dispersing, obligating or spending said restricted funds. The house then will dig in its heels and force Obama to sign the bills or shut down the agencies…no matter what.
Michele San Pietro| 8.27.10 @ 5:56PM
It would be great if Obama and his Democratic clowns lost the mid-term elections like Clinton and his Democratic lost them in 1994.