“Nullification Laws” passed by the states to fight ObamaCare

“Nullification Laws” passed by the states to fight ObamaCare
Posted By J. D. Longstreet On February 23, 2010 (8:44 pm) In Voices and Choices

In the upcoming “summit” between Obama and the Republicans on his ObamaCare proposal… you know, the one the American people have flatly rejected… you can forget the democrats tossing out anything in the current proposal. Ain’t gonna happen. The dems, with the added weight of Obama, hope to overwhelm the Republicans and force them into folding and agreeing to reluctantly support ObamaCare so they, the democrats, can save face for Obama and themselves.

WE appeal to the GOP to hold fast. Don’t give an inch. This sorry piece of legislation deserves to be flatly, and completely, defeated, with a stake driven through its heart, and committed to the trash bin of history for all time.

It is nothing more than a power grab by the Progressives in the Congress. It is power they will use to ram their remaining socialist agenda through the Congress and into law. It is a sure and certain formula for the utter destruction of our constitutional republic. And that, dear reader is exactly what they want and what they are working tirelessly to accomplish.

If they win, it will spell the doom of the United States of America — at least, what is left of the US today.

They must be stopped at the ballot box!

We warned they would try this. They have — and they are.

Already, the White House is admitting that the “NEW” ObamaCare Proposal is only a “Starting Point” for healthcare legislation. We have warned many, many, times that the current Congress believes the American people are basically stupid. We have warned, just as many times, that they will pass ObamaCare by “Incrementalism,” one small piece of the plan, at a time, until they get the whole “hell spawned plan” in place and the government will have total control of the lives of every American.

It now appears the Obama Regime is readying itself to use the reconciliation process, which requires only 51 votes instead of the usual 60 votes for passage of a budget bill, to pass their abomination of a healthcare bill through the Senate. It appears to this scribe the democrats are still pressing to gain at least one republican vote for political cover in case their plan fails. Woe be unto any republican dumb enough to side with the dems in favor of what is now being referred to as ObamaCare 2.0.

Many conservatives, including “yours truly,” have been fighting ObamaCare for over two years. We began alerting our readers and listeners in the early days of the Presidential campaign and as far back, in some cases, as 2007. Why are we so dead set against government run healthcare? To put is as clearly and concisely, yes, as bluntly as I know h — ObamaCare is socialized medicine, it is socialism, and socialism is the final step a nation takes before becoming a communist nation.

The American people HATE ObamaCare. The American people have told the government we do not want ObamaCare in any form. As evidence of this, look at the number of states that have already amended their state constitutions to ban any kind of government healthcare mandates handed down by the federal government. If you know your American history then you already know this has happened before in the US. Just before the American Civil War broke out into a shooting war, the southern states began passing “nullification” laws, within the states, which nullified federal laws and mandates placed on those states by the federal government of that day. Simply put a nullification law means those states will NOT adhere to, or abide by, those federal laws and mandates. Need I remind you of the next step taken by those states?

The American Civil War did not have to happen. It DID happen because the arrogant US Congress of that day refused to listen to the people of the southern states telling them, flat out, they would leave the Union if the Congress continued to govern against the will of the southern people.

Today the current US Congress is making the exact same mistake the Congresses of the 1840s and 1850s made — and this time, it is not just the southern states warning Congress to take heed. This time, states all over the nation are frantically attempting to get the attention of the federal government by passing modern day nullification laws.

The signs are all there. A blind fool can read them. And yet, the federal government cannot hear them or, worse, it is ignoring them.

This way lies destruction. The peoples of the states have issued the clarion call. Just as the election of 1860 was the turning point, the day the nation split into two nations, the election of 2010 will decide if the US remains one country or shatters into two or more separate nations or confederations of states. One thing is certain: America cannot continue as a single entity of 50 states ruled over by a socialist government.

The 2010 election is the safety valve. If the pressure is released by a purge of the incumbents in the Congress then the US will survive. It the valve remains closed, and no pressure is released, the explosion of the US tearing itself apart will be heard, and felt, around the globe and will spell the end of the Great American Experiment.

 

Ron, Rand Paul discuss broken government with Blitzer

Ron, Rand Paul discuss broken government with Blitzer
Posted By Steve Adcock On February 24, 2010 (10:44 am) In Voices and Choices

SOUTHERN ARIZONA – Small government Republicans Ron Paul and son Rand Paul discussed broken government with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer this week, arguing that the “government mechanism is broken because the government is broke”.

“By the time you go broke, the government is too big and inefficient,” Ron Paul said early in the interview.  ”You have to admit that you can’t pay the bills.”

Dr. Paul argued that with a 10% inflation rate, you’ve wiped off a trillion in national debt.

“Show me a government program that has ever come in under budget,” son Rand Paul said, responding to CBO data that suggested cutting waste, fraud and abuse may enable national health care to be paid for without adding to the United States’ running deficit.

Both Congressmen Paul and Kentucky Senatorial candidate Rand Paul recognize the severity of our government’s debt and refuse to believe that adding government programs will somehow fix what ails the American people, literally and figuratively.

“I would reject what the president is proposing [regarding health care], and we as Republicans need to articulate a version of what we would do,” Rand said.  ”When government sets the price for health care, the patient quits caring about the price, and there is no price competition.”

Regarding the War in Iraq, “It is not in our national security interest, and the sooner we end this, the better,” remarked Ron Paul in response to a question from Blitzer regarding disagreements between the father and son in terms of national security.

“The most important enumerated power of the federal government is to take care of our national security,” Rand said.  ”I will make them debate whether they declare war or not,” Paul continued.  ”It’s not enough to just say that our national security is threatened.”

 

‘Tea party’ in Mill Valley attracts more than 600; Obama backers demonstrate a few blocks away

Read the Marin IJ article here.

 

Who Owns Your Body? Under Obamacare, not you.

BY William Anderson

August 31, 2009, Vol. 14, No. 46

We are berated, ad nauseam, with imprecations that America is the only advanced nation that fails to have universal health care. This statement is often followed by the rueful remark that the debate over government controlled health care has been going on without progress for 60 years and, ipso facto, it is time to settle it.

All right, let’s do that. Let’s look a little deeper. Why is there no settlement of the issue, and why is America unique in its obstinate reluctance to follow the example of our older cultural brothers in Europe?

When a debate continues for decades without resolution, it is prudent to consider the deeper underlying assumptions. Principles which underpin the arguments are likely being ignored and marginalized rather than addressed in a forthright manner.

America is the only advanced country whose founding assumption is popular sovereignty. This is a proposition that stands with hardly a seconding voice throughout the contemporary international community. Yet it is the taproot of American exceptionalism.

Even here, however, the principle of government subordination to the people is by no means universally accepted. It has never been firmly ratified by our political class, those spiritual descendants of Europe’s nobility. Our soi-disant elite appear to view with dismay their countrymen’s continuing preference for self-rule.

Thus arises the question of corporal ownership. For Americans, the answer has been settled. Since the terrible bloodletting of the Civil War, and now excepting military service, ownership of one’s body is a matter between the individual and God, with no intermediation by government.

Yet assertions are now being made that government should have responsibility for, and thus authority over, the maintenance of our bodies. It necessarily follows that government must have the power to approve or withhold care. This concept collides destructively with the founding principles of individual responsibility and autonomy upon which popular sovereignty depends.

This is the reason that the debate never ends. It is also the reason that any resolution of the question will necessarily either confirm or deny the original intent of the Founders.

So let’s make up our minds. Does the government, in the last analysis, own your body, or do you? If your answer is the former, be aware that you have opted for veterinary medicine, for you are now accepting the moral status of a domestic animal. If your answer is the latter, you must accept responsibility to make mortal decisions for yourself, and pay for the care that you want with money that you have reason to see as your own.

Such money is not out of reach. Medical savings accounts, amalgamated with catastrophic insurance, could take the place of the ad hoc hodgepodge of plans, schemes, dissimulations, and promises under which we are now burdened and threatened.

And there would be greater efficiency and encouragement of individual choice. We all have an enhanced interest in thriftiness and fair value when we, and not third parties, are the payers.

The wisdom expressed in the Federalist Papers began with the insight that men are not angels. The system that the authors designed placed liberty at the head of other considerations. The Founders were determined that concentrations of power should be confounded.

The system now congealing in Congress for health care is not informed by such principles. Access to the most intimate personal information, direct interaction with bank accounts, and mandated Procrustean protocols remain features of the various schemes under consideration. Such programs would be managed by impenetrable, impersonal, and unaccountable bureaucracies. Do we wish to place such profound coercive powers in the hands of anyone, much less those who now stand expectant and eager to receive them?

The view of human nature recognized by the Founders is now in grave peril. Whither goes America? Was liberty merely an 18th-century fad, or is there still something exceptional about our country?

William Anderson, a retired physician, teaches at Harvard University and consults to the intelligence community.

 

TAM considers $10 rate hike

By Tim Omarzu
Marinscope Newspapers

Published: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 2:03 PM PST

Marin drivers may pay another $10 every time they register a vehicle, if a county agency goes for the extra fee and a majority of county voters approves it in November.

The Transportation Authority of Marin, or TAM, is considering seeking voters’ approval for a $10 vehicle license fee that would raise $2 million to $3 million annually.

“We’re considering putting it on the ballot. We haven’t decided for sure, yet,” said Diane Steinhauser, the executive director of TAM.

TAM has commissioned a $40,000 poll that’s under way now to see if Marin voters would back the fee, and the TAM board is expected to decide at its Feb. 25 meeting whether to put the measure on the November ballot.

The fee would require only a simple majority to pass — unlike many local taxes that require support from two-thirds of voters.

The millions raised by the $10-per-vehicle fee could be used for such things as funding school crossing guards and paying for senior citizens’ transport, Steinhauser said. The money would be spent on “green” projects that would encourage people to drive less, she said.

Public input would help decide exactly how the money would be spent, she said. “We have to go through a process to let everybody have some feedback.”

Once the purposes of the funding were spelled out, they would be included in the ballot language. And TAM would be audited regularly to ensure the money was being spent as intended, Steinhauser said.

The ballot language also would say how long the fee would stay in effect.

In order to get the fee on the November ballot, the TAM board has to do so by early August.

TAM is responsible for managing a variety of transportation projects and programs in Marin County, receiving federal, state, regional and local funds. TAM administers Measure A, the half-cent transportation sales tax in Marin County passed by voters in November 2004.

 

The New Fascists: Part 1 – A Political Primer

The New Fascists: Part 1 – A Political Primer
Posted By James Hudnall On February 11, 2010 (8:41 am) In History, Politics

“My dear brothers, never forget, when you hear the progress of enlightenment vaunted, that the devil’s best trick is to persuade you that he doesn’t exist!”

Charles Baudelaire, Le Joueur généreux, February 7, 1864

Forget everything you think you know about politics. It is probably wrong.

There is no left or right. Communist, Socialist, Liberal, Conservative, Progressive, Democrat, Republican, those are all meaningless terms. They are used to confuse people so they miss the point. The most important point about politics there is. There are only two schools of political thought and they have predictable results. All the names and labels for them are just smoke and mirrors.

Political ideology is designed by elites to trick the masses into doing what they want. Each side tells you something designed to get your emotions going so they can play you. They get you to agree to give them more power, money and control over your lives by telling you some kind of story.

We need to put that vicious cycle to an end. It’s time to understand what their real goals are. But to free your mind, you need to be educated first. Only by seeing the road ahead can you avoid tripping on stones or falling off cliffs.

There are only two real political choices to make. And it has nothing to do with parties. It has to do with core beliefs. You are for one side or another. These sides are diametrically opposed. The best way I can describe the two choices is, freedom or slavery. That is what it boils down to. And the slave in question is you.

Do you want to be a slave or a free person? It’s your choice.

I’m sure some of you reading this have your guard up now. So take a deep breath and walk with me for a second. I am going to open your eyes.

There are only two forms of government. Every kind of government is a branch or variation of one of the two forms. All the side issues, are just window dressing because the root form of government determines a lot of crucial matters that effect everything else.

The first form has many branches and is called many by names. It is common. It is the oldest form. It is, in fact, ancient. It has many names because so many of those names have fallen into disrepute. So they keep re-branding it and try to sell it in a different package. But no matter what name it takes, it still leads to the same end result.

The second form has very few branches and is rarer than any precious stone. It is something many people want but few have had. The believers in the first form are always trying to destroy this second form. They lie about it. Try to corrupt and subvert it. Because they know it will always be more popular with the people if they knew they had a choice. So the second form must always be defended from the predators from the first, because it is precious. I like to refer to each system as the minus and plus system. But we’ll call them BG or LG here. Big Government or Limited Government.

Those who believe in BG go by many names, and many of these believers don’t even know that they’re supporting the same goals as people they think are bad. But they have been tricked into selling out their own freedoms to enrich someone elses. All BG systems lead to the same result. I classify this as a minus system because it’s negative. The end result of a BG system is bad for most involved.

The BG system is designed to feed all resources to a few at the top. All else are diminished in power and wealth. But the citizens are told that they must support the government and its rules in order to receive some kind of “benefits.” In order to get the treats the government doles out, you have to give up your freedoms and your property. It sells the idea of some glorious future that is never attained and only gets worse over time. But it always maintains that it will lead to some kind of paradise.

It never does. It usually leads to some kind of hell. But it always finds people to subscribe to its ideas who become fanatical in defense of it, no matter how much the system abuses them. And it deludes many others into wanting it because it preys on their human nature, the very thing that destroys it in the end.

The LG or Limited Government system is the best system for human freedom. As a result it has been very rare in human history. Where it has been allowed to flourish, human beings have flourished. But those who believe in BG are always trying to corrupt and destroy LG societies. This is because LG denies ultimate power to those who seek it. An LG system is more fair because you get what you put in. You have the ability to advance to any level as long as you don’t abuse the success that you have made or use it against others.

Before we explore how each system works, we need to understand the mindset of the people who believe in either system. I once did a cartoon illustrating the philosophies in the form of two Greek Philosophers, Aristotle and Plato. Each philosopher created the groundwork for understanding these schools of thought.

LG (Plus) believers are Aristotlian. They are like engineers. If something is proven to work, then they believe in it. They are not opposed to experimentation, but only if it involves proven principles. Ideas that are demonstrated to fail are rejected. They understand that human beings are flawed creatures. Humans are born hungry and spend their lives seeking to fulfill those hungers. In science terms, humans are driven by genetic hard wiring. It is part of their nature. In religious terms, humans are born with “original sin”. We can’t radically change who we are and remain human. We can only seek to improve ourselves through discipline, education, reason and morality.

LG believers understand that humans are often given to a lust for power because we all want some kind of control. LG societies are designed to limit governance so the state can never become tyrannical. It realizes that human nature is a constant so you have to develop a system that works within its framework, and keeps its basic problems in check. That way a politician’s greed is limited by what they are allowed to do by laws. The less interference a government has in human affairs, the more free the people are to progress on their own and flourish. LG believers are for individual rights. They believe a perfect society may not be possible, but it can be best achieved by respect for others rights and liberties. They believe in a social contract and the rule of law. They want people to be free in order to live their life without interference, as long as they respect other’s rights. The LG is there to enable the society to function and keep the peace, but it is no t there to dominate or dictate how one should live.

BG (Minus) believers are Platonic. They posit that there’s an ideal form of society somewhere in the future, a utopia populated by an idealized form of humanity. This can only be achieved by forcing people to change through rules, laws and governance. It wraps itself in good intentions, but it ignores human nature, believing people can be changed by rules. Making the public follow orders will correct their bad behavior as the state sees it. It does not believe it can be tyrannical because BG systems are always sure they’re correct, not matter what happens. Dissenters are ridiculed or punished. No matter how many mistakes a BG society makes or disasters it causes, it does not admit its fault. BG believers preach dependence on the state. It denies individual empowerment or freedom and instead promotes group think. It pushes the group over the individual to keep people in check. It does not want leaders so much as followers. Its leaders are usually the hungriest for power that make their way to the top by gaming the system.

BG societies are constantly creating diversions to keep the public focused on policies it wants to sell. So it often creates “crises” of some kind that the people are supposed to rally around. In order to get them to give up more freedom or personal wealth, it often uses scare tactics. Threats of invasion, threats of nature, etc. The elites in a BG system always live vastly better than those at the bottom, but it always promises some kind of “equality” that never exists in reality. And because the BG system is large and complex it relies on bureaucracies to manage them. But because bureaucracies are made of humans, human nature always corrupts these systems. A bureaucracy becomes inefficient and corrupt in direct proportion to its size. The larger, the less effective, the more corrupt.

BG systems usually lead to economic collapse and stagnation. Usually with dire consequences for millions of people. That is why citizens in BG societies often yearn to go to LG societies. Many of them risk their lives to escape from BG societies that hold them captive. Because in worst case scenarios, BG systems imprison their citizens. They are all, to some extent, anti-freedom. It’s a matter of degree.

In contemporary American terms, the common names for BG and LG is “progressive” or “conservative”. Those terms have been used misleadingly by the media and others, so I avoided them. In part two I will do side by side comparison of the two systems performed in history. And I will explain the title of this series.

Article taken from Big Journalism – http://bigjournalism.com
URL to article: http://bigjournalism.com/jhudnall/2010/02/11/the-new-fascists-part-1-a-political-primer/

 

Seeing red as voters grow restless ahead of election

Read the Daily Breeze article here.

 

On eve of first state budget vote, California Democrats push jobs proposal

Read the Mercury News article here.

 

One judge challenged, two not, in Marin judicial election

Read the Marin IJ article here.

 

Just say snow – saving taxpayers millions

Just say snow – saving taxpayers millions
Posted By Doug Bandow On February 15, 2010 (7:43 pm) In Featured, Voices and Choices

For the first time in memory, the federal government has closed for three straight days. “Snowmaggedon” has shut down Washington, D.C. and its suburbs. With the third storm within a week hitting the region, causing white-out conditions, even Uncle Sam can’t function.

In theory the government closure is costing all of us. Some 230,000 D.C. area employees stayed home, costing an estimated $300 million “in lost productivity per day,” according to federal officials. But is the shutdown really hurting the public?

Using the term “productivity” in the same sentence as “federal government” is a dubious exercise. No doubt, in the sense of performing a task efficiently, the Feds can be productive. Just watch how quickly and completely the IRS attempts to clean out the average taxpayer. That explains the joke about Washington’s preferred tax form of just two lines: “How much do you earn? Send it in.”

But government efficiency doesn’t mean productivity in a larger sense. That is, does government activity yield a better life for Americans? On net, the answer is no. The only problem with Snowmaggedon is that it has not affected the 85 percent of federal employees who work outside of the D.C. area.

About two million people, excluding the postal service and armed forces, work for the federal government. Most are engaged in counterproductive activity.

Start with the 652,000 work for the Defense Department. Overall, their mission is vital, one of the few necessary tasks of government. But much of what they actually do has nothing to do with protecting America.

Many U.S. troops — and the civilian employees who back up the armed forces — are tasked with defending America’s prosperous and populous allies throughout Asia and Europe. Why? The European Union has ten times the GDP of Russia; South Korea has 40 times the GDP of the North. Military personnel also engage in nation-building and other forms of what Michael Mandelbaum called foreign policy as social work. Idling employees supporting these tasks would reduce subsidies for the international welfare queens now leeching off of U.S. taxpayers and military personnel.

The Department of Veterans Affairs employs 280,000 people. Give this department its due: it may not be the most efficient bureaucracy available, but Uncle Sam has an obligation to care for America’s veterans. The number of employees could be pared by integrating the treatment of veterans into the private health system, but the special needs of vets will always require special services.

Homeland Security comes next with 171,000 personnel. It’s an important function, but does anyone believe the department, a bizarre mix of everything from customs to immigration to disaster relief, actually is keeping us safe? Are we better off because of the geniuses who decided that terrorists would surrender by forbidding people from going to the bathroom and using blankets? Who benefits when personnel dole out “emergency” aid hither and yon even to the improvident and foolish? It’s hard to know how many of this department’s employees actually do useful work.

Another 108,000 people work for the Justice Department. The agency is theoretically essential. But the bureaucracy of justice — laws, police, prosecutors, courts — should rest primarily at the state and local level. One of most significant and most dangerous expansions of national power in recent years has been the increasing federalization of the criminal law. Now you can go to federal prison if you dump fill dirt on dry land that has been defined as a “wetland.”

The department also is filled with social engineers, dedicated to using the law to reorder American society along more collectivist and multi-cultural lines. An entire division promotes the federal government’s racial spoils system and its extension to the rest of society. Then there are all of the department attorneys who spend taxpayer money defending the worst depredations of government, often in contravention of the Constitution.

Some 88,000 people work at the Treasury Department. A few folks are necessary to mind the Treasury, but most of the agency’s employees are busy supporting the outrageously lavish $3.7 trillion budget approved by Congress this year. Cut back the spending and the $2.2 trillion in taxes to be collected, and the department would shrink substantially. Reduce the Treasury bureaucracy’s other threats to liberty — foreign economic sanctions, domestic financial spying — and the workforce would shrink still further.

The Agriculture Department comes in at 82,000 employees. There may be one or two people there who perform a useful and constitutional function, but it’s hard to believe there are many more. This agency’s job is to pay off special interests and manipulate food markets. This Department should be permanently snowed in.

Next is the Interior Department with 67,000 employees. There’s no reason for Uncle Sam to own hundreds of millions of acres of land. Sell off the grazing range and timberland (technically the latter resides with the Agriculture Department, but the same principle applies). Open up nonessential park areas to energy exploration and development. Keep at most a few sensitive parklands of enormous symbolic significance — such as Yellowstone and Yosemite — in federal hands or, better yet, turn them over to environmental groups. The number of people needed in their current roles at the department is very few.

Health and Human Services is a spending behemoth, but employs “only” 64,000 people. Social services, like justice, should primarily be dispensed at the state and local level. Anyway, whatever the legitimate role of the federal government, HHS should not survive in current form. The agency incorporates a multitude of ineffective, duplicative, and overlapping programs. In general, Congress never shuts down a bad program; legislators simply add new ones. Shift back functions and revenue sources to the states, as Ronald Reagan proposed, and there’d be no need for this department.

Some 55,000 people work for the Transportation Department. There are some interstate transportation issues, but the federal government shouldn’t be funding roads and bridges in communities across America. Indeed, the agency has become one of the worst sources of political pork at the national level. If local folks want a new left hand turn lane or park bike trail, let them pay for it. Most of this department’s employees are anything but essential.

The Commerce Department employs 39,000. Another 16,000 people work at the Labor Department. Both of these agencies are special interest bureaucracies, dedicated to subsidizing businesses and labor unions. Neither should exist. There are a few legitimate functions buried within the two bureaucracies — keeping economic statistics and conducting a census for the purpose of congressional apportionment, for instance. But most of these 55,000 employees should be working at useful jobs in the private sector.

Equally useless is the Energy Department and its 15,000 workers. The department is largely a forum for dispensing subsidies to favored energy interests. It also regulates the energy industry, usually to the detriment to consumers. Politicians love to dispense favors and micromanage the economy. The Energy Department is a vehicle for doing both.

The State Department also employs 15,000 people. The agency is legitimate, but many of its functions are not. There’s no cause for foreign aid: the U.S. has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on “foreign aid” programs which have turned out to be mostly “foreign hindrance” to the recipients. State should eliminate financial transfers other than limited, emergency disaster relief. Moreover, the department should cut back oversize embassies around the world. Washington should not be attempting to sell U.S. products or micro-manage other societies. There’s no reason for full-service embassies in many nations; small consulates would do just fine.

The Departments of Housing and Urban Development and Education have 9,000 and 4,000 employees, respectively. Neither of these agencies has a legitimate federal role. Housing and education should be state and local responsibilities to the extent that government is involved at all. There certainly is no reason for the federal government to create vast systems of wealth transfer from federal taxpayers to builders, local governments, developers, universities, federal bureaucrats, home buyers, students, renters, and everyone else involved in the housing and education industries. Indeed, the financial crisis, which started from an overheated housing market, demonstrates that federal involvement can be not just wasteful, but disastrously counterproductive.

A potpourri of independent agencies employs 180,000 people. The largest single bureaucracy is the Social Security Administration, which shouldn’t exist. People should be allowed to keep their own money to invest for their own retirement. Impoverished seniors should be helped because of their need, not their age. Most of the other agencies could be similarly eliminated or streamlined.

Finally, shrink government, and cut back the 33,000 people who work for the judicial branch and 30,000 who work for Congress. These two overgrown bureaucracies demonstrate how government has grown far too large. Indeed, their expansion has helped fuel government’s overall growth. More legislators, judges, aides, and clerks all want to do more. Which means an ever bigger government.

If you believe the official estimates, the three day federal shut-down cost Americans nearly a billion dollars. But don’t worry. Although Snowmaggedon has been awful for those of us who live in the region, it likely has saved the American people billions of dollars by slowing down the waste of tax dollars and limiting the harm of regulations.

Now if we could only shut down Washington permanently.