Posts
Retailers To Lobby Obama to violate states rights and give a Sales Tax Holiday.
A U.S. retail trade group asked President-elect Barack Obama Tuesday to add a series of temporary sales tax holidays to an economic stimulus package as a way to revive consumer spending.
The National Retail Federation called for three 10-day periods of sales tax-free shopping in March, July and October 2009, which it said would save consumers almost $20 billion, or $175 for the average family.
Under the NRF's proposal, the federal government would reimburse states for the lost tax revenue.
State sales tax rates range from 2.9 percent to 7.25 percent, the group said.
Really sich a plan would be a violation of States rights. The federal government has no right to get involved in state matters in this way. How would this be tracked anyway? What would prevent states from submitting false data to the feds and collect more tax money that they actualy would have collected?
What would prevent a state that pays stores %.02 for collecting the tax from not deducting this from the amount they claim to the feds to pay them?
This would be a huge waste of money for tax payers to pay the sales tax for rich people.
Is this the CHANGE we voted for?
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Universal healthcare unconstitutional
Obama wants to force you to buy helth care. But no press even asks him where in the constution it allows him to do this?
If the founding fathers knew of the Democrats' plan of universal healthcare they would be rolling in their graves, since they made it quite apparent in the Constitution that no such federal program was to be allowed.
Congress was given enumerated powers in order to insure that their supreme power only pertained to the powers awarded to them in the Constitution. Hereby I quote Amendment 10 of the Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Nowhere in the constitution does it declare a socialistic approach to healthcare to be one of the powers appointed to the federal government. Therefore the power of healthcare is left in the hands of each individual state or private industry, where it is best handled anyway.
Loose interpretations of the Constitution are the only platforms that give Democrats even an ounce of legitimacy whenever they proclaim for national healthcare. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution tells us that Congress has the power "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes," the significant word being commerce.
The fallacy of trading on equivocation is obvious in this interpretation because the term "commerce" in the 18th century did not necessarily have economic implications.
Interpretations of "welfare" are found in the preamble. Also, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, which states "Congress shall have power to … provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States…" is commonly used to extend federal power. However, contorting "welfare" to somehow mean a socialized healthcare system is drastically at odds with the fundamental reasoning of the founding fathers.
General welfare" as described in the Constitution is synonymous with interstate commerce or a strong military defense. If national healthcare had been one of their intentions it would have been quite easy to create a new clause in Article 1, Section 8 stating "Congress shall have the power to provide healthcare to all through higher taxes."
It is quite startling that the only reason such a socialistic plan is even considered in this day and age is because of the gradual increase in the federal government's power since the inception of the constitution.
Both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for the philosophy shift towards the duty of the federal government since both have repeatedly increased government spending to the excessive amount that it is today.
Healthcare is not the only issue that the federal government wants to "take care of" either. It seems all forms of social issues such as abortion, gay marriage and education are all federal issues, when they are actually explicitly state issues. States were created for this purpose, so local governments would best reflect the majority of the population in their respective state.
The federal government's power needs to be looked over and reduced in almost every field. We should leave the federal government to do what the federal government does best, collect taxes and protect the citizens from enemies, foreign and domestic.
With all the tax dollars saved by reducing federal government spending from areas where it should have no control over to begin with, taxes could be lowered and personal liberty would expand. Next time you hear a candidate mentioning raising taxes just remember that the federal government is already doing more than it is supposed to, and it will continue to expand as long as we tolerate giving them more and more of our paychecks.
This nation must remember the greatness that it was founded on, and we must retain our original framework.
A socialistic healthcare system is appealing only to those who are ignorant to the cons of such a system or to those who like to forget we have a founding document that rejects a huge federal government.
LINK
If the founding fathers knew of the Democrats' plan of universal healthcare they would be rolling in their graves, since they made it quite apparent in the Constitution that no such federal program was to be allowed.
Congress was given enumerated powers in order to insure that their supreme power only pertained to the powers awarded to them in the Constitution. Hereby I quote Amendment 10 of the Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Nowhere in the constitution does it declare a socialistic approach to healthcare to be one of the powers appointed to the federal government. Therefore the power of healthcare is left in the hands of each individual state or private industry, where it is best handled anyway.
Loose interpretations of the Constitution are the only platforms that give Democrats even an ounce of legitimacy whenever they proclaim for national healthcare. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution tells us that Congress has the power "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes," the significant word being commerce.
The fallacy of trading on equivocation is obvious in this interpretation because the term "commerce" in the 18th century did not necessarily have economic implications.
Interpretations of "welfare" are found in the preamble. Also, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, which states "Congress shall have power to … provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States…" is commonly used to extend federal power. However, contorting "welfare" to somehow mean a socialized healthcare system is drastically at odds with the fundamental reasoning of the founding fathers.
General welfare" as described in the Constitution is synonymous with interstate commerce or a strong military defense. If national healthcare had been one of their intentions it would have been quite easy to create a new clause in Article 1, Section 8 stating "Congress shall have the power to provide healthcare to all through higher taxes."
It is quite startling that the only reason such a socialistic plan is even considered in this day and age is because of the gradual increase in the federal government's power since the inception of the constitution.
Both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for the philosophy shift towards the duty of the federal government since both have repeatedly increased government spending to the excessive amount that it is today.
Healthcare is not the only issue that the federal government wants to "take care of" either. It seems all forms of social issues such as abortion, gay marriage and education are all federal issues, when they are actually explicitly state issues. States were created for this purpose, so local governments would best reflect the majority of the population in their respective state.
The federal government's power needs to be looked over and reduced in almost every field. We should leave the federal government to do what the federal government does best, collect taxes and protect the citizens from enemies, foreign and domestic.
With all the tax dollars saved by reducing federal government spending from areas where it should have no control over to begin with, taxes could be lowered and personal liberty would expand. Next time you hear a candidate mentioning raising taxes just remember that the federal government is already doing more than it is supposed to, and it will continue to expand as long as we tolerate giving them more and more of our paychecks.
This nation must remember the greatness that it was founded on, and we must retain our original framework.
A socialistic healthcare system is appealing only to those who are ignorant to the cons of such a system or to those who like to forget we have a founding document that rejects a huge federal government.
LINK
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)