ledeagenda.com

From KTVB:

Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert and chairman of the Joint Finance-Appropriations budget committee, told the Times-News that July tax revenue that was about $27 million shy of the same period in 2008 could force the 2010 Legislature into difficult choices.

Cameron says, “Now it’s going to force us to discuss what programs are necessary…and maybe even eliminate agencies.”

Cameron declined to name what agencies might be dumped.

Finally! It appears that the polls have finally caught up our representatives.

Consider this from Rasmussen:

Seventy percent (70%) of likely voters now favor a government that offers fewer services and imposes lower taxes over one that provides more services with higher taxes, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

That’s up five points over the past month and is the highest level measured in nearly three years.

Given the alarming rate of state power consolidation under the Presidency of Barack Obama, it’s no surprise to see 70% of the public saying no to increased government intrusion into our lives. The ’silent majority’, a large demographic represented by a limited government philosophy, has been shaken awake by the radical vision of President Barack Obama.

What is even more encouraging is that these voters will not be satisfied with simply cutting taxes, they want a legitimate and real rollback to the power of the state. For example, consider the polls- forty-nine percent of people say workers should be able to opt out of Social Security, fifty percent of people oppose health care reform, and forty-six percent of people are deeply worried about the Stimulus money being wasted.

Another encouraging sign- most voters seem aware of the scope of the battle that we are facing. Sixty-eight percent of voters expect to see their federal income taxes rise under President Obama. The general consensus finds that fifty one percent of Americans are deeply distrustful of our financial (Federal Reserve) system and seventy-five percent favor auditing the Fed.

Ludwig von Mises wrote in 1929, “Government is the negation of liberty”. In the wake of the economic collapse, the bailouts, the radical expansion of government power and nationalization of our economy it appears that a majority of American’s are wanting government to be replaced with personal responsibility. This will involve shrinking government by eliminating programs and reducing regulatory reach. Taxation, if we are successful in also stopping Cap and Trade, Obamacare and increased government spending, should also plunge a result.

Note the shift: cutting taxes is a result of our action, not our main purpose.

We can claim legitimacy to our case by advocating a strict return to the enumerated powers of the Constitution, rolling back the Federal government to its proper size, scope and role. This requires outreach, education and organization. If you haven’t already done so, may I suggest networking with the Campaign For Liberty, the We The People Foundation or the American Liberty Alliance?

Something to watch- if the motivation to cut government lies only in pure fiscal/budgetary reasons, our representatives may well find themselves with even further dissatisfaction among their supporters.

This presents a real danger to the Republican party as it’s political base has essentially organized themselves separate from the Party itself (i.e. “Im a conservative first, Republican second“). Viewing the Tea Parties, et all as a groundswell of support for their cause is a very big miscalculation of the politcal winds. This has all the markings of an idealogical shift- one that will leave the party playing catch-up with the political direction of it’s base.

To the believers of freedom and liberty these times are proving dark and onerous indeed. Obama, under the guise of, “fixing the economy” has proceeded to add to, complete and surpass every statist goal of the administration prior to his. In fact, I think I have finally figured out what Obama meant by “hope and change”- he is advancing the completion of total state control (”hope”) by finally removing that which limited politicians in the past, caution and prudence (”change”).

National health care. Cap and Tax. A Supreme Court justice nominee who has opined that, ‘no one has a right to a gun’. Increased Federal oversight of the economy. More bailouts and Stimulus spending.

Is this what most voters wanted?

From a pure economic perspective, I highly doubt it.

From Rasmussen Reports:

Eighty percent (80%) of Americans now say Wall Street benefited more from the bailout of the financial industry than the average U.S. taxpayer.

Only eight percent (8%) of adults say the taxpayer benefited more, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twelve percent (12%) are not sure.

This marks a notable increase in skepticism from October when 63% saw Wall Street as the chief beneficiary as the first bailout of the financial industry was working its way through Congress. In February when the Obama administration announced another bank bailout plan, 67% said Wall Street would benefit more than taxpayers.

…

This opposition has been consistent since a government bailout for the financial industry was first proposed last September.

There is little partisan disagreement that Wall Street benefited more than the average taxpayer, but that consensus breaks down over support for the bailout itself.

Seventy-two percent (72%) of Republicans and 65% of adults not affiliated with either major political party say the bailout funding for banks and other financial institutions was a bad idea. But Democrats are evenly divided over the question.

I think it is pretty clear, the public despises the bailouts. Period.

Or how about this one, again from Rasmussen:

Just 35% of U.S. voters now support the creation of a government health insurance company to compete with private health insurers.

 

 

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 50% of voters oppose setting up a government health insurance company as President Obama and congressional Democrats are now proposing in their health care reform plan. Fifteen percent (15%) are undecided.

In mid-June, 41% of American adults thought setting up a government health insurance company to compete with private health insurance companies was a good idea, but the identical number (41%) disagreed.

I think these polls are significant, it demonstrates most clearly that the battle for maintaining the free market is winning the minds and hearts of an increased number of Americans. Still, a great sense of unease remains.

I know many of my libertarian friends are fit-to-be tied with their fellow American’s perceived stupidity. From a pure libertarian perspective, it can be said, there should be no wavering from the principals of liberty and freedom. Many Libertarians view this Republican reawakening with disgust, “where have you been the last six months/two/eight years?” they ask with emphasis in the gritting teeth and tension spurred by political strife.

And yet still, most people who have actually been involved in the process with more mainstream political candidates and ideals know that a great amount of re-education will be needed to restore a significant enough coalition and voting block to truly be competitive in the marketplace of ideas.

Bryan Caplan, writing for CATO Unbound, summarized the tension between what people want and how they vote this way:

To see if the average voter’s beliefs about the economic effects of immigration are right, for example, you can ask the general public and professional economists, and see if, on average, they agree. Is this an infallible test? No; experts have been wrong before. But it is hard to get around the strong presumption that if experts and laymen disagree, the experts are probably right, and the laymen are probably wrong. More importantly, if you have some specific reason to doubt the objectivity of the experts, you can control for it. If you think that economists’ high income biases their beliefs, for example, you can check whether laymen and experts agree after statistically adjusting for income.

This was precisely the approach that I used to analyze the best available data set on economic beliefs, the Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy. The overarching finding: Economists and the public hold radically different beliefs about the economy.[4] Compared to the experts, laymen are much more skeptical of markets, especially international and labor markets, and much more pessimistic about the past, present, and future of the economy. When laymen see business conspiracies, economists see supply-and-demand. When laymen see ruinous competition from foreigners, economists see the wonder of comparative advantage. When laymen see dangerous downsizing, economists see wealth-enhancing reallocation of labor. When laymen see decline, economists see progress.[5].

In other words, there is a huge disconnect between those setting policy and those who vote for the people who will set the policy. This is a very disturbing revelation indeed, especially considering that the public has turned so sharply against the policies of a President they elected a mere eight months ago. 

Consider- despite nearly 72% Republican opposition to the bailouts, Senator John McCain suspended his campaign in September 2008, just shy of a month and a half away from the general election, to vote IN FAVOR of the bailout package.

Consider- a united Republican House stood in opposition to the Stimulus Package, only to find a few short months later in June that eight so-called Republicans voted for the Cap and Trade bill. This is even more significant when you consider that the ‘Cap and Tax’ bill, as it has become known in Republican circles, passed with a mere seven vote majority.

Consider- despite having 271 Co-Sponsors in the House, HR1207, Ron Paul’s bill to Audit The Federal Reserve, has been denied a floor hearing by House leadership. Furthermore, Senate leadership is also equally missive, refusing to allow the Senate counterpart, S. 604, to be attached to a Stimulus spending bill. Still more, the Administration, being directed by his Wall Street backers, is pushing a bill that would expand the powers of the Federal Reserve to nearly every corporation in America. This is intended as a pushback and threat to those wanting Federal Reserve transparency.

So, where do we go from here?

Our backs are up against a wall, but this is the hand that we have been dealt. Our charge, given to us when the hour is late and the stakes are high, is to infiltrate and restore the small-government mindset that has held as a great cohesive glue holding both the conservative and libertarian wings of the Republican Party intact.

Libertarians, as much as you enjoy espousing your open-minds and free-lifestyles on issues such as drug-reform, immigration, war and gay marriage, these are not issues that are universal or approachable for most people within the Republican Party. A conservative contractor isn’t very likely to find a open-borders policy as acceptable, especially when he has seen his own field infiltrated by illegal immigrants. Gay marriage is the same for your Christian or LDS Republican voters- the Libertarian mindset that marriage is not an issue of the state would largely serve as a disqualification for office for those who serve a higher calling.

I believe that there is a very limited set of ideals that conservative and libertarian voters share. Coincidentally, these ideals just happen to be an antedote to the completion of the statist goals of President Barack Obama.

I would like to propose that the great unity of principal can be narrowed to two basic ideals: 1) limiting the power of the state and 2) returning and defending free-market principals.

Your traditional mainstream conservative voter will find common ground in preserving what is left of our formerly free market. Largely, this block of voters was most consistently against the bailouts and government spending found in the Stimulus package.

On the other side of the politically Republican coin, the libertarian voter will find him or herself agreeing with the approach for truly limited government. In areas where government has exceed its mandate, either by the Constitution or public will, we can make an effort to repeal said legislation. Libertarian voters will  be able to exhaust some of their pent-up political energy in rolling back perceived government intrusion and expansion.

It has often been said that the Republican Party is the party of limited government, smaller taxation and personal freedoms/family values. Inherently, the last part of the three follows when the first two are seen through to completion, no matter if you’re more libertarian (freedoms) or conservative (family values) in nature.

The Republican Party has already done a great job of developing interest groups for defending the free market. Be it Heritage, Americans For Prosperity, the National Taxpayers Union or just our basic pro-business approach, we have already mastered this area and should continue to do so.

However, largely, the Republican Party has sought to distance itself from the libertarian wing of the Republican party when they call for the abolition of various entities of government, be it the IRS, the Department of Education, or the Patriot Act. This is a mistake that must be corrected and ultimately will have to be engaged after Obama leaves office for liberty and freedom to reign.

So where do we start? Simple: we seek to repeal the Stimulus and TARP legislation in its entirety. We seek to stop the Cap and Trade bill and the nationalization of our health care. This will require, ultimately, significant pressure being put on Republicans like John McCain and the Cap and Tax Eight. Should they be unwilling, or unable, to help the Republican party return to its roots we should assist them with retirement or Arlen Specter them.

In short, our philosophy will be to decentralize and repeal and our gameplan will be to push out RINOs and welcome back in the libertarian and constitutionalists. It won’t be easy and probably won’t get us any points in the mainstream media. But, honestly, given what we are up against, do we have any other choice?

From the Campaign For Liberty Website:

This press release just out from Dr. Paul’s congressional office:

Washington, D.C. - Congressman Ron Paul (TX-14) is pleased to announce that all 178 Republican members of the House have now signed on as cosponsors of his Federal Reserve Transparency Act, HR 1207.

This legislation calls for a full and complete audit of the Federal Reserve by the Government Accountability Office, reported to Congress by the end of 2010.

“Now more than ever, we need to know what the Fed has been doing in secret. I am pleased that all of my Republican colleagues in the House, as well as many Democrats, understand the need for this kind of transparency,” stated Congressman Paul.

HR 1207 has a total of 271 cosponsors and has been referred to the House Financial Services Committee.

Thanks to all of you who worked so hard to make this happen! Now it’s time to keep up the pressure on the rest of the House Democrats and our senators! Click here to visit our Audit the Fed action page.

———————————————-

More proof that Freedom and Liberty loving people, by getting involved with the Republican Party, can indeed get it headed back on the right course.

Stopping this ship from hitting the proverbial glacier will not be easy. We are literally staring death in the face, facing a crises that grows exponentially with every announcement of a new government program, new government assistance, or new regulations on the free market.

Many people have ratcheted up their self-reliance preparedness in the last few months. The sales of guns, ammunition, food storage, and the most essential lifestyle survival gear have gone through the roof as people are seeking peace of mind for increasingly turbulent and unpredictable times. The United States Mint has even had to suspend the sales of proof and uncirculated Gold and Silver American Eagles to meet the demand for bullion gold and silver purchases.

The nation is gripped with fear; we are out of control. The shackles or restraints on the Government by the Constitution will be willfully and blatantly ignored until otherwise stopped. The fear is that there will be no end to the increasing level of governmental control, regulation, and intrusion into our private lives. If necessary, it seems, the Constitution will be rendered moot after the fact once the laws are in place for complete governmental control.

And to be honest, this fear is justified. I mean, think about it, what sort of basic human needs will the government not provide for you? For the impoverished, we have welfare, for the homeless we have community housing, the sick, national health care, for the environment, Cap and Trade. Every aspect of our lives, from waking to eating to sleeping to working to commuting to rearing children to investing to food safety, you name it. All will be under the command of the government control grid.

We are all waiting. Getting prepared. But for what?

Our Founding Fathers have faced this fear before. After countless oppressions and struggles and a brutal war for independence, we gained freedom, liberty. That sacred trust was that our social compact with one another, the Constitution, would uphold Natural Law. That is, our Founders placed their trust in a system that inherently said our rights end where another person’s begin. We are to be free from force and compulsion to the greatest extent possible. Our rights were to be a positive prohibition against government action.

The sales of gold, guns and food are all going through the roof for a reason: we all recognize that unless we all take sudden and immediate action to stop this overwhelming tide of socialism our country will be lost forever. We are fearful of losing our own self-control, and to be prepared, many are stockpiling basic human essentials in an effort to prevent the loss of free will.

Like our Founders, we have a mighty rEVOLution to engage. And with rEVOLution comes responsibility.

First, we need a cause.

For my part in the battle, I have chosen to become involved with the Campaign For Liberty. Many of my dear readers are probably rolling their eyes right now (another C4L post Luke?). The Campaign For Liberty’s mission is to, “promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity”. In other words, the Campaign is picking up were Ron Paul’s Presidential bid left off.

I am not suggesting that the C4L is the only political organization worthy of involvement. In fact, I think it will take many different organizations working together and finding agreement on a whole host of issues to find solid, cohesive momentum in a single direction. The point is to find a group that you can relate to and get involved.

For the record, Americans For Prosperity, The American Liberty Alliance, and Freedom Works all seem to be legitimate organizations seeking to gear Americans towards liberty and against socialism. There may be more, feel free to list them in comments, these are just the ones that seem to be the most organized, the broadest in agenda and most national in scope.

Second, we need the candidates and campaign volunteers.

I would like to suggest that the bailouts, the stimulus package, hell the whole gambit of spending and government expansion over the last decade, has inspired a whole new generation of political candidates. Many of them are operating under the broad and as-yet undefined mantra of the Freedom Movement. RJ Harris, Adam Kokesh, Peter Schiff and Rand Paul are a few stepping forward for the first time. But know this: the movement is nationwide, and at nearly every level.

In the loosest possible terms I will define the Freedom Movement’s purpose as this: to maximize individual liberty through strict adherence to the United States Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. From there, every candidate will differ, but the goal is the same: a sudden and dramatic change of course from the direction of Bush/Obama socialism.

The Titanic sank because it spotted the iceberg a mere 350 yards to late. What will the fate of the USS Constitution be? By getting involved passionately, aggressively, and uncompromisingly, we may have just enough time left to change the course of history. And this time, we might actually get strict adherence to the Constitution.

Political Affiliation: Republican Constitutionalist Libertarian

Ok I’m frustrated, angry even. Is there no Republican who has a sense of morality or values? Where is our leadership?

I thought we had hit bottom with the nomination of John McCain. Sadly, it seems, we still have a long, long way to go.

CNN: Gov. Sanford steps out on wife, duties as Governor, for week long extra-martial affair in Argentina.

Brilliant. Just brilliant.

To make matters worse, he was one of a very-few handful of Republican Party leaders who had the courage and conviction to truly stand up and fight the bailouts and stimulus spending.

Every single time we start to find a political stride, rebuild our message and return to our values this happens. I am not saying we need to be judgmental, or even moralistic. But what I am saying is this: do we really have time for all this corruption, greed, arrogance, graff and adultery?

Sanford… I saw him as 2012 Presidential material. I thought he might stand a chance to unite the libertarian and conservative wings of the Republican party. I thought he could satisfy both the Palin and Paul supporters who remain locked-in to their candidates (myself, being a Pauler, included).

SANFORD: WE ARE TRYING TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY FROM THE PERILS OF FINANCIAL RUIN AND SOCIALISM AND YOU SEE FIT TO STEP OUT ON YOUR WIFE, YOUR DUTIES AS GOVERNOR, FOR A LUSTY HIKING TRIP?

Uggh…

I wonder if it’s a setup. A compelling case could be made for targeted political character-assassinations against those who are fighting socialism, the bailouts and tyranny. But still, that’s no excuse.

We need men to be men. We need Christians to follow Christ. Our resolve, being tested mightily, needs to be the strongest it has ever been. We cannot let these trifles to enter our lives, not now, not ever. Men: every act against your duties as a man, a father and a husband makes our burdens greater and weakens our resolve. There can be no place for this, far, far too much is stake. Perfection must be our goal, both personally and politically. Now is the time that everything must be on the table, nothing held back.

We must be reminded that our Lord God has promised corruption and tyranny to all who stray from His ideals:

“But you, O God, will bring down the wicked

into the pit of corruption;

bloodthirsty and deceitful men

will not live our half their days.

But as for me, I trust in you.”  (Psalm 55:23)

I have called for repentance before. I repeat that call today.

Let us return to the Constitution. Let us return to Liberty and Freedom. Let us mean it when we say that our ideals are limited government, smaller taxation and personal freedom. Let us be men of such wisdom and character that we earn our way to lead this nation out of the wilderness. Let us make our hope that divinely inspired document, the Constitution.

From the WSJ:

But the poll suggests Mr. Obama faces challenges on multiple fronts, including growing concerns about government spending and the bailout of auto companies. A majority of people also disapprove of his decision to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Nearly seven in 10 survey respondents said they had concerns about federal interventions into the economy, including Mr. Obama’s decision to take an ownership stake in General Motors Corp., limits on executive compensation and the prospect of more government involvement in health care. The negative feeling toward the GM rescue was reflected elsewhere in the survey as well.

A solid majority — 58% — said that the president and Congress should focus on keeping the budget deficit down, even if takes longer for the economy to recover.

… 

The results come after weeks of Republican hammering of Mr. Obama for spending too much and taking on too many issues, arguments that appear to be resonating with some voters.

Mr. Obama’s overall job approval and personal ratings have slipped, particularly among independent voters. His job approval rating now stands at 56%, down from 61% in April. Among independents, it dropped from nearly two-to-one approval to closely divided.

I don’t make it a habit of checking out the Democratic Party website, but occasionally research and proper perspective balance leads one down that path as a libertarian constitutionalist.

I was greatly amused, ecstatic, that I found this: The Party Of NO

That’s right. House Republicans have stood up to Obama “long enough” (just over 100 days) and Democrats aren’t going to take it anymore.

The Party Of No.

It has a nice ring doesn’t it?

I enjoy being the ‘Party Of NO’. I enjoy delivering NO Republican votes for Obama’s socialism. I enjoy standing strong and united in the face of tyranny. I enjoy opposing Socialism. I enjoy stopping the destruction of our Constitution. I enjoy saying ‘thanks-but-no-thanks’ to government expansion.

This is what I want out of my party. I don’t want expansion of any government program. I don’t want any new government benefits. In fact, given our current budget deficit, we need to give serious consideration to shrinking or ending the benefits we have. Like parents to spoiled children, “no” is the appropriate response when your government is stepping out of line.

This is what Eric Cantor said shortly after the House Republicans stood up and did not deliver a single vote for Obama’s spending bill:

The second-ranking House Republican, Rep. Eric Cantor (Va.), put it more bluntly. “What transpired . . . and will give us a shot in the arm going forward is that we are standing up on principle and just saying no,” he said.

Strong Republican opposition will be the only thing that can stop a nation drunk on excess from finally going over the edge in a radical and transformitory self-destruction.

Locally, here in my home state of Idaho, the House Republicans are fighting one of the first of these battles.

Governor Butch Otter, elected largely for his popular libertarian leaning public perception, has gone from friend of the taxpayer to a plan for the future realist. Arguing that Idaho needs to adequately fund road projects now to avoid increased costs in the future, Otter has effectively alienated himself from the political base of his own party by arguing relentlessly for increased taxes on gasoline. So far, the Idaho House has refused to capitulate to his demands, voting down not once, not twice but voting down gasoline tax increases seven times.

In return, Otter has vetoed 33 bills in an attempt to display his executive power. The Idaho House has given no sign of caving in to Governor Otter who has threatened to prolong the Legislative process until they give in. Indeed, many may be tempted in the face of overwhelming pressure to end this Legislative session and promote more bad public policy of increased taxation and government growth.

The newest proposals from Otter’s office would raise gasoline taxes far in the future and only reflect more of the “buy now, pay later” mentality of debt that got us into this mess in the first place.

This battle is the first of many that Republicans are going to have to face to restore a national identity. We will be tested more now than at any other time in our party’s history. Our ideals are seen as outdated and counter-productive to effective political discussion. However, I will argue that it is because we abandoned our traditional message- lower taxes, less government and personal freedom- to give out political favors to those who would vote for us that we have become ineffective.

The way back is simple- we need to cut government and cut it drastically. It is no longer enough for Republicans to be against new taxes and new growth, we must seek to turn back what we already have. Like the family that is overspent or is facing a sudden and drastic downsize in their income, all things must be on the table to reach that zero-sum game. Remember, just because a government program is doing good doesn’t mean that it is right for government to be doing it at all.

Yes the battles will be tough, but this vision also offers the most hope for the future. We must be able to clearly contrast the government controlled ideals of socialism with that of Freedom and Liberty.

To do that, Republicans must not be afraid to be the ‘Party Of NO’.