Thomas Jefferson wanted to keep the New Federal Government and Money Apart
Thomas Jefferson did not trust government. And he didn’t trust moneyed men. Because when the two come together they cause nothing but trouble. That’s why he hated and distrusted Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton wanted a strong central government. A central bank. And an economic system favoring merchants and bankers. With big city moneyed men financing the government in return for special favors.
This is why the nation’s capital isn’t in New York City. It once was. But one of the first deals the Hamilton and Jefferson camps made was the relocation of the nation’s capital to a mosquito-infested swamp on the Potomac River. A long, long way from the moneyed men in New York City. To try to keep the new federal government and money apart. To restrict the influence of the moneyed men on the government. And to prevent the government from having easy access to big money.
Why did Jefferson want to do this? Well, they fought for their independence from Great Britain. Which was a constitutional monarchy. Where some in Parliament were no friends of British America. And got the king to agree with them rather than the pro-British America faction in Parliament. Ironically, the Americans got help in their War of Independence from France. Which had an absolute monarchy. Whose king ruled with no check on his power. Both governments were in the big cities. London. And Paris. Where the moneyed men were. In the big cities. Allowing these monarchies to do a whole lot of mischief all around the world. And a fair amount of mischief inside their own countries. Because the money and the government were in the same city.
Government + Money = Corruption
Great Britain and France were forever at war with each other. And with other countries. Requiring a lot of money. Which they got from the moneyed men. In return for special privileges that allowed them to get ever richer. Of course the mischief grew greater as they fought a world war or two. Requiring ever more money. Which they got from, of course, taxing the rest of the people. Even those who could little afford it. And once this starts, once the government starts accumulating debt, that taxation will only get greater.
This is what Jefferson was worried about. And why he so distrusted Hamilton. The Founding Fathers were all gentlemen of the Enlightenment. Disinterested public servants. Honorable men who would never take advantage of their position in government for personal gain. Because for these men honor was everything. Some even fought duels to protect their honor. As Hamilton did. And died. Washington, Adams, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, Jay and Franklin were men of exceptional integrity. Men who could be trusted. But here is where Hamilton and Jefferson differed. Hamilton believed only men like them would ever enter government. While Jefferson believed that government service would one day attract mostly scoundrels and knaves.
Of course, Jefferson was right. For as the nation grew so did the size of government. And the need for great big piles of money. Which the moneyed men provided. In exchange for special privileges. Patronage. Lucrative government contracts. Etc. Big piles of money flowed into Washington. And favors flowed out from Washington. With many a politician getting rich in the process of getting rich moneyed men richer. Politicians who used their position in government for personal gain. Corrupted politicians. As government + money = corruption. Which is why politicians always leave office richer than when they entered office.
Power + Corruption = Tyranny
This is how it started. As the size of government grew corruption grew. Just as Jefferson feared. All that money flowing into Washington corrupted ever more politicians. Who were not gentlemen of the Enlightenment. But the scoundrels and knaves Jefferson knew would come. Who used their position in government for personal gain. Whose corruption grew so great it exploded federal spending. So great that taxes from the moneyed men AND the middle class were unable to fund it. So the taxation grew more aggressive.
The government created by the Founding Fathers had no income taxes. They funded the few things the new national government did with tariffs for the most part. People lived from day to day without any fear of the taxman. The United States even did away with debtors’ prison. Prison where people were sent who could not pay their debts. A relic of the 19th century. Sort of. For there is one debt people can still go to prison for not paying. Past-due taxes. For the IRS can take everything you have and imprison you if you don’t pay your taxes. And those taxes have grown great as of late. As the tax code has grown convoluted. Requiring businesses to hire armies of accountants and lawyers to comply with. So the government can help the moneyed men who help the government. In return for special privileges, of course. Leaving the masses dreading April 15. As they dread opening any letter from the IRS.
If you want to know what it was like living under an absolute monarchy just think of the IRS. People fear the IRS. Just as people feared the arbitrary power of an absolute monarchy. A king could take your property and lock you away. Just like the IRS. And if you spoke out against the monarchy the king could make your life really unpleasant. Just like the IRS. During the 2012 election the IRS targeted conservative political groups to stifle their free speech. Delayed their tax-exempt status approval. And harassed them with costly tax audits. And now their tyranny has extended to people in the middle class. Who unbeknownst to them had a family member owe the federal government. Years earlier. Even a generation earlier. And the IRS is arbitrarily seizing the tax refunds from these debtors’ distant relatives to pay these debts. Even though they are in no way responsible for these debts. And the government has no documentation for this debt. Doesn’t matter. Because they have the power to do this. And these people are powerless to stop them. Just like people living under an absolute monarchy were powerless to stop their king from doing anything to them. And this is what Jefferson feared. For after corruption comes tyranny. For power + corruption = tyranny. (Just look at every tin-pot dictator that has oppressed his people). Which is why people fear the IRS. And the federal government the IRS is beholden to. Because they have become everything Jefferson feared they would.
Tags: absolute monarchy, Alexander Hamilton, British America, central government, corruption, debt, Enlightenment, favors, federal government, Founding Fathers, France, gentlemen, Great Britain, Hamilton, honor, IRS, Jefferson, king, knaves, middle class, monarchy, money, moneyed men, Parliament, personal gain, politician, power, privileges, scoundrels, special favors, special privileges, tax refund, taxation, taxes, Thomas Jefferson, tyranny, Washington
Week in Review
There have been a lot of movies showing how fracking is polluting our groundwater. Giving people cancer. Causing fire to blow out of people’s water faucets. Makers of movies appear on The Daily Show and The Colbert Report talking about how horrible and dangerous fracking is. So the evils of fracking are all around us. But, strangely, these dangers are conspicuous by their absence in one area. Actual news stories.
We hear about how global warming is getting worse. We hear example after example of how Republicans hate the poor and women and want to take away health insurance from everyone. We are bombarded with news about how the rich aren’t paying their fair share and how Republicans are trying to buy elections. But we don’t see reporters filming fire shooting out of a water faucet. And we don’t see the CDC in fracking areas responding to soaring cancer rates. Or fracking fields being turned into superfund cleanup sites.
It’s odd because when Malaysian Airways Flight 370 went missing 4 weeks ago CNN covered the missing airplane 24/7. Even though they had nothing to report. They just brought in experts (and a physic) and theorized about what might have happened. The other news channels covered the non-news with nearly the same fervor as CNN. So you would think that if fracking was causing fire to shoot out of water faucets and was giving everyone cancer they would be covering that 24/7. For most of these news channels are liberal. And liberals hate fracking. But they don’t go to North Dakota to report the abject misery fracking has brought them. Probably because they don’t want to show the economic boom going on in North Dakota. Where people are going to for jobs. Where the unemployment rate there (2.6% as of February 2014) is the lowest in the nation. Perhaps that’s why they don’t report the abject misery fracking is causing in North Dakota. Because there is none.
So if the media isn’t in North Dakota is the government? Is the EPA documenting the abject misery fracking is causing the good people of North Dakota? No. Instead, they’re purposely trying to give people cancer (see What’s more dangerous to your health than fracking? The EPA, apparently by Ashe Schow posted 4/2/2014 on the Washington Examiner).
An EPA inspector general’s report found that the agency did obtain approval to conduct five “human research studies” exposing “81 human study subjects to” toxic pollutants including diesel exhaust…
So the EPA asked people to expose themselves to dangerous pollutants — some at levels 50 times greater than what is safe — but didn’t tell them about the dangers.
Why would the EPA, which supposedly cares so much about the public’s health, do this, especially to people who already had health problems?
To justify more regulations and funding, of course.
They are desperately trying to kill people by exposing them to something they can later call a toxic pollutant. So they can “justify more regulations and funding.” And they will tell the people they kill, “Fear not, you shall not have died in vain. Your horrible death will bring about the greatest kind of good there is. It will enable us to expand the size of the federal government. Allowing it to reach further into your lives. Well, not yours per se because you’ll be dead. Thanks to us. But other people will know the joy of having the federal government intruding further into their private lives. Until one day there are no more private lives.”
This is what the federal government thinks is good. Not a 2.6% unemployment rate. Like they have in North Dakota. Thanks to fracking. Which the people living there don’t seem to mind. As the people moving there don’t seem to mind. Interestingly, the blue states with higher concentrations of liberals aren’t enjoying such economic prosperity. The unemployment rate in New York is 6.8%. In Illinois it’s 8.7%. And in California it’s 8%. So they’re doing something right in North Dakota. And something very wrong in New York, Illinois and California. Perhaps committing too many resources on liberal policies. Instead of creating an economic climate that will give people the thing they want most. A job.
Tags: cancer, EPA, federal government, fire, fracking, funding, job, liberal, North Dakota, regulations, toxic pollutant, unemployment rate, water faucets
(Originally published February 12th, 2013)
Prior to 1900 the Role of the Federal Government was primarily to Provide for the Common Defense
In 1800 the new federal government didn’t do a lot. It spent only about $11 million (in nominal dollars). With 55% going to defense. About 31% went to pay interest on the war debt. About 2% went to the postal service. And about 12% went to other stuff. Defense spending and interest on the war debt added up to about 86% of all federal outlays (see Government Spending Details).
In 1860, just before the Civil War, spending increased to $78 million (in nominal dollars). Defense spending fell to 37%. Interest spending fell to 4%. And postal service spending rose to 19%. While spending on other stuff rose to 40%. Just over 60 years from the founding the federal government had changed. It was less limited than the Founding Fathers designed it to be.
In 1900 spending increased to $628.6 million (in nominal dollars). With defense spending coming in at 53%. The postal service at 17%. Interest went up to 6.4%. And other spending fell to 24%. Again, defense spending consumed over half of all federal spending. For the role of the federal government was still primarily providing for the common defense. Running the postal service. Treating with other nations. And trading with them. As well as collecting duties and tariffs at our ports which paid for the federal government. There was a lot of graft and patronage. And long lines for government jobs. Primarily because government was still somewhat limited. With a limited number of government jobs to reward campaign contributors. But that was about to change.
The Progressives expanded the Role of the Federal Government in our Lives and made it more Motherly
The American Civil War killed about 625,000 men. With an 1860 population of 31,443,321 those deaths amounted to about 2% of the prewar population. To put that into perspective if 2% of the U.S. population died in a war today that would be approximately 6.2 million people. And to put that into perspective the total population of the state of Missouri is about 6 million people. So the American Civil War claimed a very large percentage of the population. Leaving a lot of children to grow up without a father. Which had a profound impact on the size of the federal government.
Prior to this generation American men were some of the manliest men in the world. Tough and rugged. Who could live off of the land. Completely self-sufficient. These are the men that made America. Men who fought and won our independence. Who explored and settled the frontier. Farmers who worked all day in the field. Men who dug canals by hand. And built our railroads. Men who endured hardships and never complained. Then came the Civil War generation. Sons who lost their fathers. And wives who lost their husbands, brothers, fathers and uncles. Who lost all the men in their lives in that horrible war. These women hated that war. And manly displays of aggression. For it was manly displays of aggression that led to fighting. And war. Having lost so much already they didn’t want to lose the only men they had left. Their sons. So they protected and nurtured them. Taught them to shun violence. To be kinder and softer. To be not so tough or rugged. To be less manly. And when these men grew up they went into politics and started the progressive movement.
The federal government was no longer just to provide for the common defense. To run the postal service. To treat with other nations. To trade with other nations. Run our custom houses. No. Now the federal government grew to be kinder, softer and more motherly. The progressives expanded the role of the federal government in our lives. Woodrow Wilson wanted to turn the country into a quasi monarchy. With a very strong executive branch that could rule against the wishes of Congress. The Federal Reserve (America’s central bank) came into existence during Wilson’s presidency. Which was going to end recessions forever. Then came the Great Depression. A crisis so good that FDR did not let it go to waste. FDR expanded the size of the federal government. Putting it on a path of permanent growth. And it’s been growing ever since.
They decreased Defense Spending and increased Borrowings to increase Non-Defense Spending
The federal government grew beyond its Constitutional limits. And the intent of the Founding Fathers. Just as Thomas Jefferson feared. It consolidated power just as all monarchies did. And that was Jefferson’s fear. Consolidation. Seeing the states absorbed by a leviathan federal government. Becoming the very thing the American colonists fought for independence from. So that’s where the federal government changed. In the early 20th Century. Before that it spent money mostly for defense and a postal service. Now it spends money for every social program under the sun. There is great debate now in Washington about reducing the deficit. With the Democrats blaming the deficit problems on too much defense spending. And too little taxation on the rich. But if you look at the history of federal spending since 1940 the numbers say otherwise (see Table 3.1—OUTLAYS BY SUPERFUNCTION AND FUNCTION: 1940–2017 and A History of Debt In The United States).
As defense spending (including Veterans Benefits and Services) rose during World War II non-defense spending (Education, Training, Employment, Social Services, Health, Income Security, Social Security, Energy, Natural Resources, Environment, Commerce, Housing Credit, Transportation, Community and Regional Development, International Affairs, General Science, Space, Technology, Agriculture, Administration of Justice and General Government) fell as a percentage of total federal outlays. And the federal debt rose (federal debt is in constant 2012 dollars). After the war defense spending fell to 50% while the percentage of non-defense spending rose. And the federal debt dropped slightly and remained relatively constant for about 30 years.
This tug of war between defense spending and non-defense spending is also called the guns vs. butter debate. Where those in favor of spending money on guns at the federal level are more constructionists. They want to follow the Constitution as the Founding Fathers wrote it. While those who favor spending money on butter at the federal level want to want to buy more votes by giving away free stuff.
Defense spending ramped back up for the Korean War and the Cold War during the Fifties. After the armistice ended hostilities in Korea defense spending began a long decline back to about 50% of all federal outlays. Where it flattened out and rose slightly for the Vietnam War. After America exited the Vietnam War defense spending entered a long decline where it dropped below 30% of all federal outlays. Reagan’s defense spending raised defense spending back up to 30%. After Reagan won the Cold War Clinton enjoyed the peace dividend and cut defense spending down to just below 20%. After 9/11 Bush increased defense spending just above 20% of all federal outlays where it remains today.
During this time non-defense spending was basically the mirror of defense spending. Showing that they decreased defense spending over time to increase non-defense spending. But there wasn’t enough defense spending to cut so borrowing took off during the Reagan administration. It leveled off during the Clinton administration as he enjoyed the peace dividend after the defeat of the Soviet Union in the Cold War. Non-defense spending soared over 70% of all federal outlays during the Bush administration. Requiring additional borrowings. Then President Obama increased non-defense spending so great it resulted in record deficits. Taking the federal debt to record highs.
So is defense spending the cause of our deficits? No. Defense spending as a percentage of all federal outlays is near a historical low. While non-defense spending has soared to a record high. As did our federal debt. Clearly showing that the driving force behind our deficits and debt is non-defense spending. Not defense spending. Nor is it because we’re not taxing people enough. We’re just spending too much. In about 50 years non-defense spending rose from around 22% of all federal outlays to 74%. An increase of 223%. While defense spending fell from 76% to 22%. A decline of 245%. While the federal debt rose 619%. And interest on the debt soared 24,904%. The cost of favoring butter in the guns vs. butter debate. The federal government has been gutting the main responsibility of the federal government, defense, to pay for something that didn’t enter the federal government until the 20th Century. All that non-defense spending. Which doesn’t even include the postal service today.
Tags: American Civil War, Civil War, Clinton, Cold War, debt, defense, defense spending, deficit, FDR, federal debt, federal government, federal outlays, Founding Fathers, interest, Jefferson, Korean War, manly men, motherly, non-defense spending, Postal Service, Progressive, Reagan, Vietnam War, Wilson
(Originally published January 10th, 2013)
The Social Democracies of Europe were all Oppressive Absolute Monarchies at one Time
What happened in Newtown, Connecticut, was a tragedy. The shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary took 26 lives. Including 20 children. The most innocent of us. Which has ignited a firestorm of debate over guns. The Left blames these deaths on an epidemic of gun violence. Caused by people having access to guns. So the Left wants to have a real debate on gun control. To stop this epidemic of child deaths caused by firearms. By severely restricting access to guns.
Those on the Right, on the other hand, want to protect their Second Amendment right. The right to keep and bear arms. Which allowed the First Amendment. Freedom of speech. The British colonial governors tried hard to clamp down on the anti-British sentiment in their American colonies. And to muzzle that anti-British speech. They sent over British Red Coats to occupy American cities to keep order. And to find and confiscate the Americans’ guns. So the first few amendments of the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) protected free speech. Gave us the power to protect ourselves from future state oppressors. And they even included the Third Amendment. Which states, “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.” Again, further protection from state oppression.
The nature of states is to oppress their people. Most have throughout history. Even the social democracies of Europe were all oppressive absolute monarchies at one time. Where kings could do pretty much anything they wanted to. England changed that with representative government. America expanded on these liberties in the New World. And ever since has been very wary of government. Until the Twentieth century. When the growth of government began. Transferring ever more power to the federal government. Everything the Founding Fathers feared would happen without a Bill of Rights.
When it comes to Restricting our Constitutional Rights Liberals Trust Government while Fearing Republicans
Those on the Left say the Constitution is a relic of a different age. That today’s government is a kinder government. A more caring government. One that just wants to take care of the people. By providing generous benefits. Of course this is how some of the worst dictatorships started. Nazi Germany and the USSR both put the people first. Or so they said. Even their names said they were putting the people first. The Nazis were National Socialists. And the USSR was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Socialism is all about taking care of the people. Yet these nations had some the most brutal secret police that terrorized and oppressed their people. For there is no easier way to dictatorial power than championing the people. And once the people stop fearing their government is when the state can take away their guns. To make that oppression easier. The Syrian government is currently having difficulty oppressing their people because they failed to keep guns out of the hands of those they wish to oppress.
If you read a history book you will read a lot about state secret police and state oppression. It’s more the rule than the exception. When you grow up in a free country it’s hard to believe this. And when you’re young you think whatever you know and have experienced is normal. And that things have always been that way. Which is why the younger liberals dismiss talk about the transfer of power to the federal government. While the older conservatives who have seen great change in their lives and know history still fear their government. While the younger liberals grow up believing that government is not to be feared but to be trusted blindly. They even look at what China is doing with their economy with approval. Where the government controls the economy. They like that. Because liberals believe we can always trust a government more than a private corporation. Even if that government oppresses their people. Like they do in China. Where people still deal with famine in the country. Rural workers are paid poorly and live in dormitories in the city factories. And political dissidents are tortured in labor camps where they manufacture goods without pay.
So naïve liberals trust government. Completely. Unless it’s George W. Bush using the Patriot Act. That they fear. But when President Obama uses the Patriot Act liberals ask, “The Patriot what?” When it came to secret wiretaps on people with known ties to terrorists the Left quaked with fear over where these abuses of power would end. But when President Obama starts talking about gun control they haven’t a care in the world. Because when it comes to restricting our constitutional rights liberals trust government while fearing Republicans.
People killed 37 Kids with Guns in 2010 while Partial-Birth Abortions have claimed some 2,000 Lives a Year
President Obama’s former Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” For the best way to advance an agenda (especially an unpopular agenda) was in the emotional chaos following a serious crisis. Such as the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary. The majority of Americans oppose gun control. But in that majority are some people that they may be able to convince that some restrictions on the Second Amendment is a good thing in the emotional chaos following Sandy Hook Elementary. Convincing them that guns are causing an epidemic of childhood deaths. That without guns these kids simply wouldn’t be dying. A powerful message during emotional times. But if you remove the emotions and look at some facts you see something different (see 10 Leading Causes of Death, United States by the Centers for Disease Control).
These are deaths by unintentional injury. Looking at the leading causes of death in 2010 (the latest year of data) for children aged 5-14 you see 1,643 deaths. About half (809) of those are from motor vehicle accidents. Drowning came in next at 251 (15.3%). Then fire/burn at 135 (8.2%). Then suffocation at 79 (4.8%). You have to go all the way down to number 7 on the list to get to firearms. Where we can see they killed 37 children in 2010. Or 2.3% of the total number of kids aged 5-14 who died from an unintentional injury. Based on an approximate population of 41 million kids aged 5-14 the total number of kids killed by firearms comes to about 0.00009% of this total. According to the CDC’s numbers, guns aren’t killing a lot of kids. Motor vehicles are. But firearms are not. So taking away our guns will probably not change these numbers much. If at all. So the motive can’t be saving children’s lives. In fact, one can make the argument that there is a greater killer of children out there than anything on the above list. Abortion.
It’s hard to get numbers on abortions. But if you check various sources the number appears to be over a million a year. Wikipedia shows 1,313,000 abortions in 2000. Including 2,232 (about 0.17% of all abortions in 2000) that were partial-birth abortions. Whatever your politics on the abortion issue are one thing regarding partial-birth abortions is clear. These are human lives. For the ‘partial’ part of these abortions requires terminating the life of the fetus while the head is still inside of the mother. For if they terminated the life of the fetus outside of the mother it would be murder according to the law. And you can’t kill something that isn’t alive. In fact, an accidental wrongful death of a pregnant woman often results in two charges of manslaughter. One for the mother. And one for the unborn fetus. Assuming there was no spike in partial-birth abortions in 2000 one can assume that number is representative of all years. Which is far more deaths than by motor vehicle accident let alone from firearms. Yet President Obama wants gun control to save kids lives. When he could save even more by simply revising his stance on partial-birth abortion. Something he argued to keep when a state senator in Illinois.
Tags: abortion, anti-British, Bill of Rights, British, conservatives, Constitutional rights, emotional chaos, federal government, fetus, firearms, free speech, gun control, gun violence, liberals, Nazi, Newtown, partial-birth abortion, Patriot Act, President Obama, Sandy Hook, Second Amendment, secret police, serious crisis, socialist, state oppression, USSR
Slavery made the South more like an Old World Aristocracy than a New World Meritocracy
Democrats don’t like people of color. Never have. The Democrat Party’s lineage goes back to Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican Party. Thomas Jefferson was one of our Founding Fathers who, as the Democrats love to remind us, owned slaves. In fact, the Democratic-Republican Party was the party of the planter elite. And of slavery. While the opposition party, the Federalists, whose members included George Washington, John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, preferred manufacturing and commerce for the future of the United States. Not just plantations and slavery.
It was these southern planters who made the Three-Fifths Compromise necessary. Slaves couldn’t vote. So the North didn’t want to count them in determining the number of representatives a state had in the House of Representatives. The planter elite did not like this. As the anti-slave North had more free people and would end up controlling the government. Possibly passing anti-slave legislation. Well, without the southern states there would be no United States. So they compromised and counted some of their slaves. Giving the planter elite greater power in the new federal government than their population would otherwise have allowed. And to seal the deal they agreed not to discuss the issue of slavery again for 20 years.
The minority power in the South, the planter elite, who were Democratic-Republicans, brought a lot of slaves to the United States during that 20 year moratorium on the slavery issue. Swelling the slave population in the South. But once the 20 years were up Congress banned the slave trade. So from that point forward all slaves would have to be born on U.S. soil. But the minority power in the South had built their little fiefdoms by then. Owning large estates. With their lands worked by their large slaveholdings. Making the South more like an Old World aristocracy than a New World meritocracy. And the planter elite liked having so much power vested in so few of their hands. From having their few numbers control the federal government. To their absolute control of so many human lives on their plantations. They were an elite few. A superior people. And they liked it.
The South used the Power of the Federal Government to Suppress States’ Rights in the North with the Fugitive Slave Act
Over time as the north pursued the dreams of Washington, Adams and Hamilton immigration began to swell the population in the industrial North. Leading to the South losing their control over the House of Representatives. And threatening their elitism. By then the Democratic-Republican Party had become the Democrat Party. Which pushed to protect the institution of slavery. To protect their southern aristocracy. And their elevated status as a superior people. They used the power of the federal government where they could. Such as passing the Fugitive Slave Act to force free states against their will to return free blacks in their states to slavery. Then they argued that their states’ rights were at risk with all of the North’s abolition talk. Where the North might one day do what the South did to them. Use the federal government to force a state to do something against their will. Such as they did with the Fugitive Slave Act.
Their fight for the Senate led to further compromises to keep the union together while accommodating the planter elite. The Missouri Compromise (1820) had prohibited slavery in the new territory in the Louisiana Territory above approximately the southern border of Missouri (but permitted it within the borders of Missouri). Each state gets two senators. So with the House lost the Democrats needed more of the new states from the Louisiana Territory entered into the Union as slave states. Even those above the southern border of Missouri. Which they did with the Kansas–Nebraska Act. Which repealed the Missouri Compromise and replaced it with popular sovereignty. Where the people would chose whether they wanted to be a slave state or a free state. Setting off a mad rush by both sides to get to these territories so they could vote the slave status of these new states their way. Leading to a bloody civil war in Kansas.
Then another blow fell to the southern aristocracy. Abraham Lincoln. With the election of Republican Abraham Lincoln the southern aristocracy lost not only the House of Representatives but the presidency as well. Worse, the Republicans were an anti-slavery party. So even if they were somehow able to hold onto the Senate the Republicans in power would challenge the planter elite’s supremacy. Break up their fiefdoms. And challenge their power. Something this elite few were willing to fight to prevent. Well, they were willing to have others fight for them. To maintain the social order in the South. Leading to cries about states’ rights. And an over-powerful federal government. Despite their having used the power of the federal government to suppress states’ rights in the North with the Fugitive Slave Act.
Democrats see Benefits for Blacks as a Necessary Evil to keep them in Power
Most southerners were poor farmers. Who owned no slaves. Yet they rose to fight for states’ rights. And to protect the South from northern aggression. At least, that was what the planter elite had them believe. Who sent many of these poor farmers to their deaths in the American Civil War. When it was over approximately 8.6% of the South’s population was dead. By comparison World War II killed approximately 405,399 Americans. However, if we had suffered the same death rate as the South did in the American Civil War our World War II dead would have totaled over 12 million. This is what the southern aristocracy was willing to—and did—sacrifice to maintain their power and privilege. Their supremacy over other people. Especially over their black slaves.
Such a feeling of superiority allows you to do some pretty horrible things. Just review the history of Nazi Germany to see some of the atrocities a ‘master race’ can do. In the post-war South the Democrats did not lose with grace. They resented the martial law in the South after the war. And they hated Republican rule. Protecting their former slaves. Even allowing them to run for government office. It was all too much for the fallen southern aristocracy. To remind people of the proper order of southern society they formed the KKK. And unleashed a terror across the South. Killing their former slaves. And Republicans. To codify their white supremacy the Democrats turned to the legislature. And passed laws to segregate the ‘inferior blacks’ from their superior selves. Jim Crowe Laws. Separate but equal. With the emphasis on ‘separate’. In time pressure grew against the southern Democrats. But they held strong in Congress. Fighting against any civil rights legislation. Including the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Where Democrat Senator Robert Byrd (and former Exalted Cyclops of the KKK) filibustered against the Civil Rights Act for 14 hours and 13 minutes. To keep the blacks segregated from their superior selves.
Things are a lot better these days. But Democrat feelings of superiority die hard. Even though they would have us believe they like blacks today. Despite their past hatred of blacks. And their seething anger of having lost them from their plantations. But they found a way to ‘get them back on the plantation’. By making them dependent on government. In exchange for their vote. Which keeps them in power. Back where they believe they belong. And are entitled to be. Because they are a superior people. So benefits for blacks are a necessary evil to Democrats. For they still don’t like them. As evidenced by where they live. Where some of the richest Democrats (such as Nancy Pelosi) live in the whitest of neighborhoods. And their apparent racial purification of society. Through the guise of women’s rights. The most important thing to women, according to Democrats, is abortion. And they do their best to make abortion readily available. Especially to women of color. Like in New York City. And Mississippi. Where black women are having far more abortions than white women. Making America whiter. More like the neighborhood where Nancy Pelosi lives. And more like the color Democrats have fought to keep America since the Three-Fifths Compromise. The Fugitive Slave Act. Popular Sovereignty. The KKK. And Jim Crowe Laws.
Tags: abolition, abortion, Abraham Lincoln, American Civil War, aristocracy, blacks, civil rights, Democrat Party, Democratic-Republican Party, Democrats, elite, elite few, federal government, fiefdoms, Fugitive Slave Act, House of Representatives, Jim Crowe laws, Kansas, Kansas-Nebraska Act, KKK, Louisiana Territory, Missouri, Missouri Compromise, Nancy Pelosi, New World, North, Old World, plantation, planter elite, popular sovereignty, power, privilege, Republican, Senate, slavery, slaves, South, southern aristocracy, Southern Democrats, states' rights, superior, superiority, supremacy, Three-Fifths Compromise, white supremacy
The Inauguration Date was originally in March to allow for Long Travel Times
It was difficult to be a career politician at the federal/national level at the Founding. Thanks to the horse. The primary means of transportation over great distances. Either on horseback. Or pulled in a buggy. Neither of which provided for a comfortable ride. With that discomfort compounded by the fact you were leaving family and friends behind. People you wouldn’t see again for a very long time.
When John Adams served in the Continental Congress he rode for some two weeks through brutal winter weather on hard, frozen ground. Ground so hard and dangerous that they let the horses only walk. Whether it was traveling to Cambridge to meet with the newly appointed General Washington facing off with the British in Boston. Or riding on to the federal capital in Philadelphia. The ride was long, brutal and cold. As well as lonely. For Adams missed his wife and family when away serving his country. Which he did often. And longed to return home.
James Madison was a Virginian. And hated traveling up to the federal capital in Philadelphia. And then later in New York. For he hated being away from his wife. And he hated those long rides on hard, bumpy roads. As Madison suffered from some digestive disorders. Leaving him with chronic discomfort in his abdomen. And lower. For he probably suffered from hemorrhoids, too. Making those long, bumpy rides unbearable. This is why the inauguration date was originally in March instead of January like it is today. They had to allow for long travel times and bad weather for the new office holders to get to their offices. Unlike today where you can fly from anywhere in the United States to Washington D.C. in one day.
James Reynolds had his Wife seduce and sleep with Alexander Hamilton so he could Blackmail Him
George Washington was president when the nation’s capital was in New York City. Which was a long way from Mount Vernon. Washington’s Virginian home. Other Virginians were the first Secretary of State. Thomas Jefferson. The first Attorney General. Edmund Randolph. And the first Speaker of the House. James Madison. While the first Vice President, John Adams, and the first Secretary of War, Henry Knox, came from Massachusetts. The first Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton, on the other hand, was a New Yorker. Living in New York City. Close to the capital.
Ironically, the man closest to his wife was the one to have an extramarital affair. Alexander Hamilton. Who was targeted by a couple of con people. Mr. and Mrs. Reynolds. That’s right, Mr. Reynolds used his wife, Maria, to seduce Alexander Hamilton. Including actually having sexual relations with him. Just so he, James Reynolds, could blackmail Hamilton for money. Threatening to tell Hamilton’s wife. And ruining his good reputation as a gentleman if he didn’t pay. He paid. For awhile. And with his own money. Reynolds was later arrested for counterfeiting. And told the opposition party of Hamilton’s affair. Thomas Jefferson. And his fellow Republicans (the forerunner to the Democrat party, not the Republican Party of today whose first president was Abraham Lincoln).
Thomas Jefferson loved his wife and hated being apart from her. The last place he wanted to be in 1775/1776 was at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia. A lonely year spent a very long way from his wife. Who was sickly. And died in 1782. Jefferson was at her bedside when she passed. And he was devastated. He had promised her he would never remarry. And he never did. He later accepted the post as United States Minister to France. A much greater distance from Virginia. Which is probably the first time he wanted to be far away from his beloved Monticello. To escape the desolation of life without his wife.
The Founding Fathers served Reluctantly and didn’t leave Office Richer than when they entered Office
Hamilton and Jefferson hated each other. They vehemently disagreed with each other’s vision for the United States. When Jefferson got wind of the Hamilton affair he pounced on it. Well, not so much him. But the Republican Party which he was the de facto head of. And a guy by the name of James Callender. A pamphleteer and journalist. And all around scandalmonger. He made the Hamilton affair public for the Jefferson Republicans. Who, being men of the Enlightenment, would not sink to such a low level. But Callender would. And did. Who Jefferson helped with some financial support. But Callender ended up in jail for sedition. And when he got out he wanted Jefferson to make him post master general of Virginia in return for services rendered. Jefferson refused. Then Callender turned on Jefferson. Revealing that it was him that was bankrolling his journalistic scandal mongering. And that he fathered children with his slave Sally Hemings.
George Washington was the commanding general of the Continental Army from 1775 until 1783. And he spent most of that time with his army in the field. Away from his beloved Mount Vernon. Just after he returned to civilian life came the Philadelphia Convention. And a new nation. The first president of that new nation? Much to his displeasure it was him. George Washington. Who was the only one people were willing to give the powers of the new federal government to. And after sacrificing so much he did not want to see it all be for nothing. So he served one term as president. Then another. In New York. A long way from Virginia. And pretty much hated every minute of it. Especially the bickering between his ‘children’. Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. He was never happier than when he left office in 1797. Sadly, he lived just shy of three years in retirement.
The Founding Fathers hated being in office. They hated being away from home. And the long travel time to and from home. Which meant when they were serving in office they did not see their family and friends. Unlike today. Where modern transportation allows career politicians to enjoy the graft in Washington. While breaking it up with numerous vacations back home. Without having to endure two weeks of bouncy rides with hemorrhoids. Or riding horseback in blowing snow. Being a career politician today is like being part of an aristocracy. Where you travel first class. And live first class. Unlike the Spartan loneliness at the Founding. And the animus. Washington’s, Jefferson’s, Madison’s and Hamilton’s lives all got worse from serving. Washington was cheated out of a long retirement he more than earned. Jefferson suffered bitter loneliness after losing his wife and probably did turn to the comfort of a slave. (Sally Hemings had accompanied him to Paris to care for his daughter. And later was a house servant. Though he didn’t legally free her and her children from slavery they did live their lives out as free people after he died. Which was probably a compromise by Jefferson to reconcile his feelings for her while protecting his historical legacy). Something that blemishes his reputation to this day. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson went from practically best friends to bitter enemies before they left Washington (though they rekindled their friendship later in retirement). James Madison was the father of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Believed in a strong federal government and wrote the Federalist Papers with Alexander Hamilton to help ratify the Constitution. Then he switch sides. And sided with Thomas Jefferson and fought for limited government. Then he was president during the War of 1812 and believed in a strong federal government again after struggling through that war with a weak government. Madison spent his later years rewriting letters and correspondence. Making large revisions to his historical legacy. While Alexander Hamilton’s stand on principle ultimately led to his death in a duel with Aaron Burr.
Washington, Jefferson and Madison all returned home after serving as president poorer than when they left for Washington. That just doesn’t happen today. Today once you get elected to a federal office in Washington you return home a millionaire. Because being a professional politician today pays very well. Which is why there is less standing on principle in Washington and more doing what it takes to remain in power. Such as lying to the American people. “If you like your health insurance and your doctor you can keep your health insurance and doctor.” The Founding Fathers served reluctantly. And their lives were worse for serving. But the country was far better off because they did. And that’s something else that just doesn’t happen today.
Tags: Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Callender, career politician, Continental Congress, federal government, Founding, Founding Fathers, George Washington, Hamilton, inauguration date, James Callender, James Madison, James Reynolds, Jefferson, John Adams, Madison, Mount Vernon, Mr. Reynolds, Mrs. Reynolds, New York, Philadelphia, Thomas Jefferson, Virginia, Washington
Stores used the Incentives of Black Friday to get People to do what they Wanted
A belated happy Thanksgiving. And a belated happy Black Friday. We say belated because Black Friday was already here by the time Friday woke from its sleepy slumber. No more waiting in line Friday morning for those stores to open. No. Today if you snooze (i.e., spend Thanksgiving with the family at home) you lose. Because it’s first come first served. Which means if you wanted to get some of those deep discounts before they run out you didn’t let anything silly like celebrating Thanksgiving with the family get in your way.
Now everyone loves a bargain. It’s why we scan the Sunday sales papers. And search online for the best price. But in the Obama ‘recovery’ there isn’t a whole lot of spending going on. As there isn’t a whole lot of employment going on. Since President Obama assumed office his policies have destroyed some 10 million jobs. And one thing about unemployed people. They definitely want a bargain. Especially if they want a good Christmas for their family during the dark times of the Obama presidency.
But there is a greater lesson Black Friday can tell us other than President Obama is a bad president. Especially in things economic. Why are stores opening on Thanksgiving? Because they’re cruel and evil forcing their workers to slave away during a holiday? No. It’s not that. In fact, some employees love working on a holiday. For they get paid more working on a holiday than they normally would. Allowing them to earn extra money to give their families a good Christmas during the dark times of the Obama presidency. As it turns out shoppers and workers alike like Black Friday. For it allows each to have more for less. And that is the great lesson of Black Friday. Getting people to do what you want by offering them something they want. Or, in other words, offering them an incentive.
The Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 pitted Northern Republicans against Slave-Owning Southern Democrats
Slaves working in the planter South had no desire to be slaves. Yet they were slaves. Why? There weren’t slaves in the North. Only in the South. The blacks in the north chose not to be slaves. While those in the South had no choice. The planter elite in the South, the ‘Old World’ planter aristocracy, used force. And having a larger force in Washington than they normally would have (thanks to the Three-Fifths Compromise that counted slaves as three-fifths of a person for representation in Congress) they were able to use the force of government to continue to force blacks into slavery. The Southern Democrats (i.e., the ‘Old World’ planter aristocracy) were able to keep the black man enslaved until the mid 19th century. Even using the power of the federal government to override states’ rights in the North. Using the Fugitive Slave Act to force northern states to return fugitive slaves to their Southern Democrat owners. The ‘Old World’ planter aristocracy.
This is coercion. This is how you get people to do what they don’t want to do. Using the power of the federal government the Southern Democrats kept their slaves in bondage. Also, using the power of the federal government they forced those in the North who wanted to help ‘fugitive’ slaves to stay free return their slaves or else. That ‘or else’ being the full weight of the federal government coming down on them with extreme prejudice. But when the North became more populated control of the House of Representatives favored the larger populated North. Despite the Three-Fifths Compromise. Which left the Senate. And as each state got two senators how the new states entered the union mattered. For the planter elite to hold their power over the United States.
The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was an early attempt to put slavery onto the path of oblivion. Those in the North did not want it. The planter elite in the South did. So they compromised. Slavery could remain in the South to appease the planter elite but the compromise prohibited slavery in the new Louisiana Territory that Thomas Jefferson purchased above the 36°30′ parallel (about the southern border of Missouri). Except in the state of Missouri. Then came the Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 and the idea of popular sovereignty. Throwing the Missouri Compromise of 1820 out the window. These two states were both above the 36°30′ parallel. The Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 said the first people into the fledging states could choose for themselves if they would be a slave-state or a free-state. Which led to a mad rush to Kansas. And a bloody civil war there. That eventually led to the American Civil War. To settle once and for all the issue of slavery in America. Would the Southern Democrats prevail and keep the black man in bondage? Or would the Republicans free the slaves?
Obamacare is less like Black Friday and more like Slavery
Even if you flunked your history class you should know the answer to this. Abraham Lincoln and his Republicans defeated the Southern Democrats and won the American Civil War. Freeing the slaves. Of course, the Southern Democrats were not good losers. They gave us the KKK. Then the Jim Crowe Laws. The separate but equal nonsense that didn’t exist in the Republican North. The old southern aristocracy were not huge fans of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. All they wanted was privilege. They wanted the Old World in the New World. And the planter elite fought bitterly to keep that. Well, not them as much as their fellow southerners they lied to about states’ rights. Getting them (most of who were too poor to own a single slave) to fight and sacrifice their lives to maintain the institution of slavery. To maintain the privilege of the southern aristocracy.
So there you have examples of incentive and coercion. Black Friday incentivized people to hire in for seasonal jobs during the holiday season. And brought people into stores with deep discounting. Everyone got something they wanted. And so they did what the store owners wanted. People worked for them on Thanksgiving. And people came into the stores on Thanksgiving. Both of their own free will. Now contrast that to slavery. Where there was no free will. Only the coercion of the federal government. Where fear and intimidation compelled slaves to remain slaves. And their only incentive was to obey their masters to avoid physical harm.
With the Supreme Court ruling the penalty of Obamacare became a tax. Allowing the federal government to compel people to buy health insurance or suffer the consequences. A ‘tax’ that will grow in time. Buy insurance or else. With that ‘or else’ being the full force and fury of the IRS. Something most people would find more unpleasant than a colonoscopy. Without any anesthetic. No, a letter from the IRS is something no one wants to see in their mail. For few things will fill you with fear and dread more. This is the enforcement mechanism of Obamacare. Which they need because people otherwise wouldn’t spend more for less. Higher insurance premiums to cover things they will never need (a gay man will never need prenatal care). And sky-high deductibles that will be like having no insurance. As everything will be out of pocket until you reach that sky-high deductible. Which few people will reach unless they have a catastrophic illness or accident. This is why people are NOT signing up for Obamacare. Because Obamacare ain’t no Black Friday. Obamacare is offering nothing the people want. At prices higher than they ever had to pay for health insurance before. Leaving them with less to spend on their family. Forcing them to cut out things they once enjoyed. Which is why Obamacare will fail. Because you can’t incentivize people to make their lives worse. No, to do that you need the fearful power of the state. Just like the Southern Democrats used to maintain the institution of slavery.
Tags: American Civil War, aristocracy, bargain, Black Friday, Christmas, Civil War, coercion, dark times of the Obama presidency, deductible, federal government, free will, fugitive slaves, incentive, incentivize, insurance, IRS, Kansas-Nebraska Act, Missouri Compromise, North, Obama, Obamacare, Old World, planter, planter aristocracy, planter elite, Republicans, slavery, slaves, South, Southern Democrats, states' rights, Thanksgiving, Three-Fifths Compromise
What doesn’t Kill You Makes you Stronger
They say what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. And you can see that in military basic training. There have been some good movies showing what military basic training is like. Perhaps one of the best is Full Metal Jacket. Where Gunnery Sergeant Hartman played by R. Lee Ermey wasn’t acting as much as reliving his days as a Marine Corps drill instructor. Watching it you may come to hate Sergeant Hartman for he was pretty sadistic. But they didn’t design basic training to be a pleasant experience. They designed it to prepare recruits for the worst thing in the world. War.
In the miniseries Band of Brothers we follow Easy Company, 2nd Battalion, 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, from basic training through D-Day and to the end of the war. Airborne training followed basic training. And was harder. Fewer people make it through airborne training than they do basic training. Ranger training is even harder. And fewer people make it through Ranger training. But airborne units and Rangers get the more difficult missions in combat. Because they can do more. For their training is more difficult. But it didn’t kill them. So it made them stronger.
Perhaps the most difficult military training is the Navy’s SEAL program. Where if they get a good class of recruits they may have 1 in 10 complete training. For it is that hard. In fact, some have died in training because they refused to give up. That’s why you will find few tougher than a Navy SEAL. They are tough. And they never quit. Which is why we give them the most difficult missions to complete. Missions that others would find impossible. Proving that the more brutal and difficult training is the stronger and more able we get.
During the 20th Century the American Left has tried to replace Rugged Individualism with the Nanny State
Those who founded this nation were tough people who worked hard and never gave up. They provided their own housing, food, clothing, etc. If they needed something they figured out how to provide it for themselves. They worked long hours. Survived brutal winters and hostile environments. But they never gave up. In fact, they raised families while doing all of this. With no help from government. As there were no government benefits. Yet they survived. Even prospered. For what didn’t kill them only made them stronger. These rugged individuals could do anything. And did. Which is why the United States is the leader of the free world. And the world’s number one economy. Because of that rugged individualism.
This is the way America was before the progressives came and softened us. And made rugged individualism somehow a bad thing. Beginning with Woodrow Wilson. Then FDR. LBJ. And then President Obama. A long line of American presidents who eschewed individualism. And thought in collective terms. When the Americans rejected socialism they gave us progressivism. When we rejected communism they gave us liberalism. The 20th century has been a tireless attempt for those on the left to replace rugged individualism with the nanny state. With their brilliant selves in power. Managing the economy. And making life fair. To undo the unfairness of laissez-faire capitalism. To make the United States better. And more according to their vision. Just like the socialists did. And the communists did. Yet no socialist or communist state became the leader of the free world. Or the world’s number one economy.
Those who lived in those socialist and communist utopias learned one thing. It was better to live someplace else. And their ultimate destination? The United States. Yet those on the left refused to believe that life was worse in those states where they put people first instead of profits. Like that unfeeling and cruel laissez-faire capitalism did. Which is why Wilson, FDR, LBJ and Obama worked tirelessly to move the United States in the direction of socialism and communism. Because they cared for the people. Or the power they got by making so many people dependent on government.
Someone receiving a Comfortable Level of Benefits will not be pushed to Leave their Comfort Zone
So is it about the power or that thing about helping people? What is it exactly that progressives/liberals really want? Well, we can look at the historical record to determine that. By looking at a point in time when America really changed. With the assassination of JFK. JFK’s chances of reelection weren’t great. Which is why he went to Texas. As he needed LBJ to deliver Texas to the Democrats. Instead of electoral victory, though, he fell to an assassin’s bullet. The great outpouring of grief and love for their fallen president exceeded the love he got before the assassination. The heightened emotions allowed LBJ to pass the many programs of the Great Society into law. In the memory of JFK. The greatest expansion of the federal government since FDR’s New Deal. Making the welfare state the largest yet. In an attempt to put people first. Not profits. In fact, LBJ declared a war on poverty. By providing government assistance to lift everyone out of poverty. And he championed civil rights. LBJ was going to make the United States that utopia socialists and communists always dreamt about. For everyone. Blacks. And whites. Especially blacks. Who were suffering great discrimination then. But things would be different for them. Starting in the Sixties everything was going to get better. And how are blacks doing today? Well, if you use employment as a measure, not good (see Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age by the Bureau of Labor Statistics)
The federal government has done a lot for blacks. More than any other minority group. Affirmative Action was to correct all past wrongs. By making it easier to get into college. And to get a job. Yet we don’t see that when looking at the unemployment numbers. In fact, the group the government does the least for—white men—is doing the best. They don’t need any help because they won life’s lottery. By being born white. According to liberals. So there’s no Affirmative Action for them. Yet they have half the unemployment rate black men have. While white women have half the unemployment rate black women have. And white 16-19 year olds have half the unemployment rate black 16-19 year olds have. Brilliant progressives/liberals have been trying to make life better for blacks for 50 some years now and have failed. Despite this blacks have never been more loyal to them. Which answers the question what the Democrats care more for. The people? Or the power the people give them. By getting them dependent on government. Who they tell over and over again that they would have nothing if it weren’t for them. The Democrats. For blacks just can’t make it on their own without help. Even though after receiving all of that help blacks are suffering the greatest levels of unemployment. Clearly something isn’t right here. And it goes back to that thing that made America great. Rugged individualism.
You know what the difference is between a white SEAL and a black SEAL? Nothing. Blacks have equality of opportunity in SEAL training. And that’s all they need. They don’t need special treatment. And the Navy doesn’t tell them that they do. All they need is the strength. And the will. Which will be there if you don’t keep telling people that they can’t succeed without the government’s help. Because if you keep doing that they will come to believe that. And they will keep voting Democrat. Looking for help. Whereas those who face adversity and overcome it grow stronger. Because what doesn’t kill them makes them stronger.
Handing out government benefits will make people like you. But it won’t get them a job. For someone receiving a comfortable level of benefits will not be pushed to leave their comfort zone. And while they languish in their comfort zone they will not gain work experience. Allowing others to gain experience and move up in their careers. Making them more employable. While those with less experience and less education are less employable. And that’s what Democrats do when they buy votes with government benefits. Make people less employable. And blacks have been especially useful to them. As they can stoke the fires of racism to drive blacks even further to the Democrat Party. By calling Republicans racists. Because they want to take away their benefits. Just because they hate black people. Or so goes the Democrat line. So they keep voting Democrat. While losing their rugged individualism. And suffering higher levels of unemployment than everyone else.
Tags: affirmative action, airborne, basic training, comfort zone, Communism, Communist, Democrats, FDR, federal government, government benefits, individualism, JFK, laissez faire capitalism, LBJ, liberalism, liberals, nanny state, Navy SEAL, President Obama, Progressives, progressivism, put people first, Ranger, rugged individualism, SEAL, socialism, socialist, unemployment, welfare state, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger, Wilson
The Constitution prevented the Executive from Ruling Arbitrarily and becoming Judge, Jury and Executioner
There have been funding gaps. And there have been government shutdowns. But not always both. For once upon a time the executive branch stayed open for business even when the House of Representatives did not approve their bills for payment. But that all changed in 1980 thanks to Jimmy Carter’s attorney general. Benjamin Civiletti.
Civiletti wrote two opinions as attorney general changing the way government spends money. The first said the executive can’t spend any money without the House of Representatives’ approval. A strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. His second opinion softened the first. Giving the executive power to spend money the House of Representatives doesn’t approve of when necessary to protect life and property. Such as funding the military. And so grew the delineation between essential and nonessential spending. Or what some would say essential spending and pork.
The Founding Fathers saw the damage absolute monarchies could do. Even a constitutional monarchy with too much power. So they separated powers. They created three branches of government. The executive, the legislative and the judiciary. One branch to write the law (the legislature). One branch to enforce the law (the executive). And one branch to interpret questions in the law (the judiciary). Thus preventing the executive from ruling arbitrarily and becoming judge, jury and executioner. Like a king.
The Founding Fathers gave the Power of the Purse to the House to rein in Executive Spending
The Founding Fathers took the separation of powers further. The House of Representatives was the people’s house. Where the people voted in their representatives by popular vote. But to keep a check on federal power the Senate was the states’ house (since changed by constitutional amendment, thus greatly increasing the power of the federal government over the states). Each state in the union had an equal voice. Thus requiring not only a majority of the people it also required a majority of the states to pass federal law. To keep the larger urban populations from dictating policy to the lesser populated rural areas.
The Founding Fathers took the separation of powers even further. Giving the power of the purse to the House of Representatives. So the executive couldn’t wage costly wars. Or expand bloated bureaucracies to reward campaign donors with patronage. Or expand a welfare state to buy votes. Especially since Alexander Hamilton opened Pandora’s Box with his interpretation of the necessary and proper clause. Which expanded the scope of the federal government to include whatever it thought was necessary and proper. Giving rise to the progressive/liberal state. Something that would have horrified Alexander Hamilton if he were alive today to see the behemoth the federal government became. And had he known then what would become of the federal government today he would have been a Jeffersonian. Jefferson and Hamilton would probably still have hated each other but they would have agreed on keeping limited government limited.
Civiletti understood that the Founding Fathers meant to rein in the spending powers of the executive branch. To meet the intent of the separation of powers they felt was essential for representative government. A government of the people, by the people and for the people. As Abraham Lincoln so eloquently said in the Gettysburg Address some 76 years later. Hence his first opinion. Which he softened with his second when it hurt his boss and the Democrat cause. For Civiletti was a Democrat.
The Democrats want to Break the Republican Opposition and Govern Against the Intent of the Founding Fathers
Before Civiletti’s opinions there was little urgency to settle funding gaps between what the executive branch wanted and what the House would approve. So at the end of a fiscal year the executive often continued to operate without spending authority. Letting the durations of these funding gaps last for a week or more. With no interruption of government services. But after Civiletti’s opinions the government shut down nonessential services. Which did speed up the closing of the funding gap. For when the funding gap included a government shutdown resolving the funding gap went from a week or more to a few days.
To date there have been 18 funding gaps that went unresolved into the new fiscal year. One of which is still ongoing. In the table you can see how much quicker the House and the executive branch resolved their differences with the threat of a government shutdown. The exception to that being the longest shutdown during the Clinton administration. Which ultimately led the way to welfare reform. Which greatly dampened President Clinton’s costly liberal agenda. And was the law of the land until President Obama used sweeping powers he does not have to roll back some of that legislation.
President Obama and the Democrats have called the House Republicans about every derogatory name in the book for dare trying to enforce the Founding Fathers’ separation of powers. Saying that never before has a radical fringe held a gun to the head of the executive, took hostages, demanded ransom, etc. But that’s not true. Of the 18 funding gaps where the House of Representatives did not give the president all the money he wanted that president was a Republican 55.6% of the time. So Republican presidents got their way fewer times than Democrat presidents. And as far as hostage takers, the Democrats held the power of the purse 15 of those 18 funding gaps/shutdowns. Or 83.3%. So the president and the Democrats aren’t telling the truth when it comes to the historical record. Who seem to be more interested in swinging public opinion to their side. So they can break the Republican opposition. And govern against the intent of the Founding Fathers.
Tags: Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Civiletti, Civiletti, Constitution, Democrat, essential spending, executive, executive branch, federal government, Founding Fathers, funding gap, government shutdown, House of Representatives, judiciary, legislative, limited government, necessary and proper, nonessential spending, power of the purse, representative government, Republican, separation of powers, shutdown, the House, U.S. Constitution
Week in Review
It is remarkable how so many people believe the government can do things better. That somehow fraud just doesn’t happen with government people involved. This despite those hundred dollar toilet seats the government bought. Which is a lot for a toilet seat if you’ve never bought one. I mean, you can buy one for less than $10. But because the government is so large and handles so much money they attract fraud like fresh dog poop attracts flies. There are just too many people. And too much money. Making it too easy for someone to slip in a bill for hundred dollar toilet seats. Which is why fraud is rampant in government programs. Like Medicare (see ‘Death doctor’ accused of misdiagnosing cancer patients to scam millions out of Medicare a ‘serious risk’ to flee the country posted 10/2/2013 on Mail Online).
A Michigan oncologist charged with intentionally misdiagnosing patients with cancer as part of a major Medicare fraud operation will remain in prison until trial, with court officials scared he will flee to the Middle East.
It is alleged Fata received about $35 million from Medicare via his insurance scam over a two year period.
So what’s the difference between private health insurers and the federal government? People hate the private insurers for refusing to pay for their medical bills. To prevent fraud. Someone concealing a pre-existing condition when buying health insurance is committing an act of fraud. The whole idea of Obamacare is to prevent this kind of fraud. By forcing everyone to buy health insurance. Instead of living their lives without ever contributing to the insurance pool until the day they find out that they have a catastrophic health problem. And then lie to an insurance company to conceal that catastrophic health problem. So they can get the health insurance pool to pay for their medical care. Even though they never contributed to that insurance pool when they were healthy.
This is why people hate private insurance companies. For preventing fraud. Which is why you don’t see fraud in the private health insurance companies on the scale you see in Medicare. Because Medicare uses taxpayers’ money. So the people in charge of Medicare don’t suffer a loss in any fraud. Unlike the private health insurers. So the private health insurers are more aggressive in preventing fraud. While the federal government just raises taxes to pay for the fraud committed on their watch. That’s the difference between private health insurers and the federal government.
And if you think the Medicare fraud was bad you ain’t seen anything yet. Thanks to Obamacare. With the federal government taking over one-sixth of the national economy we will see fraud like we’ve never seen before. More money. More people. An organization so big the left hand won’t know what the right hand is doing. Making Obamacare a fraud paradise. Not to mention a gift for hackers and identity thieves. Who can find out everything on everyone from one location. Making that $35 million Medicare fraud seem like child’s play.
Don’t think so? You’re willing to trust the harden defenses of the government’s computer system? If so, ask yourself this. How well did the rollout of Obamacare go this past week? How well did those computer systems do in collecting the data upfront? Not well. And knowing how poorly the rollout was are you any more confident that once they have all of your personal information that their system will work any better? Or do you think it will just make it easier for people like this doctor in Michigan?
Every bad thing that happened in Medicare will be worse in Obamacare. Because Obamacare is bigger than Medicare. And as this fraud takes a bigger bite out of the Obamacare cash-flow there will be less money for treating patients. Meaning longer wait times. And rationing. As well as higher taxes to pay for the fraud. So we will end up paying more for less under Obamacare. Just like with Medicare. Only worse.
Tags: federal government, fraud, health insurance, insurance pool, Medicare, Medicare fraud, Obamacare, preventing fraud, private health insurers, taxes
« Previous Entries