Kentucky

Comment

Comment by Mark Littrell on January 17, 2010 at 8:36pm

Government Healthcare Protection Or Oppression And Profits


I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Healthcare Choices Act of 2009. I have studied it with particular emphasis from my areas of expertise - civil and constitutional law. I found that I had concerns that points of the proposed law that were being discussed were unconstitutional. What I discovered was far worse than what I was hearing or expecting.

First of all, much of what has been stated about the law and its implications is, in fact, true, despite what the Democrats and the mainstream media are saying. The proposed law does, in fact, provide for rationing of healthcare, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free healthcare for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and very likely forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business which will put everyone into a government run system. All decisions regarding personal healthcare will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be healthcare professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled by the federal government.

However, as menacing as all of that appears, it only scratches the surface. The fact is, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable healthcare choices. Instead, it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the executive branch of government that has ever transpired, or ever been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed and/or severely mitigated.

The first casualty will be the balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of our Government which is vital to maintaining checks and balances within our Government. Congress will be transferring to the Obama administration authority in numerous areas over the lives of the American citizenry and the businesses which they own. Congress does not have any authority to legislate in most of those areas. I personally challenge anyone to read the text of the U. S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate healthcare.

This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and information of your employer, physician, as well as hospitals. All of this is in direct violation of the specific provisions as set forth in the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about your right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you should decide not to carry healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama, there will be tax imposed upon you for either of these failures. It is referred to as a “tax” instead of a fine because of its intent to avoid application of the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment. However, this does not work as there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law” being applied.

So, there are three amendments that the current administration hates so much in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified through implementation of this law. It does not stop there however. The 9th Amendment which provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” the 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states, are preserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of congressional legislation, neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas once this legislation is passed.

I could write a great deal more about this legislation, but I think you should be getting the idea. This is not about healthcare; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires that members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress, I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it, without feeling that I was violating that sacred oath. If I voted for it disregarding this oath, I would hope the American people would hold me fully accountable.

The Constitution does not provide Congress with the power to mandate that Americans purchase health insurance. Congress must be able to point to at least one of its powers listed in the Constitution as the basis of any legislation which it passes. None of those powers justifies the individual insurance mandate. Congress’s power to tax and spend does not apply because the mandate neither taxes nor spends.

Another constitutional defect of the Reid Bill passed in the Senate involves the backroom deals which Harry Reid made to secure the votes of individual senators. A number of those deals do involve spending programs because they waive certain states’ obligation to contribute to the Medicaid program. This selective spending targeted at certain states clearly runs afoul of the General Welfare Clause. Yet another constitutional defect contained in this legislation, is its command that states establish such things as benefit exchanges, which will consequently require state legislation and regulation. As written, this is not a condition for receiving federal funds, and would still leave some kind of choice to the states. The legislation would mandate states to establish these exchanges or states that the Secretary of Health & Human Services is to do it for them. It renders states little more than subdivisions of the federal government. This violates the letter, the spirit, and the interpretation of our federal/state form of government as established in our Constitution.

All such pronouncements are, for the time being, opinion, whether some aspects of healthcare reform legislation are indeed unconstitutional, is an issue that will only be resolved if and when cases are brought challenging them before the Courts of our Nation.

Further, those in congress who are protecting the insurance industry from government intrusion are doing a great job of protecting their campaign contributions. They have masterfully so complicated the healthcare debate that many Americans have been completely blinded to what should be clearly obvious. There's only one issue in this debate, whether or not we want to entrust the healthcare of our families to an entity whose only goal is to provide service or one that's in the business solely to make as much profit as humanly possible. The federal government, simply put, has recognized the profitability of the healthcare industry and wants to cut itself in on all or least a large portion of that profitability.

In order to see through the smoke and mirrors of this debate we need ask ourselves only a few basic questions. First, do we really believe that the insurance industry is giving politicians $1.3 million a day just so they can protect our well being? Second, how have the insurance companies become so rich that they can afford to give away that much money? Third, if they're doing such a good job of looking after our interest, why do they fear that a public option will lead to a government takeover of the industry?

And finally, what's so bad about government protected healthcare anyway? The government protects us with the police department, the fire department, the military, social security, and Medicare. So why do we allow these things to be run by government? What do they have in common? The answer to this question is very simple. They are all services that are far too essential to our wellbeing to entrust to those whose single motive, and sole reason for being, is to produce a profit.

If you really think about it, the so-called insurance industry is not an industry at all. An industry produces products. The insurance business produces nothing. It is comprised of Wall Street speculators who take your money with the promise that they'll protect you from potential financial ruin. Then if something unforeseen does occur, they spend much of that money attempting to find loopholes to get out of honoring their agreement with you.

Their entire business model is based on the proposition that they can get more money out of you than they will have to pay back. So they are not in the business of providing you with a service. On the contrary, they’re in the business of taking your money, while providing you with as little service as possible. That's how they make huge profits.

Now, it is the current administration’s contention that too many Americans are being denied services, and as a result, they're dying or losing everything they own just so these speculators can make a profit. The current administration states that they want to bring that to an end.

In response, the politicians who the insurance companies are paying to deceive you are screaming. Since they obviously don't have truth on their side, they have taken to lying to the American people.
If your representative is among them, instead of representing your interest, they’re being paid by the insurance companies to lobby against you. They are trying to convince you that it is a bad thing for you to have the choice of a public option that would protect you and your family from loss of coverage if you're laid off from your job, or having your insurance cancelled if a member of your family contracts a disease that the private insurance companies deem so expensive to treat that it cuts into their profits. In short, they are placing their seat in congress before the welfare of your family.

In addition, they always conveniently fail to mention that with your current healthcare you have a businessman, who's out to make a profit, between you and your doctor. You're rarely aware of what goes on between your doctor and your current insurance company, because your doctor simply won't prescribe a treatment that he knows the insurance company will not cover. But how many times have you gone to the pharmacy and had a generic drug suggested because your insurance will not cover the drug that the doctor originally prescribed, and wanted you to have?

We must not forget that the infamous AIG is an insurance company. It was suppose to be insuring Wall Street against investment losses, and you see what happened there - AIG was so greedy for profits and paid so little attention to the precarious condition of its customers, that when Wall Street collapsed and AIG's customers came to it to cover the losses that they'd paid billions of dollars to insure, AIG simply said, "Sorry, we can't help you with this matter."

Thus, if the crooks on Wall Street can't trust the insurance companies, the average American family does not stand a chance. Even though AIG was founded, appropriately enough, in Shanghai, China, and was doing business and spreading its money all over the world, when it found itself in trouble it ran back to the United States to pick American taxpayers pockets, in an effort to get back on its feet.

And that's not the worst of it. Once the current administration did agree to help them to get back on their feet, they took much of our hard earned tax money (while we were losing our homes and jobs) and used it to wine and dine company bigwigs at plush resorts, and pass out multi-million dollar bonuses to the very people who ran the company into the ground.

Now, these are the people that many of your representatives want to protect from a government takeover, never mind what is in the best interest of your family. These very same people who have already robbed you of your tax dollars, that your representative want to see standing between you and your doctor, with calculator in hand. Of course he does, because the government is not going to contribute to his campaign.

So if your representative comes to you during this break and tries to fill you with this nonsense, you should respond with just one sentence - "You are out of here in the very next election." You'd be entirely justified, since his support of the insurance lobby is irrefutable evidence that what he sees as his vested interest is far removed from that of your own and your family.

So is this legislation about oppression or profits or both? I will leave that choice to my readers… The one thing that remains clear, regardless of choice, is that it time for AMERICA TO STAND UP AND DEMAND TO BE HEARD!

Comment by Mark Littrell on January 17, 2010 at 8:33pm

The Obama Administration’s Strategy For Change In America

The American electorate has watched in horror for over a year as the Obama administration has created unprecedented havoc and outrage throughout our nation.

And yet, the actual result of 2009's non-stop crises has been not just the dramatic transfer of wealth and power away from citizens and small businesses and into the controlling hands of government, but also the beginnings of a profound transformation of America's basic economic and governmental system.

Is it possible that the Obama administration is intentionally creating crises to facilitate the conversion of America into a socialist state? Many say that such a conclusion sounds like an absurd conspiracy theory.
But for those who are knowledgeable about the modern history of the radical left, creating crises is simply another method of getting things done.

Following the classic radical left strategy of the manufactured crisis, the Obama administration and Congress are creating crises in every area of life and policy.

They are wreaking havoc throughout America's capitalist, free enterprise system by taking over major industries like automotive, banking and healthcare. And by multiplying the national debt so astronomically that the only possible way to pay it off is with a printing press. This action translates directly into the "grand theft" of Americans' hard earned wealth through major inflation.

But it's not just the economy. The administration is also wreaking havoc on America's national security; prosecuting U.S. soldiers for being too rough with terrorists, but rewarding confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed with a civilian trial in New York City and affording him all the powerful legal rights of an American citizen. And by badmouthing and apologizing for America overseas and bowing before Muslim kings, while scandalously snubbing leaders of America's few remaining allies such as the United Kingdom and Israel.

They're creating crises in the nation's energy policy by stubbornly adhering to the controversial and now utterly discredited "global warming" theory and pursuing economically catastrophic legislation such as "Cap and Trade." They're creating havoc in education by putting radical homosexual activist Kevin Jennings, notorious for sexually corrupting children, in charge of the safety of the nation's public schools.

In every area imaginable the Obama administration is busily engaged in undermining and destroying the nation's key institutions or as Obama euphemistically put it a few days before being elected president, "We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America."

For the last year the Obama administration has relentlessly hammered into our heads that America will self destruct economically if we don't solve our cataclysmic healthcare crisis. But in reality, there is no healthcare crisis. We have the best medical services delivery system in world history. What about the poor and uninsured? In America, you can be an escaped, convicted, illegal alien, child rapist but if you get hurt and go to a public hospital, you will by law be taken care of, completely and totally, whether you can afford to pay for it or not. That certainly is not a broken system; that's the most magnificent system in the world.

Of course, the government could easily legislate into law a simple safety net to help the small percentage of American citizens who do not have health insurance but they have never been interested in that. They're interested only in creating the illusion of a systemic and fatal healthcare crisis as a means of forcing socialism, oppression and profits for the federal government down the throats of America’s citizenry.

Manufacturing crises to force 'change' is how the radical left has operated for decades, and now that Obama, Pelosi and Reid are in power, fake crises and their terrible 'solutions' dominate life in America."
Many Americans already are aware of what is happening in our nation, and are understandably horrified. For millions of outraged citizens, fighting back is what 2010 is all about."
The one thing that remains clear is that it is time for AMERICA TO STAND UP AND DEMAND TO BE HEARD!

Comment by Bob J Criswell on January 17, 2010 at 2:03pm

Comment by Tea Party Founder on January 17, 2010 at 10:26am

Bob - Thanks for this info. I agree the Union members need to standup for America, even if their Union Bosses don't.

Comment by Bob J Criswell on January 17, 2010 at 10:26am

What Sarah Said: Fri at 9:45am

Union Brothers and Sisters:
Your Leadership Doesn’t Get It – You Deserve Better

In the latest to come out of D.C.’s backroom health care deals, President Obama yesterday cut a doozy of a deal with labor union bosses. The fed’s health care plan must be so bad that even union bosses had to go to D.C. to say they wanted out. So... to keep their support for a flawed plan they got an exemption to provisions in the deal that others did not. Small business owners, our families running America’s mom & pops, did not get this deal. Ask yourself: why did union bosses get special treatment? And when did our country’s unions get on the wrong track with moves like this that hurt their good members and put them in such a bad light?

Good hard-working, pro-free-market, pro-America union members should join in opposition to their union bosses’ sweetheart deal. Coming from a union background and living in a world with many union memberships among my family and friends, I know that average members will be embarrassed by their bosses’ deal, which basically only delays the heavy tax on their health care plans until 2018 and in the meantime unfairly leaves many fellow Americans in a much less “enviable” position.

Union members don’t want to stick it to non-union colleagues in the private and public sector. Their union leadership is not helping them in the long run, they’re certainly not helping the rest of America, and unfortunately some union bosses are making all union members look bad, selfish, and anti-business with this Big Government backroom deal.

I know that ordinary union members don’t want to hurt their fellow Americans, just as ordinary Nebraskans didn’t want to stick it to the rest of the country with a sweetheart deal on Medicaid subsidies. I urge union members to make their voices heard. Please, call your leadership – don’t put up with these special-interest politics – tell them to fight for all Americans who want common sense health care reform, not this flawed boondoggle.

- Sarah Palin

Comment by Bob J Criswell on January 11, 2010 at 1:31am

BRAVO MARK! We all need to get the word out to the people who are not aware of their founding farthers actions and God given rights.

Comment by Mark Littrell on January 10, 2010 at 11:02pm

Call The Democratic Party's Bluff On Refusing To Seat Scott Brown

The Democrats have come up with a plan to nullify temporarily the Massachusetts voters in the Senate special election on January 19, if Scott Brown wins.

As reported by the Boston Herald, interim Senator Paul Kirk is on record that he will vote for the Senate health care bill even if Brown wins the election if the vote takes place before Brown is sworn in. Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin has stated that the certification of the election result will be delayed at least until February 20, giving the Democrats a full month after the election to push through the health care bill without Brown being able to join a filibuster.

This scheme does not depend on the usual delay, for example, where there is a slight margin of victory in the hundreds of votes out of millions cast, where a recount and ballot challenges take time. The Democratic scheme will delay Brown's certification even if Brown is the clear winner.

Voters need to call the Democrats' bluff. The deliberate delay of Brown's certification in order to push through the health care bill will cause a political explosion unlike anything we have seen before.

There are certain red lines which no one has crossed before. And refusing to seat a duly elected Senator, for the sole purpose of excluding that Senator from voting on a particular piece of legislation, crosses that line.

The Democratic Party are once again threatening to break the democratic links which bind us as a nation. The electoral outrage at such a tactic will be generational, and the Democratic leadership in Washington knows it.

If on the day of the health care vote, the duly elected Scott Brown shows up at the Senate to claim his seat for the vote, will Harry Reid instruct the Capitol Police to bar Brown from the chamber and from casting his vote? Will that be the legacy of health care "reform"?

The voters of Massachusetts need to call the Democrats bluff on this.

The Democrats have shown complete contempt for the Massachusetts voters, now it is time for the Massachusetts voters to show contempt for the Democrats who have hatched this scheme.

How much more are we going to take? The snooze alarm has be reset to many times... It is time to standup and be heard... The Silent Majority can sleep no longer!

Comment by Mark Littrell on January 10, 2010 at 10:59pm

The Constitution Does Not Enforce Itself

Our Founding Fathers secured for us a land of freedom and opportunity that has been the envy of the entire world whether they want to admit this fact or not. Our Founding Fathers sought to protect those freedoms and opportunities through our Constitution. But the Constitution is not of itself the protection. The Constitution only provides each of us with the means to protect ourselves.

It is becoming ever more apparent that the federal government is completely out of touch with those they are supposed to be serving. Yet the Constitution provides to each of us, the beneficiaries of the greatest system of government the world has ever known, a way to defend our rights. This defense is to be found in our Tenth Amendment. And while Amendment Ten has not stopped the power grab from all branches of the federal government, it does provide both the framework and the justification for “We the People” to maintain and defend our portion of power in our political system.

You have to understand that power is a finite resource, meaning that as one group gains power, it must be relinquished by another group, in this case “We the People”. Leave there be no doubt; a lot of laws passed in the past One Hundred years have been about power. More to the point, it is about power that is going from “We the People” to the Federal Government.

Therefore, it is not enough to be against Healthcare Reform;
Therefore, it is not enough to be against Cap and Trade;
Therefore, it is not enough to be against the bailouts, against TARP, against the Patriot Act, against No Child Left behind.

It is not enough to oppose activist judges legislating from the bench, or executive orders, or bureaucratic regulations or any other “laws” without the understanding that these “laws” were not passed in a legislative branch of Government as provided for in our Constitution, nor were they passed to serve in the best interests of the people of our Nation. You must realize that it is really about power and you have to recognize that this power has been taken from each of us, “We the People”.
How? Through apathy, indifference, and willful ignorance the silent majority has allowed it to be taken. This brings us to the power, provided to each of us as citizens, contained in the Tenth Amendment and Nullification.

Nullification simply stated says that the States entered into a contract known as the Constitution where the Federal Government was granted specific powers, most of which are found in Article One, Section Eight. The states had not only a right, but an obligation to interpose or nullify laws passed by the Federal Government that go beyond those powers and infringe upon the rights of “We the People”. This responsibility is clearly spelled out by the Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

It only makes sense that the states must have some recourse available to them should the Federal Government overstep its authority and infringe upon the liberty of “We the People”. Does this sound crazy? Here are a few notes regarding the safeguard from the founders before the Constitution was ratified.

“It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority.” Alexander Hamilton Federalist Papers #28

“The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority then the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” James Madison Federalist Papers #39

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” James Madison Federalist Papers #45

“Hence, a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other; at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” James Madison Federalist Papers #51

“We may safely rely on the disposition of the state legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.” Alexander Hamilton Federalist Papers #85

The Federalist papers were never meant to define the Constitution; rather as a method of selling it to the general public to get it ratified. The former colonist did not want to trade a despotic centralized Government across the ocean for one on their own continent. Proof is self evident by the fact that they had to promise that a bill of rights would be added to get it ratified.

The Doctrine of Nullification was first introduced in 1798 in the Kentucky Resolution, written by Thomas Jefferson, and the Virginia resolution, written by James Madison. These were in response to the “Alien and Sedition Acts”. I urge you to read these resolutions for yourself. The “Alien and Sedition Acts”, among other things, made it illegal to criticize the Government. This doctrine was later adopted by Massachusetts and Wisconsin to nullify parts of the “Fugitive Slave Act”, and by South Carolina to nullify a tariff they believed harmful to their state economy, and by the New England states in response to embargos.

‘What about the “Supremacy clause”?’ The one that states the Federal Government is the Supreme law of the land.

1997 “Mack/Printz vs. the US” Where two County Sheriffs sued the Federal Government over the Brady Bill. This was a law that forced county Sheriffs to run background checks on their citizens who bought handguns at the expense of the county, and any sheriff who did not comply with this law would be subject to arrest. These sheriffs argued that this law violated the Tenth Amendment. This case was heard and ultimately won before the Supreme Court.

Justice Scalia writes for the majority, “… the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discreet, enumerated ones.” And in a direct challenge to this interpretation of the Supremacy clause, he writes, “It is incontestable that the Constitution established a system of dual sovereignty”. He also states, “This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty. Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the federal government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.”

But there is really a supremacy clause, and it states:
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” This clearly states the Constitution and laws that carry out, follow and continue the Constitution are the Supreme Law of the land.

How about the Real ID Act, whereby the States had until May of 2008 to issue everyone of its citizens a national ID card complete with biometrics, resulting in the complete loss of privacy from the state. States who failed to comply by the deadline would see its citizens loose the ability to board an airplane or enter a federal building. It has been over a year since that deadline has passed. Do any of you have a “Real ID”? How many of you have entered a federal building or boarded an airplane in the last year? Do you know why? Because the states said no!

This is a real and viable strategy, not only secure the freedoms that are guaranteed to each of us by our Constitution, but to take back the power that has always been our God-given natural rights?
First, we must redirect the efforts from the Federal officeholders who not only have ignored us, but hold us in contempt! And direct that energy towards the State Legislators. These people live here in our communities with us and are much less insulated from “We the People”.

We must get them to introduce and pass key laws including: nullifying both a National Healthcare Act and Cap and Trade that will be the result of this out-of-control spending. Furthermore, we should follow the lead of Tennessee whose legislators are introducing a bill which creates an escrow account whereby legal federal taxes are collected and held by the states as protection against federal backlash against our nullification efforts.

At some point as “We the People” work to make the Constitution relevant again, you will begin to hear the progressives and their puppets use the term “General Welfare Clause”

The General Welfare Clause has been interpreted by those favoring a strong central government to mean that as long as the law was meant to be in the “general welfare” of the union, congress has the authority to pass it. The argument against this is the Virginia Plan, which was introduced by Madison at the Constitutional Convention. This plan would have created a National Government that gave the central government the authority to do anything it wanted. It is important to remember this plan was rejected by the delegation, and more importantly, it was never ratified by “We the People”.

James Madison, considered the ‘Father of the Constitution’ and the author of the defeated Virginia Plan, stated the following about this interpretation of the “General Welfare Clause”.

“Such a view of the Constitution would have the effect of giving to Congress a general power of legislation instead of the defined and limited one hitherto understood to belong to them.” Think on that statement a second. Now allow me to further quote James Madison. “Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.”

This should aid in explaining where we are today and how we got here, and hopefully what we need to do next.

Will it be easy? No. Every step of the way not only will enemies of Freedom tells us this won’t work, but even our friends, who should be on our side, will say it is impossible. The Central Government is too big and powerful to take on!

Will there be risk? Yes. We will be taking on the most powerful “empire” in the world today, and you can be sure that they will not give up all this power without a fight. But I ask you to consider what dangers our Founding Fathers faced, surely this pales in comparison.

I think Samuel Adams said it best when he said this, “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better then the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsel or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”

Remember:
It is about your future,
It is about your children’s future
It is about your grandchildren’s future,
It is about control,
It is about power,
It is especially about socialism, and finally
It is about time that people began standing up for themselves and do more then just complain to our government for better treatment. Begin to assert the power that is our god given birth right as American citizens…

AMERICA STAND UP NOW "WE THE PEOPLE" DEMAND TO BE HEARD!

Comment by Mark Littrell on January 7, 2010 at 11:09am

An Eerie Lesson From History... Does This Sound Familiar Today?

Don't Cry For Me, America

In the early 20th century, Argentina was one of the richest countries in the world. While Great Britain's maritime power and its far flung empire had propelled it to a dominant position among the world's industrialized nations, only the United States challenged Argentina for the position of the world's second most powerful economy.

It was blessed with abundant agriculture, vast swaths of rich farmland laced with navigable rivers and an accessible port system. Its level of industrialization was higher than many European countries: railroads, automobiles and telephones were commonplace.

In 1916, a new president was elected. Hipólito Irigoyen had formed a party called The Radicals under the banner of "fundamental change" with an appeal to the middle class.
Among Irigoyen's changes: mandatory pension insurance, mandatory health insurance, and support for low-income housing construction to stimulate the economy. Put simply, the state assumed economic control of a vast swath of the country's operations and began assessing new payroll taxes to fund its efforts.

With an increasing flow of funds into these entitlement programs, the government's payouts soon became overly generous. Before long its outlays surpassed the value of the taxpayers' contributions. Put simply, it quickly became under-funded, much like the United States' Social Security and Medicare programs.

The death knell for the Argentine economy, however, came with the election of Juan Perón. Perón had a fascist and corporatist upbringing; he and his charismatic wife aimed their populist rhetoric at the nation's rich.

This targeted group "swiftly expanded to cover most of the propertied middle classes, who became an enemy to be defeated and humiliated."

Under Perón, the size of government bureaucracies exploded through massive programs of social spending and by encouraging the growth of labor unions.

High taxes and economic mismanagement took their inevitable toll even after Perón had been driven from office. But his populist rhetoric and "contempt for economic realities" lived on. Argentina's federal government continued to spend far beyond its means.

Hyperinflation exploded in 1989, the final stage of a process characterized by "industrial protectionism, redistribution of income based on increased wages, and growing state intervention in the economy."
The Argentinean government's practice of printing money to pay off its public debts had crushed the economy. Inflation hit 3000%, reminiscent of the Weimar Republic. Food riots were rampant; stores were looted; the country descended into chaos.

And by 1994, Argentina's public pensions - the equivalent of Social Security - had imploded. The payroll tax had increased from 5% to 26%, but it wasn't enough. In addition, Argentina had implemented a value-added tax (VAT), new income taxes, a personal tax on wealth, and additional revenues based upon the sale of public enterprises. These crushed the private sector, further damaging the economy.
A government controlled "privatization" effort to rescue seniors' pensions was attempted. But, by 2001, those funds had also been raided by the government, the monies replaced by Argentina's defaulted government bonds.

By 2002, ".government fiscal irresponsibility. induced a national economic crisis as severe as America's Great Depression."


In 1902 Argentina was one of the world's richest countries. Little more than a hundred years later, it is poverty stricken, struggling to meet its debt obligations amidst a drought.

We've seen this movie before. The government’s populist plans can't possibly work, because government bankrupts everything it touches. History teaches us that Health Care Reform in its current form and unfunded entitlement programs will be utter, complete disasters.

Today's government is guilty of enslaving future generations to poverty and misery.

We the People must be heard! Take a stand today!

Comment by Mark Littrell on January 7, 2010 at 11:03am

I request that each member of our group read and disiminate this pledge to all of their contacts... it is vital to the survival of our Great Nation!

I Pledge to vote against any politician that fails to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I Pledge to end the Congressional Crisis by voting in 2010 and 2012 to put a new person in every seat in Congress.

I Pledge to only support candidates that have run a successful private business, not career politicians.

I Pledge my vote only to candidates that practice and support permanent Term Limits for Congress and ending Congressional pension programs.

I Pledge my vote only to candidates that will work to end the influence of professional paid lobbyists and their campaign dollars..

I Pledge my vote only to candidates that will promise no new spending programs until failed programs are repaired or eliminated.

I Pledge my vote only to those that will stop the voter fraud and manipulation which is corrupting our election process.

I Pledge to abandon any political party whose candidates serve themselves and the party instead of We the People.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page