Month: March 2015

MO puts its foot down against federal overreach

Nathaniel Hall Law Enforcement, Local

I’m glad to see someone in Missouri finally doing something about the federal government overreach. Unfortunately, the Republican majority in Missouri is comprised of a bunch of idiots.

For those who don’t know, State Rep. Mike Moon introduced a bill that would basically stop any agency in Missouri from enforcing federal laws unless they are approved by the state legislature. This means any federal law would need to be reviewed by the legislature, debated, voted upon, and approved by the Governor. This obviously would not stop federal agents from enforcing federal laws within the state, but it does stop state and local agencies from using their funding to enforce laws that haven’t been approved.

This is likely to stir up other problems, such as loss of federal funding for a variety of programs and projects, but I don’t see that as a bad thing. Citizens in different states should not be funding projects and programs here in Missouri. By losing federal funding and forcing those within the state to fully fund local projects people will begin to see where their money is going and, therefore, can more easily hold those in power accountable.

This also begins to put a price on the enforcement of federal laws because costs cannot be pawned off on local agencies and hidden from view. Right now all we really know is that state agency X received Y amount as part of a program. Does that mean the local agency utilized that money in the best way possible? No. Is it possible that the local costs of the program exceeded the funding they received? Yes, but we don’t know.

I doubt this will ever receive any real momentum, but I believe that if states started creating this kind of law and following them that we could begin to reign in those who continue to exceed their constitutional powers.

h/t Tenth Amendment Center

Republicans and the budget

Nathaniel Hall Financial

I’m tired of Republicans. In this article there is a comment by Colorado Republican Ken Buck. “I don’t know anyone who believes we’re going to balance the budget in 10 years.” I could do it. I know for a fact that I could do it. I’d likely even end up with a surplus. Let’s look at the numbers.

According to the Department of Treasury (1) the total revenue for the federal government was $3,021,000,000 for fiscal year 2014 (Oct. 2013 – Sept. 2014). The total outlays (expenditures) was $3,504,000,000, leaving $483,000,000 in debt. Those are obviously very large numbers. My solution would fix that problem. First, I’d start at $0 instead of starting with an existing budget. I’d then determine what was absolutely necessary. Defense, courts, interest, and *interstates* (no grants for local development). Obviously, there is a lot of waste in these areas, but by going back to basics we could end up with a budget surplus, pay off the debt, and nearly eliminate federal taxes. By doing so states can be left to take care of everything else (10th Amendment). If the federal government isn’t taking our money then the states can decide which programs they want to pay for and which they don’t. This brings the burden (and accountability) to a more local area. It also forces the people who benefit from the program to pay for the program instead of taking money from Missouri to pay for high speed rail in California.

The idea that you can’t balance the budget in 10 years is ludicrous. The problem is that they don’t want to eliminate unnecessary programs in order to balance the budget. The first place to look is the group of “non-essential” people who don’t go to work during a government shutdown.

(1) http://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/mts0914.pdf

h/t Fox News

Mandatory voting? Probably not to Democrats benefit.

Nathaniel Hall Uncategorized

The other day Obama made a comment about wanting mandatory voting. In some ways, I don’t think it would work as he expects though. Why do I believe that? Because, it goes against many things he believes.

Without amnesty, this is certainly a no-go. If you take a look at the map above you’ll see that a majority of the country, according to the 2012 Presidential election, is not Democrat. And according to a 2015 Gallop pull, 38% of Americans self-identify as Republican and a mere 24% identify as Democrat. Assuming those statistics are accurate, that means Republicans are much more likely to take a majority among all voters, not just likely voters.

With amnesty, many people believe those who would take advantage of the opportunity are likely to vote Democrat however, it is said that many Hispanics do not vote Democrat. Why? Because, Democrats push for amnesty programs that 1) takes jobs from those who went through the legal process in the first place and 2) lowers wages for those who work to send money to their families south of the US border.

Finally, Democrats have been heavily against any voter ID legislation. Any time voter ID legislation is presented Democrats are the first to claim racism against blacks and Hispanics even if the legislation extends free government IDs to those who cannot afford one. This is an important factor because the only way to make voting mandatory you have to account for everyone who has voted.

I don’t expect voting to become mandatory for these reason and, of course, for constitutional reasons. I also believe that once Democrats actually look at the data they’ll run from this idea.

h/t http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/20/mandatory-voting-experts/

Congress can’t do anything right…

Nathaniel Hall Energy, Financial, Illegal Immigration

“If we don’t win this battle today, we’ll attach [the legislation] to another bill and win the war.” — North Dakota GOP Sen. John Hoeven

This quote is in regards to a vote on a bill to approve the Keystone pipeline. Why don’t I believe him? Because Republicans just finished a “battle” to stop Obama’s immigration actions and not only did they lose, but they gave up. The language was tied to a Homeland Security funding bill and they gave up. The immigration actions relate directly to homeland security AND the department would have continued to operate without approved funding, but they still decided to give up. That is why I have absolutely no faith I the Republicans to pass the Keystone bill.

h/t http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/04/gop-senate-fails-to-get-enough-votes-to-override-obama-keystone-veto-says-fight/