President Obama would be surprised to learn that Senate Democrats have paved the way to repeal Obamacare.  Republicans and conservatives have been planning ways to repeal Obamacare and were facing an up hill battle.  However, Senator Reid (D-Nevada) unwittingly gave a gift to those wishing to repeal Obamacare earlier this week.

Senator Reid invoked the so called nuclear option this week to block a vote on the Obama jobs bill, the American Jobs Act.  By using the nuclear option to block a vote on the Obama jobs bill, Senator Reid blindly handed opponents of Obamacare a clear path to repeal Obamacare.

Assuming that Republicans take control of the Senate and the White House in 2012, they would have to overcome a Democrat filibuster in order to repeal Obamacare.  However, with Reid’s actions, a Republican controlled House, Senate, and White House could easily repeal Obamacare with a simple majority vote.

With President Obama falling in the polls, high unemployment, and Senate Democrats defending twice as many seats as Republicans, Republicans have a good shot at taking the Senate and White House in 2012.  If that happens, Republicans will almost certainly repeal Obamacare which remains unpopular in polls.

If Republicans are able to repeal Obamacare following the 2012 elections, former President Obama and Democrats will have Senator Reid to thank.

President Obama has been demanding that the congress pass his American Jobs Act.  However, the Obama jobs bill is opposed by Senate Republicans and several Senate Democrats.

Hoping to spare President Obama an embarrassing defeat of the Obama jobs bill, Senator Reid invoked the so-called nuclear option to block Senate Republicans from offering the American Jobs Act up for a vote.

It is interesting to note that when the Democrats were in the minority in the Senate, Senator Reid decried the potential use of the nuclear option as an unconstitutional abuse of power.  At the time, Senate Democrats were using the filibuster to block votes on several of President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees.  However, now that Senator Reid leads the majority party in the Senate, he believes that the nuclear option is an acceptable procedure.

At any one of the upcomming jobs speaches that the President will give, he will point the finger at Senate Republicans for not supporting the American Jobs Act.  However, he does not need to look any futher that his own party.

Today, the Federal Government can pay for spending by claiming a savings on money they never intended to spend in the first place.  For example, included in the deficit reduction proposed by President Obama are the savings of not being in Iraq at last years troop levels 10 years from now.  Some of that money is then used for other spending or in phony savings.  You can think of this as assuming that you will continue to pay your mortgage even after you have paid it off and using that money to pay for things now.

According to the Senators, the Honest Budget Act:

• Requires both houses of Congress to adopt a binding budget resolution or face a 60-vote threshold to move any spending bills through Congress (if they don’t create a budget, they need 60 votes to pass any spending);
• Makes it more difficult to label routine expenditures “emergency spending”;
• Eliminates phony rescissions (using phony spending projections to create savings used to pay for other items);
• Makes real the fake federal pay freeze;
• Disallows timing shifts, which bill drafters use to make a bill appear deficit-neutral within a certain time frame. (think of Obamacare)

Not only with this make it harder for Washington to hide spending and continue to trick the American people, but the Honest Budget Act would also help save money.  As point out at HotAir, …. Since 2005, budget gimmicks have enabled more than $350 billion worth of additional deficit spending.

It will be interesting to see the response and opposition to this bill or if Harry Reid (D-Nevada) will even allow it to come up for a vote.

In the ad, Senator Obama is quoted as saying “… raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure” on the Senate floor while debating a debt ceiling increase in 2006.  The ad also highlights Obama’s desire to raise the debt ceiling high enough to avoid it coming up again until after the next election.  Apparently, President Obama does not want to add a debt ceiling increase to the discussion while making his plea to be re-elected in the midst of raising unemployment and a stalled economy.

HotAir points out that Obama is in good company when it comes to debt ceiling increase flip flops.  Both Senators Reid and Durbin voted against every debt ceiling increase were Republicans were in control of Congress and for debt ceiling increases when Democrats were in control.  American’s should remember that over the next few days as Senate Democrats bemoan Republican partisanship.

Many Americans and more sadly, many politicians are not familiar with the founding documents of the United States.  Here are a couple of facts that you may not have known:

• The wording was approved on July 4th, 1776, but it wasn’t signed until later.
• It does not start with “We the people” (see below)
• George Washington did not sign it.
• The Colonies and England had been at war for over a year prior to July 4th, 1776.
• The original draft denounced the slave trade (southern states would approve until the references were removed)

The Declaration of Independence

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. –Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Source: The Pennsylvania Packet, July 8, 1776

Recently, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) showed his ignorance about the Constitution while promoting the DREAM Act.

As reported by HotAir, Durbin said “When I look around this room, I see America’s future. Our doctors, our teachers, our nurses, our engineers, our scientists, our soldiers, our Congressman, our Senators and maybe our President.” when addressing a group of illegal immigrants.

However, the Constitution is crystal clear about the status of a person who may become president.  According to Article II, section 1 of the United States Constitution:  “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Perhaps it is time for a new amendment to the Constitution.  Something along the lines of “No person without a general clue as to what is in the constitution and its meaning shall be eligible to the Office of President, Senator, or Congressman”.  Sadly, that would eliminate roughly half of those already in congress and at least half of the population of the United States.

The percent of government outlays sent to individuals as increased from 2.4% of the budget at the end of World War II to over 66% of government spending in 2010.  Over two thirds of government spending is in the form of checks sent directly to individuals.

As pointed out at HotAir, government payment to individuals account for almost 16% of GDP in 2010.  In 1945, direct payments to individuals was 1% of GDP.  This means that the Federal Government redistributes 16% of our economy.  It is as if the Federal Government believes its job is redistribution of wealth.

Some people would argue that the primary job of the government is wealth redistribution.  However, it is clear that the founders did not intend for the government excel at wealth redistribution.  In 1794, James Madison said “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” — James Madison, 4 Annals of Congress 179, 1794.

Others would argue (including several clueless people in congress) that the “General Welfare” clause of the Constitution gives the Government the power to redistribute wealth.  Again, James Madison – “With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” — James Madison in a letter to James Robertson.

Earlier this week, the Republican run House put forth a budget that cuts $61 billion dollars for 2011 spending.  The President and Senate Democrats call those cuts draconian and severe.  The obviously aren’t aware that we are facing a $1.6 trillion being added to the National Debt this year.

Congress can do very little to get spending under control until they are willing to address the 66% of spending that is an every increasing part of the Federal Budget.  Anything else will fall short of the “fiscal discipline” both parties are promising.  Being that the Federal Government is not granted the power of wealth redistribution, Congress should look to those programs.

Recently Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) proclaimed that the House Repealing ObamaCare is unconstitutional.  She claimed that repealing Obamacare would violate the 5th and 14th amendments to the Constitution.

The 5th amendment to the constitution says that ”No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice but in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”.

Rep. Lee claims that repealing Obamacare would deprive someone of their life or liberty.  Lee proclaims that ”I rise in opposition because it is important that we preserve lives and we recognize that 40 million-plus are uninsured.”  Lee seems to believe that because the Constitution prevents the government from depriving somebody of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, repealing Obamacare  is in violation of the Constitution.

Rep. Lee seems to lack the basic understanding that the Constitution doesn’t provide for our rights, but prohibits the government from taking our rights away.  In Rep. Lee’s view, the government provides and sustains our rights and any attempt to stop the government from providing or facilitating a service would be unconstitutional.

Another hilarious example of Congress’ lack of understanding of the Constitution comes from Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) attempt to justifiy Obamacare by  saying “Well, when you start off with the Preamble of the Constitution, you talk about the pursuit of happiness,”.  Rep. Lewis seems to be ignorant of the fact that the “pursuit of happiness” phrase comes from the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution.

Americans should be alarmed at the lack of basic understanding of our founding documents demonstrated by members of Congress.  All members of Congress swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same.   How can they take this oath without understanding the document or in some cases, not even know the contents of it?

Perhaps we should at least make are representatives memorize the 1oth ammendment which states “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.”  At least then, we could expect them to at least do nothing as they would be unsure what powers the government is granted.

This weekend, the Congress  is battling over the extension of the Bush tax cuts through meaningless votes on bills that are sure to fail in attempts to win the favor of various groups of Americans.  Politicians attempt to draw lines and force choices over who is for the little guy and who only cares about money grubbing fat cats.  But this only serves to distract us from the true issue.

In a recent Democrat tax cut press conference  Americans can yet again see the shameful attitude of our representatives in Congress.  Senator Clair Mccaskill said “If they (Republicans) think it is OK to raise taxes for the embattled middle class because they are going to pout if we don’t give more money to millionaires, it really is time for the people of America to take up pitchforks.”  This is just one more example of many where those in government from President Obama to members of the House and Senate refer to tax cuts as “giveaways”.

Ignoring the early 20th century class warfare rhetoric, we get insight into the minds of those that believe the government gives us our income.  The political class believes that a tax cut is “giving more money” to millionaires.  By that same logic, extending tax cuts for individuals making under 200k or couples making 250k is “giving” them money also.

Those serving in Congress need to understand that Americans do not earn their income at the pleasure of the political ruling class, but rather “we the people” have allowed our government to take some of our money and freedom to fund the federal government.

The authors of the Constitution prohibited the federal government from directly taxing individuals.  They wisely sought to construct a government where the government could not oppress and control the people as the founders had experienced under the rule of  King George III.

 In 1913, the 16th amendment chipped away at the economic freedom that all Americans enjoyed so that the federal government could raise additional revenue.  Since then, the Congress has been in perpetual debate regarding how much money they will “give” us or allow the American people to have as it is now in their power to take all of our income.

The founders of our country would find it appalling that the government is now engaged in a battle over how much money should be “given” to which individuals.  In a free society, the government is not given the power to determine how much economic freedom individuals have.

Americans need to curtail the power of the federal government to limit economic freedom by demanding reform and simplification of the tax code, elimination of wealth creation limiting progressive taxes, and a return to the founding principles of our country.

The national debt is the total amount of money that the US Government owes.  This differs from the budget deficit in the the budget deficit  is the difference between what the government takes in through taxes and what it spends in a given year.  In years when their is a deficit, the national debt goes up.  In years with a surplus, the national debt can go down if Congress chooses to apply the surplus to retiring debt.

According the the Congressional Budget Office, the current level of budget deficits predicted for the next 10 years will drive the national debt to over $20 trillion by 2019.

 As reported by CPHQ roughly 6 months ago, the national debt  passed the $12 trillion mark for the first time.  At this pace, the national debt will top $14 trillion before the end of 2010.  This is expected to continue to grow higher in 2011 as the CBO and the White House predict a 2011 Obama budget deficit of over $1 trillion.

According to the national debt clock, that $13 trillion breaks down to $42k per citizen and over $118k per tax payer.  The interest payments alone amount over $195 billion.

Over the last few years, Americans have learned the hard way the taking on too much debt can lead to personal ruin.  The US government needs to learn from American’s personal mistakes and take steps to dramatically reduce the Obama deficits and begin to pay down the debt before it becomes entirely unsustainable.