Littlestuff Weekender-2-18-2012

Thursday night I had the pleasure of visiting with my dear friends and fellow patriots of the North Central Ohio Conservatives. My topic was the Fed and the Economy, and I approached it primarily from a micro-economic perspective. Because so many members of the NCOC read these columns, I would like to add a brief macro-economic point of view. But first, I wish to extend many thanks to Jim and Jan Green, Marsha and Keith Rexroth for a great dinner and superb companionship.

With our artificially low interest rates mandated by the Fed, we are facing a national economic Armageddon in the near future. Our $16 trillion debt and our more than $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities added to the profligate spending by our governments at all levels means that our debt service (interest payments) are at astronomical levels and in grave danger of becoming impossible to maintain. Right now the federal government is paying less than 1% interest on the national debt because of the heavy-handed intervention by the Federal Reserve in the free market. If the situation in Europe disintegrates to the point that upward pressure on interest rates is unavoidable, the cost of servicing our U.S. debt will double, triple or perhaps soar out of sight. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and all other entitlement programs will be severely affected as will national defense and every other government program….constitutional and unconstitutional. Our government’s emphasis will pivot from a buying-votes mentality to a taxing-for-survival oppressive approach. It won’t be pretty. It will be painful. We must prepare.

On a lighter note…..oh, there is no lighter note.

Next weekend…the 25^th and 26^th, I’ll be in Elizabethtown, Kentucky for the annual convention of the Libertarian Party of Kentucky (LPKY). I am honored to be their main speaker with the “Why Liberty, Why Now” message scheduled for 3:30pm on Saturday the 26^th. Thanks to Chairman Ken Moellman and his fellow Bluegrass defenders of liberty for inviting me.

Have you ever found yourself so engrossed in a task that you were unaware of what was happening around you? As I become more and more disturbed by the circumstances of our nation and the congressional failures to challenge the President and stop the bleeding, I suspect that those in Washington whom we expect to stop this mess are clueless. They are so engaged in the political aspects of their offices that they must be ignorant of our dire situation. We know that congress persons rarely read the legislation they pass, and that most of their time is devoted to fundraising and managing their public personas. Indeed, their failures to carefully monitor and understand the ramifications of their legislative activity are profound indictments of the untenable and unconstitutional massiveness of the federal government. It is far too large to be managed by 535 venal people. If the reach of the federal monstrosity were confined to the enumerated powers as listed in The Constitution of the United States of America, the 435 House members and the 100 senators could spread themselves broadly enough with fewer committees to effectively oversee the federal functions. Big is not necessarily better. Big is much worse, more dangerous and totally ineffective. The word that comes to mind that describes the precarious state of the nation is …….delegation. Too much delegation leads to entrenched bureaucratic fiefdoms and unaccountable career politicians.

It’s about time to start my garden seeds, but I’m somewhat hesitant. The winter has been so mild so far that it’s quite possible we will have a vengeful early spring thus delaying the transfer of the little plants to the outdoors. Decisions, decisions….I think I’ll start half of each species/variety now and the remainder in early March.

I read last week that North Korea had employed American-made drones that they purchased from Syria who had bought them as used surplus material from us with foreign aid money and credits we provided them. And some of you believe that Ron Paul’s foreign policy is “wacky.” Perhaps his is, but no one in his right mind and with a straight face can convince me that the one we have now and we have followed for years is working all that well.

Three Afghan nationals were intercepted in Texas after crossing into the U.S. over the southern border. I wonder how many we’ve missed so far. Meanwhile Granny continues to get fondled at the Charleston, W.V. airport and every other interior landing spot that features nothing but domestic air traffic. More government wisdom and efficiency is on display to calm the fears of the citizens. They have semantically disemboweled “protect and defend” until it has become “harass and annoy.” These are the baby steps of a tyranny quickly growing to raging adolescence. It seems that the time has passed for correcting the child in the way that he should go. The only logical response is to sentence the culprits to a juvenile detention center.

Greg Ruffner, candidate for Wood County Commissioner, will be my guest on Tuesday’s show. My little audio battle for liberty begins at 6:00pm and ends at 7:00pm on the Talk of Toledo, 1370 WSPD.

www.wspd.com

Have a great remainder of the weekend. Enjoy President’s Day on Monday by celebrating the few who were constitutionally faithful….shouldn’t take too long. We’ve only had 44 of them and the way things are going, we may not have many more…..if any.

cearlwriting@hotmail.com

www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

  

Balanced but not Equal

Until recent times every American student has learned the axiom of United States’ constitutional government that our 3-headed federal construct is limited by checks and balances built into the system. The three branches—executive, legislative and judicial—exercise certain powers and oversights that in theory offset one another. Many people err, however, when they consider the branches equal. They are not. For example the shoe and the foot are both larger than the pebble, but the tiny stone in the boot can make walking an uncomfortable undertaking. Two entities do not have to be equal in order for one to judiciously restrict the other. The three federal branches have different functions, constitutional powers, and responsibilities. They are not equal. One of the great distortions of the Twentieth Century was the emergence of the courts as power players in the national arena. Their portfolio for cases brought before them is to determine if matters of law were applied correctly so that plaintiffs and defendants could rely on a just system.

My description of the legal system will not be found in Black’s or Blackstone. It is simply my interpretation of The Constitution of the United States of America and its recognition of the necessity for a system of courts to oversee disputes between citizens and confrontations between citizens and governments. This piece is a perception rather than a précis. In my view there appear to be three primary determinants for identifying the relative power of a branch of government: the constituency, its role, available remedies for enforcing its actions. For example, the President is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and the Secretary of Defense is a cabinet level position in the Executive Branch. The people and the various electors choose the President who appoints the Secretary of Defense…subject to Senate confirmation. The House of Representatives is responsible for funding the military, but is not constrained by the desires of the President or his SecDef. In essence, the President has, subject to the War Powers Act and posse comitatus limitations, the entire military apparatus plus various federal agencies with police power to enforce the law. The Congress does hold the “power of the purse,” and the Courts have the force of decree but must rely on voluntary compliance because the courts have no police or military power.

Historically, in my view, there have been two great shifts in the balance of power among the three branches. The 1803 case, Marbury vs. Madison, established the notion of judicial review and the Supreme Court’s authority for determining the constitutionality of legislation and executive actions. Prior to this ruling the Court was viewed as a mere dispute-resolution mechanism. The other action that I believe transformed the balance of power was the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment which altered the method for selecting U.S. senators from being appointed by their respective state legislatures to direct popular vote by the citizens of each state. The former constituents for senators were THE STATES. The amendment changed their obligations and loyalties to a more populism-oriented constituency. Surely there are additional developments that have altered the delicate balance envisioned by the Framers, but I suspect these two would make the “Power Shifting Hall of Fame.”

Even now with the additional power for the Supreme Court and the alteration of the senators’ fidelity, I believe the House of Representatives remains as the most powerful portion of the federal government … if the country follows constitutional law. Controlling the financial elements for most of the federal government should give the House extraordinary leverage for determining the policies and direction of the nation. As the direct representatives of the people, the House can protect the peoples’ interests from encroachment by the other branches and the bureaucracy. Clearly the House has failed in a number of ways. The House of Representatives with agreement by the Senate has ignored or abrogated some of its constitutional duties by transferring them to other governmental or private sector entities thus minimizing its oversight capabilities. The House has ignored its fiscal responsibilities by over spending and through massive borrowing to fund unconstitutional programs, departments, agencies and bureaus.

We have had inter-branch faceoffs in the past as one branch or another sought to increase its power or to preserve its niche. Some have been ugly, and others were subtle, but the bottom line is that the 3 branches of our federal government are NOT equal. If our federal government were operating in a constitutionally pure manner, the House would be the most powerful entity in the federal government because of its fiscal control. It’s true that the Congress cannot lower the pay of the sitting federal judges, but they can abolish and/or create federal circuits and judgeships at will. This, in effect, allows the Congress to rein in a runaway judiciary. Congress can refuse to fund various and sundry executive branch department, and thus, render them useless. Some people fear the power of the purse that is given to the “Peoples’ House,” but a dispute or confrontation between branches of government is to be preferred to all of them vigorously defending the government’s interests…..as they do now. We need balance. We do not need equality among the branches. In fact we need balance and counterbalance.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com

www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Radio this week: Tue. & Wed., 6-7:00pm, 1370 WSPD

                              Friday, 3-6:00pm for Brian Wilson, www.wspd.com

     

Stashin' Passion

You probably recall an interview from Detroit shortly after President Obama was elected. The woman who was the subject was ecstatic because she believed that the President was going to give her and others some money. When asked where she thought the money would come from, she answered “Obama’s stash.” I’m certain that many of us chuckled at her apparent naiveté. It seems, however, that at some level she was correct. Obama does have a “stash,” but the Detroit lady’s cut will be much smaller than she had expected. On the other hand his big business cronies have been faring well.

The President may have been a lowly community organizer when he ran for the Illinois State Senate, but he learned the politics of the Chicago streets very well. “The Chicago Way” requires an unflinching and unrepentant commitment to rewarding one’s friends and crushing one’s foes. All progressives and most Democrats believe that they have a proprietary interest in public funds….formerly your money. Once the taxes or fees have been coerced or confiscated from citizens, they become the personal bankroll for the leftie politician. The money can be budgeted for programs and policies that favor groups that are safely ensconced in the leftist voting bloc.

While directing advantageous budgetary allocations toward compliant groups is an important element of leftist politics, the recipients must be continually reminded who their benefactors are. It follows, therefore, that massive funds are required to “inform and educate” the masses so that their voting will allow the looting cycle to continue ad infinitum. To effectively reach the people with a message of beneficent government requires massive amounts of funds. Soliciting campaign money from the smaller recipients of government largesse can be an effective strategy, but $25 and $50 donations will not accumulate quickly enough to underwrite a broad based ad campaign.

Entering from “stage left” are the idealistic dedicated leftists who have entered the world of capitalism by becoming innovative entrepreneurs. Like many progressive lefties their ideas of “ought to” are rarely grounded in reality. Their innovative concepts may be intriguing and creative, but the market and consumer demand are not yet favorable for their products or services. Some of their concepts are politically correct, but can never become commercially viable….unless they can secure a “sugar daddy” to underwrite or finance their trip into dreamland. Other development concepts are more feasible, but why invest your own assets when government is available to provide funding? Two glaring examples stand out. The Solyndra fiasco in California and the Petrobras development in the deep water off Brazil are representative of the type of cronyism this administration has employed to reward political friends and contributors.

Given the two examples that have been cited, it should be clear that President Obama has distorted the so-called “stimulus” funding to reward his political allies. As the Federal Reserve Bank cranks out more dollars, the President’s friends are rewarded by raids on public funds, and the citizens of the nation are penalized with increasing debt and decreasing currency values. The Obama “stash” has been found. It is not a vault at Fort Knox. It is not a shoebox under the President’s bed in the Whitehouse. It is not Al Gore’s famous “lockbox.” The Obama stash is a keyboard in Ben Bernanke’s office at the Fed. Those stash-driven keyboard strokes are underwritten by higher prices for consumers, and an increasingly uncertain economic future for Americans. The Obama stash ultimately begins and ends in your pocket, but the lady from Detroit is still waiting for her cut from the stash. I suspect that she’ll vote for him again because she does not yet understand that the “stash” is a myth, and his promises to her were meaningless. Meanwhile, George Soros enjoys the profits from Petrobras, and the Solyndra executives plead the Fifth Amendment. The Obama campaign re-election fund continues to grow in anticipation of another four years for looting the people of the United States and dashing the dreams of the Framers and the Founders.

Comment:  cearlwriting@hotmail.com

www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com

Tue. & Wed., 6-7:00pm, 1370 WSPD, Toledo  www.wspd.com

 

Cooperation or Coercion

Those of us who are skeptical of a large federal government usually prefer our public affairs to be conducted locally. Tyranny is tyrannical no matter the source, and we find that many local governments and their “cooperative” offspring are trampling our freedoms with the same level of gusto as “Big Brother.” Cities, villages, townships and counties have become obsessed with micro-managing many aspects of their constituents’ lives. Add to their growing interventionism the reality that many local governments find themselves in dire fiscal straits. My observation is not uniformly true. There are a number of local political entities who practice restraint, but their numbers are dwindling as urban, suburban and rural areas pattern themselves after one another.

The growing power grab by local government is exacerbated by another development….the proliferation of regional “authorities.” Local entities band together for oversight and services or form new governmental agencies to administer interests that cross political boundaries. Some examples might include a park district, water board or scenic river administrative unit. This expansion of government administrative authority may, at some level, appear to be a beneficial development for the citizens who are affected. Cost savings may occur because of consolidation of redundant services, yet the mere creation of a cross-boundary entity generates more power for the new agency. Though the regional administrative agencies lack legislative or executive power, they do employ varying elements of regulatory coercion. Some of the regional cooperatives can preempt personal property rights of citizens within their jurisdictions, and others can implement rules and regulations that require citizens’ compliance. There are agencies that oversee waterways and shorelines that are shared by various jurisdictions, and in some cases the cooperative district can restrict a property owners rights if the property abuts the water. In essence, this becomes a de facto eminent domain issue without compensation for the property owner.

One huge political benefit of the cooperative entities for local politicians is that they can figuratively “wash their hands” when a noxious ruling is promulgated by the regional authority. The buck doesn’t stop with the politician’s accountability. The buck becomes vaporized with no discernable accountability and no clear pathway for appeal. When a regional body implements an egregious ruling that negatively impacts citizens, the politicians can deny responsibility and deflect criticism. Typically the only remedy available for the aggrieved citizen is via the courts…a potentially costly and lengthy process.

When one examines the federal government and its misuse of power, the focus may be on the various agencies, departments and directorates that appear to operate with impunity as they trample the rights of citizens. The cooperative and regional alliances that many local governments have formed can function similarly to the federal bureaucracy with minimal accountability and limited restraint. From the perspective of a citizen, local government is more accessible and more responsive than are the federal or state governments. The model becomes distorted, however, when government at any level becomes too large and unwieldy. Big coercive government is the antithesis of freedom….no matter where it is, at home, in Columbus or in Washington D.C.

Comment: earl4sos@gmail.com               or                          www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com