You are here: Home / Archives for States Rights

Insurance Companies and Bureaucrats, Obamacare’s Big Winners

May 24, 2012 By 1 Comment

By Diane Cohen

When the topic is protecting liberty and the headline reads, “Even in Illinois but not in Arizona,” we’re in trouble. Indeed, while even the Democrat-controlled legislature in President Obama’s adopted home state of Illinois said no to establishing an insurance exchange to facilitate the federal health care law, Arizona is moving full steam ahead with its exchange and is using more than $30 million in federal tax dollars to do so.

While exchange supporters euphemistically refer to exchanges as “marketplaces,” exchanges are in fact government-sanctioned, invitation-only clubs where only government-approved insurance companies can sell government-approved insurance. No wonder big insurance companies are lobbying so hard for an Arizona exchange and want them to stand even if the President’s health care law is struck down by the Supreme Court in June – they want to make sure they get an invitation to the party so that they can monopolize the market now and forever. Bloomberg News reported just last week that insurance companies stand to gain billions in revenue over the next seven years from the President’s health care law.

While exchanges will benefit the big insurance companies and bureaucrats who will get jobs, the Arizona taxpayers will be stuck paying the bill. At a Senate hearing last November, Arizona’s exchange director, who previously worked for the very insurance lobby that advocated for the passage of the President’s health care law, said he could not answer the question of how much the exchange will costs taxpayers until it was up and running. We do know the Massachusetts exchange costs taxpayers in that state $60 million a year.

Last fall, the Goldwater Institute sent a public records request to the Governor’s office to find out how much the state is spending on the exchange, including specific requests for the payroll records of all state employees who have worked on the exchange since its inception in March 2010. The response was a mere 33 pages of undated, redacted records, most of which are indecipherable. What little is visible indicates that in addition to paying salaries of some unknown amount, tax dollars are paying for exchange employees’ food, lodging and travel. This non-response appears to be a violation of Arizona public records law and we hope the Governor’s office will soon make a full and transparent disclosure of these records.

States are not required to establish exchanges and Arizona should say no. Instead, it is entrenching the federal health care law, along with a new government bureaucracy and the special interests that go along with it.

Diane Cohen is a senior attorney with the Goldwater Institute.

Learn More:

Goldwater Institute: States Must Protect the Health Care Freedom of their Citizens by Saying No to Federal Health Care Insurance Exchanges

Arizona Governor’s Office: Payroll Records (PDF)

Bloomberg: Insurers face $1 Trillion in Revenue at Stake in Health Law

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Health Care, State Budget, State Government, States Rights

Tombstone Ain’t Dead Yet

May 23, 2012 By 1 Comment

By Nick Dranias

Last week, the U.S. Forest Service got the drop on Tombstone when the City’s request for an emergency injunction was denied by Senior Judge Frank Zapata of the United States District Court. But Tombstone’s legal posse has a more than a few rounds left in the chamber.

The Goldwater Institute has already appealed the decision as a violation of the Tenth Amendment and, on May 21st, we filed an emergency motion for an injunction with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of the City of Tombstone. The motion urges the Court to allow Tombstone to repair its Huachuca Mountain water system because the loss of water to the City is especially dangerous now that wildfire season has arrived. It is entirely possible that the motion will be granted in just a few days. But even if it is denied, the City won’t be firing blanks just yet. The next move is an emergency request before Justice Anthony Kennedy, who “rides” the Ninth Circuit.

Meanwhile the cavalry is on the horizon. County and rancher organizations from around the Western States are gearing up to file “Friend of the Court” briefs in support of Tombstone’s appeal. And three days after the denial of Tombstone’s request for emergency relief from Judge Zapata, U.S. Representative Jeff Flake introduced a bill entitled the “Emergency Water Supply Restoration Act.” The bill would allow state and local governments to freely and fully restore water supplies in Wilderness Areas without interference from federal agencies during a declared State of Emergency. No doubt the bill will catch the U.S. Forest Service’s attention.

Congressman Flake’s bill may have an uphill battle in the Senate, but combined with the cutting edge legal theories being used by the Goldwater Institute’s posse of public interest attorneys, no one should count out the “Town Too Tough to Die.”

Nick Dranias is the Director of Policy Development and Constitutional Government for the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Goldwater Institute: Emergency Motion Pending Appeal (PDF)

Goldwater Institute: Tombstone v. United States

U.S. Congress: Emergency Water Supply Restoration Act (PDF)

Filed Under: Constitutional Law, Environment, Federal Government, Property Rights, States Rights

The Feds Are Coming for Our Water

May 3, 2012 By 2 Comments

By Nick Dranias

The City of Tombstone, Arizona is no longer the only one fighting the federal government for water rights. The latest move by the Federal Bureau of Land Management appears to herald a bigger and much more comprehensive effort to seize water and access rights on federal lands throughout the western states.

Just last week, the Bureau of Land Management declared to the Arizona Department of Water Resources that the federal government holds senior water rights across much of Arizona’s San Pedro River riparian watershed. The BLM’s objection to the “Designation of Adequate Water Supply” issued by ADWR to Sierra Vista’s Pueblo del Sol Water Company stakes the claim that water sources in the area cannot be used without the federal government’s permission. This new federal policy not only defies decades of deference to and accommodation of state sovereignty over water law, but it throws a noose around Arizona’s neck, for which water is life.

The growing federal stranglehold over water rights in Arizona is a direct assault on state autonomy. There is perhaps no better way for the federal government to quell restive western states, like Arizona, that dare to resist federal immigration, healthcare, and unionization policies.

More than ever before, the BLM’s actions show that it is essential for the Goldwater Institute to prevail in our efforts to vindicate Tombstone, Arizona’s 130-year-old water rights, which the federal government is challenging. If Tombstone fails in its effort to preserve its municipal water supply, which is essential to its existence, the floodgates of federal overreach will wash away what little sovereignty the western states still enjoy.

Nick Dranias holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Sierra Vista Herald: Warning on water issued by Babbitt in ’94

Arizona Department of Water Resources: Bureau of Land Management letter (PDF)

Goldwater Institute: Tombstone v. United States

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Constitutional Law, Environment, Federal Government, States Rights

Tombstone, Arizona is Ground Zero for State Sovereignty

April 11, 2012 By 1 Comment

By Nick Dranias

In a showdown between the Obama Administration and the “Town Too Tough to Die,” the U.S. Forest Service is refusing to allow the City of Tombstone to repair its mountain spring water infrastructure after the 2011 Monument Fire destroyed pipelines and catchments.

Despite Gov. Jan Brewer’s declared state of emergency to empower Tombstone to restore its municipal water supply, the feds continue to block Tombstone, citing the Wilderness Act, which was passed decades after Tombstone secured the water rights. The Forest Service’s decision risks the lives and properties of Tombstone residents and tourists due to the loss of adequate fire suppression capabilities and safe drinking water.

This is a case of egregious federal overreach. If the Forest Service can effectively seize Tombstone’s 130-year-old water rights during a state of emergency — rights that the Service recognized as valid in 1916 — no state or local government will be safe from the feds. That’s why the Goldwater Institute recently filed for a preliminary injunction to restore Tombstone’s sovereign power to restore its municipal water supply.

There is plenty of reason to believe that Tombstone will ultimately prevail. The Supreme Court is already familiar with federal overreach in Graham County, Arizona. In Printz v. United States, the Court rejected efforts by the federal government to commandeer the Graham County Sheriff into implementing a federal gun control law, writing, “the Framers explicitly chose a Constitution that confers upon Congress the power to regulate individuals, not States.” The Forest Service is openly flouting this principle of law.

By denying Tombstone access to its water, the Forest Service is threatening to directly regulate Tombstone to death. Printz makes it clear that the Forest Service has no such constitutional power — not if the guarantee of state sovereignty means anything under the Tenth Amendment.

Nick Dranias holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

Goldwater Institute: Tombstone v. United States

Justia.com: Printz v. United States

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Constitutional Law, Environment, Federal Government, Judicial, Property Rights, Public Safety, States Rights

Rationing by Any Other Name

March 21, 2012 By Leave a Comment

By Diane Cohen

Just over a week ago, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved legislation to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board (“IPAB”), and did so in an overwhelmingly bi-partisan fashion. This should come as no surprise because IPAB had bi-partisan opposition before it was enacted as part of the President’s healthcare law in March 2010, and opposition to it has only grown since then. The full House will vote on the measure on Thursday.

IPAB represents the worst of the President’s health care law and has been at the forefront of the Goldwater Institute’s lawsuit challenging the Act. IPAB will be composed of 15 presidentially-appointed, unelected bureaucrats who will have sweeping powers; their decision cannot be reversed by Congress or the courts, and are subject to no meaningful Congressional oversight.

Because IPAB is not required to be bipartisan, President Obama could use his power to make recess appointments, as he has done before. That means he could stack the board entirely with members of his own party, who could then exercise all of the board’s powers. Even worse, while the board is meant to have 15 members, there’s no requirement that it must. The President could give all of this power to just one person by appointing only one board member, or appoint none, in which case his Secretary of Health and Human Services would exercise the power.

IPAB will have the power to dictate whether and how much medical providers can be reimbursed for medical care provided to seniors, which means it can decide not to reimburse for services in any manner it sees fit. That is why IPAB is a rationing board. And despite the law’s prohibition on rationing, that term is not actually defined in the law. “Rationing” will be whatever IPAB says it will be, with no judicial check on its decision.

IPAB is independent all right, but in the worst sense of the word. It is independent of Congress, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people. Far from representing reform, IPAB will reduce access to and the quality of care for millions of Americans. Call your Representatives and ask them to vote for H.R. 452, the IPAB repeal bill. It is time for Congress to step up and rein in this literally uncontrollable board.

Diane Cohen is a senior attorney for the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

House of Representatives’ switchboard: (202) 224-3121

Goldwater Institute: Diane Cohen’s Congressional testimony

Goldwater Institute: Coons v. Geithner

Filed Under: Health Care, States Rights

PAChyderm Coalition Publishes 1st Weekly Legislator Evaluation for this Session

February 24, 2012 By 5 Comments

Here is the general information provided about the evaluation:

We have been working with Republican legislators to refine the bill weights. The have had private access to our proposed weights prior to our publication of them.

The number of bills being tracked is 173 plus 37 bills that have strike all amendments.

There are a lot of legislators with high scores including many representatives who have +100% ratings!

Although we are well into the session, there are still many floor votes as well as committee votes to come. The scores currently are still heavily influenced by bill sponsorships compared to floor and committee votes, but, as more votes are taken, they will have an increasing impact on the scores as the session continues.

We have tightened up the categorization we apply to the scores. Reagan Republican and RINO have stayed the same, the Bipartisan Republican score range has expanded, and the other categories have higher score values with narrower ranges.

Click here to see the complete evaluation.


Filed Under: Conservatives, Elected Officials, Legislation, State Budget, State Economy, State Government, States Rights, Taxation, Uncategorized, Voters Guide Tagged With: , ,

Senator Russell Pearce predicts Supreme Court will uphold SB1070

February 7, 2012 By 29 Comments

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 7, 2012
CONTACT: Sen. Russell Pearce

Ban Amnesty Now president says America’s highest court will not turn back on states’ rights

PHOENIX—Senator Russell Pearce, the author of SB1070 and newly-appointed president of America’s largest grassroots anti-illegal immigration organization, said today the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to hear arguments on Arizona’s contested SB1070 legislation was great news for every legal U.S. citizen.

“When the activist judges in lower federal courts bowed to Barack Obama’s whims and put illegal aliens ahead of American citizens, undermined the Rule of Law, they followed in the president’s footsteps in perpetrating a great injustice against our nation, our citizens Constitutional rights and the state of Arizona,” said Pearce.

“We are a nation of fifty sovereign U.S. states, not a nation of 50 subservient states to be dictated to by a Big Brother leviathan. When the Supreme Court rules, I expect that Washington will learn an important lesson in its proper role, not just on immigration but in its role in governance,” Pearce said.

“We send far too much money to Washington for this to be the treatment we get in return. Sovereign U.S. states and legal U.S. citizens were never meant by our Founding Fathers to become penniless orphans in some Twilight Zone version of a Charles Dickens story, begging for scraps from an all-powerful, dictatorial federal government which waves full ladles of nourishment above our heads but never pours anything into our bowls,” said Pearce.

“When the Court rules, I expect power to return to the states, and Ban Amnesty Now by then will be working diligently to pass SB1070-style legislation in all 50 states, like Alabama, South Carolina and Georgia already have” he said. “The president can sue every state if he pleases, or he can get out of the way while we do the job Washington won’t in protecting our great nation from illegal aliens.

“I fully expect we, the legal citizens of Arizona and America, will win in the Supreme Court on SB1070, just as we did with Arizona’s Employers Sanction Law, the toughest in the nation, which goes after illegal employers and protects American jobs and was upheld five-to-three in the Supreme Court,” said Pearce.

While 6 of the 10 provisions of SB1070 were upheld, four main provisions of the contested SB1070 were blocked from implementation by lower courts, including:

(1) requiring law enforcement officers to make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there is reasonable suspicion that person is an illegal alien;

(2) creating a crime of failure to apply for or carry “alien-registration papers”;

(3) permitting the arrest of an illegal alien in which there is probable cause to believe the individual committed a public offense that makes him or her removable from the U.S.; and,

(4) making it a crime for illegal aliens to solicit, apply for or perform work.

“America is greater than any one man, than any one president,” said Pearce. “I believe the court will rule on the side of law, our Constitution, and states’ rights, and that we will prove our nation can indeed work again. This will be an important ruling, an important milestone, in a long road ahead to restoring the rule of law, America’s economy, political and national security.”

# # #

Filed Under: Illegal Aliens, Illegal Immigration, Judicial, Legislation, Press Release, State Government, States Rights Tagged With: , ,

OBAMACARE: A Panel Discussion at the Goldwater Institute

February 2, 2012 By Leave a Comment

FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE

A Panel Discussion: OBAMACARE

Phoenix, AZ – On Wednesday, February 8, 2012, Arizona Mainstream Project (AMP) will bring to the public a panel discussion on Obamacare.  Speaking on this panel will be Goldwater Institute’s Senior Attorney Diane Cohen and Director – Center for Economic Prosperity Byron Schlomach, Dr. Jeff Singer, and former AZ Congressman John Shadegg.  550 KFYI Talk Host Terry Gilberg will be the moderator for the discussion.

Each panel member will share their personal expertise and direct involvement with uncovering the facts about The Affordable Care Act and how it has begun and will continue to negatively impact the lives of ALL Americans.  You will gain a better understanding of this law and how it applies to your access to health care, the current legal battles, and how you can help stop this anti-American and socialistic agenda.

Diane Cohen:

The Affordable Care Act mandated states to establish insurance exchanges by 2014 or have exchanges set up by HHS. These exchanges are nothing more than invitation-only clubs where only government sanctioned insurers can play. They must meet all the federally mandated medical coverages/benefits specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. In an effort to preserve some sovereignty, states, even some who opposed the federal healthcare law, including Arizona, are rushing to get federal money to set up these exchanges. Diane Cohen, Senior Attorney, of the Goldwater Institute will refute this notion.  Ms. Cohen has testified before Congress on the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). She will explain what effect this fifteen-member board of political appointees will have in our future.

Dr. Byron Schlomach:

Byron will discuss how government is at the root of our problems in health care, making it the problem, not the solution. He will show you how our income tax system plays a major role in determining what our health care system looks like and how it operates.

Dr. Jeff Singer:

Dr. Singer will discuss the ways in which “Obamacare” will affect the patient doctor relationship, the relationship of the doctor with the state, the relationship of the patient with the state, the loss of personal autonomy, and the ultimate decrease in quality and rationing of heath care that will inevitably result from “Obamacare.”

John Shadegg:

President Obama promised that the cost of health care would go down and it hasn’t. A recent HHS press release acknowledged that premiums have gone up by as much as 12.8% in the last year after the rates were reviewed by state bureaucrats under the provisions of Obamacare. Obama has also promised that if you liked your health care plan, you could keep it. Yet, we now know that Obamacare mandates will not allow anyone to keep the plan they had. As the nation’s economy struggles, Obamacare increases taxes by 800 billion dollars and crushes jobs. Learn how free market solutions will reform health care in ways that promotes quality and reduces costs for all Americans.

Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Location:  Goldwater Institute Auditorium
Address: 500 E. Coronado Road, Phoenix,  AZ

Time: 6:00 pm – 8:30 pm (doors open at 5:30)

Light snacks and beverages will be served

Cost:  $10.00 per person

To reserve your seat we encourage you to RSVP and purchase tickets in advance

Go to: http://www.arizonamainstreamproject.org/#q=Seminars-18

or send payment to:

Arizona Mainstream Project
15029 N. Thompson Peak Parkway
Suite B-111 Box 589
Scottsdale, AZ 85260

This panel discussion will be STREAMED LIVE from AMP’s website.

A “Live Stream” button will be available on our homepage www.ArizonaMainstreamProject.org on the day of the event.  Follow the instructions to access the live video stream.

Contact: Honey Marques, Executive Director, at 808-283-3661 or honey@arizonamainstreamproject.org

Arizona Mainstream Project is a 501 (c) 3 non-profit charitable grassroots organization whose mission is to attract, educate, and mobilize the people of Arizona around America’s founding principles and leadership. AMP believes in the principles of a constitutionally limited government, free markets, fiscal responsibility, and individual liberty to promote the common good and prosperity for the people of Arizona.

Filed Under: Advertising, Conservatives, Federal Government, Government Reform, Health Care, Legislation, Press Release, Regulations, Special Event, States Rights, Taxation, Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Recently seen entering the State of Arizona

January 26, 2012 By 3 Comments

Arizona: An Obama-Free Zone

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, States Rights Tagged With: ,

Sign The Petition Supporting Governor Jan Brewer!

January 26, 2012 By 48 Comments

Please sign the petition supporting Governor Jan Brewer in her defense of the State of Arizona.

As we all witnessed on Wednesday afternoon, Governor Brewer, was confronted by President Obama as he stepped off Air Force One in Mesa. As the Governor has testified, he did not take kindly to an excerpt in her book, Scorpions for Breakfast, about an accounting of her defense of SB 1070. He also treated Governor Brewer with disrespect as he walked away from her while she spoke with him.

Please support Governor Brewer as she stands up for Arizona against an administration that has failed us on border security, failed us through Fast & Furious and even has brought a lawsuit against the State of Arizona.

Thank You Governor Brewer!

I Support Governor Jan Brewer!

I support Governor Jan Brewer for standing her ground while remaining respectful to President Obama during his recent visit to Arizona.

I support Governor Jan Brewer in her defense of Arizona against an administration that is suing the State of Arizona for passing strong immigration laws such as SB 1070.

I also support Governor Brewer in her effort to seek the truth and justice for the death of Border Patrol Brian Terry after the Obama Justice Department got caught red-handed ran a covert gunwalking operation to smuggle guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels through Fast & Furious.

Thank You Governor Brewer for standing up for Arizona!

SIGN NOW
142 signatures

Share this with your friends:

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Elected Officials, Petitions, State Government, States Rights Tagged With: ,

A Photo Tells A Thousand Words: Obama Confronts Brewer, Gets Earful

January 26, 2012 By 19 Comments

Thank you Governor Brewer for not backing down when confronted by President Obama this afternoon.

This is Our State and even the President needs to show a little respect when he touches down on our turf, especially turf that once sent our men and women off to battle.

Lesson to President Obama: Never mess with a Governor who eats scorpions for breakfast!

Filed Under: Elected Officials, Federal Government, Freedom of Speech, State Government, States Rights Tagged With: , ,

Statement by Governor Jan Brewer Regarding President Obama’s Visit to Arizona

January 25, 2012 By 3 Comments

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 25, 2012
CONTACT: Matthew Benson

“I welcomed President Obama to Arizona this afternoon, and we spent a few moments discussing this state’s economic turnaround. This was the President’s opportunity to see the Arizona Comeback firsthand.

“First, let me say I don’t doubt that the President wants what he believes is best for this country. He and I simply have starkly different visions of what that is.

“The President and I each took office in January 2009. We each stepped into grim circumstances. Just speaking for Arizona, I inherited a per capita state-budget deficit judged among the worst in the country, an economy in freefall and a clobbered housing market.

“My first action as Governor was to issue a regulatory moratorium so that state government could not impose any more needless rules on business. The President’s first move was to rush through an $800 billion stimulus spending plan that saddled the nation with more debt.

“Here in Arizona, we passed a historic economic package that included corporate tax reductions and targeted job incentives that make our state among the nation’s most inviting for business investment and relocation. In Washington, D.C., the President spent the better part of two years pushing a health care scheme that reduces consumer choice and saddles states with tens of billions in additional costs.

“This much is clear: Arizona is on the way back, with job growth over the last year rated 7th-best nationally. Our state budget is not only balanced, we have a surplus. Most important, we are putting in place the fundamentals for sustained economic growth: quality education, competitive tax policy and low regulation.

“Don’t be mistaken, I’m bullish on our nation’s future. But I’m convinced the path the President has pursued is the wrong one. I hope he takes some of the lessons of Arizona back with him to Washington.”

###

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Elected Officials, Press Release, State Government, States Rights Tagged With: ,

“Conservatives” Angling for a NEW National Tax?

January 18, 2012 By 4 Comments

 

Right when we should be CUTTING spending (not just the rate of increase, but ACTUAL spending) and lowering taxes, certain elements of the RNC and “think tanks” are angling not just to keep existing spending and taxes going but ADD an entirely NEW federal tax for us to pay.

What the heck is going on, aren’t we in the midst of a teaparty?

=====
 
Is a European Style VAT Tax the GOP’s Answer to the Growing Federal Funding Crisis? 
 
With all the GOP candidates fussing over Mitt Romney and his track-record at Bain Capital, does it not strike anyone as odd that none of them are putting the screws to the Massachusetts Republican in debates over his unwillingness to rule out a European-style Value Added Tax (VAT)?
Mitt and VAT (Valued Added Tax)
While Romney says he doesn’t want to go down the path of European socialism, in a recent Wall Street Journal he did not rule it out and even suggested that it might be an option.
 
The lack of clarity on this subject is ominous given that a VAT is probably the only way to come close to funding the federal government at its current levels of outrageous spending. Since none of the other candidates are forcefully calling Romney out on the VAT issue, I suspect an eventual Republican betrayal on establishing a VAT tax is likely.
 
As a reminder, a VAT would tax goods at ALL layers of production, from their origin as raw material to manufacture to final product.
 
Rising levels of federal deficit spending create momentum toward the VAT “solution.” Debt-addicted central governments in Europe and the United States have no intention of dealing with the true causes of the financial crisis.
 
To get to a VAT from here, all the political class needs to do is wait around for a “responsible” Republican to come around and act as a tax collector for the welfare state. My point is the Big Government people have already established the new unsustainable spending baselines.   All they need now is a gullible Republican to come in and “do something.” Paralysis and dysfunction are their friends, because it will lead to a crisis that may well result in the imposition of the VAT tax.
 
=======
 
Interestingly, the imposition of a VAT by the federal government is currently illegal and unconstitutional.
 
So, how do they implement it?
 
 
So, what does “balanced budget” mean?  To you, me, the teaparty, and normal people it means to bring spending in line with revenues.  I.e. don’t spend more than you have.
 
But once you enter the twisted mind of a politician, “balanced budget” means RAISING REVENUE to match the amount of money you WANT TO SPEND.
 
Since
a) imposition of a VAT by the federal government is now illegal and unconstitutional,
b) congress and certainly our state legislature lacks any will or spine to CUT REAL spending (not just rates of increases), and
c) it requires a constitutional amendment to pass this new tax,
there is no other conlcusion to draw than this travesty certain state legislators want to desecrate our God-inspired constitution with will lead to anything other than a new federal tax to meet spending targets the government wants to achieve.
 
Frankly, any state legislator who believes otherwise is an idiot.  (Yes, I just called you that.  Embrace it.)  A real Republican would be withholding remittance of tax receipts to the federal government, not empowering the federal government to levy yet another tax from Arizonans.
 
The fact that Republicans are behind this one is disgusting and only proves that RINO hunting should be an active and ongoing endeavor by any real American patriot.
 
Our God-inspired constitution is just fine, thank you.    Leave it alone.
 
Teaparty, y’all!
 
Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Campaigns & Elections, Constitutional Law, Debt, Federal Budget, Spending, States Rights, Taxation

Washington spending: Have we learned our lesson yet?

January 5, 2012 By 6 Comments

by Nick Dranias
Goldwater Institute

Promises of reduced spending swept dozens of self-proclaimed conservatives into power during the 2010 congressional elections. What did they do? They gave President Obama the power to lift the federal debt limit, twice failed to move a Balanced Budget Amendment proposal out of the House and promised spending cuts that look increasingly illusory.

As history increasingly shows, Washington’s limitless ability to incur debt is one of the greatest errors in our Constitution. Fortunately, there is no reason to wait for Congress to propose what Thomas Jefferson called the “Missing Amendment.”

Federalist No. 43, written by James Madison, emphasizes that Article V of the U.S. Constitution empowers “State governments to originate the amendment of errors.” This means state legislatures can compel Congress to call a convention for proposing constitutional amendments when 34 of them pass “applications” requesting one.

Not surprisingly, states and citizens are increasingly recognizing that Article V was designed to tackle the problem of the federal debt.

Last session, two states — Louisiana and North Dakota — passed National Debt Relief Amendment (NDRA) applications. They request an Article V convention to require any increase in the federal debt to be approved by a majority of state legislatures. Legislators in 20 states, including Arizona State Senator Linda Gray, will sponsor the NDRA this year.

Moving the federal debt debate to state legislatures would enable states and ordinary citizens to exert far more influence than they currently have. And the logistics of complying with this amendment would require the federal government to prepare budgets, debt financing proposals, and fiscal contingency plans months in advance.

The National Debt Relief Amendment would decentralize power, establish transparency and encourage basic fiscal responsibility. But no one should hold their breath waiting for Congress to propose it. The only realistic option is to impose it from the outside, and Article V of the U.S. Constitution gives us this power.

Nick Dranias holds the Clarence J. and Katherine P. Duncan Chair for Constitutional Government and is director of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center for Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.

Learn More:

Goldwater Institute: Article V research resources

New York Times: Obama Waits Before Asking for Increase in Debt Limit

RestoringFreedom.org: The National Debt Relief Amendment

Filed Under: Debt, Federal Budget, Federal Government, Government Reform, Spending, State Government, States Rights

Arizonan Exceptionalism: A Conservative Voice in the Wilderness

November 29, 2011 By 3 Comments

By Kelly Townsend

Arizona continues to be a shining star in the midst of liberal darkness that shrouds our country. As we hear reports of inequality regarding the treatment of the Tea Party vs. the treatment of the Occupy protesters in Richmond and other locations, I wish to give thanks the leaders of our great State for their support and fair treatment of our groups over the last two and a half years.

Kelly Townsend

Not once have we received resistance to our events, been unduly denied permits or access to public areas, nor harassed in any manner. On the contrary, the City of Phoenix has provided police protection for our members and has provided freedom of expression of our first and second amendment rights. We have always felt free to express our message, even when it is alongside the violent opposition.

Indeed, Arizona has been a beacon for those wishing to lift their voices in protest, not only for the Conservative voice, but also for the law-breaking entitlement groups who hate our State and our country. When a group of illegal immigration proponents threw a large American flag on the State Capitol grounds, placed a toilet seat on it and instructed their children to stomp their dirty shoes over it in defiance of our laws, the Arizona Capitol police protected their 1st amendment rights as well.

Yes, here in Arizona you can wave your Mexican flag on the porch of the Capitol and declare that it is truly Mexico, not the United States, and get away with it. As abhorrent as that seems, it is the nature of Arizona to uphold the law and the rights of her people, even when it hurts. We applaud our great State, and offer her example to those officials in other parts of our great country who have forgotten what it means to respect the protection of the Constitution.

Kelly Townsend is Co-Founder of the Greater Phoenix Tea Party.

 

Filed Under: Arizona Politics, Conservatives, Culture, Freedom of Speech, Government, Guest Opinion, Political Correctness, Political Parties, Political Science, Protests, States Rights Tagged With:

Seminar on Sharia Law: What We Need To Know, presented by Al Fadi

November 29, 2011 By 18 Comments

INVITES YOU TO ATTEND

Sharia Law:  What We Need To Know

PRESENTED BY AL FADI

Date: Saturday, December 3, 2011
Time: 10:00 am – 12:00 noon
Location: The Scottsdale Bible Church  Room E-210
Address: 7601 E. Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ

Al Fadi is a former Wahabbi Muslim from Saudi Arabia.  He is the researcher, editor, writer, and translator for numerous ministries, including “Answering Islam” and runs an outreach center called; the Center for Islamic Research & Awareness. The center focus is to bring awareness regarding Islam, to build bridges with Muslims, and to provide expert input on issues related to Sharia Law and Democracy.

Al is the editor, co-author and contributor of “The Qur’an Dilemma” (both English & Arabic versions) – a critical analysis book of the Qur’an. He is also the director of TheQuran.com Group (www.theQuran.com) which desires to assist both Muslims and non-Muslims who seek to learn more about the main source of Islamic teachings, the Qur’an, to research it, to critically analyze it, and to better comprehend its contents without the traditional religious and cultural barriers designed to indoctrinate and encapsulate the minds of many truth seekers.

Al has a Masters in Engineering and is currently working on completing his M.Div. in Biblical Communications. He is an invited teacher/lecturer on Islam and related Islamic study topics. He is an invited guest speaker and trainer at numerous churches and mission agencies on the topic of Islam & Evangelism to Muslims. As a former devout Muslim, he is an expert on the teaching and challenges of Islam. In addition, Al is an invited guest/expert on numerous Arabic evangelical Satellite TV and Radio shows on the topics of Islam and the Middle East.

Refreshments will be served

Cost: $10 per person

Go to www.arizonamainstreamproject.org to make payment by credit card.  If making payment at the door, please RSVP to Susan Leeper at 480-998-5022 or susan@arizonamainstreamproject.org

 

Filed Under: Advertising, Culture, Ethics, Family, Freedom of Speech, History, National Security, Political Correctness, Religion, State Government, States Rights, Terrorism, Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

States must “Just Say No” to Obamacare health insurance exchanges

October 4, 2011 By 4 Comments

by Diane Cohen
Goldwater Institute

Obamacare gives states an option: Either establish insurance exchanges by January 1, 2014, or the Secretary of Health and Human Services will establish one for them. An “exchange” is essentially a bureaucracy where federally-mandated and regulated health insurance may be bought and sold. Amazingly, some states that otherwise oppose Obamacare, including some who have joined the Florida lawsuit that is on its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, are choosing to implement these exchanges.

These states may be under the mistaken belief that if they set up an exchange, they will preserve a modicum of state sovereignty – a belief perpetuated by the supporters of Obamacare as well as by some insurance companies. But these exchanges will be governed by federal regulations and mandates, leaving no flexibility – exactly the situation that has put many states in a bind with runaway Medicaid costs. The State of Arizona has already received a $1 million planning grant from the federal government and just last week Governor Brewer’s office submitted a request for an additional nearly $30 million to establish Arizona’s exchange.

States that establish exchanges are doing nothing short of the federal government’s dirty work. Worse still, they are being complicit in enforcing and entrenching this unconstitutional law.

In its legal briefs filed around the country in defense of the health care law, the federal government has argued that the exchanges are critical to enforcing the law’s individual mandate. That is because the exchanges will be used to determine whether an individual is exempt from the mandate and will report to the federal government, by name and Social Security number, those individuals who are exempt, as well as those who are not in compliance with the mandate.

By 2015, while the federal mandates on exchanges will remain, federal funding for them will be gone. All that states get by establishing exchanges are more federal mandates. What they will give away will be much greater – state sovereignty and the liberty of their citizens.

The choice is very simple: states that oppose Obamacare should just say no to the exchanges. And for those states like Arizona that have already received money, they should follow the lead of Florida, Oklahoma, and Kansas and send it back.

Diane Cohen is a senior attorney for the Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.

Learn More:

Goldwater Institute: Coons v. Geithner (federal health care lawsuit)

Heritage Foundation: States should return Obamacare Grants

Mackinac Center: Michigan Creeps Closer to Obamacare Exchange

Cato Institute: Should Missouri Create a Health Insurance Exchange?

The Federal Health Care Blog: Preparing for the Exchanges

Filed Under: Constitutional Law, Federal Government, Government, Health Care, Legislation, State Government, States Rights
« Older Posts