Today, I was utterly disgusted to have to call the offices of both my senators -- John McCain and Jon Kyl -- to urge them to vote against the Law of the Sea Treaty. This is an international treaty which would create an international body in Jamaica to monitor traffic, mining and other uses of the seas, including emissions from shipping and etc. The real purpose of it, however, is similar to Cap & Trade: wealth redistribution, with the people of the United States as the main distributors. The staffers in each office told me that the senators had no stated opinion.
No stated opinion? How is that possible? Why don’t the Republican National Committee and every elected Republican official have a written statement on it? Are we to believe that they have no opinion or that it’s all brand new to them? Yet, here I am in the ridiculous position of having to call two Republican US Senators to urge them, through the filter of their twenty-something staffers, to please not sign away our sovereignty! When is it ever, under any circumstances other than total military defeat, okay to sign away American sovereignty?
It's Time To Get The Agenda Done
We need a tea party agenda and we need one soon. For one thing, having the agenda would solidify and somewhat formalize our millions of voters who call themselves “teaparty”. Secondly, it would give us clout with Republicans. We could demand that they sign our agenda, pledging to carry out the items on it. Failing to do so would result in an elected official’s name being sent out to all teaparty membership, advising of this failure to take the pledge. Thirdly, if establishing our agenda and having Republican elected officials sign that pledge fails to result in winning the policy items pledged, due to half-hearted efforts or total neglect to introduce or pass the items, we would have the basis to form a new party and leave the old, ineffective, unresponsive leadership in the dust.
Is anyone under the impression that Republicans in congress are presently working 24/7 to win the legislative policies we wish to see implemented? I think not -- but then, where would I go to find out? They make a show of protesting Democrat initiatives, but we end up with basically what the Democrats want as public policy. How can there be any question as to how two Republican senators will vote on Law of the Sea? It’ mind-boggling to think that it’s in question. Suppose, however, that both senators are against this treaty and will actually vote against it. Why shouldn’t that position have been previously stated and posted for all to see? We should be able to go to any congressional delegate’s website and see (1) I will vote for the following (list of items) (2) I will vote against the following (list of items) (3) I will introduce bills to achieve the following, in accordance with my pledge (list of items) (4) Here are some things we may wish to consider as a party (list of items). What's difficult about that? Want to know where your representative and your senators stand on Obamacare? Go to their website. It’s not there? Why not?
Decision-making in this Republican Party seems to be far too sequestered and made by far too few people while the rest of us are totally in the dark and out of the conversation. The majority of policy outcomes in terms of voting and positions should be known prior to an individual’s election. They must then be held accountable for those positions.
Obama recently claimed “executive privilege” in order to stonewall information about “Fast & Furious”. Why isn’t there an explicit, detailed agenda, with a list of action items, distributed to the party membership by the Republican Party leadership? I believe that it’s for the same reason as Obama’s executive privilege: they don’t want us to know.
Let’s get a Teaparty agenda written and let’s start to exert some control over these runaway politicians!
Just for fun, here’s a start. Only a true conservative would introduce this bill:
Local Preservation And Citizen Empowerment Act
“Any program or function of the United States government which sends funds to the states in the form of grants, matching funds or aid is terminated. The government of the United States is hereby prohibited from dispensing funds, collected from the various states and their citizens, to another state and its citizens, for projects or other purposes unrelated to the direct operation of the federal government and/or unrelated to the general welfare and benefit of all citizens of the United States. Neither may the government of the United States take money from any state and then give the money back to that state for purposes unrelated to the direct operation of the federal government and/or unrelated to the general welfare of all citizens of the United States. The United States government is hereby prohibited from funding or contributing to funding public schools. Exceptions to these prohibitions are ad hoc aid to a region following a natural disaster or damage from warfare.”
The purposes and intent of this legislation follow:
1. To permit local decisions as to how local funds should be used. To place decision-making back in local hands, taking the approval of federal government employees out of the equation.
2. To keep citizen money of the various states in those states for local consideration.
3. To reduce the federal tax burden on the people of the United States while shrinking the size of government and the influence of government employees over our lives.
4. To reduce the influence of the federal government employees in the determination of public spending among the various states.
5. To prevent the federal government employees from wasting taxpayer dollars on local projects which would never have been approved if locally funded (meaning they were unnecessary to begin with).
6. To place into local hands more decisions over who receives financial funding from public sources (city, county, state).
7. Place education funding and decision-making once again securely into the hands of the localities.