A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia
February 8, 1998
by: Doug Fiedor
E-mail to: email@example.com
Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html
And so it is today. The administration and Congress tell us that the Social Security "fund" is running a surplus. In fact, all tax money collected for Social Security goes into the general fund. There is no Social Security fund – except for a pile of IOU's.
They tell us that the nation is $5.7-trillion in debt. Yet, no one in Washington mentions that none of the money belonging in the Social Security fund is listed as part of this national debt. Nor do they count the many hundreds of billions of dollars of debts owed by the various federal departments, or the money owed by any of the federal regulatory agencies.
So, reading the federal budget is more akin to reading a book of lies. Congress voted for it, but not one of them read it before voting. Clinton signed it, but he doesn't read any of it either. Actually, no one reads it. Each department's bureaucrats do their own respective budget, and budget for increases every year. The administration usually attempts to slip in new programs. And Congressional committees play with the numbers a little – and add pork.
Often, it is not clear exactly what all was signed into law for weeks, or maybe months, afterwards. And, as sometimes happens, devious political types sneak in stuff after the vote. In fact, many budgets were actually voted through Congress before they were even printed, let alone studied by anyone. Truly, that is negligence of office by all of the elected ones.
The fact is that our federal budget is such a mess simply because the people we elect to watch it do not. Rather, they play with it, each person in government paying only limited attention to one or two of the many sections. Therefore, every year it increases. And, every year, the bill to the taxpayer increases.
Federal taxes are now the highest they have been since 1945, and that was a war year. In 1997, federal taxes alone reached 20 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), and there is really no relief in sight. Closer to home, federal taxes claimed 19.9 percent of the earnings of a middle-class family in 1957, but by 1997 this had grown to 26.1 percent. State and local taxes went from 7.4 percent in 1955 to 12.9 percent in 1997. Add to this the hundreds of hidden taxes due to federal and state regulations and, like sharecroppers, American taxpayers are paying out over half of their earnings to that master called government each year.
So, the Clinton administration proposes an increase of $100-billion (about $875 per taxpayer) in domestic spending. Clinton starts out with a new baby- sitter entitlement of $7.5-billion. But that's not all. There is another $12.72-billion in the new budget targeted towards the incidentals of the "child care" industry. That's over $20-billion in new entitlements. Oh, and there's another $900-million to enroll 3 million uninsured children in Medicaid – which, incidentally, is not nearly enough money and they know it.
This allows the federal government a foot in the door. Bureaucrats will then move forward to regulate – control – all child care in the nation. That's what co-president Hillary wants, and so shall it be, evidently.
The Clintons also want federal control of all schools. So, there is $7.3-billion included for more teachers and another $5-billion for school building bonds. In other words, the federal government will provide a small percentage of the necessary public school funds, then write 90% of the school regulations. Typical.
Another totally silly whopper in the new budget is a $6.3-billion package to spur development of ultra fuel-efficient automobiles. Why silly? Because the Big-Three in Detroit do not need the money. They are already rich. Anyway, as Heads Up readers know, all three corporations already have electric vehicles. And all three have fuel cells coming out of research shortly to power these electric vehicles efficiently. Therefore, all will have cars for sale that get 60 to 90 miles per gallon within a few years. The $6.3-billion, then, is play money -- probably targeted to "selected" research companies of dubious scientific expertise, and to schools so engineering students can reinvent what the auto companies have already done. On top of that, Clinton proposes a $3,000 to $4,000 tax credit for anyone purchasing one of these "fuel-efficient" automobiles. That, of course, means battery-powered electric cars right now.
Also interesting is a new entitlement for the middle aged. Clinton actually says, with a straight face, that a program of selling Medicare coverage to people aged 55-64 for $400 per month would pay for itself. Obviously, that is not true. Because, were it true, these folks would already have used that money to purchase medical coverage on the open market. However, commercial insurance companies know that the $400 monthly premium will not cover the costs.
And, here's a special for all you Heads Up readers with web pages: The administration proposes $8-million to construct a World Wide Web site to facilitate job searches. Now, how hard can this be? You receive notices of open jobs and paste them on a web page. Some sort of order will be necessary, of course. A good search engine would also be necessary for users. And you would have to pay ten to twenty people about $50,000 a year. That leaves a bunch of profit!
If the Department of Labor sets up the database, they'll probably hire 200 people and spend a million or two on computer equipment. Then, it will work somewhat like the IRS computers, which is not very well.
The Cato Institute reported that "Americans are justifiably skeptical about promises of a balanced budget. Surveys show 17 percent believe it will occur, about the same as the percentage who think space aliens are now living on earth." Yup. We're catching on.
Waste, fraud and abuse, that's what's in our federal budget. A waste of money by government doing things it has no authority to even think about. Fraud because there is no real accounting system used in the federal government. And abuse because we serf-citizen, share croppers are forced to pay for this waste and fraud year after year.
Time for some MAJOR changes.
Note that the White House propaganda artists are not actually coming out and denying Clinton's actions. Instead, they are working a vicious campaign to bash Ken Starr in the popular press. That is, they do not speak of Bill Clinton's wrongdoing per se, but instead have launched a campaign to attempt to point out that Starr may have also broken the law by leaking grand jury information.
In truth, it is the White House operatives who are leaking grand jury information to their sycophants in the press so as to accuse Kenneth Starr and company of wrongdoing. It's an obstruction of justice game being played by Hillary's media control propagandists simply to throw suspicion away from Bill Clinton and towards Starr and his team of investigators.
Last week we described a little about Hillary's attempt to "control" the press and counter accounts of Bill Clinton's sexcapades, perjury and obstruction of justice. Now comes part of the proof.
The Landmark Legal Foundation (http://www.llf.org) posted a copy of the talking points provided the media by Hillary's back-room propaganda machine. The report also identifies part of the White House's enemies list.
The Landmark Legal Foundation describes the document thusly:
"The following document was produced by unknown authors and sources on behalf of President Clinton. This document was distributed widely to the media and used to perpetuate the myth of the First Lady's allegation that a 'vast right-wing conspiracy' was out to get the president. Clearly, this information influenced the media's coverage of the current Clinton scandal."
We suggest Heads Up readers study these talking points provided to the media by the White House, and compare the text with what was told the American people by the press. Much of these talking points were used verbatim, as fact, by the national press.
As we have reported frequently, the Washington press corps are not really "reporters," as we commonly think of news reporters. Rather, most of them are little more than "repeaters" of the information they receive. And, because most in the Washington media are quite liberal, they tend to accept any material received from Hillary and friends as factual news not needing verification.
Material received from Conservative sources, of course, needs verification before it is used. It also requires "balance" in reporting by acquiring the opinions of one or two liberals to run with the story. It is only liberal information – including the political lies, called spin – that may be taken by the media as true news.
The digest of the bill reports that HB 2687 "declares an intent, with certain limited and necessary exceptions, that all persons, whether government employees or private persons, be made subject to the same restrictions with regard to entering upon the property of another. It is the intent of the legislature to eliminate special immunities from prosecution for trespass, whether those immunities have been legislatively granted to government or to private persons or entities."
This bill is a good start. Therefore, we suggest that the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, which is currently in session, should also consider such a bill. The Kentucky version should include all government officials, federal, state and local. The bill should protect all private property, such as homes, farms and businesses. Lastly, it should mandate enforcement by any sworn police officer, and also include penalties for violation that include prison.
This is not the Soviet Union. No American should ever need worry about snooping bureaucrats. If a citizen is suspected of a crime, police may obtain a proper search warrant from a sitting judge. But, no legal warrant, no snooping. That was the intention of the Founding Fathers. It is therefore the expressed duty of every public official in the country to enforce the Fourth Amendment.
The Washington State bill may be found at:
Currently, they're pointing to Arab groups, like Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestine Islamic Jihad and others. More and more we see news reports stating that Islamic terrorist groups are operating within the United States. We hear that there are "cells" of trained terrorists set up throughout our country, each one just waiting for a signal to start trouble.
These reports are slightly late in getting out.
Twenty some years ago there were a number of potential terrorist "cells" made up of people of Arab descent throughout the country. We found it interesting that a large number of them purchased and operated gas stations, too. At the time, many Americans laughed and said the Arabs just wanted to be close to their oil. Others of us felt it could have had a great deal to do with the explosive properties of gasoline.
The next wave of immigrants bought party stores, usually the ones that sold hard liquor. After that, they seemed to purchase nearly any type of small store.
As with immigrants from Europe and Asia, Arab immigrants set up family owned and operated businesses. Generally, the businesses were profitable and benefited the neighborhoods in which they were located.
Quite a number of the first and second wave of Arab immigrants were identified as possible terrorists. Yet, not one of them was ever involved in any type of terrorism. So, where did all these potential "terrorists" go? Nowhere. They still live here. It's just that circumstances have changed somewhat.
Oh sure, they were said to have "sacrificed" to come here and live in the "Great Satan," never even knowing if they would ever be activated for the greater good of Islam or not. A few got homesick and went back after two or three years, but many stayed.
Over the years, the ones who stayed changed. They bought cars and homes. They invested in stocks and bonds, started retirement funds and bought rental property. They started business associations. Some married Americans. Their kids attended school, and they the PTA meetings. Twenty years later we find many of these people quite active in their communities. In short, they became Americans.
So, while it was evident that a few of these people may have been trained terrorists way back then, times have changed. Today, they are working to put their kids through college, pay off the cottage and to insure they have enough money socked away for retirement. Many of them are avid volunteers in political campaigns, and most of them will help out political candidates somehow, if asked.
I've been shooting and hunting with a few of them over the years. That is an easy way to pick out the ones with training. And, at times, it was quite obvious that some of them had excellent formal training with weapons. But, so did many Americans. At times it also became evident that some of them knew their way around explosives, too. But, so do many Americans.
And today, they are Americans.
We cannot expect them to blow up or poison their neighborhoods any more than the rest of us would. And that is exactly the point. They live here now. This is their home. They respect it, care for it and can be expected to protect it.
I only wish that was true of all Americans.
So when I see those articles implying possible chemical and biological terrorism against Americans within the borders of the United States, two thoughts come to mind: First, I remember a little of my Army training on CBR warfare, and the problems involved in producing results from such weapons. Second, I am sure that at least a few of the Arabic gentlemen now settled here would personally know any new "terrorists" sent over here. And, I doubt if they would take kindly to any type of disruption in their neighborhoods.
Mr. Chairman, I have here in my hand President Clinton's Executive Order, signed in September of last year. I strongly urge that every member of the Senate read this document carefully. It is an order empowering the American Heritage Rivers Initiative.
In this order, the President invokes the United States Constitution as his authority for such a bill, but I challenge anybody...ANYBODY...to find in the Constitution where the authority lies to strip Kentucky or any state of their sovereign right to chart their own course on behalf of its citizens. Moreover, the American Heritage Rivers Initiative is one of the most damaging documents I have ever seen. It in effect would turn control of the Licking River and two sections of the Ohio River, and properties surrounding them, over to the federal government and its regulatory agencies. These are the same agencies that tried to seize our property that was home to the copper bellied water snake. The same agencies we have filed suit against in federal court to stop from ordering mandatory emissions testing in parts of Kentucky.
This is indeed a curious document. In it, the Council on Environmental Quality will appoint a "River Navigator" to make easier the cooperation between the federal agencies and the affected communities. Isn't that quaint? A "River Navigator" who never set foot in Kentucky or has seen any of our rivers. What they don't seem to understand is that we already have "River Navigators." We call them, mayors, county judge executives and state and federal legislators. By and large, our existing state and local governments have done a pretty good job of navigating our rivers for two hundred years.
Read between the lines. This is nothing more
than bribery to the various communities, offering taxpayer
money in return for giving up their rights under the
Constitution. Mr. Chairman, this is not a partisan matter.
Regardless of our differences here in this chamber, we are
all Kentuckians. Not a man or woman here can be accused
of a lack of devotion to this Commonwealth. And that is
why we must vote as one on this bill, rejecting the
American Heritage Rivers Initiative. We must stand firm
for the Sovereignty of Kentucky, and serve notice that we
are not a branch office of the federal government.
The above text rightly points out that the Commonwealth of Kentucky is not a department of the federal government. As the United States Supreme Court determined in the "New York" and "Printz" decisions (see previous editions of Heads Up), this type of arrangement is a violation of our United States Constitution and should not be accepted by any state. The problem is, the administration is unilaterally going forth with the program anyway. Congress, as usual, wimped out on the issue.