Author: Campaign For Liberty Blog

By Doug Bandow

Amazing.  Most congressional Republicans believe the Iraq invasion was a mistake.

Reports The Raw Story:

Two GOP congressmen say most Republicans on the Hill now believe the Iraq war was a mistake, and “more than half the Republican caucus” believes the way in which the US entered the Afghanistan war was also a mistake.

Reps. Tom McClintock (R-CA) and Dana Rohrbacher (R-CA) made the comments at a discussion panel at the Cato Institute on Thursday.

Going into Iraq “was a mistake because I thought we had to finish the job in Afghanistan,” Rohrbacher told the panel, echoing a popular Democratic talking point at the time.

“In retrospect, almost all of us think that was a horrible mistake,” Rohrbacher said. “Now that we know that it cost a trillion dollars, and all of these years, and all of these lives, and all of this blood … all I can say is everyone I know thinks it was a mistake to go in now.”

Asked by panel moderator Grover Norquist what percentage of Republican congressmen agree with that view, McClintock said, “I think everyone [in Congress] would agree that Iraq was a mistake.”

After 4400 dead Americans and tens of thousands of dead Iraqis, as well as hundreds of billions of dollars wasted, we find out it that even those who so strongly supported the war believe it was all a blunder.

When will someone be held accountable?

By Gary Howard

On April 8-11, Campaign for Liberty will seek to build off of last month’s success at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) by bringing liberty-minded activists and supporters to the Southern Republican Leadership Conference (SRLC) in New Orleans!

Congressman Paul is scheduled to deliver a speech to the SRLC crowd on Saturday April 10th.

In addition, due to a special contribution from some generous donors, Campaign for Liberty is currently offering SRLC tickets at a steep discount to our supporters.

Please come out and join other liberty supporters and show that we are a force to be reckoned with and a strong presence at SRLC. Not only will you have the opportunity to see Congressman Paul speak in person on Saturday, but the conference shares the weekend with the French Quarter Festival where you can enjoy over 150 musical performances, cuisine and culture of the Big Easy.

After his speech, Campaign for Liberty is also hosting a free reception with Dr. Paul and all of his supporters who attend the conference.

Make a weekend of it. Come out with other friends of liberty and support Ron Paul.

Go here to purchase your ticket!

By Matt Holdridge

From Roll Call:

Members continued to be inundated with phone calls from constituents and interest groups Friday thanks to an impending vote on health care reform this weekend.

Calls to the House numbered close to 100,000 an hour, creating a bottleneck in a phone system only meant to handle 50,000 calls an hour. The chamber has been similarly overloaded for four consecutive days, beginning on Tuesday when radio host Rush Limbaugh told viewers to call the Capitol switchboard phone number.

Jeff Ventura, spokesman for Chief Administrative Officer Dan Beard, said the problem was essentially unsolvable. The issue lies with the capacity of the cables buried underneath the Capitol complex — and even if those could be dug up and replaced, Members simply don’t have enough staff to answer so many calls, he said.

“Our capacity rate is about 50,000 calls an hour, and once we hit the 40,000 mark, we start to get these signals,” he said. “We’re beyond that. There’s no other way to say it other than the system is at capacity.”

This means call your representative’s district office or make a personal visit! 

Also, encourage the people in your circle of influence to do the same. Now is the time to pull out the stops! 

By dljholt

Virginia Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II told Greta Van Susteren on Thursday that if Speaker Nancy Pelosi and democrats use the unconstitutional tactic, deem and pass, to ram Obamacare through.

Here is the letter Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli sent to Speaker Pelosi:

March 17, 2010

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the United States House of Representatives
Office of the Speaker H-232
U.S. Capitol
Washington, D.C.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Dear Speaker Pelosi:

I am writing to urge you not to proceed with the Senate Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act under a so-called “deem and pass” rule because such a course of action would raise grave constitutional questions.

Based upon media interviews and statements which I have seen, you are considering this approach because it might somehow shield members of Congress from taking a recorded vote on an overwhelmingly unpopular Senate bill.

This is an improper purpose under the bicameralism requirements of Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution, one of the purposes of which is to make our representatives fully accountable for their votes. Furthermore, to be validly enacted, the Senate bill would have to be accepted by the House in a form that is word-for-word identical (Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998)).

Should you employ the deem and pass tactic, you expose any act which may pass to yet another constitutional challenge. A bill of this magnitude should not be passed using this maneuver.

As the President noted last week, the American people are entitled to an up or down vote.

Sincerely,
Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II
Attorney General of Virginia

By Matt Holdridge

From the DailyCaller:

Jane Hamsher of the liberal blog firedoglake remains unenthused about the Democrats’ healthcare bill:

Real health care reform is the thing we’ve fought for from the start. It is desperately needed. But this bill falls short on many levels, and hurts many people more than it helps.

A middle class family of four making $66,370 will be forced to pay $5,243 per year for insurance. After basic necessities, this leaves them with $8,307 in discretionary income — out of which they would have to cover clothing, credit card and other debt, child care and education costs, in addition to $5,882 in annual out-of-pocket medical expenses for which families will be responsible. Many families who are already struggling to get by would be better off saving the $5,243 in insurance costs and paying their medical expenses directly, rather than being forced to by coverage they can’t afford the co-pays on.

Read the fact sheet that firedoglake put together concerning the bill here; it’s very eyeopening.

By Andrew Ward

Score one for the good guys.  Here’s the story from MarketWatch:

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) – The Federal Reserve will be required to identify the names of banks that could have collapsed if not for the central bank’s emergency lending, a federal appeals court said Friday. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York ruled on Friday that the Fed needs to disclose documents in response to Freedom of Information Act requests by Bloomberg L.P. and other news organizations. “We are reviewing the decision and considering our options for reconsideration or appeal,” said Fed spokeswoman Barbara Hagenbaugh.

Read the post here.

By Matt Hawes

March 19, 2010

Dear Member of Congress:

On behalf of our organizations and the millions of people we represent, we strongly encourage you to oppose the “individual mandate” in the “Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act of 2009.”

Our groups and members may disagree on what are the best solutions to our health care problems, but this unprecedented coalition of organizations from across the political spectrum agrees that forcing individuals to buy insurance from private companies under the threat of fines or jail is not the reform we need.

The “individual mandate” is a section of the bill that requires every single American to buy health insurance-whether or not they want it or feel they can afford it-or break the law and face penalties and fines. Consequently, the bill does not actually “cover” 30 million more Americans-instead it makes them criminals if they do not buy insurance from private companies. We hope you agree that it is unconscionable to force people to buy a product from a private insurer. This would effectively be a tax-and a huge one-paid directly to a private industry.

Enacting this mandate would be a major victory for the insurance companies at the expense of the American people. It should be no surprise they support the government forcing everyone to buy their product. Imagine how the hamburger industry would respond if the government forced everyone to have hamburgers for lunch or pay fines?

According to the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, the average annual premium for single coverage is $4,321. If the 46 million uninsured are forced to purchase private health insurance at that price, then the insurance industry stands to bring in up to $200 billion in new insurance premiums per year. The Senate bill also includes an estimated $630 billion in corporate welfare for private insurance companies in the form of subsidies over the next 10 years, creating even less incentive than currently exists for private insurance premiums to be lowered.

To make matters worse, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that 19 million Americans would not buy insurance and as a result would be forced to pay $29 billion in taxes/fines. The Joint Committee on Taxation has made it clear that failure to pay these fines could result in jail time.

Thirty-six states have passed or are considering measures that would allow their residents to opt out, including Virginia, Utah, Pennsylvania, Florida, Minnesota, Michigan, Georgia and Ohio.

Given these facts, it is not surprising that a recent NBC News poll finds 57 percent of Americans do not want the government to create “a law that requires everyone to have health insurance coverage” and that only 38% of Americans favor the mandate, making it the least popular part of the bill.

The American people stand in firm opposition to the individual mandate. We stand with them. We hope you will, too.

Sincerely,

Americans for Tax Reform, Grover Norquist, President
Democrats.com, Bob Fertik, President
Healthcare-NOW!, Katie Robbins, National Organizer
FreedomWorks, Matt Kibbe, President and CEO
Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), Tim Carpenter, Director
Campaign for Liberty, John Tate, President
60 Plus Association, Jim Martin, President
Liberty Tree Foundation, Ben Manski, Executive Director
Hector Barreto, Chairman, The Latino Coalition
National Taxpayers Union, Duane Parde, President
National Coalition of Organized Women, Consuela Sylvester, Ohio Director
Citizens for Health, Jim Turner, Chairman
Competitive Enterprise Institute, Gregory Conko, Senior Fellow
American Association of Small Property Owners, F. Patricia Callahan, President
U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation, Dane vonBreichenruchardt, President
Institute for Liberty, Andrew Langer, President
Santa Monicans for Safe Drinking Water Coalition, Gene Burke, Founder, Director
Alliance for Natural Health USA, Gretchen DuBeau, Executive Director
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Dr. Jane Orient, Executive Director
Fairfax County Privacy Council, Mike Stollenwerk, Chairman
The Rutherford Institute, John W. Whitehead, President
Pain Relief Network, Siobhan Reynolds, Executive Director
American Policy Center, Tom DeWeese, President
Justice Through Music, Brett Kimberlin, Director
Velvet Revolution, Brad Friedman, Co-Founder
After Downing Street, David Swanson, Co-Founder
Project Vote Smart, Mark A. Adams, Founder
Democracy in Action (DIA), Dorothy Reilly, Organizer
Squadron13.com, Gordon Sturrock, Founder
Democracy for America – Tucson Chapter, Richard Kaiser, Co-chair
DownWithTyranny.com, Howie Klein, Publisher
Center for Financial Privacy and Human Rights, J. Bradley Jansen, Director
DownsizeDC.org, Inc., Jim Babka, President
Cyber Privacy Project, Richard Sobel, Director
Citizens For Legitimate Government, Lori R. Price, Managing Editor
Republican National Hispanic Assembly, Minnesota Chapter, Rick Aguilar, Chairman,
Georgia Peace & Justice Coalition, Mike Hearington, Steering Committee
Council for Affordable Health Insurance, Brian McManus, Director of Federal Affairs
Americans for Prosperity, Tim Phillips, President
American Academy of Private Physicians, Marcy Zwelling, MD FACEP
Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education, Star Parker, President
National Coalition of Organized Women, Eileen Dannemann, Director
Citizens’ Council on Health Care, Twila Brase, President
Hispanic Professional Women Association, Laura Drain, President
Prosperity Agenda, Kevin Zeese, Executive Director
Hispanic Alliance for Prosperity Institute, Joe Nino, Co Chairman
Republican National Assembly of Tennessee, Raul Lopez, Chairman
Independence Institute, Linda Gorman, Director
Doctor Patient Medical Association, Kathryn Serkes, Co-Chair

By Tim Shoemaker

…in order to collect the new taxes, fees and penalties included in the new legislation.  According to a press release from Rep. Kevin Brady, this will be the largest expansion of the Internal Revenue Service since withholding taxes were introduced during WWII.

A new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee minority staff estimates up to 16,500 new IRS personnel will be needed to collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the ‘reconciliation’ bill being taken up by the U.S. House of Representatives this weekend.

Scores of new federal mandates and fifteen different tax increases totaling $400 billion are imposed under the Democratic House bill. In addition to more complicated tax returns, families and small businesses will be forced to reveal further tax information to the IRS, provide proof of ‘government approved’ health care and submit detailed sales information to comply with new excise taxes.

Read the rest.

A “standing army” of tax collectors are just as much of a threat to liberty as any other army.  The power to tax truly is the power to destroy and we can expect to see plenty of taxation as a result of ObamaCare.

Contact your Representative today!

By southernavenger

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough delivered a great keynote speech on Thursday outlining a genuinely conservative foreign policy during the CATO Institute conference, “Escalate or Withdraw? Conservatives and the War in Afghanistan.” Here’s the description:

“During his speech, Scarborough took on neo-conservatives, Obama’s foreign policy record since taking office, and why the United States is still at war.

‘In 2010, there’s not much difference between the Republicans’ view on foreign policy and the Democrats’ view of  foreign policy,” said Scarborough. “President Obama… this anti-war president, has doubled the number of troops to Afghanistan to nearly 100,000… and he’s continued the transformation of the Afghanistan effort from a counterterrorism mission to a nation-building mission.” 

Says Scarborough:

“those who are still arguing in 2010 that we can somehow export democracy across the globe or rebuild other countries on the other side of the world in our image, these are the people that we have to call out today, tomorrow and everyday as the dangerous radicals that they are, history has proven them and their worldview to be dangerous and radical.”

You can listen to the podcast here.

By Andrew Ward

Congressman Paul will be on John King’s new show on CNN to discuss health care and the future of the GOP. The program will air tonight. Go to CNN.com or CNN.com/Live today at 12 PM eastern to get a sneak peek of ‘John King, USA.’

Update:

By Matt Holdridge

From the Huffington Post:

Democratic lawmakers, from the leadership on down, are facing what many describe as an unprecedented amount of political pressure as the party scrambles to pass health care reform.

In recent days, the message has been conveyed throughout the caucus that the failure to pass legislation into law would be a cataclysmic misstep. It goes beyond the certainty that activists in the base would be demoralized, that the president would be weakened or that Congress would seem entirely ineffectual (if not so already). The damage to the party would be so far-reaching, lawmakers have been told, that even the big-time donors who have long supported Democratic causes would be less inclined to contribute.

“The party is on a precipice,” said one longtime Democratic donor who asked to speak on the condition of anonymity. “If they pass this [bill], people will be jubilant. If they don’t, there are going to be a lot of us who consider just staying home in 2010.”

Unfortunately, it’s not hard to believe that people would be “jubilant” to take away the liberty and property of others but it does leave a knot in your stomach. 

Keep the calls and office visits going! 

By Gary Howard

Just wanted to post this piece from a while back. Indonesian students are rightly upset about U.S. foreign policy, which has not altered one bit since Obama took office.

From AP:

Scores of Islamic students staged protests outside Jakarta’s parliament and in at least three other major Indonesian cities on Friday against President Barack Obama’s upcoming visit to this predominantly Muslim country.

The students carried banners branding Obama as an enemy of Islam and an imperialist in downtown Jakarta as well as in the provincial capitals Padang, Yogyakarta and Surabaya. Read more…

These folks apparently didn’t get that “change” memo.

They also threw shoes at large pictures of Obama’s head. An Iraqi journalist was sentenced to a year in prison for throwing his shoes at U.S. President George W. Bush during a news conference in Baghdad in 2008.

Protest organizer Ahmad Irhamul Fikri, spokesman for the Coordinating Board for Campus Proselytizing Institute, said bigger rallies will be staged next Friday in more Indonesian cities ahead of Obama’s March 20-22 visit. Read more…

Maybe more of those Americans who screamed and protested so loudly against the wars during the Bush years should take a cue from these kids in Indonesia–and call the administration to task for its continuation of those policies.

By Matt Hawes

From Tim Carney’s latest piece in the Washington Examiner:

The budget reconciliation bill being used as a sidecar to the Senate health care bill also contains a federal takeover of the student loan industry. Judging by preliminary data from the Congressional Budget Office, the student loan provisions are similar to those in the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act — a bill that passed the House this year, but faced a Senate filibuster.

The reconciliation version of the bill chops out much of the student aid, making the measure fairly profitable on paper. After all, government will now have a monopoly in an industry already being subsidized by other parts of government….

The CBO revealed Thursday the bill would “establish a new program for lenders who were chartered before July 1, 2009, and are owned by a state under the control of a board including the governor and offered guaranteed loans prior to June 30, 2010.”

That’s an oddly specific description of a financial institution. That’s because this program applies to exactly one lender: The Bank of North Dakota. The CBO explains, “Under the new program, these banks [sic] would be allowed to offer guaranteed student loans.” In other words, all student lenders would be killed by the budget reconciliation bill, except for the biggest one in the state of Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad.

This sort of game playing is the hallmark of health care reform, which has included backroom deals with the drug lobby, parliamentary innovation, and budget tricks to make Enron accountants envious….

Read the rest.

By John Tate

President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are hell-bent to pass their health care takeover despite a tidal wave of opposition from the American people, and your congressman may be the one who casts the deciding vote to determine whether or not you get fined for not having “government-approved” health insurance in the future.

Call your representative right away!

This is the time real patriots need to show what we’re made of. With victory within their grasp, supporters of big government health care have made it well known that they’re lighting up Capitol Hill’s switchboards and flooding congressional inboxes.

If we are to win this battle, the freedom movement has to make its stand this weekend with the same passionate intensity that has pushed efforts like Audit the Fed into the mainstream. Nancy Pelosi will try any trick in the book, including a “deem and pass” scheme which will allow the House to pass the bill without even voting on it. She thinks this “no vote” will give some swing members enough cover to support “deem and pass” and by extension, the whole bill. House Democrats are also using the health care bill to mask a federal takeover of the student loan industry.

This weekend may be our last chance to stand up against ObamaCare and prevent further government interference in our lives. Please, call your Congressman today and insist that they OPPOSE any rule or other vote that does not provide for an up or down vote on such a critical issue. And urge your representative to oppose final passage of this latest big government nightmare.

If a vote comes this weekend, don’t look back wishing you had gotten involved and made your voice heard. Let it not be said that we did nothing in defense of liberty.

Please contact your Congressman right now!

By Adam de Angeli

In case you missed it (I had):

Newborn babies in the United States are routinely screened for a panel of genetic diseases. Since the testing is mandated by the government, it’s often done without the parents’ consent, according to Brad Therrell, director of the National Newborn Screening & Genetics Resource Center.

In many states, such as Florida, where Isabel was born, babies’ DNA is stored indefinitely, according to the resource center.

Many parents don’t realize their baby’s DNA is being stored in a government lab, but sometimes when they find out, as the Browns did, they take action. Parents in Texas, and Minnesota have filed lawsuits, and these parents’ concerns are sparking a new debate about whether it’s appropriate for a baby’s genetic blueprint to be in the government’s possession.

“We were appalled when we found out,” says Brown, who’s a registered nurse. “Why do they need to store my baby’s DNA indefinitely? Something on there could affect her ability to get a job later on, or get health insurance.”

According to the state of Minnesota’s Web site, samples are kept so that tests can be repeated, if necessary, and in case the DNA is ever need to help parents identify a missing or deceased child. The samples are also used for medical research.

If the state governments are collecting DNA samples for every baby born in America since the 1960’s, one can only wonder at what point they began entering them into databases, and who else might have legally or illegally obtained the records.

By Anthony Gregory

Greg Conko has a thoughtful critique of Carolyn Moffa’s featured article on GMO corporatism.

Now, I actually have sympathies to critiques of both sides of the GMO debate, but the real issue here is the problem with government being involved in agriculture. Conko somewhat is lefitimately concerned that anti-GMO rhetoric could “at the very least provide aid and comfort to[] more government intervention.” I don’t believe Moffa’s article calls for the statism explicitly, and Conko doesn’t seem to say so either. But this might be a concern.

However, this is a concern of all critiques of any social conditions brought about by state intervention in the first place. If you criticize the effect of mass immigration and spurred by distortions in the labor markets and by welfare, does that mean you’re necessarily calling for national ID cards? If you complain that a favored industry gets kickbacks from the state, are you necessarily defending Antitrust? If you criticize a foreign regime getting U.S. taxdollars to conduct atrocities (like Saddam in the 1980s) is this in any sense a call for war against that regime to remedy it?

The main thrust of a proper critique of GMOs is they are more pervasive than they should be, and dangerous, because of government intervention. Moffa was blaming the corporate state, its subsidies and patents, for bringing about a situation whereby many Americans might be eating stuff they wouldn’t in a free market. I believe personally in a free market that food would be much more traditional and less “engineered” than it is, for a variety of reasons. I also believe that students would score better on standardized tests in a freer society. That is not a call for No Child Left Behind.

In other words, the way to reconcile the interests of all producers and consumers is not by adding any layers of intervention — whether it be labeling requirements, as some might think the anti-GMO folks are necessarily calling for, or stronger patent protections that override common sense and often victimize farmers who want nothing to do with GMOs, as the pro-GMO folks are sometimes thought to be advocating — is freedom itself, a complete separation of agriculture and state. I find valuable insights on both sides of the food debate within the freedom movement, but admit it is beyond my expertise to say which side is absolutely right or wrong on some of the more esoteric facts. Until free markets are restored, these conflicts are just as inevitable, even among pro-freedom folks, as would be religious conflicts in a country with only one legal and official religion. Food is an intimate area of every one’s life, and I tend to think Americans are being swept away into an industrialized revolution in agriculture faster than they are ready for, and certainly faster than the market would bear on its own. I also believe world hunger is a real problem and people in any event have a right to eat what they want, whether it be organic veggies or “frankenfoods,” without either the Nanny State or corporate state discouraging or encouraging anything.

Before we have a free market in food, all our choices are being infringed and constrained by the government, with threats to liberty shrouded behind the rhetoric of both sides on this debate. But in a free society, the stakes would be much lower as people could eat what they want, and a more informed consumer base would almost surely exist. Until we get there, I plead with pro-freedom folks of all diets and impulses regarding food to unite primarily against the state that divides us, the state that props up Big Ag while banning transfats, the state that entrenches Monsanto while threatening to prevent the poor from the benefits of agricultural miracles, the state that has managed to turn free-markets against each other by becoming so intertwined in farming. Our goal should be the separation of food and state, and, secondarily to that, people can demonstrate the problems with statist solutions running in either direction while encouraging their fellow humans to eat economically and healthy.

We can disagree on what’s best to put on our own bodies, but I would like the pro-GMO and anti-GMO folks to agree that the state is the problem and everything it does in the realm of food production, distribution and consumption—everything—must be abolished, to break bread on this issue, even if they eat from different loaves.

By Tim Shoemaker

The Washington Examiner has an interesting piece today looking into what the Wall Street Journal called “ObamaCare’s worst tax hike.”  David Freddoso highlighted this new tax that as the WSJ explained:

For the first time, the combined employer-worker 2.9% Medicare rate would be extended beyond wages to interest, dividends, capital gains, annuities, royalties and rents for individuals with adjusted gross income above $200,000 and joint filers over $250,000.

That would lift the top capital-gains rate to 22.9% as the regular rate bounces back to 20% from 15% when the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year. The top rate for dividends would rise to 42.5% when the Bush income-tax rates expire. The White House plan also raises the ordinary Medicare payroll tax by 0.9 percentage points for the same filers, bringing it to 3.8%…

…Earning even a single dollar more than $200,000 in adjusted gross income will slap the 2.9% tax on every dollar of a taxpayer’s investment income, creating a huge marginal-rate spike that will most hurt middle-class earners, as opposed to the superrich.

This will have a significant impact as Freddoso explains:

Even if you don’t make that much money, understand that this could hurt you, and it also sets a major precedent here. The government would begin charging a so-called “payroll tax” on non-wage income that results from saving money. If you do save up, and you happen to do well in any given year, you will suddenly begin paying Medicare taxes on the interest in your savings account.

Just imagine the kind of bizarro-world, in which we live, where people are punished for actually being fiscally responsible and saving for their future.

Read more here.

By Adam de Angeli

Congratulations, we have arrived!

This was FRONT PAGE in yesterday’s New York Times, a testament to all that we have done and all that we are doing:

Whether it’s correctly called a movement, a backlash or political theater, state declarations of their rights – or in some cases denunciations of federal authority, amounting to the same thing – are on a roll.

Gov. Mike Rounds of South Dakota, a Republican, signed a bill into law on Friday declaring that the federal regulation of firearms is invalid if a weapon is made and used in South Dakota.

On Thursday, Wyoming’s governor, Dave Freudenthal, a Democrat, signed a similar bill for that state. The same day, Oklahoma’s House of Representatives approved a resolution that Oklahomans should be able to vote on a state constitutional amendment allowing them to opt out of the federal health care overhaul..

“Everything we’ve tried to keep the federal government confined to rational limits has been a failure, an utter, unrelenting failure – so why not try something else?” said Thomas E. Woods Jr., a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a nonprofit group in Auburn, Ala., that researches what it calls “the scholarship of liberty…”

I’m only posting four paragraphs for the sake of keeping the citation neat, but you really must read the whole article to take in the long list of achievements we’ve made all over the country. 

Yes, Thomas Woods was quoted on the front page of the New York Times. Goodbye, fringe.

Thank you all for making this whole endeavor worthwhile.  It truly is an exciting time to be alive.

By Andrew Ward

Fox News reports that the nearly one trillion dollar government onslaught of what’s left of the free market in health care has been deemed a “deficit-reducer” by the Congressional Budget Office.  That’s right, the government is planning on saving the taxpayers $130 billion dollars over the next 10 years, and 1.2 trillion over the decade after that by spending approximately 100 billion dollars a year.  Talk about voodoo economics.  You and I both know that this abomination, like Medicare, is going to cost much more than originally forecast.  To add insult to injury:

Here’s why the budget estimate was so critical: House Democrats want to pass the “side-car” package of changes to the Senate-passed health care bill under “reconciliation” rules, which would allow the Senate to pass it with just 51 votes, instead of 60. However, in order to qualify for the process, the CBO estimate needed to show that the bill saves at least $1 billion over five years and creates absolutely no deficit after that period of time.  

With the bogus report, Nancy Pelosi gets a pass to push for a vote on the so-called “reconciliation” bill in the House on Sunday. 

Now is not a good time to ease up on pressure on your representative.  Click here to take action.

By Matt Holdridge

From the Washington Times:

BOISE, Idaho — Idaho is leading the charge in a states’-rights push to defeat a proposal in Congress that would require people to buy health insurance, a key reform pushed by President Obama.

Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter, a Republican, used a ceremony Wednesday afternoon to become the first governor to sign into law a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government over any such insurance mandates.

Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states, a point Mr. Otter stressed when asked if the bill he signed can succeed, given constitutional law experts are already saying federal laws would supersede those of states in a U.S. District Court fight.

“The ivory tower folks will tell you, ‘No, they’re not going anywhere,’” he told reporters. “But I’ll tell you what — you get 36 states, that’s a critical mass. That’s a constitutional mass.”

The Washington Post is reporting:

A spokesman for Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R) said this afternoon that Virginia will file suit against the federal government if the Democratic health care reform bill is approved by the U.S. Congress.

Cuccinelli has long said he was examining the legal issues and suggested he would likely file suit. Brian Gottstein, a spokesman for the office, said this afternoon that a lawsuit is now a definite. Gottstein would provide no details of the legal rationale for such a suit, indicating the process is “still being worked out.”

Virginia last week became the first state in the country to pass a state bill declaring it illegal for the government to require individuals to purchase health insurance, a key part of bills under consideration on Capitol Hill.

As the C4L blog recently pointed out, even the New York Times is acknowledging the growing enthusiasm of nullification movements. 

If you’re unsure about what nullification is, watch this video where Tom Woods goes through the history of the idea in American politics. 

Is state resistance to the federal health care takeover our next line of defense? Does this underscore the importance of using your local and state C4L groups?