Recent polls show how Americans think about important issues

July 8, 2025

Those of us who have been around for a while — seasoned citizens — realize that the level of disagreement has grown greatly in the last decade or so.

With the sharp divide between the left and the right in our country about how it is doing and what needs to be done, it is interesting to see what the concerns are, and how each side views the situation.

A recent poll by Newsmax magazine showed the results of how all voters view the Republican and Democratic parties’ position on important issues. Republicans topped the Democrats on ten issues, while the Democrats won on three. There were five ways voters expressed their opinion: For Republicans, Democrats, Both, Neither, and Not Sure.

The top issues for Republicans were: 
Immigration & border - Rep 47%, Dem 28%
Government spending - Rep 42%, Dem 28%
Terrorism/national security - Rep 41%, Dem 30%
China-U.S. relations - Rep 38%, Dem 29%
Mideast/Hamas/Iran - Rep 38%, Dem 29%
Russia/Ukraine situation - Rep 39%, Dem 31%
Reducing violence and crime - Rep 38%, Dem 31%
Restoring our core values - Rep 40%, Dem 32%
Growing the economy - Rep 40%, Dem 33%
Gun policy - Rep 37%, Dem 34%

The Democrats led on these:
Lowering healthcare costs - Dem 39%, Rep 32%
Addressing Climate Change - Dem 40%, Rep 27%

Increasing home affordability - Dem 34%, Rep 33%

Another poll asked about the Budget and the National Debt, and the poll showed that overall, 75% of voters were very concerned or somewhat concerned. There were four categories of voters: Overall, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. 

Those results were fairly close among the groups: 
Overall - Very concerned 40%, Somewhat 35%
Democrats - Very concerned 42%, Somewhat 36%
Republicans - Very concerned 41%, Somewhat 34%
Independents - Very concerned 40%, Somewhat 37%

In looking at the leading cause of the National Debt — far and away the leading cause in each voting group — Excessive Government Spending won. Overall, 47% chose it, and 54% of Republicans, 48% of Independents, and 40% of Democrats chose it.

A distant second place went to Tax Cuts That Reduced Revenue, with only 16% Overall, Democrats at 17%, Republicans at 14%, and Independents at 13%. Coming in third was Not Sure, with slightly lower numbers.

Other causes coming in at less than 10% each were Military and Defense Costs, Social Programs (like Medicare and Social Security), and COVID-19 Pandemic Relief Spending.

Newsmax also showed how the sources of electricity production have changed since 1950. Data from 2024 provided by the U.S. Energy Information Agency show that while their numbers have changed, fossil fuels — coal, crude oil and dry natural gas — still lead by a wide margin.

Over that period coal usage has dropped by about 25% while crude oil has more than doubled, and dry natural gas has increased by more than 600%. There have been significant increases in biomass, wet natural gas and nuclear. But even so, they make up just less than 25% of all sources. Solar, wind and hydro provide roughly 3.5% of all sources.

It seems a majority sees problems with federal law enforcement having become politicized. Another Newsmax poll illustrated the degree to which Americans consider this to be a problem, and focused on the FBI.

On whether the agency needs to undergo reform by the Trump administration, 55% said “yes,” 30% said “no,” and 15% were “not sure.” 

On whether the FBI has become politicized in recent years, 51% said “yes,” 25% said “no,” and 24% were “not sure.”

Asking voters from the Democratic and Republican parties how they viewed FBI Director Kash Patel’s leadership, Democrats said: Favorable - 24%, Unfavorable - 44%, Not Sure - 32%. Republicans said: Favorable - 62%, Unfavorable - 11%, and Not Sure - 27%.

And for FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino, the results were, Democrats: Favorable - 26%, Unfavorable - 37%, and Not Sure - 37%. Republicans said: Favorable - 57%, Unfavorable - 13%, and Not Sure - 30%. Both leaders received a favorable opinion from a plurality of those polled.

On another subject, there is a majority of those polled who agree on three elements. That subject is China, our most threatening adversary. China has purchased thousands of acres of American farm land, much of it near military bases. It has also purchased some American businesses, and has stolen many good ideas from us. It is also the source for many goods that once were produced here.

However, the three areas of the Newsmax polls show that more than 50% of Americans want China to be held accountable.

On the topic of tariffs, 52% strongly or somewhat support them. Those who strongly or somewhat oppose tariffs are only 33%.

Those wanting China to pay reparations for the COVID pandemic are 52%, with 31% opposing. And the third category, reducing the reliance on China, regardless of the costs, are 45% to 29%.

While most of the pro/con numbers are not as far apart as we might expect, given the extreme political divide we see daily, there is still a majority of opinion supporting the Republican position on these issues.

Moving toward a limited and cost-effective federal government

March 18, 2025

Our country is currently experiencing many problems, and some are quite serious. As President Donald Trump’s opponents constantly remind us, he has not yet corrected these problems, even though he has been in office for almost two months.

But seriously, folks, we do have some real problems. And what the most serious of them is depends to a large degree upon whom you ask about that. Some of them are: the national debt, inflation and the resulting high prices, illegal immigration, military strength, big government.

But in whatever order you rank these problems, none of them can be cured overnight; they will all take time to be worked out. That amount of time will be shortened if everyone involved will work together for that purpose. And perhaps that is the most complicated problem of all.

Of those many problems, one that has attracted much attention, and one that is actively being addressed, is the size, cost, and activities of the federal government. Due to the way things have been going for decades, we have become saddled with a national debt of $35.46 trillion, as of fiscal year 2024, and this figure is rising every second. As of last week, it was $36.22 trillion. And the impact of that is enormous: the interest on the national debt is billions of dollars per day.

Our government is too big, it costs too much to operate, its reach has grown far too broad, and it has expanded its power and authority well beyond its originally designed limits. Almost every year the government has a sizeable budget deficit, which adds more to the national debt.

And not only are we spending far too much, billions of those dollars are being spent improperly. Many decisions on spending are being made not by Congress, as is the constitutional process, but by unelected bureaucrats, many with partisan motives.

The entire operation of the government and its spending practices are currently being examined by the newly created and temporary Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Despite the fact that the people pay taxes on what they earn, on what they spend, annually on property they own, and the Social Security payments they receive, and businesses pay taxes on their operation, the country still spends more than it takes in.

In 1789, several years after the creation of the country, there were only three federal departments: State, War, and Treasury. Today, there are 15 departments. The government has five times the departments it had in the early years. And there are fair points being made that we don’t need some of them, and that others need to be downsized and/or merged.

One example of this is that we don’t need USAID, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and that its work can be done by the State Department. Another is the Department of Education. Its job can be done by the individual states, who handled it before the department was created in 1979.

Liberal criticism of the Trump administration contains the scare tactic that Trump wants to create a dictatorship. That would mean a government that controls everything. But that situation has been building for many years, as evidenced by the increase of government departments and the authority they now exercise.

And what Trump is aiming for is reducing the size, cost and broad authority of the federal government. This is being done by DOGE and other efforts of the administration.

With our oversized federal bureaucracy, we are dependent upon other countries for some of the goods that our people need and want the most. And some of them are things that were once produced here, or that could be.

Due to various causes, many of those things were moved out of the U.S., and for the most part, the reason is that government interfered with domestic production by increased regulations that made production more difficult and more expensive. This caused production of some to be moved to other countries, and made foreign products more necessary.

Why shouldn’t a country as great as America not produce the things its people need and want at home? Why should we be at the mercy of other countries, some of whom love to make us suffer, when we can reorganize our country to produce nearly all of the things we need and want?

By appealing to companies that have moved out of the U.S. and encouraging them to return, and by attracting companies that have not been located here to move here, great things will happen. Thousands of new jobs will be created, and the prices on many items will be better. 

We can act to make domestic products more desirable than foreign made products, if some of them are threatening our own products.

Imagine a country that has an abundance of good jobs creating needed and wanted products. And one with a balanced budget, enough income to allow lowering the national debt, and with national spending low enough to allow a tax system with low tax rates that enable the people to keep more of their earnings.

All of this is possible. But the road to that future is not an easy one.

Trump faces many serious problems, and tremendous obstacles

December 10,2024

As January 20, 2025 — the day of inauguration — approaches there is much talk about what things Donald Trump will do as the new President.

Among the serious problems facing the country and the Trump administration are: the federal government’s size and exorbitant operation; straightening out the military; and the National Debt.

The federal government has become a place where unelected bureaucrats make decisions with the force of law and impose penalties and fines without congressional approval.

Back in June the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a decision that addressed this problem. Kentucky Republican Representative James Comer, Chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, issued this statement about this decision.

“Today’s Supreme Court decision stops the unelected, unaccountable federal bureaucracy’s aggressive regulatory overreach. This is a win for the American people, small businesses, and our Constitutional Republic. For far too long, the administrative state has been able to wield unchecked power and act as legislators by issuing major regulations that have driven up costs for Americans, stifled innovation, and micromanaged nearly every aspect of Americans’ lives. This decision rightfully hands the power back to Americans’ elected representatives in Congress to write our nation’s laws and to the courts to interpret them.”

This is a good development, but more can and must be done. 

There is a crisis within our military. Some in its leadership have become terribly confused in terms of understanding the requirements for and critical job of the military. Foolish and non-productive ideas like DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) have replaced merit in determining job assignments, recruitment processes and promotions. 

Last year the Army, Navy, and Air Force failed to reach their recruiting goals by 41,000 recruits. That means that in 2023 we had the smallest active-duty force since 1940. 

Some other factors in this recruitment failure are: a smaller eligible population, Gen Z has a low trust in institutions, and follows traditional life and career paths much less than previous generations. Another factor is that the military, due to recent changes in operations and philosophy, does not have the strong appeal it once had.

The military’s role is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, and maintain, by timely and effective military action, the security of the United States, its possessions and areas vital to its interest.

We need to increase funding for defense to strengthen and grow our military forces.

The National Debt has grown beyond all reason and is dangerously high. This problem has been going on for many years and has increased recently, as the following data shows: 1974 - $475 billion; 1995 - $4.9 trillion; 2005 - $7.9 trillion; 2015 - $18.2 trillion; 2020 - $26.9 trillion; 2024 - $36.2 trillion.

The current total works out to $107,169 for every person in the country.

Decades ago our largest budget deficits were brought on by national emergencies like the Great Depression and World War II. More recently, the government has simply spent more money than taxation provides, and on inappropriate things. This causes huge deficits, and huge interest payments on our debt.

In 2023, the federal government spent $658 billion on interest costs. That was 2.4 percent of the GDP (gross domestic product). 

While the June Supreme Court decision was a step in the right direction, the federal government still needs much corrective work. There are several departments, agencies, offices, etc. that are not necessary or useful.

Government employees are often not living up to their duties. Many of them work remotely, not at their duty station, a situation that evolved during the COVID pandemic, and which has not been remedied. 

A report found that only 6 percent of federal workers report in-person on a full-time basis. And, almost one-third of federal workers are remote full-time, which is a big difference from before the pandemic when only 3 percent worked remotely. This negatively affects the efficient and proper functioning of many areas of government.

There are at least three federal departments that need to be eliminated: The Departments of Commerce, Education, and Energy. These are among the most frequently mentioned for elimination, with the Department of Education leading the list. 

Having only been around since President Jimmy Carter signed it into law in 1979, the Education Department unnecessarily interferes with the efforts of the individual states to serve their citizens’ needs, a federal department which states did without for two hundred years.

And, as these items are addressed, other critical problems exist. We must repair the open borders of the Biden administration and get control of the illegal aliens now in the country, restore our position of energy independence, and fix the horrible Biden inflation that has made life so difficult for so many.

The Trump administration has a wonderful opportunity to begin to restore the federal government to a reasonable size and reach, to get government spending under control and make some headway toward reducing the National Debt.

That is a substantial challenge under the best of circumstances. And with the Democrat/liberal mindset that is so subversive to the American ideals our Founders established, it will be much more difficult. 

Too much government control negatively affects the people

October 22, 2024

We have all probably noticed that over the last few decades, and likely almost as long as the country has existed, the federal government has been growing and has gotten much bigger, much more powerful, and mind-bogglingly expensive.

While the addition of new government departments, agencies, offices, etc., and their increases in size, may have been intended to improve government functioning, and were done for the best of reasons, that has often not been the result.

While the elements of government are constitutionally under the control of the administration and Congress, that leadership changes fairly often, and with those changes come different ideas about how government should work. But most of the personnel in the various administrative departments and agencies stay in their positions for years or decades, and while they are there they develop their own ideas about how their part of government should work.

These concepts frequently are at odds with what is expected by the people, and what best serves their interests. As a result, terms like “deep state” and “administrative state” have arisen to describe them.

Complaints about this troubling problem are not unusual, and quite often highlight true problems caused by a particular area of government. But the complaints quite often fall on deaf ears, or do not have needed support to change things. A recent correspondence from the CEO of a South Carolina electric cooperative to its customers is a good example.

Palmetto Electric Cooperative President and CEO, A. Berl Davis Jr., identified and explained one such problem brought on by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Davis began by discussing referees in a football game, who he said often operate as if they are more important than the game itself. “I think of the Environmental Protection Agency the same way,” he wrote. “The role they fill is a critical one, but their recent set of regulations on power plants is a bad call. Unfortunately, the consequences will be much worse than merely losing a ballgame. The EPA’s latest interference in the energy industry threatens our access to reliable, affordable electricity. It’s one more reason our cooperative’s energy costs are rising, along with inflation and the increasing price of wholesale power from one of our primary power sources, Santee Cooper.”

EPA’s recent rule aimed at existing coal and new natural gas power plants requires them to either greatly reduce their output or install carbon capture and storage. “In theory, carbon capture and storage, or CCS, might sound like a neat idea. A power plant’s carbon emissions could be injected deep underground rather than released into the atmosphere,” Davis wrote. “But in practice, CCS is unproven and unbelievably expensive. No utility in the country has successfully pulled off CCS at the level the EPA is requiring for America’s fleet of power plants.”

This action’s expense results in higher prices for consumers, and also puts power suppliers in a crisis. As he explains it, “South Carolina urgently needs more power supply, not greater restrictions on our existing power plants or the ones our state needs to build. Our state has already struggled to supply sufficient electricity during the coldest hours of the winter, such as when freezing weather led to rolling blackouts in parts of South Carolina during Christmas 2022. And South Carolina’s power needs are only increasing amid the state’s rapid population and economic growth.”

Some help can come from solar farms, he notes, but also recognizing that solar power is not always there when it is needed, like on cold winter mornings and at night when the sun isn’t shining.

“To keep up, we will need to be able to rely on 24/7 energy sources including natural gas and, at least for now, coal. Yet the EPA seems intent on throwing its yellow flag and ejecting those reliable power plants from the game,” Davis wrote. “The job of keeping the lights on is hard enough during a challenging time for the energy industry. We don’t need the government making it any harder or more expensive for you.” And this problem affects other states, too.

He said further that Palmetto Electric Cooperative is joining other organizations to fight the EPA’s dangerous rules in court and in the Congress.

Decisions like this one are made by bureaucrats in government offices, not by the one law-making body that we have: Congress. Where the environment is concerned, decisions like this one are often the result of political positions and ideals, not on actual problems and needs, and the effects they will have on the people that the bureaucrats exist to properly serve.

The “administrative state” must be brought under control. Our government needs to be reduced in its degree of control, its size and its cost. Its focus must be restored so that it works for the good of all of the people, not just the political faction that most government employees favor, whatever that may be.

In the election next month there is the opportunity to do one of two things: either continue the current trend and increase the size, cost and control of government by electing radical Democrat liberals/socialists, or say a loud “no” to that.

Our government spends too much, and taxes the people too much

April 7, 2024

Several weeks ago, as the April tax filing deadline neared, Facebook featured some comments about how Americans feel about taxes.

Among those comments were these: 

** The biggest scam in life: Paying taxes on money you make; taxes on money you spend; and taxes on things you own that you already paid taxes on with already taxed money.

** Paying taxes in the USA is like having a never-ending car payment on a car that won't run.

** If your country has enough money to give to illegals, your taxes are too high.

** If they can pay all these student loans, they can stop taxes on seniors!

Clearly, taxes are not popular with the American people, despite the need for the government to collect taxes to pay its bills.

Founder Benjamin Franklin in the very early days of the republic said the only two certainties in life are death and taxes. But he wasn't talking about income taxes, because they did not exist then.

In order to help pay for the Civil War, the United States government imposed its first personal income tax, on August 5, 1861, as part of the Revenue Act of 1861. Tax rates were 3 percent on income exceeding $600 and less than $10,000, and 5 percent on income exceeding $10,000. But this tax didn’t last very long. There were other income taxes of short duration.

The income tax we pay today came into existence in 1913 when the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. It was a tax on incomes of both individuals and corporations. 

As much as people dislike the taxes they must pay, they generally understand that taxes are necessary for governments at the federal, state, and local levels to operate. And here in America, with our commitment to personal freedom, those governments are expected to be lean, efficient, not overbearing, and not overly expensive.

On the federal level, those characteristics are not being followed as our Founders expected.

USA Facts tells us that the “federal government collected nearly $4.5 trillion in revenue in fiscal year 2023 (FY2023). About half was collected through individual income taxes, while 37 percent was through payroll taxes. Other revenue sources included corporate income taxes, customs duties, and sales taxes.”

However, the report continues, the “federal government spent almost $6.2 trillion in FY 2023, including funds distributed to states, Medicare, Social Security, defense and veterans, transfers to states, interest on the debt, and aid to individuals such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and refundable tax credits accounted for 90 percent of spending.”

Worldometer online said that “the current population of the United States of America is 341,531,428 as of Sunday, May 5, 2024.” That’s about $13,000 in federal income collected per person. Spending, however, ran up to more than $18,000 per person.

Today, the National Debt stands at roughly $34 trillion. In 2006 the National Debt was around $8 trillion. A steady increase put it at about $23 trillion in 2020. And then the government stepped on the gas and the National Debt soared by $11 trillion in just 4 years to today’s $34 trillion. As a result, the per person amount to clear the National Debt today is more than $99,500.

The federal government is not as designed: small and limited in function. Today, it is too big, too expensive, not very efficient, and often quite over-bearing.

There are 15 executive departments and hundreds of federal agencies and commissions, employing approximately 1,427,700 federal employees, not including the military. Given the limited government philosophy of the Founders, many/most of these are not appropriate.

Which ones are needed? Here are a few of those executive branch departments that are sensible and needed: Department of Justice, Department of Defense, Department of State, and Department of the Treasury. While others may function well and sometimes provide positive guidance, are they really appropriate under the founding principles?

Why do we need a federal Department of Education to tell states how to educate the young? Why do we need the Environmental Protection Agency to tell private land owners what they can and cannot do with their own property? Why do we need a Department of Labor to tell businesses how they must operate? Under our system of federalism, these and other functions should be under control of the states, not the federal government.

In many of these departments, agencies or commissions unelected bureaucrats set rules in place with the force of law, complete with penalties. However, they are not approved by Congress, the law-making body. These bureaucrats tell the people that they work for, and who pay their salaries, what they can and cannot do, and can render punishment for them if they do not comply.

Over the decades the limited government philosophy of the Founders has fattened up and grown far beyond what it was designed to be, and what is needed and appropriate.

With every such step, the freedom of Americans becomes a little bit more limited. And if this concept continues much longer, America will no longer be the Land of the Free.

Our government has grown beyond what it was intended to be

December 12, 2023

After the Revolutionary War when the Founders were working on a governing document, they worked hard to not only develop a good design, but a design that protected the people from a government that could control everything they did and thought.

The design they came up with was spectacular, creating a nation governed by a philosophy of limited government and individual freedom. It had three co-equal branches: the legislative branch to pass needed and beneficial laws; an administrative branch to run the country and enforce the laws; and a judicial branch decides the constitutionality of federal laws and resolves other disputes about federal laws.

The design was not perfect, but included a mechanism to amend the Constitution to make it better. Of course, the success of the design depended upon those working in government: the employees and appointed and elected officials. It was expected that everyone involved would understand and support the design.

But, as fate would have it, some politicians and bureaucrats have their own ideas about what should be done, and how. Consequently, the government has grown in size and power, well beyond what the Founders imagined. Still, despite the excesses of the politicians and bureaucrats, many of whom were honestly trying to make things better, the government has grown too big and too powerful.

Columnist George Will in a recent column provided some insight into where we are, discussing a lawsuit before the Supreme Court that could be a start to changing things back toward the original design. The column started with a quote from James Madison in Federalist 47. “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands … may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

He then went on to discuss the case, but used an example of bureaucratic/administrative overreach, and how such behavior weakens what was and could again be the best governmental design ever.

The example he used describes the typical enforcement activities of some federal agencies, in this case the Federal Trade Commission, as published in the Harvard Law Review.

“The Commission promulgates substantive rules of conduct. The Commission then considers whether to authorize investigations into whether the Commission’s rules have been violated. If the Commission authorizes an investigation, the investigation is conducted by the Commission, which reports its findings to the Commission. 

“If the Commission thinks that the Commission’s findings warrant an enforcement action, the Commission issues a complaint. The Commission’s complaint that a Commission rule has been violated is then prosecuted by the Commission and adjudicated by the Commission. This Commission adjudication can either take place before the full Commission or before a semiautonomous Commission administrative law judge. 

“If the Commission chooses to adjudicate before an administrative law judge rather than before the Commission and the decision is adverse to the Commission, the Commission can appeal to the Commission. If the Commission ultimately finds a violation, then, and only then, the affected private party can appeal to an Article III court. 

“But the agency decision, even before the bona fide Article III tribunal, possesses a very strong presumption of correctness on matters both of fact and of law.”

In this case, and many other similar instances, even if the rules in force have been assumed to be appropriate, or found to be appropriate by the courts, the behavior of the government agency in being the only party prosecuting the rule breaking, and deciding whether things are right or not, is more than just a little heavy-handed.

This is precisely what Madison was referring to in the Federalist article. When the government makes the rules, adjudicates the rules, decides the outcome and also the penalties, the people are not being fairly or constitutionally dealt with. 

In a government set up to be fair in its dealings with the people, it is clearly not in the best interest of the people when the politicians and bureaucrats work under the table to increase their power over the people, the very people they are elected and hired to serve.

In the example cited, and likely many others we may not have heard about, what is the difference between life in the United States, and in some third world or authoritarian regime? Realistically, we are not there yet, but have been walking in that direction.

What we find and have observed for a long time is a strong effort on the part of politicians and bureaucrats to engage in what former President Barack Obama promised during his 2008 campaign: “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” 

There have been efforts to pack the Supreme Court; do away with the Electoral College; replace the local and state government control of elections with federal control of elections; move away from dependable energy sources; end our energy independent status; heavily restrict or ban citizen gun ownership; dictate what type of light bulbs and other conveniences and appliances we may have; and effectively open our southern border to all who want to enter, for whatever ends they may seek.

Our country is weaker and further from its original design than in many decades. Or, perhaps, ever.

Increasing federal control reduces our constitutional freedoms

September 19, 2023

Actions by those in positions of authority to push the boundaries of that authority took a huge step recently when New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham issued a public health order outlining efforts to combat gun violence in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. 

“I’m going to continue pushing to make sure that all of us are using every resource available to put an end to this public health emergency with the urgency it deserves,” she said. “I will not accept the status quo. Enough is enough.”

A provision of that public health order temporarily suspended both the open and concealed carrying of firearms in Albuquerque and surrounding Bernalillo County by those who had been granted carry permits by the state government.

The violations would result in civil penalties, not criminal penalties, but the fines imposed could be up to $5,000 per violation.

This action attempted to suspend rights guaranteed to the people by the U.S. Constitution, and that action brought swift and harsh criticism from both sides of the political aisle, and resulted in law suits against the action.

In response, U.S. District Court Judge David Urias agreed with plaintiffs who pointed out the violation of constitutional rights. He granted a temporary restraining order to block the suspension of gun rights. The order will remain in place until an Oct. 3 court hearing.

The rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution cannot be suspended on the whim of a mere elected official, whether that official is the president, a governor, an attorney general or a mayor. Yet this woman believed she had that authority in order to combat a local problem, a problem that many of her constituents argue is really not that much of a problem.

Recently we have seen government mandates and restrictions on our freedoms during the Covid pandemic, and others ostensibly to save the planet from climate change due to too much CO2 in the atmosphere.

The actions taken during Covid, and currently to combat the climate change that many people believe in, may actually have been taken for the best of reasons. However, they also constitute restrictions on the personal freedoms that the United States is known for. And they frequently inconvenience people and raise prices on things they want and need.

We recently increased our level of energy independence, but it was wiped out almost as soon as President Joe Biden took office. That forced the purchasing of materials and fuels from other countries like China and Russia, raised fuel prices substantially, and put thousands out of work. 

And, by the way, American oil and natural gas are the cleanest in the world. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., noted recently that “If we replaced Russian natural gas in Europe [with American natural gas], for one year, just one year, that would lower 215 million tons of emissions because our natural gas is 41 percent cleaner than Russian natural gas.” Biden’s war on fossil fuels has negatively affected his goal of reducing CO2 emissions.

Biden’s efforts to kill fossil fuels now has him campaigning to do away with gas-burning stoves, furnaces, fireplace logs and grills; creating stricter specifications for common appliances like clothes washers and dryers, dishwashers, and others that will substantially increase the cost of those products.

There is the manic effort to decrease gas- and diesel-powered vehicles in favor of electric vehicles that cost much more, depend almost entirely upon China and other countries for the materials to build their batteries, and require fewer American employees to produce them than conventional vehicles. And then there is the needed enormous increase in our electric grid to be able to recharge these tens of thousands of EVs that Biden wants.

The Department of Justice not long ago involved itself in a local matter. When parents attended school board meetings to register their displeasure with some things that were going on in the school their children attended, the DOJ labeled them “domestic terrorists.” 

Even if the parents were behaving inappropriately, or even violently, it is not the job of the federal government to become involved in state or local matters. That is how our republic is designed.

This nation was formed by the several states that united for that purpose. They did not give up their right to control themselves in local matters by creating a federal government. The states still have a large degree of sovereignty that is protected by terms of the U.S. Constitution.

What we are seeing is an increasing effort by Democrats to empower the federal government to control virtually everything that goes on in our country. They are “fundamentally transforming” the country. 

That contradicts two of the primary goals of the Founders of the United States of America: a large degree of personal freedom, and a federal government limited in its power.

If this power-grab is allowed to continue, the once-great United States of America will some day in the future degenerate into just another Cuba or Venezuela, as the protections provided by the Constitution are gradually erased.  It will be a country whose citizens are at the mercy of autocrats who have complete control.

Our government needs to be reined in, restored to its original intent

April 18, 2023

In November of 1863, a few months after the Union defeated the Confederates in the Battle of Gettysburg, President Abraham Lincoln delivered a speech now known as the Gettysburg Address. “Four score and seven years ago,” he began, referring to the signing of the Declaration of Independence. It was an historic speech, despite its mere 271-word length.

But at the end of the speech he referred to the U.S. government as “that government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

Looking at what our once limited government has grown into, it seems more like the government is by some people and for some people. So much of what happens today is less “for the people,” meaning the U.S. citizenry as a whole, than for some people, and for the government people.

The federal government is too big, too expensive, and too powerful. 

In September of 2021, federal civilian employees numbered about 2.85 million. The U.S. population in 2021 was approximately 333 million. This means that there was one federal civilian employee for every 118 persons.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, “the federal budget for fiscal 2022 was $6.3 trillion. The federal deficit in 2022 was $1.4 trillion, equal to 5.5 percent of gross domestic product, almost 2 percentage points greater than the average over the past 50 years.”

USA Facts provides this information:

* The federal government collected $5.0 trillion in revenue in fiscal year 2022 (FY 2022) — or $15,098 per person. 

* The federal government spent $6.5 trillion in FY 2022 — or $19,434 per person — including funds distributed to states. 

* Federal revenue increased 14.3% in FY 2022 after collecting more personal income taxes, social security taxes, and auctioning spectrum for commercial wireless and broadcast use. 

* Federal spending decreased 12.4% in FY 2022 after remaining relatively flat in FY 2021. 

* The federal government spent 28.7% more than it collected in FY 2022, resulting in a $1.45 trillion deficit. 

* The national debt hit $30.9 trillion last fiscal year. That is $931,000 per person.

“In today’s world, it’s rare for the federal government to balance its budget, meaning revenue is higher than expenditures,” Politifact reported. “Since the 1960s, only five years have had balanced federal budgets: 1969 under President Richard Nixon; 1998, 1999 and 2000 under Bill Clinton; and 2001 under George W. Bush.” 

A balanced budget does not mean that there was no national debt. Andrew Jackson, who served from 1829-37, “is the only president to preside over a total elimination of all remaining debt while having a balanced budget,” according to Politifact.

A 2022 Gallop poll found that 54% of Americans feel our government holds too much power. That figure is comprised of 74% of Republicans, 32% of Democrats and 54% of independents.

The feds rule through laws, rules and regulations. Quora.com tells us that there “are thousands of federal laws in the United States. The exact number can vary depending on how one defines a ‘law,’ as there are also regulations and executive orders that have the force of law. Additionally, new laws are constantly being proposed and passed by Congress.”

In 2017, Forbes.com said, “Let's look at year-end 2016 for starters. Federal departments, agencies, and commissions issued 3,853 rules in 2016, while Congress passed and the president signed 214 bills into law — a ratio of 18 rules for every law. The average has been 27 rules for every law over the past decade.”

“How did it get this way,” the Convention of States online (COS) asks, “Slowly but surely, we allowed D.C. bureaucrats to take over our way of living and push connived agendas in our faces.”

“Since the COVID crisis ensued in early 2020, every day has only allowed for the people to recognize how power abuses in the government are not just possible but extremely common.”

This needs to be fixed. But how? Well, one way is by electing people to the White House and Congress who will restore the republic’s intended limited government status. That, however, is a slow, and very iffy process.

Another possibility is a “Convention of States to rein in the powers of the federal government,” COS states. The states have the ability to call a convention to meet and discuss limiting its size and jurisdiction, adding term limits to federal officials, and writing a permanent budget plan.

“The good news is that already, 19 out of the required 34-state threshold has officially passed the COS Resolution.” Seven other states have passed the Resolution in one house of their government, and 12 others are going to consider the Resolution. “The people are looking for a real solution, not just another temporary fix,” COS added.

This would be a quicker solution than through elections, but it might not produce the desired result.

Clearly, the United States government’s size, cost, and power is a serious problem. And the wandering away from the ideal of government “for the people” — meaning all of the people, not just some of them — that has occurred over recent decades needs to be reversed.

More IRS agents, or smaller, less intrusive, less expensive government?

January 17, 2023

Wealthy Americans are a favorite target of the political left. They suspect they do not pay their fair share, and indeed, actually work to evade paying what they should. The many features of the tax code provide opportunities for people, especially the wealthy, to pay less than what their critics think they should pay.

Congressional Democrats last August passed the so-called "Inflation Reduction Act." Among other things, this bill would add 87,000 new Internal Revenue Service agents to search for taxpayer mistakes and evasions.

This $72 billion of taxpayer money would, according to Sen. John Kennedy, R-LA, expand the IRS to the extent that it will have "more agents, or soldiers, than the entire Israeli army." It will definitely more than double the size of the IRS, which currently has 78,661 employees. 

And Elon Musk, said to be the world’s richest man, tweeted a picture of a British Redcoat, expressing the irony of it all:  "When the country that revolted over taxes hires 87,000 new agents."

CBN News commented: “The Internal Revenue Service dropped the ball on auditing millionaires, according to a new report published by Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC). Despite calls by Democrats to ramp up scrutiny of high-net-worth individuals’ tax returns, and a legislative push for increased funding for the agency, the likelihood of a millionaire being audited in 2022 was just 1.1 percent.

“Instead, data shows that low-income earners were more than five times more likely to be targeted by the IRS in 2022,” the CBN story continued. “TRAC, a nonpartisan data gathering and distribution organization, was able to obtain the information under a court order through a Freedom of Information Act request.”

“Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Joe Biden himself claim these agents will target only the wealthy,” CBN wrote. “And congressional Democrats say the money will just be used to restore the IRS to its previous size.”

The Heritage Foundation’s John Cooper showed a chart reflecting the concerns of average Americans. "From 2010-2021, those making less than $200K accounted for the most in additional paid taxes. Those making less than $25K were audited at a higher rate than those making $200K to $500K," he commented.

The House of Representatives new Republican majority passed a bill rescinding the $72 billion for the 87,000 new IRS agents. House Resolution 23, the Family and Small Business Taxpayer Protection Act, passed the House on a 221-210 vote along party lines. “This was our very first act of the new Congress, because government should work for you, not against you,” said new House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-CA.

America’s government should be small, efficient, and not intrude into the lives of its citizens. The Libertarian Republic published an article in 2015 focused on the “Top 10 Government Agencies We Should Eliminate Immediately.” Citing the size of President George Washington’s cabinet, with only three departments, the article lists the 10 we could close, and why:

* National Security Agency - Perhaps the US governments’ most Orwellian agency, it has many times found itself embroiled in controversy, whether for spying on leaders opposed to the Vietnam war, or collecting the phone records of billions of people.

* Food and Drug Administration - The FDA is given the surreal power of regulating what Americans may eat, drink and medicate themselves with. This creates an environment where citizens are told that they are in fact not the sole deciders of what goes into their own bodies.

* Environmental Protection Agency - The EPA has gone from a small and seemingly necessary regulatory agency to a behemoth which tramples small businesses without regard for economic realities. The EPA has taken the power to arbitrate land disputes and environmental concerns from courts and private citizens, replaced with actions by bureaucrats with no accountability.

* Amtrak - Trains are the transportation choice of the past, yet government keeps investing in them. Higher subsidies are necessary to keep Amtrak running. 

* Internal Revenue Service - The IRS has a long history of abusing its power. If taxation is indeed necessary, must there really be an agency which so clearly intrudes into every aspect of our lives when tax filing season approaches?

* Federal Emergency Management Agency - Emergency relief should be left to private organizations like the American Red Cross, which has proven itself time and time again.

* Transportation Security Administration - Americans have been taught that Constitutional rights are suspended if one decides to travel through an airport. There are certainly better and more efficient ways for safety to be ensured.

* Drug Enforcement Administration - The War on Drugs has taken millions of lives and prisoners, and billions of taxpayer dollars. We as free people have a duty to bring an end to the tyranny of the DEA. 

* Federal Communications Commission - Freedom of speech is among the most important rights in our Constitution. However, the FCC places barriers upon our rights to engage in and listen to speech of our choice. 

* Federal Reserve - Not many Americans truly understand it, yet it silently steals value from Americans’ dollars every day. Since its creation, the dollar has lost 95 percent of its value. 

Agree or disagree with this libertarian view, our government is too big.

America is a much weaker nation today than it used to be

Many of us living today were born at a time when a family most often consisted of a mother, a father, and one or more children. The father — and sometimes the mother, also — worked to support the family. The children grew up in an atmosphere where things like a basic education, a close-knit family that survived on love for each other and respect for others, preparing to get a job and probably getting married and having a family of their own, were normal. And children were then prepared to repeat the cycle.

This age-old process produced a stable, mature society that helped America, which was brilliantly designed, develop into the leading nation in our world. And today there are still many people who are raised that way and will continue to live that way.

But through recent decades, this process has been weakened, and some of the influences that weakened it have come directly from our federal government. 

Today, America is a much weaker nation than it used to be, in many ways. Many people seem to be unaware of that, and others are unconcerned with the state of things. Will America follow the same path as Rome? Will it be destroyed from within because its people do not know, or have abandoned the governmental and social structures that made it great?

In addition to the Roman Empire, Babylon and Greece fell. Many of us watched as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (the Soviet Union, or USSR) fell apart. These once-great nations did themselves in. They were careless with their strength and glory, and they abandoned what helped them grow, and destroyed themselves.

There is a story from the early days of the United States. In Philadelphia in 1787, as delegates to the Constitutional Convention were leaving Independence Hall, from the crowd of interested onlookers a woman approached Benjamin Franklin. She asked, “well, Doctor, what do we have, a republic or a monarchy?” Franklin replied, “a republic, if you can keep it.”

Great nations evolve. They start from meager, often negative beginnings; they gradually grow to a level of freedom, security and comfort.

But then devolution begins. After time, comfort leads to forgetting the past struggles and the need to conserve what made them what they are. Seeking abundance takes control. With abundance comes an attitude of superiority, accompanied by greater apathy for the processes that brought development and success. That leads to selfishness. Selfishness leads to societal division and discord. And eventually, discord brings collapse. 

How far down that road has America traveled? What are the signs? Here are some.

A. Government is too big, costs too much and is too involved in our daily lives.

The federal government website tells us that “There are roughly 2 million civilian government jobs at more than 120 federal departments and agencies, not including the U.S. Postal Service.”

A federal department rules over education, which should be a local and state responsibility. Government inserts itself in other areas where it is not needed, wanted, or supposed to be. Ten thousand new IRS employees, they say, are “needed” to process tax returns, or for whatever purpose the government may direct.

Many government agencies are encouraged to put into effect rules with the force of law. But in America, only Congress can make laws. And then government agencies are sometimes ordered not to enforce the law, like on the southern border, allowing illegal entry of people, drugs and gangs. And at the state and local level, district attorneys in several states are not prosecuting some or many crimes.

In a Gallup poll last September, 52 percent said government is doing too many things, and prefer lower taxes and fewer government services.

B. Some military leaders think “equity” among races is more important than having the most qualified people functioning in the most effective military possible. Shifting attention from readiness to identity equity is dangerous. Mortars, bombs and bullets do not seek targets evenly by race, they seek available targets, perhaps made easier by this new wokeness. Military personnel must be united against a common enemy, not against those in other sub-groups because of race or other irrelevant differences.

C. One political party is straying from, and working to be rid of, some of the principles established more than 200 years ago. Members of Congress have discussed doing away with the filibuster and the Electoral College, which protect minority interests and the interests of smaller states from the tyranny of the majority; and stacking the Supreme Court to achieve dominance through law-making by judges and justices. 

On that subject Justice Clarence Thomas said in Utah Friday, “Are we leaving [our children] a mess or are we leaving them a country? Are we leaving them chaos or are we going to leave them a court?”

D. Social media companies believe they have the power to censor speech that does not toe the line of their preferred set of ideals. Large corporations buy up competitors, making life easier and more profitable for themselves, but not necessarily better for the people.

The signs are there, if we just honestly look for them. And then work to reverse them.

Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ tax and spend dream is being whittled down

In the span of just eight months since January 20, President Joe Biden has given us the border crisis, the Afghanistan debacle, the issues with China and Russia and North Korea, a broken supply chain, ridiculously high gas prices, and staggering inflation throughout the economy. 

That works out to nearly one catastrophe for each month. Some are wondering if America will be able to survive another three-plus years of Biden rule.

If many of the desired elements in Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda are approved, the answer to that is: America will be moving even farther from the country our Founders designed.

Some of the things in that agenda are not legitimate roles for the government of a democratic republic that was founded on the principal of individual, God-given freedoms. They are wrong for a nation which was created by its individual states, and that gave themselves a degree of independence from the federal government. They are wrong for a nation with a government of limited authority.

Our system of government purposefully gave us the ability to follow our desires for how to make a good life for ourselves, and not be dependent upon the government to take care of us from cradle to grave.

If you want to ply a particular trade, participate in a particular profession, start a business, or work in some other way to build your life so that you support yourself and perhaps a family, or just live independently, go for it. You may succeed, or you may not. If not, you are free to try something else.

Eventually you may make a decent living, a pretty good living, or become wealthy. What you choose to do is up to you. It is not the government’s place to tell you what you can or cannot do, beyond some common-sense laws, or to take care of you if you decide you don’t want to try anymore. And in the case of some who have bad luck and are unable to support themselves, the most generous people in the world — the American people — will most likely help you when you need it.

Yes, it is true that through the decades our government has grown well beyond its desired size, costs far too much, goes well beyond its designed restrictions, and interferes in our lives more than it was designed to do. That is not good. But it can be corrected.

Instead, the left in America is working overtime, not at trying to make their individual lives better, but to make our government even larger, more expensive and more controlling.

Some of the things President Biden and the Democrats, who still hold tenuous control of the government, want to do are simply improper. Such things as paying for child care, “free” community college, $450 billion for government-run preschools, are not the proper role of our government.

Some other things, such as amnesty for more than 8 million illegals, complete with payments of $450,000 for some; doubling the size of the IRS to monitor bank accounts of citizens; and spending $3.5 billion for a “Civilian Climate Corps” of Climate Change activists, are not good for the country, or our freedoms.

As Congress struggles to get support to pass Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda, the monstrous $3.5 trillion, 2,465-page tax and spend leftist dream is being whittled down. Even though it now spends less money and uses less paper, it is still way too expensive and much too heavy. And Biden’s tax and spend agenda is still a disaster.

One really goofy idea for funding some of the multi-trillion-dollar spending plan is a tax on the “unrealized capital gains” of anyone who makes more than $100 million a year, or whose worth is at least $1 billion. This idea is likely unconstitutional. But if not, it most certainly is an oxymoron. 

A capital gain is the profit you make when you sell an investment asset for more than you paid for it. If you buy an asset for $1,000 and sell it for $5,000, you would pay tax on the additional $4,000. But this weird tax idea would be applied to the increased value of the asset before it has been sold.

If the asset later lost some or all of its gain, would the government return the taxed amount? Nope. This concept beautifully illustrates the twisted understanding many liberals/socialists have for economics.  

The left is determined to transform our nation of maximum individual freedom and world-leading prosperity into a government-run nation like Cuba and Venezuela, and all the others that have failed.

And some of our citizens, who have never seen worse times than these pretty good times of the 21st century, do not understand how things have improved through time in America, and how good of a country they have been blessed to live in. They don’t understand that America’s poor are so much better off than those that live in the poorest nations. 

They are eager to see the left succeed, believing that socialism — and ultimately communism — will make things better for us. It won’t. Let’s hope this effort fails.

The transformation of the United States of America is ongoing

Today, we are living in crazy and dangerous times. Tens of thousands of people from many countries travel many miles to get to Mexico so that they can enter the United States illegally.

There are different reasons why they want to be here, just as there are different types of people coming here. Some come with criminal intent, such as gang members and drug dealers. Some come because they know they can get a lot of stuff for free.

The most desirable ones, however, realize that America is so much better than where they came from. They can have a good life here. We have freedom, jobs and opportunities, due to the crystal-clear vision of the Founders.

The number of illegal entrants coming into the country is likely above any previous level, with more than 1.4 million people coming in illegally the first nine months of 2021, according to U.S. Border Patrol and the Office of Field Operations Encounters.

This high number is due to the failure of the Biden administration to do its job of providing border security, whether that is through ignorance of why borders are important, or is a deliberate effort to attract illegal aliens to our country.

Of course, the Biden administration insists that the borders are not open. Perhaps one of them can tell us how open borders, as they imagine them, would actually look, and be worse than what we see with our own eyes.

Even as those migrants from socialist, communist and otherwise poor countries come here to enjoy living in what is regarded by many as the best country on Earth, people in the government of this country continue to increase the control of the government over its people, gradually moving it toward the kind of places these illegal migrants could not wait to get away from.

The Democrats in Congress and the administration are busy transforming America into a government-controlled “paradise” where many things are free, except, of course, the individuals under the thumb of a government that seeks to control important things like healthcare, jobs and many current freedoms.

U.S. Senator Joe Manchin, D-WV, is a strong opponent of the Democrat’s multi-trillion-dollar efforts to increase dependence on government, calling these proposals that total some 5.5 trillion dollars "fiscal insanity" paid for with "vindictive" tax hikes, that will basically change “our whole society to an entitlement mentality." 

In a shocking display of abysmal ignorance about economics, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki responded to a question about raising taxes on businesses by saying, “In the past, companies have passed on these costs to consumers… We feel that that’s absurd and unfair, and the American people won’t stand for that,” she said.

She apparently perceives economic matters like most “progressives,” which does not include understanding economics, specifically that every cent a business spends — for materials, wages, advertising, loans for new equipment or expansion, taxes, etc. — is paid for with income from consumers that buy its product or service. And when taxes and other costs go up, prices have to go up to pay for them.

Perhaps this is why they see no problem with humongous spending bills that will add trillions more to the already-gigantic national debt of $28.8 trillion.

A New York Post opinion column by Betsy McCaughey had this to say about the spending bill: “The colossal bill Democrats in Washington, DC, are assembling this week is a slap in the face to Americans who work, pay taxes and support their families. It demeans the work ethic and glorifies government handouts, sending the message that work and self-sufficiency are for suckers: better to climb on Uncle Sam’s gravy train, which will now provide cradle-to-grave benefits.”

McCaughey mentions “Biden bucks,” which are monthly payments to almost all parents, based on how many children they have. Unsurprisingly, it doesn’t even matter whether the parents work or not. She notes that Democrats also promise “virtually free child care until the children turn 5, free community college and, for seniors, new Medicare and elder-care benefits,” and “12 weeks a year paid leave for anyone who claims a family member — even a distant relative like a spouse’s grandmother — needs care.”

“This bill pours money down a rathole,” McCaughey wrote. “It allocates a whopping $45 billion to make community college free. Students won’t have to spend a single dollar on tuition or fees — or pursue studies that prepare them for work. Only about one in five students now finishes community college within two years. A big reason is lack of academic skills when they enter. Nothing in this program will change that.”

Manchin urges “needs testing” to see who really needs these freebies and financial bonuses. That’s moving in the right direction, but the real question that needs an answer is, “are these measures, which will dramatically increase the peoples’ dependence on government, really a proper role for our government?”

The answer to that is a definite “No!” Our government is supposed to be as small, inexpensive and unobtrusive as possible. That’s how it started; that’s what built the country to which so many want to come;  and that’s how the country works best.

Democrats want to control how the states manage their own elections

 

Hurricane Ida’s destruction and the colossal Biden Afghanistan blunder dominate the news. And given the enormous impact of these two catastrophes, that is entirely appropriate. Yet, there are other things of importance that continue to move forward, that are covered up by the “big news” of the day.

One of those other things is alive and well in Congress. H.R. 4, the illegitimate offspring of H.R.1 and S.1 — known inappropriately as the “For the People Act of 2021” — moves in the same direction: aiding the federal government in taking control of election procedures that belong to the states, and weakening the election system.

The Heritage Foundation, hated by many on the left for its accurate perspective, had this to say about the “For the People Act of 2021”: “H.R. 1 would federalize and micromanage the election process administered by the states, imposing unnecessary, unwise, and unconstitutional mandates on the states and reversing the decentralization of the American election process —which is essential to the protection of our liberty and freedom,” the summary began. 

“It would (among other things) implement nationwide the worst changes in election rules that occurred during the 2020 election; go even further in eroding and eliminating basic security protocols that states have in place; and interfere with the ability of states and their citizens to determine the qualifications and eligibility of voters, ensure the accuracy of voter registration rolls, secure the fairness and integrity of elections, and participate and speak freely in the political process.”

Since H.R. 1 and S. 1 were not passed by Congress, this new effort to destroy our election security — H.R. 4 — is now alive and well. It has been named the “John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021.” Naming it after a deceased and respected gentleman is a good thing to do, and has the added advantage of helping to disguise its true purpose.

“H.R. 4’s goal is to eviscerate the right of states to manage their own elections with appropriate transparency and ballot-security safeguards. It will attempt to misuse the 1965 Voting Rights Act to achieve this goal,” the Real Clear Politics (RCP) evaluation begins. 

“’Preclearance’ is central to H.R. 4 — this plank of the law would require every state election official to submit any election law changes to the Department of Justice for approval. In short, Democrats want states to ask Washington, D.C., for permission to pass local laws that would, for example, require voter ID — a policy that polls consistently find roughly 80% of Americans in support,” RCP continues. 

“Joe Biden and Democrats want their politicized Department of Justice to control how states manage their own elections,” RCP wrote, adding that the “Department of Justice is currently trying to strong-arm states into making their elections less secure and transparent, and Joe Biden wants to expand its mandate to control every aspect of state-level elections.”  

The U.S. Constitution, which controls how our government operates, very deliberately, and wisely, leaves much authority to the states. A country where everything is controlled by the federal government is not what America is or was ever supposed to be. In fact, without the necessary support from the individual states, there would be no federal government for the likes of Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and the rest to try to commandeer, by hook or by crook. 

Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of U.S. Constitution states: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing [sic] Senators.”

While the Elections Clause does give the Congress the authority to “make or alter such Regulations,” that does not mean that Congress actually has the authority to replace all state legislatures’ decisions on how their state will hold elections. If the Clause was actually intended to empower Congress to change all election laws nationwide to suit its desires, the Founders would not have written the first half of the Clause that gives that authority to state legislatures.

We have been taught — through outright lessons of failure, or by our elders, if we had sense enough to listen to them — that we must protect the things that are most valuable to us. One of those things is the right and duty to vote. Through voting, American citizens steer their country forward.

Yet, despite that voting is one of the most sacred, most valuable of our rights, there are those who would subvert that process for their own selfish, political purposes.

Mailing out thousands or millions of unrequested election ballots, and not absolutely verifying voter’s identification are just stupid, and put election security at risk. And there are other actions that Congressional Democrats favor that weaken ballot security and invite fraud.

Common sense, which unfortunately is a tool too often not used, dictates making sure that every vote is cast by an eligible voter in that voter’s proper precinct. Yes, that sometimes causes inconvenience. But that is a small price to pay for a secure election system that our nation depends upon. 

The infrastructure bill highlights what is wrong with Congress

The bill H.R. 3684, the Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act, known simply as the “infrastructure bill,” has been a controversial product from day one. 

The Democrat majority attempted to get a vote to pass the bill before it was even fully written. Yeah, what a wonderful idea: let’s vote to approve a bill before it’s written. What could possibly go wrong?

This situation is a serious contender for the dumbest idea dealing with pending legislation in our nation’s history.

Next, the bill is 2,702 pages long. Most books I read take many hours from start to finish, and most of them are not only a fraction of this bill’s length, usually 300 to 500 pages, but also have much smaller pages with fewer words.

The Christian Bible has about 1,300 pages and about 800,000 words. That makes this Democrat bill twice as long as the Bible. Another way of understanding how long this bill is: compare it to these weekly columns. Each weekly column word-count target is 858 words, give or take a few. Dividing 800,000 by 858 equals 932.4, or enough weekly columns to fill 17.9 years.

The International Christian College and Seminary tells us that it takes approximately 70 hours and 40 minutes to read the Bible. Extrapolating that to the infrastructure bill, someone who read the bill continuously from start to finish in one sitting would spend more than 140 hours, or six days, reading it. With time out to eat, sleep, visit the restroom, and other normal things, add more days. And experts tell us that reading federal legislation is a more difficult read than most books. It takes study time, in addition to reading time.

“These bills are not written for even the educated layperson, Ross Baker, a political scientist at Rutgers University, said. “They are written for specialists.” His comment was made back in 2009 when the Affordable Care Act and the Health and Education Reconciliation Act were under consideration. Those two bills dwarfed the infrastructure bill, adding up to 10,516 pages in the Federal Register.

This bill is simply way too big, in both length and dollars spent. It’s a safe bet that few if any of our representatives and senators will have personally read and studied the entire bill. Much of the work will be done by staff, and some topics may simply be accepted as good and proper without anyone actually reading or studying them. Is that really the best way to do things?

Furthermore, there is no emergency demanding that one ridiculously long bill that spends more than a trillion dollars be created and voted on. Truly important measures will have bipartisan support, and can be easily passed individually, or in small groups of two or three closely related topics, and a few dozen pages. 

Within its 2,702 pages the bill contains 10 divisions, and most of those could easily be, and should be, addressed as separate bills to be debated and voted on over time, rather than crammed through all at once.

One part of the bill proposes spending $110 billion for roads, bridges, and major projects. That’s a bunch of money. Will it all be spent on really needed projects? Or will some of it be used for pet projects that benefit some special interests?

Iain Murray of the Competitive Enterprise Institute addressed some specific features: “The bill also contains various faddish ideas like elements of the Green New Deal and ‘Buy American’ provisions, all of which will simply increase costs to American consumers for no discernible benefit. Many of my criticisms of the president’s infrastructure plan as being bloated and wasteful continue to apply to this bill.”

“Finally, several Democrats have made it clear that they view this as the first of a two-part package,” Murray’s evaluation continued, “the second being a budget reconciliation bill with $3.5 trillion of new spending and a variety of progressive wish-list items that would seek to turn the U.S. into a European-style social democracy, with a vastly expanded welfare state. Again, it appears that the plan is to rush this through on the back of the infrastructure bill without proper scrutiny.”

One feature of the $1.2 trillion bill that appears to breach President Joe Biden’s “red line” pledge not to raise taxes on anyone earning less than $400,000 a year is a “national motor vehicle per-mile user fee pilot program,” which would affect most drivers. Calling it a “fee” instead of a “tax” will do little to soothe the pain that drivers will have to endure when they drive to and from work or on vacation to help fund this massive spending plan.

And then we must ask, will there be the need for a “Mileage Czar” with a bloated staff to keep track of these taxes?

There is a need to address real infrastructure issues in the country. But the most important, the most critical area of need today, is securing the southern border. Thousands of illegal aliens, many of whom are gang members, drug dealers, and Covid-infected, enter this country every week. This bill does not address that. Congress needs to address the criminal nature of the border crisis first.