AWARD #1: Nathan Deal Liberal Republican Medal of Honor Award

"It is good to know they're all innocent in the Big House."

Ladies and gentlemen this is where we draw the line in the sand. The border of the 9th Congressional District of Georgia is where we will stand the line against Socialism and Statism. The future of our families are at stake and we must elect a Constitutional Conservative to represent us in the US House of Representatives. The representative we elect must understand the Constitution and make decisions and policy that secures and protects the Liberties of the citizens of this district. While our children slept we failed to protect them from the decisions and votes made by our previous US Congressman Nathan Deal (R-GA9). Nathan Deal voted to massively increase the size of government, spent future generations of our families into oblivion, and created huge bureaucracies that usurp the Liberties given to us by the Founding Fathers and enshrined in the United States Constitution. For that distinction I award Nathan Deal the Liberal Republican Hammer and Sickle medal.

Nathan Deal was elected to the US House of Representatives in 1992 as a Democrat. He switched parties in 1995 after the Gingrich revolution wrested control of Congress in 1994. Nathan Deal said he switched parties because he was uncomfortable voting alongside Liberal Democrats, yet he voted NO to elect Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House. Nathan's voting record is clear. He made 11,315 votes over this time period and only missed 675 (6%) of total votes. The vast majority of his missed votes were in 2009 and Q1 2010 as he planned his run for the Office of Governor, Georgia. The votes range from the ludicrous (H.Con.Res 275 Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the education curriculum in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) to the largest entitlement in human history prior to Obamacare (HR 1/HR4954 Medicare and Prescription Drug Act 2003 a $16.1T unfunded mandate that cripples the finance of this nation.) He has voted to restrict prayer in school (HR 2518 Section 304 Prohibits funds to prevent voluntary prayer in public schools) and leading us to war in Iraq with two votes (HR 4655 Iraq Liberation Act 1998 calling for regime change in Iraq and HJ 114 Authorization to use Force in Iraq.) Make no mistake about Nathan Deal. He has spent trillions and trillions of your hard earned tax dollars and the wealth not yet earned from future generations of your families. Nathan Deal is a Statist and I can prove it with his voting record. This man is running for Governor of the State of Georgia in 2010. GOD help us all!

I. Summary:

During his tenure Nathan Deal voted;

1. to increase the public debt limit from $4.0T (1993) to $7.384T (2007).
2. to authorize military force against Iraq and Afghanistan.
3. for The Housing and Community Development Act 1994. [HR 3838 leading to the financial meltdown in 2008]
4. for Federal intervention into our childrens' education. [HR 1 2002 No Child Left Behind]
5. for NAFTA which sent millions of jobs overseas. [HR 3450 1993]
6. to massively expand welfare benefits in housing, food stamps, and health care.
7. to spend $124B in the Resolution Trust Corporation S&L bailouts. [S. 714 Resolution Trust 1993]
8. to implement incremental steps towards Obamacare.
9. to infringe our 2nd Amendment rights. [HR 3098 Handgun Safety Act 1993/HR 1025 Brady Handgun Law 1993]
10. for environmental regulations that impede economic growth.
11. to infringe on States Rights 10th Amendment.
12. to institutionalize the nanny state.
13. to steal your Liberties.

Notes:

Nathan Deal is pro life.
Nathan Deal voted to impeach Clinton.

II. Corruption

Keep one thing in mind when reading this report. Nathan Deal is rated as one the most corrupt members of the House of representatives by the organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington DC. (See Report http://www.crewsmostcorrupt.org/files/Deal%20Profile%20Final.pdf) In addition, the Office of House Ethics Committee (OCE) ruled that they "believed Representative Deal violated the House Ethics Manual’s directive to disclose all nongovernmental positions held." The original report is linked (http://oce.house.gov/disclosures/Review_No_09-1022_Referral_to_Standards.pdf) and can be found on page 5 paragraph 6 of the original report by the OCE. Nathan Deal conveniently resigned this office at the end of March effectively closing the investigation. Nathan Deal denies any wrongdoing and claims it is a political witch hunt in reaction to his bid for Governor. It is good to know they're all innocent in the Big House.

III. What is a Constitutional Conservative?

Ask yourself one question. Would a true Constitutional Conservative ever put themselves in the position to give the appearance of impropriety? No. Nathan Deal's Job description as a US Congressman is to secure and protect the Liberties of the citizens in the 9th Congressional District of Georgia. Nathan Deal swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. You decide if he lived up to his oath.

IV. The Evidence

The Charts below is a detailed reconstruction of his voting record since entering Congress by subject matter. Not all of these Bills became law, but Nathan Deal's YES votes give you a glimpse into his state of mind. You can review all of the information within this report at (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400099) by looking up the year or Bill number. I only included the most egregious and faulty judgment to illustrate Nathan Deal's Liberal and Statist agenda. Almost every item is unconstitutional.


RED = Statist unconstitutional vote BLUE = Constitutional Conservative vote.


Public Debt

1993	HR 1430	Increased Public Debt Limit	From $4.0T to $4.37T	Big Spending	YES
1994	HR 2586	Increased Public Debt Limit	From $4.37T to $4.97T	Big Spending	YES
1996	HR 3136	Increased Public Debt Limit	From $4.97T to $5.5T	Big Spending	YES
1997	HR 2015	Increased Public Debt Limit	From $5.5T to $5.95T	Big Spending	YES
2003	HR 4775	Increased Public Debt Limit	From $5.95T to $6.4T	Big Spending	NO
2003	HJ Res 51	Increased Public Debt Limit	From $6.4T to $7.384T	Big Spending	YES
2004	HR 856	Increased Public Debt Limit	From $7.38T to $8.18T	Big Spending	YES

Defense Spending and Wars

1994	HR 2401	Defense Appropriations Act	Largest reduction in Defense spending as % of GDP in history.	YES
1996	HR 4655	Iraq Liberation Act	Policy for the United States to remove Saddam Hussein Leading up to the Iraq War.	YES
1998	SJ Res 54	Government of Iraq Resolution	States the Government of Iraq is unacceptable and in material breach of International obligations. Leading up to the Iraq War.	YES
2001	HJ Res 64	Authorization to use military force against Afghanistan	War: The United States invades Afghanistan and installs a government.	YES
2002	HJ Res 114	Authorization to use military force against Iraq	War: The United States invades Afghanistan and installs a government.	YES

Education: Federal intervention

1993	HR 1804	Goals 2000: Educate Americans Act	Establish seven year accomplishment goals	YES
1998	HR 6	Higher Education Amendment	$$$ to ensure dorms are alcohol free	YES
2001	HR 1	No Child Left Behind	Federal takeover of our childrens education	YES
2003	HR 2210	School Readiness Act	Head Start	YES
2003	HR 438	Teacher Recruitment Act	Subsidies to schools to recruit and retain teachers	YES
2003	HR 2211	Ready to Teach Act	Mandates for teacher certifications	YES
2005	HR 366	Vocational and Technical Education Act	Guidelines for vocational and technical education	YES

Massive Expansion of the Welfare State

1993	HR 3838	Housing and Community Development Act	Primary cause of financial meltdown in 2008. Forced Banks to make loans to families unable to pay. Authorized GNMA to issue mortgage backed securities. Funded Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage relief.	YES
1993	HR 2351	Arts, humanities and museums Amendments	Funding for the National Endowment of the Arts.	YES
1996	HR 3734	Personal Responsibility and Work Act	Welfare and Medicaid reform.	YES
2000	HR 4386	Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention Act	Money for indigent Welfare	YES
2000	HR 3529	Economic Security and Worker Assistance Act	Billions of dollars of unemployment assistance.	YES
2001	HR 2646	Farm Security and Rural Investment Act	Subsidies to farmers.	YES
2001	HR 256	Family Farmer Bankruptcy Relief Extension	Subsidies to farmers.	YES
2007	HR 976	State Childrens Health Insurance Plan	$71B unfunded mandate to the states.	NO

Incremental Steps to Obamacare

1993	HR 2202	Preventative Health Amendments Act	Voted alongside Henry Waxman (D-CA)	YES
1994	HR 8	Healthy Meal for Healthy Americans Act	Voted alongside Kildee (D-MI)	YES
2000	HR 4680	Medicine RX 2000 Act	Precursor to Medicare Prescription Drug Act 2003	YES
2000	HR 4365	Childrens Health Act	Precursor to SCHIP	YES
2000	HR 2887	Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act	Precursor to SCHIP and Medicare Prescription Drug Act	YES
2001	HR 2559	Federal Long Term Care Act	Amendments require citizens to purchase LTC	YES
2003	HR 1/4954	Medicare Prescription Drug Act	A $16.1 T unfunded mandate and entitlement.	YES
2005	HR 5573	Health Centers Renewal Act	A $1.2 trillion cost to build regional medical centers.	YES

2nd Amendment (Two gun control Bills made it to a house vote during Nathan's tenure and he voted YES)

1993	HR 3098	Handgun Safety Act	Prohibits juveniles from possessing a gun. This is a parents decision.	YES
1993	HR 1025	Brady Hand Gun Law	Requires background check and five day waiting period for firearms.	YES

Environmental Extremism (How does any of this help a 9th District citizen?)

1993	HR 322	Hardrock Mining Reform Act	Restrictions on coal mining	YES
1998	HR 2863	Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act	National regulations on migratory birds	YES
1998	HR 3267	Sonny Bono Salton Sea Act	Millions to reclaim the Alamo River and Salton Sea in California	YES
1998	HR 2870	Tropical Forest Conservation Act	Million for Tropical Forest Conservation	YES
1999	HR 193	Sudbury Assabet Scenic River Act	Millions for Massachusetts	YES
1999	HR 171	Heritage Trail Route in New Jersey	$1.0M to $4.0M for a nature trail in New Jersey	YES
1999	HR 468	St. Helena National Scenic Area	Millions for St Helena Island National Preserves in South Carolina	YES
2000	S 2943	Assistance for International Malaria Control Act	Millions to fight malaria around the world	YES
2000	S 2547	Grand Sand Dunes Preserve Act	Millions for Grand Sand Dunes Preservation in New Mexico	YES
2000	HR 5375	Erie Canal Heritage Corridor Act	Millions to establish a heritage trail for the Erie Canal	YES
2000	HR 4656	Conveyance of Forest Service Land in Lake Tahoe Basin	Millions to establish a National refuge in Lake Tahoe, NV	YES
2000	HR 2090	Exploration of the Sea Act	What is it that they expect to find?	YES
2000	HR 3176	Kealia Pond Wildlife Refuge	Millions to establish a National Wildlife area	YES

Infringement of States Rights and the 10th Amendment

1995	HR 3396	Defense of Marriage Act	State Issue: Defines Marriage	YES
2000	HR 3088	Victim of Rape Health Protection Act	State Issue: Mandates HIV Testing	YES
2000	HR 2498	Cardia Arrest Survival Act	State Issue: Funding for defibrillators in rural areas	YES
2003	HR 1350	Reauthorizes Individuals with Disabilities Act	State Issue: The level at which someone hangs a mirror in a public bathroom is not the business of the Federal Government	YES
2004	HR 2028	Pledge Protection Act	State Issue	YES
2004	HR 3313	Marriage Protection Act	State Issue	YES

Institutionalize the Cradle to Grave Nanny State

1995	HR 2010	National and Community Service Act	Funding for youth Community work opportunities	YES
1999	HR 3073	Fathers Count Act	Promote marriage Enhanced relationship skills training Promote successful parenting Massive funding for programs around the nation	YES
1999	HR 325	Diabetes Act	Diabetes research funding	YES
2000	S. 2311	Ryan White Care Act	AIDS/HIV education and spending	YES
2003	HR 395	Do Not Call List Act		YES
2004	HR 5107	Justice for All Act	Amends previous acts for DNA testing. $18B cost	YES

Big Spending and Loss of Liberty

2001	HR 3150	Airport Security Federalization Act	Initiates TSA and federalizes all airport security	YES
2001	HR 5710	Homeland Security Act	Establishes a $58B per year agency with >200,000 employees.	YES
2001	HR 3162	The Patriot Act	Largest infringement on personal rights since Habeas Corpus was suspended by Abraham Lincoln	YES
2002	HR 4598	Homeland Security Info Sharing Act	Authorization to share data bases between police agencies.	YES
2005	HR 3199	Patriot Act re Authorization	Re authorizes the Patriot Act	YES

Ranking the Georgia 9th District Candidates on Job Knowledge and Constitutionality

DISCLAIMER

I do not work, nor do I endorse any candidate for the 9^th Congressional District of Georgia. My research of each candidate is based on their campaign materials, speeches, website, radio ads, radio interviews, television spots, and personal interaction. I personally interviewed three candidates, attended campaign speeches and engaged them at Tea Party rallies, GOP meetings, and 912 meetings.

This is the first update [Another update will be released on July 4, 2010.] to the rankings of the field of Republican candidates for the 9^th Congressional District of Georgia. Several candidates voluntarily made adjustments to their campaign platform and this captures those changes. These strong and vibrant candidates are working very hard to earn our votes and any one will be a honorable member of the United States House of Representatives on our behalf.

This analysis does not predict a winner in the May 11, 2010 Special Election for the 9^th Congressional District nor the General Primary Special Election on July 20, 2010. It is only designed to rank each candidate based upon their understanding of the Job Description of a US Congressman based upon their understanding of the Constitution.

Figure 1 is an objective scoring analysis to achieve a ranking of each candidate. The higher the score the better understanding of the Job Description and Constitution. A perfect score is 15 and represents a Thomas Jefferson Conservative. A further explanation of the categories are explained below.

Health care: Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution does not empower the Federal government to interfere in a citizens health care decisions. All candidates vowed to be one vote to repeal the unconstitutional Obamacare. Still several candidates indicate they want to back reform and interfere in our health care decisions. These candidates were downgraded in both the health care and the Constitution categories. The only power granted to a US Congressman from the 9^th District of Georgia, by the United States Constitution, is to be one vote to repeal the unconstitutional Obamacare.

Economy: All candidates scored the maximum in this category. It is obvious that every candidate is solid when it comes to economics. Each candidate favors lower taxes, or the fair tax, and less regulation.

Taxes: (See Economy above.)

Conservative Values (Abortion, Traditional Marriage, 2^nd Amendment): All candidates are solid on life and marriage issues. Its their understanding and knowledge of the 2^nd Amendment that is confusing. The United States Constitution tells the Federal government what it CAN do; the Bill of Rights (Amendments) tell the Federal government what it CAN'T do. The 2^nd Amendment tells the Federal government it CAN'T infringe the right of the people to bear arms. It is a negative to the Federal government and it does not bestow upon the citizenry any right to bear arms.

Several candidates state they will protect our 2^nd Amendment rights or infer that we have a right to bear arms. This is a complete lack of understanding of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Is there no government that is authorized to restrict the right of a blind man to duck hunt or the criminally insane to carry concealed? As a US Congressman from the 9^th District of Georgia the only policy the candidate can possibly guarantee is that they will never vote to repeal the 2^nd Amendment.

Defense: The number one constitutional obligation of a United States Congressman from the 9^th District of Georgia is to maintain a strong national defense in order to secure and protect the liberties of the people. It is one of the primary reasons the Founding Fathers formed the United States. The candidate was downgraded if they did not address Defense.

Immigration: All the candidates voluntarily updated their platforms on this issue. All are strongly opposed to amnesty and have differing thoughts on the solution to the problem. It is the constitutional responsibility of a US Congressman from the 9^th District of Georgia to develop policy that fits within the expectation of their constituency.

Constitution: Five of the candidates were downgraded in this category, because they advocate an issue which is outside their job description as it applies to the United States Constitution. Generally it was health care and/or the 2^nd Amendment.

States Rights: The Founding Fathers envisioned a Federal government where states are sovereign entities. Our Founders bequeathed almost unlimited powers to the states and thus empowered State Representatives, State Senators and Governor's unfettered dominion over the health and welfare of the people. The Founders purposefully limited the power of Congress and ratified the 10^th Amendment to the Constitution. The candidates were downgraded if they indicated a desire to interfere in a state issue. Case in point: Lake Lanier is not a Federal government issue it is a state issue.

CONCLUSION

If you feel the Constitution reflects the best way forward to protect the Liberties of the people in the State of Georgia and to ensure a free and prosperous society, then I suggest you ask the candidate to clarify their positions. This election is so critical to this nation and most importantly to our families. We only get one vote on our behalf in Congress, let's make sure it is the right person. Thank you ...

Ranking the Georgia 9th District Candidates on Job Knowledge and Constitutionality

Jones is no longer running.

The field of GOP candidates for the 9th Congressional District is strong and vibrant this year. Still there are differences between their positions if you look at it closely. The above chart is an objective scoring analysis to achieve a ranking on the Constitutionality of the Candidates positions and their overall understanding of their job description as a member of Congress. Once again I only rated the candidates I.A.W. their perceived understanding of the job of Congressman from the 9th District. The higher the score the better; a perfect score is 15. Use this as tool to form your opinion and I'll be updating this as May 11th approaches. Obviously there may be additional perceived values you have of each candidate or dislikes about another. Below is a breakdown of each category.

Health care: The correct answer in this category is; “I will be one vote in Congress to repeal Obamacare.” Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution does not empower the Federal government to interfere in a citizens health care decisions. If Obamacare is unconstitutional then what makes Cates, Graves, Hawkins, and Stephens health care reform proposals constitutional? Nothing. Reese is less specific, but Loftman, Jones, and Tarvin either address health care constitutionally or not at all. If a candidate demonstrated a constitutional understanding of health care they received the highest score; no mention slightly lower. All unconstitutional understanding of health care received a negative score in Constitution line item. Again the best answer for health care is; “I will be one vote in Congress to repeal Obamacare”.

Economy: The correct answer in this category is; “Lower Taxes, Fair Tax, Less Regulation.” All the candidates were particularly strong in this category reflecting an understanding of the Austrian School of Economics, which is basic Conservatism. The only reason Jones is slightly lower, because he does not specifically and categorically state Lower Taxes and Less Regulation. Again the correct answer is; “Lower Taxes, Fair Tax, Less Regulation.”

Taxes: (See Economy above.)

Conservative Values (Abortion, Traditional Marriage, 2nd Amendment): The correct answer is; “Pro Life, Traditional Marriage, I will not vote to repeal the 2nd Amendment.” The candidate received no score if no mention was made in this category. The 2nd Amendment category was particularly incoherent among the candidates, which tells me many don't understand the concept of the 2nd Amendment. There is no right by any individual to own a gun, the only thing the 2nd Amendment applies to is that the Federal government can't infringe on our right to bear arms. If there was no mention of the 2nd Amendment the candidate was scored highly, because the only thing a Congressman from the 9th District is to guarantee they will not vote to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Loftman's constitutionally correct explanation earned him a high score. Again the correct answer is; “Pro Life, Traditional Marriage, I will not vote to repeal the 2nd Amendment.”

Defense: The correct answer is; “It is my constitutional obligation, my job, to maintain a strong national defense in order to protect the liberties of the people.” Curiously few of the candidates actually addressed this issue when it is the fundamental responsibility in the job description of a United States Congressman from the 9th District. The correct answer is; “It is my constitutional obligation, my job, to maintain a strong national defense in order to protect the liberties of the people.”

Immigration: The correct answer is; “Immigration must conform to the will of the people and I will vote accordingly.” This is a very difficult issue and I suspect the reason only three candidates addressed the issue. The Constitution delegated the power of immigration to the states. Yet the Supreme Court in 1875 ruled that the regulation of immigration was a power of the Federal government, which created all the problems we have to date. The Federal Government has tried quota systems, skill based immigration, preferred ethnicities, race and gender bias, and preferential treatments. What a mess. In the end, it is by the “Will of the People” to approve or disapprove of legislation through their 9th District Representative. Candidates that expressed a desire to protect the borders were given a high score, because that seems to be what the people actually want. The correct answer is; “Immigration must conform to the will of the people and I will vote accordingly.”

Constitution: I created this category to specifically grade candidates on their understanding and intention to follow the Constitution while serving in office. Cates, Graves, Reese, Hawkins, and Stephens were scored negatively due to their expressed intentions to interfere in the citizens health care decisions. Jones received a negative for his desire for a Federally funded Mag Lev rail from Atlanta to Chattanooga. President James Madison even vetoed a bill that included a canal system. The Constitution does not empower the Federal government to build mass transit systems. These are particularly egregious , because they espouse clear violations of the Constitution outside their authority as a US Congressman from the 9th District.

States Rights: I created this category to further explore whether the candidates understand the relationship between the State of Georgia and the Federal government. Reese and Hawkin's were downgraded because it is apparent they don't understand that every drop of water in Lake Lanier is none of the Federal governments business. It is a states rights issue and the business only of Georgia. Jones was downgraded because of the Mag Lev train issue. A double downgrade for this particularly bad stand on the issue.

CONCLUSION

The candidates will take a stand on the issues and are free to change their positions going forward. If you feel the Constitution reflects the best way forward to protect the liberties of the people in the State of Georgia to ensure a free and prosperous society then I suggest you ask the candidate to clarify their positions. This election is so critical to this nation and most importantly to our families. We only get to put one vote in Congress, let's make sure it is the right person or we have only ourselves to blame. Thank you ...

Convene the Article V Convention

SAMPLE LETTER
(feel free to use this template)

TO: The Honorable Representatives of the State of Georgia
Senators of the Great State of Georgia

Dear Sir/Madam,

The purpose of this letter is to urge the Georgia State Legislator to introduce a Bill to announce its intentions to attend an Article V Convention. On January 2, 1788 John Wereat as President and delegate for Richmond County along with 25 other delegates ratified the United States Constitution in the City of Augusta on behalf of Georgia. In the United States Constitution our founding fathers protected the states by providing them the ability to Amend the United States Constitution with requests by two thirds of the states. Application by thirty-four (34) states automatically convenes the Article V Convention even if the United States Congress under Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) refuses to convene that Convention.

Article V states;

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

There are thirty-nine states initiating lawsuits1 against the Federal government for the recently passed health care reform H.R. 4872 Health Care and Educational Affordability Reconciliation Act 2010 (Obamacare); thirty-eight (38) states are required to ratify an Amendment. At the Article V Convention the states can Amend the United States Constitution to prohibit Obamacare in perpetuity. I also suggest that the 16th and 17th Amendments be repealed. The 16th Amendment is the Income Tax2 a Progressive Republican initiative shoved down America's throat under Woodrow Wilson's Democratic Congress – sound familiar? The 17th Amendment removed the last protection for the states when Senate elections were switched to popular vote versus appointment by State Legislatures.

The encroachment of the Federal government (Leviathan) over the past 100 years transcends political boundaries – the Leviathan will torment and abuse Democrats and Republicans alike. The Leviathan does not discriminate; black and white, rich and poor, young and old, people of all faiths will be equally abused without remorse. Unless we, the citizens of Georgia, protect ourselves this Leviathan will destroy Georgia families and lead to heart-break and the destruction of the individual. These are moral and fiscal dilemmas we can no longer ignore.

If you add the $500M unfunded mandates from Obamacare to SCHIP, Medicaid, Welfare, No Child Left Behind, and other programs, it is simply unsustainable. They are crushing state budgets and re directing money for infra-structure development, education, the environment, and other services into the black hole of entitlement spending. There is simply not enough wealth within the State of Georgia to pay for all of these unfunded mandates without tax hikes that destroy jobs and families.

I urge all of you on a bi-partisan basis to pass a bill and join other states to convene and attend an Article V Convention to protect your family, my family, all our families in the great State of Georgia. If you don't draw a line in the sand against this Leviathan it will result in the impoverishment of everyone in this state.

Please pass a bill. Notify Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Harry Reid (D-NV) that you intend to draw a line in the sand against the Leviathan.

Best Regards,

ConservativeAnchor

See Attachment for Email Addresses of all Georgia State Representatives and Senators

https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AWNSvjZ7qkmDZGdna2Z0MzhfNGNxbnJmNmdq&hl=en

A Case for Smaller Government

Rasmussen Reports released a survey on February 5, 2010 indicating that 58% of the American public supports cutting the size and scope of government. Over half, 51%, of the American public support cutting the salaries of non-military government employees. In the face of this overwhelming evidence there are politicians claiming that Georgians want government services. Nathan Deal (R) candidate for Georgia governor made this statement at the January 19, 2010 Republican candidates debate at the University of Georgia; John Oxendine (R) candidate for Georgia governor made the same statement at the Cherokee Womens GOP Forum on February 17, 2010. There is a simple reason these men make such a claim – those who sit at the top of big government are able to grab more power. This power enables them to reward their friends and political cronies. I can prove my claim with a simple explanation of the Chart below.

Figure 1

Figure 1 above is an illustration of the true health of our economy. An unhealthy economy erodes our purchasing power and destroys the value of our savings. The blue line tracks the performance of the 10 year Treasury Note Yield and the yellow line Gold spot prices. Treasury Yields are a barometer of the health of the United States economy; Gold measures the future outlook for money. A lower Yield indicates high demand for the United States dollar; higher Yields means the government must offer higher Yields to attract buyers of our debt. Gold prices rising mean people would rather hold this commodity than dollar based investments.

The two troughs in the Yield curve illustrate an economy healing. By November 2004 the impact of the dot.com bust, 9/11, and Iraq War caused people to save and spend less. Likewise, starting in 2007 Yields began to fall due to the credit crunch and a slowing economy. Yields fell to 2.32% by December 2008 because people and government stopped spending and increased savings. Savings are good. It is required to provide investment capital for businesses to grow and create jobs.

The peaks in the Yield curve indicate periods of rapid growth in spending (debt) by government. Yields started up shortly after the Medicare Prescription Drug Act (2003)1 and the Homeland Security Act came into law. Both bills increased spending and grew government faster and larger than any other previous Congress in United States history. The Medicare Prescription Drug Act is a $16.1 trillion unfunded mandate and The Department of Homeland Security costs US taxpayers ~$58.0 billion per year -- massive spending and bureaucracy. You think rational people would have stopped at this juncture. Not true!

In October 2008 the Bush Administration, Hank Paulsen and Ben Bernanke, presented to the nation the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 or Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)2 and insisted without passage world economies would collapse. Nothing could be further from the truth. TARP was a pay-off to political cronies at the expense of the American people.

Ben Bernanke funded TARP by going to a Bond broker and writing a check for ~$700 billion. Ben Bernanke created $700 billion dollars out of thin air and Hank Paulsen turned this newly created money over to Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs did not stash this cash in a vault, they turned it over, continued lending, cleared counter party trades, and generally used the non-inflated value of this currency to boost its profits. By the time this money filtered down into the economy, inflation destroyed its original value. The only people that benefited were the politically connected. The election of Barack Hussein Obama changed nothing.

On February 17, 2009 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009, better known as “Stimulus”, was signed into law. Ben Bernanke for the second time in six months went to a Bond broker and wrote another check for $789 billion. Ben Bernanke created $789 billion out of thin air. This money is flowing down to the states to fund public union constituencies. $1.5 trillion … that is $1,500,000,000,000 of savings/capital that was transformed into debt that could otherwise been used to invest in plant, capital, and equipment to create jobs. The result is rising 10 year Note Yields.

Treasury Yields are creeping up precisely because government is spending/creating money thereby causing inflation and destroying the dollar. From January 2009 to September 2010 (fcst.) the dollar has fallen 54.69%. The value of your savings, retirement accounts, 401K's, etc, has fallen 54.69%.

The proof is the value of Gold. Gold is up 322% since the election of G.W. Bush as President and his decade of massive government spending. There is no end in site with the election of Barack Hussein Obama as President. It is not going to stop as more-and-more Americans are purposely forced on to welfare rolls by Federal government policies that impoverish our nation. Both Democrats and Republicans are to blame at the State and Federal level.

The only way we can combat the impoverishment of our families is to elect a Governor, State Representatives, and State Senators that will slash state government and put up as many roadblocks as possible in front of the Federal government. Georgia State government must be slashed, spending on welfare, Medicaid, SCHIP, and Medicare must be reconciled; salaries of state workers cut, state union pension plans renegotiated, and as much money as possible returned to the citizens of this state to be saved and invested.

If we fail to elect the right people in Georgia, we will continue to be impoverished by corrupt politicians and a Federal government that is destroying the dollar and the economy.

1. Nathan Deal (R-9th) and Senators Johnny Isakson and Chambliss of Georgia voted YEA.

2. Senators Johnny Isakson and Chambliss of Georgia voted YEA.

Book Review: Who Killed the Constitution?

Murder I tell you ... it's murder.

Who Killed the Constitution? The Federal Government vs. American Liberty from World War 1 to Barack Obama. By Thomas E. Woods Jr and Kevin R. C. Gutzman. Three Rivers Press; 202 pages; $10.20. Buy from Amazon.com.

Its death was ingloriously slow that only a few men know to cry. Thomas E. Woods Jr, Senior Fellow of the Mises Institute and Kevin R. C. Gutzman, Professor History Western Connecticut State University, lay out the evidence in a remarkably easy to read book proving once and for all that the United States Constitution is dead. The authors offer no finger pointing at Democrats or Republicans, left or right, they provide twelve "The Dirty Dozen" examples of Supreme Court decisions (Judicial Branch), Presidential abuses (Executive Branch), and Congressional excess (Legislative Branch), that "bear no resemblance to what the Constitution's ratifiers intended, and in fact run directly counter to the plain text of the Constitution"1. This they argue is the key to understanding that the United States Constitution is dead.

Of course, the American people are occasionally treated to a crumb of liberty. On October 19, 2009, David W. Ogden, Deputy Attorney General, United States issued a Memorandum stating;

"As a general matter, pursuit of these priorities should not focus
federal resources in your States on individuals whose
actions are in clear and unambiguous compliance with existing
state laws providing for the medical use of marijuana."

The 2009 memorandum repudiates a Supreme Court decision in Gonzales v. Raich (2004), whereby the Justices erroneously used the Commerce Clause (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3) to usurp California State sovereignty and deny Ms. Raich her right to use medical marijuana. Ms. Raich would die from complications of bromyalgia, seizures, nausea, and an inoperable brain tumor without the aid of medical marijuana. No one should be deluded to think that David Ogden is interested in Ms. Raich's medical situation, but his Memorandum is extremely important from a Constitutional perspective. The 2009 Memorandum recognizes California's sovereign right to regulate marijuana for medical purposes -- Federalism. The 10th Amendment states;

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Federal government was not granted any powers to regulate medical marijuana by the original framers and ratifiers of the United States Constitution. Likewise, the ratifiers and the framers did not intend for the Commerce Clause to be interpreted by the Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Raich (2004) to limit state sovereignty.

Messrs Woods and Gutzman note that the death of the Constitution is not partisan. The authors point out that John Taylor of Caroline noted,

"the problem is not the character of members of one party or the other, one section of the country or the other, but the effect of power on the human ego, regardless of party or section. People in power exercise all the power they can get, even after they have howled in the wilderness against legislating judges, imperial president, and the death of states' rights." 2

The spectre of the United States Constitution can still be of value. The authors suggest that we call attention to the Constitution and alert our friends, family, and the young people how dramatically their fundamental rights have been betrayed.

This book is fascinating, well written, and academic. It should interest anyone with a keen interest in Constitutional history and good ole fashioned Who Dunnit's.

1 Page 199, Paragraph One
2 Page 201, Last Paragraph

Newsflash Obama wins 2010 Green Jacket

Augusta (Golf Channel) - President Obama was awarded the 2010 Green Jacket after being awarded Master's Champion. Golfers worldwide were shocked that the Championship was played in October 2009 with only one qualifying golfer. Obama commented on the Green Jacket saying; "What's for dinner next year - watermelon?"

The Master's selection committee commented on the award saying; "It was a small that fit no one else."