PDA

View Full Version : Kudos to Mark Levin on phony balanced budget amendment!



johnwk
11-19-2011, 01:15 PM
I was pleasantly surprised to hear Mark Levin, on his Friday show, express his rejection of the phony balanced budget amendment and giving his support to the four Republicans who voted against it. My disappointment with Mark on this issue is his failure to associate our founder’s expressed intentions to have the rule of apportionment applied when dealing with deficits should they occur, and how the rule of apportionment would make each State’s Congressional Delegation immediately accountable if Congress spent more than is brought in from its normal means of raising a federal revenue, which would trigger the apportioned tax among the States to extinguish the shortfall:

States’ population

---------------------------- X DEFICIT = STATE’S OBLIGATION

Total U.S. Population

This rule of apportionment for any general tax among the States was intended to cure an evil of democracy under which 51 percent of a nation’s population use their vote to tax away the property of the remaining 49 percent of the population. It was also intended to create a very real moment of accountability if Congress spent more than was brought in from imposts, duties and excise taxes.

It would be music to my ears and every “constitutional conservative” to hear Mark Levin use his God given verbal skills to articulate the threat and consequences each State’s Congressional Delegation would be working under while in Washington, D.C., and spending federal revenue, if the rule of apportionment were once again applied ___ especially the threat of each State’s very own Treasury hanging in the balance and would be depleted whenever a State’s Congressional Delegation returned home with a bill to extinguish an annual deficit.

And I’m sure Mark Levin would be able to articulate far better than I can how States with large pinko Congressional Delegations such as California, New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey who now pretty much control spending from the federal treasury and are quite happy to vote for every progressive giveaway program because there are no consequences in the process, would suddenly have their Congressional Delegation returning home with a bill in hand for their State’s Legislature to pay an apportioned share of the pork their Congressional Delegation purchased while in Washington.

I would also love to hear Mark Levin use his God given gift to articulate the consequences if a State’s Legislature refused to pay their State‘s apportioned fair share to extinguish a deficit or were delinquent in paying it on time, under which circumstances Congress would be required to enter the State and collect the amount due with (for example) a direct tax upon the real and personal property within the State. And if the owners of said property did not pay the tax due, then their property would be put up for a tax sale and the good news is, our California limousine riding, tofu-eating liberals will quickly come to their senses!

Put this rule of apportionment back into operation and the evil of democracy under which our nation now suffers (representation without proportional financial obligation) will be corrected, and Congress will once again be the servants of the people and not their masters which is what our founding fathers intended!

Mark Levin, please don’t let us down! Rise to the occasion and use your God given talent, and defend the clear thinking of our founding fathers!

JWK

“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”, no longer in print.

DragonStryk72
11-19-2011, 08:28 PM
Should we just start posting links to all the other times we've had this talk, John? Seriously, when is it going to sink in that no one, on either side of the line on this site, backs this idiocy of yours? Use all the big words you want, but unless you can disprove any of the points against your tax plan for ALL of the previous threads where we've shot you down, this is just more spinning of the tires.

Do you just enjoy being shot down again and again on the same point?

johnwk
11-20-2011, 02:07 PM
SEE: Mark Levin on the phony balanced budget amendment (http://www.marklevinshow.com/Article.asp?id=2337819&spid=32345):

``On Friday's Mark Levin Show: Mark says that he's happy the balanced budget amendment didn't pass the House because it was a fraud. If you actually read the bill, it didn't do what many phony Republicans said it would do - and it would only increase spending and further put us into debt. Speaker Boehner has abandoned his pledge to cut, cap and balance. And because of this, the American people will continue to suffer. Also, some politicians believe that they have the power to seize whatever funds they want from you to fund it's insatiable appetite. Finally, Rick Santorum calls in and talks about his Republican presidential bid.``

And let us not forget that Boehner was all in favor of, and at the singing of, the unconstitutional No Child Left Behind Act, the funding of which is now used by the federal government to blackmail the States into submission! Take a look at John, cry-baby-face Boehner with a BIG FAT GRIN ON HIS FACE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Child_Left_Behind_Act) when he joined hands with progressives and RINOs in the adoption of this usurpation of power.

JWK

Solyndra is not “crony capitalism“! It was a swindle and plundering of our federal treasury from the very beginning.

DragonStryk72
11-20-2011, 06:07 PM
So, in other words, you're going to go for ignoring me. Nice.

johnwk
11-21-2011, 08:44 AM
Why is it that not one “Republican” in Congress supports our founding father’s intended method to deal with annual deficits using the apportioned tax among the States?

Picture for a moment California’s pinko Congressional Delegation returning home with a bill to pay for all the pork it purchased while in Washington and handing it to the governor and legislature to pay from the State‘s Treasury. And then imagine when the State of California refuses to pay its apportioned share and then an across the board tax is laid upon the people’s real and personal property in the State and all the California limousine riding, tofu-eating liberals are assessed and taxed on their accumulated real and personal property and they finally get to pay for all the “progressive social federal programs ” they say they are in favor of.

I suspect there would be millions of “fiscal conservatives” born overnight in California, and the occupation in Washington D.C. by “progressives“ would come to an abrupt end, especial progressives in Congress who now masquerade as Republicans and dominate the Republican Party Leadership!

Too bad we cannot find one loyal and patriotic member in Congress to introduce the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment as a proposed amendment to our Constitution.

The Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment

“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money

NOTE: these words would end the progressive’s occupation of America which began in 1913 with the 16th Amendment and federal taxes calculated from “incomes”, and return us to our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN (http://townshipnews.org/?p=1360) as they intended it to operate!

"SECTION 2. Congress ought not raise money by borrowing, but when the money arising from imposts duties and excise taxes are insufficient to meet the public exigencies, and Congress has raised money by borrowing during the course of a fiscal year, Congress shall then lay a direct tax at the beginning of the next fiscal year for an amount sufficient to extinguish the preceding fiscal year's deficit, and apply the revenue so raised to extinguishing said deficit."

NOTE: Congress is to raise its primary revenue from imposts and duties, [taxes at our water’s edge], and may also lay miscellaneous internal excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption. But if Congress borrows and spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes during the course of a fiscal year, then, and only then, is the apportioned tax to be laid.

"SECTION 3. When Congress is required to lay a direct tax in accordance with Section 1 of this Article, the Secretary of the United States Treasury shall, in a timely manner, calculate each State's apportioned share of the total sum being raised by dividing its total population size by the total population of the united states and multiplying that figure by the total being raised by Congress, and then provide the various State Congressional Delegations with a Bill notifying their State’s Executive and Legislature of its share of the total tax being collected and a final date by which said tax shall be paid into the United States Treasury."

NOTE: our founder’s fair share formula to extinguish a deficit would be:

States’ population

---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S SHARE

Total U.S. Population

This formula, as intended by our founding fathers, is to insure that those states who contribute the lion’s share of the tax are guaranteed a representation in Congress proportionately equal to their contribution, i.e., representation with proportional obligation!

"SECTION 4. Each State shall be free to assume and pay its quota of the direct tax into the United States Treasury by a final date set by Congress, but if any State shall refuse or neglect to pay its quota, then Congress shall send forth its officers to assess and levy such State's proportion against the real property within the State with interest thereon at the rate of ((?)) per cent per annum, and against the individual owners of the taxable property. Provision shall be made for a 15% discount for those States paying their share by ((?))of the fiscal year in which the tax is laid, and a 10% discount for States paying by the final date set by Congress, such discount being to defray the States' cost of collection."

NOTE: This section respects the Tenth Amendment and allows each state to raise its share in its own chosen way in a time period set by Congress, but also allows the federal government to enter a state and collect the tax if a state is delinquent in meeting its obligation.

"SECTION 5. This Amendment to the Constitution, when ratified by the required number of States, shall take effect no later than (?) years after its ratification.

Now, why is it that our “conservative” talk show hosts [Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Doc Thompson, Neal Boortz. Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, etc.,] neglect to ever mention our founding father's intended method to deal with deficits which is already part of our Constitution and simply being ignored?

JWK

"In matters of Power, let no more be heard of confidence in men, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution"--- Jefferson

DragonStryk72
11-21-2011, 03:02 PM
Why is it that not one “Republican” in Congress supports our founding father’s intended method to deal with annual deficits using the apportioned tax among the States?

Because it doesn't work. Read every other thread you've posted on this topic for the reasons why.