The South Florida Water Management District Governing Board faces a defining vote at its meeting this week, one that could bring the agency to the fiscal brink and force an increase in property taxes for homeowners in the 16 counties that make up the district.

Two weeks ago, the district’s financial adviser gave the agency a dire forecast if it proceeds with the planned purchase of land owned by U.S. Sugar, which, despite what you’ve heard, would do little to advance the important goal of Everglades restoration. Still, the board appears determined to approve this sweetheart deal, no matter that the purchase would create operating deficits of $89 million and $110 million in each of the next two years.

The board’s financial adviser says significant cuts will be needed in the operations and maintenance budgets for current projects essential to the district’s mission. To make ends meet, the board will likely have to raise property taxes. No matter the red flags, the district’s unelected board is stacked to approve this deal, which was negotiated in secret by big-money special interests in Tallahassee.

Last week, in making two new appointments to the South Florida Water Management District board, Gov. Crist told the St. Petersburg Times that he applied a “litmus test:” assurance that the new members would vote to approve the purchase. Predictably, both new members are on record as supporting the deal.

As I’ve said from the start, the U.S. Sugar deal represents bad public policy. I was the sponsor of the bill to authorize bond sales for Everglades restoration, as well as legislation that created the Florida Forever land preservation program. But if completed, the U.S. Sugar purchase will swallow the district’s budget for years, and prevent progress on other water-supply measures identified as priorities, including the reservoir, pollution-treatment marshes and flood-control protections around Lake Okeechobee.

So, while this project is being sold as Everglades restoration, it would delay actual restoration efforts by using needed money for land acquisition, while U.S. Sugar would retain the more significant tracts in the natural flow-way. Making matters worse, the deal would give U.S. Sugar an exclusive right to lease back the acreage at below-market rates for 20 years.

I’m asking board Chairman Eric Buermann to be forthcoming about the consequences, including tax increases that will be needed and opportunities that will be lost. Continuing to pursue this purchase is not just fiscally irresponsible; it is nothing short of reckless.

SEN. PAULA DOCKERY

Lakeland

Editor’s note: Paula Dockery represents Florida Senate District 15. She is a Republican candidate for governor.

Senate President Jeff Atwater tapped Sen. J.D. Alexander to chair the Ethics & Elections Committee now that Sen. John Thrasher stepped down once he became head of the Republican Party of Florida. Atwater spokeswoman Jaryn Emhof said Atwater chose Alexander, who was chair last year, because he was already on the committee. That way, she said, the president wouldn’t have to tap someone from another committee and start a domino effect of “shuffling people around” from one committee to the next.

One of those people who wanted to be shuffled: Sen. Paula Dockery,  wrote Atwater earlier today:

This letter serves as a notification of my desire to serve as chair of the Senate Ethics & Elections Committee, in addition to my current chairmanship of the Criminal Justice Committee. The people of Florida are rightfully demanding substantial ethics reforms. The chairperson that you select for this committee will be in a position to truly listen to the people and begin the restoration of the public trust.

I have been emphasizing this need for the past three years and have researched changes that would restore the integrity of our beloved institution, and my sincere desire to use my leadership skills for this critical purpose, as well as my record on transparency and open government makes me the logical candidate for the job.

Thank you in advance for your careful consideration in this matter.

Interestingly enough Senator Dockery has been the only one calling for Ethics Reform in the state legislature.  J. D. Alexander refused to remove himself from the Sun Rail vote, even though he stood to benefit financially from the vote.  His recently acquired company Phoenix Industries in Winter Haven is located adjacent to the CSX rail line.  The company specializes in Rail to Truck transportation, Cold and Perishable Storage.

The way I see J.D.’s appointment is simple.  It’s a classic case of a FOX WATCHING THE HEN HOUSE! Not to mention the Sun Rail connection between Jeff Atwater and J.D. Alexander, but then again seems as if it’s business as usual in Tallahassee.

Charlie Crist & Marco Rubio

Marco Rubio’s latest campaign email hits Governor Crist on “Trust”.  It’s titled Oh, you can trust Charlie Crst…   Snip it of email is below

“Miami, FL – Lately, Governor Charlie Crist has seized on a new campaign buzz word: “trust,” which U.S. Senate candidate Marco Rubio has long insisted is what this election is all about – who Floridians can trust to go to Washington, stand up to the Obama-Reid-Pelosi agenda, and offer a clear alternative.

According to the Miami Herald, “Crist used the loaded word at least a dozen times in a 10-minute speech at a breakfast in Miami hosted by the Christian Family Coalition, an offshoot of the well-known Christian Coalition.” (Miami Herald, 2/27/10)

“Florida voters can trust Charlie Crist alright…to raise taxes, embrace Barack Obama on the stimulus and health care, and be completely untrustworthy on mainstream Republican values,” said Rubio for Senate spokesman Alex Burgos.  “Marco Rubio has said all along this race is about trust – it’s about who Floridians trust to go to Washington, stand up on principle to the current misguided agenda, and offer a clear alternative.

“Marco’s record and deeds prove he’s the only one in this race who can be trusted to do this, whereas Charlie Crist has proven time and time again he can only be trusted to stand with the big government, big spending agenda that is threatening America’s future.”

With Rubio in the center of Credit Card Gate one has to wonder about voters “TRUSTING” him as well.  Several sources pointed out that Rubio has other purchases that were made but put on other RPOF AMEX cardholder’s card.

While Speaker of the House Rubio had many opportunities to introduce legislation curtailing illegal immigration yet never did.  As for Rubio’s statement that voters can trust Crist to raise taxes and embrace the stimulus, isn’t this the pot calling the kettle black?  Rubio, you did after all say that you would accept stimulus funds as well or did you forget this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNg4gvWtAE8

When it comes to trusting Rubio or Crist voters are going to be left holding the bag.  At least Bob Smith is shooting straight these days and not double-talking.

Bill Posey

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Bill Posey (R-Rockledge) delivered the following statement today before the House Budget Committee regarding closing the human space flight gap and keeping America first in space:

“Chairman Spratt, Ranking Member Ryan, Members of the Committee:

“Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.  You have likely already heard a great deal about the President’s FY 2011 budget request for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).  Today, I appear before this Committee to ask that the Committee provide NASA with sufficient resources to continue Shuttle operations through at least Fiscal Year 2011, sufficiently fund Constellation and see that the space gap between the two is minimized.  I am here to tell you why this is the wisest policy.

“The plan for human space flight, as outlined by the Administration, is significantly lacking in detail and appears to have been developed with little or no coordination with public and private stakeholders.

“One glaring example is NASA’s announced decision to seek termination of the Constellation program.  This decision will adversely impact our nation’s solid-rocket-motor industrial base, which is critical to our military. In a report from last June to the Congress, the Air Force said that delays in the Constellation program could have significant negative impact on the industrial base.  When questioned about this issue last week, Air Force Secretary Donley testified that “we have a challenge on the solid-rocket-motor industrial base and on the booster industrial base.”

“NASA is making the decision in a vacuum, and does not fully understand, or at least obviously does not take into consideration, the much broader military, industrial, and economic implications. The plan, and I use that term lightly, demands considerably more discussion and public scrutiny.  I am very concerned that they continue to develop this plan “on the fly” and that it is irresponsible for the Congress to embrace it without considerably more input from all the stakeholders.

“Over the course of the last year we lost precious time in charting a course for the future for our nation’s human space flight program. NASA remained without an Administrator for much of the year, and NASA was essentially placed on hold as the Augustine Committee undertook a review of our nation’s human space flight program.  All the while NASA continued to approach the impending retirement of the Shuttle fleet.  Over the years, the Constellation program continued to be underfunded.

“The Augustine Committee report made clear what many of us already knew:  If America is to have a robust space exploration program it must have a budget to match it.  That, my friends, is the essential question before you and this Congress. Are we going to continue to have a robust space program and continue on the path forged by John F. Kennedy? Or, are we going to return to the days of Sputnik, when the United States took a back seat to space exploration. Are we going to cede space to Russia and China? Apollo 7 astronaut Walter Cunningham recently said that the Administration’s proposal “accelerates America’s downward spiral toward mediocrity in space exploration.”

“I think Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. Senator Harrison Schmitt summarized it best last week when he wrote that this proposal “would cede the Moon to China, the American Space Station to Russia, and assign liberty to the ages.  Other [nations] would accrue the benefits –psychological, political, economic, and scientific – that the United States harvested as a consequence of Apollo’s success 40 years ago. This lesson has not been lost on our ideological and economic competitors.

“It is my sincere hope that it will not be lost on this Congress either.  This Committee is the one that will take the first step regarding the President’s NASA budget.  I urge you, my colleagues, to think about the future we are building for our children and grandchildren. Will it be a future where we do mediocre things or will it be one where we embark to accomplish bold things?

“Some have suggested that this is a question of jobs. That is true. The lives of tens of thousands of Americans will be disrupted if the Administration’s proposal is adopted.  There will be 10,000 direct jobs and according to a recent economic impact assessment as many as 23,000 jobs will be lost – almost immediately – in my district and that of Rep Suzanne Kosmas to my north.  We are still waiting on a current NASA Workforce Transition Strategy report.  The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 requires NASA to produce this strategy every six months; the last one Congress received is from July of 2009.  This is further evidence of a failure to plan for the future and follow Congressional intent.  We need a better landing and a smoother transition for our nation’s premier space launch workforce.  This is a highly skilled workforce that cannot be replaced, and will be lost if we travel down the proposed path.

“Space exploration touches the life of every American.  Our space program has generated thousands of inventions and spinoffs that have translated directly into the creation of tens of thousands of jobs right here in America.  If we accept the Administration’s plan, we will be abandoning a robust space program.  They may protest that it is not abandonment, but that is exactly what it is.  And, as a result we will lose these future benefits, and we will see China, Russia, India and others become the beneficiaries of a robust and superior space program.

“Countless products in our homes, offices, cars and airplanes owe their existence or widespread use to space exploration. Yet we often take for granted cell phones, GPS, carbon monoxide detectors, Velcro, lithium batteries, and advanced weather forecasting, just to name a few.  We will be compromising advanced micro-gravity research.  It is no doubt that our space  program leads to cutting edge, high-skilled jobs and inspires the leaders of tomorrow to study Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fields.  Among great human achievements, space exploration is inspiring in a way like no other.

“Under the current plan, NASA is betting our nations’ entire space program on yet unproven commercial vendors.  I am very supportive of commercial, but I am concerned about sole reliance on entrepreneurs for the short-term.  NASA has taken the mistaken step of once again putting Russia in the critical path for our research on the International Space Station.   We saw how this almost jeopardized the ISS from the very outset and raised the cost of the ISS.

“The Committee should also be aware that retiring the Shuttle will generate far less in savings that what has generally been believed.  This is due to several factors.  By abandoning the Shuttle prior to fulfilling our commitments to fly foreign astronauts to the ISS through 2020, NASA will incur hundreds of millions in costs associated with purchasing seats for foreign astronauts on Russian vehicles – a price Russian Space Agency officials just said they would raise once they are the only game in town.  Also, hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure costs will not turn into savings as many assume, but rather those costs will continue to recur but from an accounting perspective will be assigned to another account.

“According to the Augustine Committee, and information I have received from NASA, the annual cost of flying the Shuttle may cost up to about $1.3 billion for two flights per year. However, that cost can be cut significantly based on discussions with the contractors who currently operate the Shuttle for NASA.  I would ask the Committee provide sufficient funding to allow up to two shuttle flights in Fiscal Year 2011 for the many reasons I have outlined for you. Thus, for a budget equal to a fraction of one percent of the stimulus, we can extend the Shuttle for one year and provide a smoother transition for our nation’s space program and tens of thousands of dedicated workers.

“Furthermore, although the Shuttle’s current manifest includes four remaining launches, NASA needs to act now to assure that even these missions are completed.  NASA’s current, inflexible policy on flying the Shuttle beyond calendar year 2010 jeopardizes the last scheduled Shuttle mission, which would transport the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) to ISS.  It is my understanding that this mission may not be ready until spring of 2011, beyond NASA’s arbitrary deadline.  Fully funding Shuttle operations through FY 2011 will not only provide for smoother transition, but it will ensure that our commitments to our international partners regarding the AMS are fully met.  Absent the Shuttle, there is no means of getting AMS to the ISS. Let’s also remember that Endeavor just completed its 24th mission.  It was designed for 100 missions.

“In addition to extending Shuttle operations, the Committee should provide sufficient funding to continue with the Constellation program. It makes little sense to abandon Constellation given the investments already made and the termination costs estimated to be in the range of $2.5 billion.  We had a successful test flight of the Ares 1-X rocket in October and are building on that success.

“Congress must act today to save our space program. The plan presented by the Administration has gaping holes and is not ready for prime time.  They need to go back to the drawing board and the Congress needs to join with the voices of our nation’s space pioneers like Gene Cernan, the last human to walk on the moon, who said last week, “Now is the time for wiser heads in Congress to prevail. Now is the time to overrule…mediocrity.  Now is the time to be bold, innovative and wise in deciding how we invest in the future of America.”

“We have a come a long way since Alan Shepard became the first American in space in 1961.  I urge you, my colleagues, to work together to ensure that our 50 years of leadership in space is not abandoned. America is looking to us for leadership.”

Heinie Heinzelman

Below are the questions asked in our Liberty questionnaire that went to all Republican candidates for Congressional District 24 seat.  Only 2 have currently responded.  Mr. Heinie Heinzelman was the first to get back with me.  To visit his site and learn more about his campaign CLICK HERE

——————————

1. Will you cosponsor and call for roll call votes on the Audit the Fed bill, designed to bring transparency to the Federal Reserve (H.R. 1207/ S. 604 in the 111th Congress)?   YES

2. Will you support legislation removing capital gains and sales taxes on gold and silver coinage?  Yes

3. Will you vote to oppose any legislation that allows the federal government to prohibit the sale, use, or carrying of firearms?  YES-YES-YES

4. Will you support a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution that includes hard spending limits and allows for no increase in taxes or other federal revenue enhancements?  YES

5. Will you support legislation that forbids U.S. troops from serving under United Nations command?  YES

6. Do you support and will you vote to protect states asserting their rights under the Tenth Amendment?  ABSOLUTELY YES!

7. Will you oppose Big Labor’s Card Check bill and any other legislation designed to empower union bosses?  YES, AND GLADLY

8. Do you support U.S. withdrawal from the United Nations?   YES, YOU BETCHA

9. Will you support the American Sovereignty Act to restrict the Executive’s ability to forge international agreements that lessen our sovereignty?    Yes

10. Will you oppose using U.S. forces to occupy a foreign nation without a declaration of war?  Yes

11. Will you oppose any attempt to nationalize our health care system, including any sort of public option for insurance?  YES-YES-YES

12. Will you oppose so-called “Cap and Trade” legislation?   YES-YES-YES

13. Will you vote to eliminate the IRS?   YES, WITH THE FAIR TAX. (And put some of them on illegal immagration control)

14. Will you vote against any budget that increases our debt?  YES, AND GLADLY

15. Will you oppose federal power grabs like roving wiretaps and warrantless searches, and oppose Patriot Act renewal that includes such items?  NEED TO RESEARCH AND EVALUATE FURTHER.

16. Will you oppose any legislation that requires states and citizens to participate in a National Identification Card program?  YES

17. Will you oppose the so-called “NAFTA Superhighway” and any move toward a North American Union?  PROBABLY, BUT STILL REVIEWING

18. Will you support legislation that ensures Members of Congress have at least 72 hours to read any bill before it is allowed to come to the House floor?  NO–I PREFER 72 HOURS FOR UP TO 288 PAGES PLUS 15 MINUTES FOR EVERY PAGE OVER 288.

19. Will you oppose all tax increases?  YES

20. Indicate the tax cuts you are willing to vote for:
Across the Board Income Tax Cut   YES
Capital Gains Tax Cut   YES
Business Tax Cut  YES-YES-YES
Estate Tax Cut   YES

Alan Grayson

(WASHINGTON) – Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) today praised the implementation of the Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights (H.R. 627).  Rep. Grayson helped to shepherd this bill through the House Financial Services Committee, and then voted for it in the House.  It contains several strict protections for consumers, including banning unfair interest rate increases, and forbidding abusive fees and penalties by credit card companies.

Congressman Grayson said, “Credit card companies will no longer be able to stick it to middle-class families in Central Florida.  These huge banks charged exorbitant interest rates, and used gimmicks to burden people with unnecessary fees.  These reforms will help hard-working people pay off their debt.”

The so-called “Credit CARD Act” was signed into law on May 22, 2009, and takes effect this week.  A recent report by the Pew Charitable Trusts concluded that unfair or deceptive credit card practices hurt families badly before this important law was enacted.  For example, interest rates climbed an average of 20 percent in the first half of 2009, on credit cards representing more than 90 percent of outstanding balances.

As part of the new law, consumers are now given the right to refuse to accept rate hikes, and pay off existing credit card balances under the old rate. Credit card companies also are required to give 45 days’ notice of any rate increases on new purchases.  If a consumer receives notice of a rate hike, he or she can now simply ask the card company to reverse the rate hike and close the account.

Additional provisions of the Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights (H.R. 627):

·       Account statements must be sent 21 days in advance of the payment due date.

·       Interest rate hikes on balances are prohibited.

·       Penalty rate increases for payments less than 60 days overdue are banned.

·       Charging interest on debts paid on-time is banned.

·       “Due-date” gimmicks, such as setting morning times for payments before mail is delivered or charging fees for paying a bill by phone or internet, are banned.

·       Promotional rates must last at least six months.

·       A consumer under 21 must demonstrate an ability to pay, or have a parent co-sign, to be eligible for a credit card.

Bill Posey

MELBOURNE, FL – Congressman Bill Posey (R-Rockledge) provided the following testimony to the EPA regarding Florida’s water standards. The remarks were delivered on his behalf by his District Director:

“I want to take just a couple of minutes to express my concerns about the proposed regulations and how they would adversely impact our local businesses, our state’s critical agricultural community, and state and local government budgets.

“There is strong opposition to the proposed EPA regulations based on sound reasons.  In fact, 23 members of Florida’s Congressional delegation wrote EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson on December 2, 2009, expressing our concerns about the proposal and its adverse economic impact on the state.   Concerns over the regulations have been expressed to me by small business owners, agricultural producers and elected officials.  I would urge the EPA to listen to the concerns that are expressed today, to take these concerns into consideration, and to adjust your approach to accommodate these concerns in this particularly trying economic time.

“The state of Florida has been a national leader in making our waters cleaner.  Florida has in place today some of the most robust standards to support water quality improvement.  Unfortunately, the proposed regulations fail to recognize this and instead impose a blanket approach to water quality that fails to recognize the variability of Florida’s water resources and the positive steps Florida has already taken.  Furthermore, rather than this being a science-driven approach, it has been a timeline driven approach that lacks the transparency that our local governments and businesses deserve.  If allowed to be implemented, these regulations will cause serious economic harm to our state while having uncertain environmental benefit. If, that is, the proposal is even economically attainable.

“The EPA should set aside the proposed regulations and begin to work again closely with the State of Florida to utilize the state’s existing efforts to enhance water quality, rather than disrupt Florida’s successful ongoing efforts and divert limited resources to initiatives that may not be the most effective.

“Agriculture faces higher costs and increasing pressures due to overseas competition.  The proposed regulations would further compromise Florida’s competitiveness, result in further job loss, raise the cost of agricultural production, and impede our recovery from the recession.  Additionally, in this era of heightened awareness of the threats of terrorism and the need to secure our nation’s food supply, it is critically important that we retain our domestic agricultural production.  Regulations that lead to the loss of domestic production could result in greater reliance on foreign producers, thus potentially compromising the safety of our nation’s food supply.

“Many businesses are struggling to keep their doors open.  Costly regulations would raise the cost of doing business in Florida and the United States, hampering our ability to remain competitive and create jobs here in Florida.   With an unemployment rate of nearly 12 percent, we cannot afford to see the costs of doing business in Florida increased further.

“Finally, state and local budgets are stretched thin.  Not only would the loss of additional agricultural production and small businesses limit our state’s ability to create more jobs, but the loss would also make it more difficult for the state and local governments to balance their budgets.  The costs of complying with these proposed rules do come with a cost. There will be budget tradeoffs for local governments.  Costly regulation should not be imposed in a vacuum because they do impact every sector of our economy.

“Thank you for this opportunity and thank you for listening to the concerns of Florida residents.”

CLICK HERE to read the letter from the Florida Delegation to the EPA Administrator.

Bill McCollum

It is really something when Alex Sink is sounding like Jack Kemp!  Yet Bill McCollum is sounding like a Democrat. You can read more about that here

Tonight the Paula Dockery campaign fired off a great Press Release that hit Bill on that mark as well.  Below is that release

Matthew Falconer for Orange County Mayor won a straw poll in a landslide on Saturday at a candidate forum. The Supervisor of Elections conducted a poll with all Mayoral candidates on the official ballot. I won 73.3% of the vote while all six of my opponents collected only 26% of the vote combined. Only Marco Rubio had more votes (277) to Matthew Falconer (242). Below are the official results;

http://www.teapartypatriotslive.com/2010/02/13/orlando-tea-party-candidate-hob-nob-straw-poll-results/

What is clear from the vote is taxpayers are fed up with government of career politicians serving special interests. The Mayoral opposition candidates on the ballot included four incumbent commissioners with 28 years of “experience.” All four commissioners voted in unison for the taxpayer funded arena, corporate welfare programs, and the $3 billion commuter rail program they still do not know how we are going to pay for. None of the opposition candidates managed 9% of the vote.

In what may be the truest statement in the local media all year, Jane Healy from the Orlando Sentinel said Teresa Jacobs “might be in the wrong party.” I have called Teresa “Pelosi” the most liberal Republican in Florida, see the column below.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/os-ed-jane-healy-column-021410-20100212,0,3501971.column

I also received an email on Sunday that Mildred Fernandez is on her fifth campaign manager in as many months. The email stated “The Spanish community feels abandoned by her; they think she only wants to deal with rich white folks.” I have heard that statement many times in the past few months.
It is clear the era of “progressive” Republicans, or Republicans in Name Only, is over. I call on my “republican” opponents, Mildred and Teresa, to withdraw from this race and help me defeat the fiscally irresponsible Bill Segal-bama.

With your help, this will be the “Year of the Taxpayer.” Please join me at our precinct walk Saturday February 20th  at 9am in East Orange County (by the Chipotle on Alafaya). We will knock on 700 doors and get out our message of lower taxes and more responsible government. It is time for the taxpayers to get off the couch and take back their government.

There are now five candidates for Orange County Mayor but only two choices; Matthew Falconer who will put Taxpayers First, and all of the rest who will put their special interests first.

The current U.S. Federal taxing scheme is exasperating if not convoluted and intentionally vague to incomprehensible.  Any belief that fair is a concept in governmental oversight, only needs to look at the IRS for re-evaluation.  There is not lack of proposals of change to manipulate and recalculate.  It is only a matter of whom to bestow gracious favor.  The government is in the business of choosing winners and losers. Economically “fair” is a concept that is misplaced in a fluid and vibrant free market.  Fair requires a static economy that can be studied and managed.  Keynesian’s believe such managing of the economy is achievable with their diligent studies, charts and graphs.  So it should not be surprising that government and central bank collude to impress and befuddle with their omnipotent grandeur.  The only practical reasons for such deception is to cover a theft a plundering of the citizens of magnitude.

The call for governmental reform and transparency resonates with the populace, so politicians echo sanctimoniously. The speeches passionately delivered and warmly received, will in the end provide no  resolution from dissonance.  There will be unending debates and ridicule of solutions, those endangering the power structure, vehemently denounced as radical.  The messenger  will be derided as inept and conspiratorial, quickly vanquished by hyperbole.  Remember the King tyrant deemed us  radicals for demanding liberty.  The importance of this action is not to lecture to innocence, but to  take away the pleas of ignorance.  For if we are to have a government of the people, the people are responsible for safeguarding their freedom and liberty.  Government no matter it’s intentions is by nature oppressive.

Freedom and liberty is the ability to make decisions unencumbered regarding life and property, without impinging on the natural rights of others. In 1913 the U.S. Government became chief arbitrator and enforcer of bestowed rights with the 16th amendment.  The importance of understanding that the government decides how much prosperity your allowed to keep, not how much you pay. The government by determining the allocation  of the fruit of labor transitioned the American people into a slave master relationship.  For those that would claim the nation will implode without the 16th need only look at 1912 surpluses.  No legitimate reform in taxation can be achieved without first abolishing the 16th amendment.

The first proposal for a tax reform bill should be to abolish the 16th amendment, replacing it with nothing.  Any proposal that maintains the 16th by either manipulating or shrinking the tax code needs to be rejected out of hand, including any iteration of the FLAT TAX.  The proposal of the VAT/BCT tax is a reminder of attempts to hide the true cost of government and is intellectually misleading. The need to return to a constitutional limited government may need a transitional taxing scheme to pave the way to prosperity. Reluctantly the FAIR TAX would be more advantageous to the American people.  The provision of a “pre-bate”, political appeasement tactic, should be left on the table as the embodiment of socialism through a monthly government check.  Consumers  reminded daily by the receipt in their hand of the high cost of government will demand a decreasing rate, until a proper limited government is achieved.

Next time I’ll focus on the printing tax, the largest tax ever imposed on the American people.