The NDAA: Whodunnit and What We Can Do

December is to politics as October is to stock market crashes.  It's a great time for Congress to pass the junk that nobody wants because we're all in the spirit of the winter season preparing for family events, winter vacations, and spiritual renewals.  Its the time of year that Congress sneaks in debt-ceiling raises and little things like Obamacare.

Last month, Congress passed a 565-page military spending bill, HR 1540 (full text) or the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  The most grievous portion of the bill is located in Title X, Subtitle D, Sections 1021-2, pages 265-7.  The bill, signed into law by President Obama allows permanent detention without trial of US Citizens by the military and is quite likely far worse on the violation of our rights and Constitution than even Obamacare.

The Senate held a couple of votes with final passage being 86-13 (roll call vote) with Utah's liberal Senator Hatch voting aye and conservative Senator Lee nay.  I must say that if anyone believes Senator Hatch has become more conservative over the past two years as he gears up for reelection, the severity of this Constitutional violation has to knock the wind out of any argument in that respect.

Utah's house vote was equally telling:  Bishop sided with Democrat Jim Matheson while Chaffetz voted against.  In all the House vote was much closer, 283-136 (roll call vote).  The NDAA is a clear violation of the 5th and 6th Amendments (and others) and MUST be repealed!

Video blogger ABillyRock puts the NDAA in perspective in promoting a Feb 3rd national event (Facebook) to bring attention to the repeal cause:

Also this week, Congressman Ron Paul introduced a 1-page bill, HR 3785 to repeal this most offensive section.  It should be on the forefront of anyone who defends the Constitution as well as a litmus test for choosing federal representatives in primary, general, and Presidential elections.  Here is the video from Rep. Paul who took the time out from campaigning in South Carolina to help preserve our liberties:

Hatch's Record: A FCINO "Demon Sheep" Responsible For The Debt Threat

Responsibility Placed For Our National Debt Threat

With the Federal Reserve now monetizing our $14T debt, it is clear we are on the morning of a major economic downtown with high probabilities of hyperinflation, a downgraded of our bond rating, and/or removal of the dollar as being the world's reserve currency. Any one of these three threats would cause a greater financial disaster than the current recession we have; all three are well on their way to becoming reality. This crisis was caused by individual members and leaders of both parties in Congress over decades of undisciplined spending and earmarks, and of recent note includes signatures on bills from both Presidents Bush and Obama.

Spending Cuts: The Only Solution to Our Debt Crisis

No longer is terrorism my foremost concern for the defense of our country: it is instead the defense of our economic system which can ONLY be resolved through massive spending reduction. Democrats might agree on principles that the debt is a threat, but more often than not their solution is to raise taxes. My counter is that the population is already overtaxed and historically governments have been overthrown for less taxation than we are already suffering. Additionally, both Republicans and Democrats have proved time after time that increased taxation is a "green light" for them to increase spending. This would only exacerbate the problem.

So we must cut. We have to cut everything if we are to have any chance late in this fourth quarter of avoiding looming economic disaster. Entitlements including Social Security and Medicare, defense spending, earmarks, and even petty things like Obama's staff and innumerable czars have to take net hits. Fresh-faced Republicans in the 112th Congress get it and have proposed $2.5T in cuts over 10 years. This is a superb start and so much better than the spending spree of the Democrats, yet hardly enough to balance the budget or avert financialgeddon. I support these cuts, but demand more--much more. We must balance the budget within four years like McCain promised during the 2008 debates (NY Times transcript).

While the House is on to the gig, the Senate is way behind. And the finger must be pointed at fiscal liberals who have helped create this disaster--and that includes our current Senator Orrin Hatch. I have already documented that Hatch has contributed to the problem through his prolific earmarking (see "Hatch Opposes His Own Earmarks", "Hatch Proposes UTOPIA Bailout", Dec 2010).

Hatch's FCINO Record

When Hatch was sworn into office in January 1977, our entire national debt was a mere $0.6T (publicdebt.treas.gov, Wikipedia)--less that the widely-unsuccessful spending aka "stimulus" bill passed in 2009 to defibrillate our economy. Currently the national debt stands over 20 times greater at $14T. By no means is Hatch singlehandedly responsible for this debt, yet the impression of many a Republican in Utah is that Hatch has tried to stem the inevitable tide of Democratic Big Government. If that were true, I'd argue that given 34 years, Hatch has been pretty ineffective in averting economic disaster and we should pass the reigns to another.

Instead of being the chief scissors-operator some GOP Utahns believe he his, Hatch has been hiding his spending ways to his constituency behind his FCINO Demon Sheep clothing (Campaign Ad, Carly Fiorina 2010). Take as evidence the Political Courage Test sponsored by the non-partisan, non-profit Project Vote Smart (PVS): Hatch refuses to participate to let us know where he stands.

"Senator Orrin G. Hatch repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on issues through the 2006 National Political Awareness Test." (PVS, Issues Positions)

If Hatch were a fiscal conservative, then to a Utah electorate he should be unafraid to tout his fiscal conservancy and ideas for cutting the budget to reduce the deficit. Hatch's problem is that he's a fiscal liberal who won't find major areas of the budget to cut. This is evidenced by Hatch's response to the PVS "Presidential Election 2000 National Political Awareness Test" where he did reveal his fiscal preferences.

The 2000 PVS Test¹ questioned candidates on 13 areas of the budget asking them to identify on a five-point scale from "greatly decrease" to "greatly increase" where they stood with funding. Hatch's revealing answers to this test precluded a single area of the budget for cuts. (Orrin Hatch, 2000 PVS Test Responses) Indeed, coupled with areas of desired fiscal expansion, Hatch's responses would be indicative of an expansion of the budget, not a retraction. In further support of this claim, the PVS Test gave Hatch an opportunity to list "Other" areas of the budget he could elaborate on response and Hatch declined to do so, thus leaving the foregone conclusion that Hatch wanted to increase the budget, a tenant of fiscal liberalism.

The Balanced Budget Amendment: Hatch's Signature Sheep's Cloth

Hatch's signature sheep's cloth is his longstanding support for a Balanced Budget Amendment. While such is a commendable good start and one I support, as evidenced above Hatch has long ignored his own constitutional budget duties to walk the talk and pass responsible budgets within the current scope of the constitution. If the answer to Congressional spending relies uniquely upon a Balanced Budget Amendment as Hatch's record points to, I predict fiscal failure for our country before we get around to it. Hatch has been trying fairly unabatedly for the past three decades to get it through Congress--including a time when Republicans held majorities in both houses. Were even Congressional passage to occur, 3/4 of the states would still have to pass--a process historically taking years at best.

Hatch's support for the Amendment provides what he thinks is cover for his well-documented spending spree and fiscal liberalism. I believe Hatch's sheepskin is rapidly falling off revealing a FCINO to his Utah constituency rightfully panicked by an inescapable debt.

¹ As background, in 2000 our national debt stood at a breathtaking $5T: to any professed fiscal conservative this is a massive, multi-bell alarm to cut spending, a firestorm out of control.

Hatch's Support for a Liberal Senator Proves Decisive

During a 1975 Barbara Walters interview, President Ford's Photographer David Kennerly was confronted about rumors of dating first daughter Susan. Responding to the rumors Kennerly turned the tables:

"Well, Barbara, I put those stories in the same category as those about you and Ed Brooke, they are rumors and gossip." Kennerly added that Walters lightened up pronto. (NY Post, 2008)

Walters kept her multi-year affair with liberal Sen. Edward Brooke (R-MA) under raps until the release of her 2008 autobiography "Audition."¹ Although the Walters/Brooke affair wasn't public in 1978 when two-term Sen. Brooke was running in the GOP primary against conservative Avi Nelson, Brooke's public divorce and liberal voting record--including pro-ERA and pro-abortion, two highly unpopular Utah political positions--were well documented. Although Brooke would win his primary election, Brooke would lose in the general to Democrat Paul Tsongas. Reflecting on the loss Lynette Clemetson claimed Brooke's lackluster image at the time:

Mr. Brooke lost his seat in 1978 after a bitter, public divorce and charges of financial impropriety had tarnished his reputation.² (NT Times, 2007)

During the GOP primary Avi Nelson,³ a conservative TV talk show host, seemed to be a clear-cut alternative to the liberal incumbent. Former campaign worker, Bostonian-raised columnist Frank McGuire mused on Nelson's credentials:

[Avi Nelson] was in the Tea Party Vanguard long before the current movement began. In 1978, Avi ran in a primary campaign as a Constitutionalist Republican against the Massachusetts mugwump Senator Ed Brooke, whose mug was on one side of the fence while his "wump" was on the other. With the odds and big-bucks against him, Avi, the son of a rabbi, and the graduate of MIT and Yale missed by a whisker of knocking-off Brooke. (RenewAmerica.com, Dec 2010)

It would seem then that for a first-term, self-labeled "Conservative" Senator from Utah if one were to throw support to a GOP candidate in a MA primary given a choice between supporting a waning, pro-ERA candidate⁴ who voted to expand FICA benefits with the alternative a Constitutionalist Republican, Hatch would have an easy time tapping Avi Nelson. Nevertheless in a telegram shortly before the primary Hatch would join with others in opining:

Dear Ed: We want you to know that you have our strongest, most enthusiastic support in the primary election on Tuesday. (Roderick, Leading the Charge, 1994 p. 119; emphasis mine)

Brooke's post-primary response to the Hatch telegram pointed to the impact Hatch had in defeating Brooke's conservative primary opponent:

Your endorsement was perfectly timed and politically potent...I'll always be grateful. (Ibid.)

One of the reasons Hatch gave as his reasoning for his support for Brooke over Nelson was Brooke's skin color. Brooke had on his own achieved the distinction of becoming the first black U.S. Senator since reconstruction and was the only black at the time. Privately, Hatch revealed:

Besides, Ed Brooke is the only black in the U.S. Senate, and a friend, and I would hate to have him lose. (Ibid.)

In expressing the desire to vote for Brooke because of his skin color, perhaps Hatch was fulfilling an inner need to publicly show tolerance admist previous national racial divides. Yet Hatch's decision to support the liberal Brooke based partly on race seems to have clouded what blacks have fought for, to--as Dr. King famously said--one day live in a nation where we would not be judged by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character.

Hatch's motives in supporting a losing liberal Republican over a Conservative seem rather inconsequential at this point as he gears up for re-election. Of relevance is that this liberal-supporting incident early on in Hatch's career would hardly stand out as an anomaly. Hatch has continually supported liberal candidates and judges over his tenure--with a recent example being his support for ex-Sen. Bennett. Conservatives were furious with Hatch's support of Brooke in 1978, and a new generation of conservatives are resurrecting those frustrations, coupling them with present ones.

¹ Were these 1975 rumors to ever be proved valid, then both Brooke and Walters would have both been married during the time of their affair as Walters did not divorce until 1976 and Brooke until 1978.

² Black Americans in Congress cites the same issues in their Brooke bio. See especially footnote 44 for further reading.

³ Avi Nelson is still around the political arena in the Bay State. He currently has a Saturday radio show at WRKO in Boston.

⁴ I'm re-emphasizing this issue because its importance to the context of this discussion. To equivocate ERA in 1978 in terms for modern readers, think of the 2008 California Prop 8 issue. In both cases the LDS church took strong and active stances and was highlighted in the national media. Also if the name Sonia Johnson means anything to anyone, 1978 was the apex of her notoriety culminating her her excommunication from the church the following year.

Hatch Opposes His Own Earmarks in Omnibus Bill; Obama, Democrats, Bennett, Hatch All Fail Utah (Update)

Senate Democrats ruined last Christmas by passing Obamacare. This Christmas, they want to push the country into further oblivion by passing a last-minute, $1.1T, 1924-page (link to actual text), massive pork-barrel-laden Ominbus bill with 6600 earmarks, to make up for dereliction of duty in not passing a budget.¹ The bill if passed and signed by Obama (as widely expected if passed), would violate Obama's election promises to keep government transparent with C-SPAN coverage, fight wasteful spending, and not vote for earmarks.

Senate Democrats overwhelmingly support the spending. A few RINOs have voiced support including Bob Bennett who is on his last month as Utah's Senator and is ending his reign by showing his true, liberal Democratic colors: (The Hill.com, emphasis mine)

“That’s my intention,” said retiring Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) when asked
if he would support the package.

Bennett said earmarks in the bill might give some of his GOP colleagues reason to hesitate but wouldn’t affect his vote.

“It will be tough for some, but not for me,” he said.

After still not listening to Utah's desire for us to actually follow the Constitution and decimate the deficit, all I can say to Bennett that since I can do no more to get you any sooner out of office, may God hold you accountable for the country and the lives you are destroying.

Hatch meanwhile is doing the doublespeak. While is denouncing the Omnibus on Fox News² his own earmark requests have been stuffed into the bill. That's the problem, and he hasn't owned up to it either. As I reported in my last blog entry: Hatch Proposes UTOPIA Bailout Earmark for 2 Towns, Hatch proposed a $1M bailout earmark for helping with the UTOPIA buildout for Perry City and Tremonton in a $132B appropriations bill which had yet to be voted on: S. 3606.

The proposed $1.1T Omnibus takes S. 3606 and adopts it in full or modified form (so sorry, like anybody else in Congress I haven't had time to read it all) and combines it with the other pending appropriation bills Congress has failed to address. If you compare p. 55 of S. 3606 which authorizes the money to p. 63 of the Omnibus, they read exactly the same: both grant the continuation of the $18M in grant money (the grant money was separately earmarked on p. 76 of Senate report 111-221).

I've only had time to identify these two earmarks by Hatch in this bill. The real question--and I honestly don't know (probably no one does as of this moment)--is just how many earmarks of the hundreds Hatch has proposed for FY 2011 are in this awful Omnibus? And when will Hatch be honest to the people of Utah about his role in earmarking and contributions to the deficit?

Obama has failed. Democrats have been derelict--as well as proposing thousands of earmarks themselves--Bennett has converted to the Democratic Party, and Hatch is saying one thing and doing another. Utah: we've got a big problem on our hands. It's time to raise the alarm that Scrooge is about to steal another Christmas.

++++ Update 12/16 8am:

(h/t) Political Cornflakes Hatch has apparently stripped out his [other] earmark requests in the Omnibus due to his moratorium support (TPM). Still remains viable for Perry and Tremonton to get the money Hatch asked for.

More importantly Hatch's website has been scrubbed of his earmark requests. I half suspected this might happen so I downloaded copies before and am happy to repost the documents or email any interested parties. Naughty, naughty Hatch. Trying to cover up your wrongdoings before it gets out of the blogosphere into broadcast media.

At least Hatch is shrewd enough not to ignore lowly blogger Nacilbupera.

¹ Not to mention lame-duck Democrats attempt at passing a START treaty, a federal land grab, and a repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, and others I am missing...

² While the denunciations are good, they're probably more aimed at kicking off his 2012 re-election bid than to seriously attack spending. Case in point: Hatch's vote today to extend unfunded unemployment benefits and pork spending for a weak 2-year deferment of tax increases.

Hatch Proposes UTOPIA Bailout Earmark for 2 Towns (Updated)

It is no secret that UTOPIA, Utah's 11-city¹ fiber optic services consortium is struggling to compete against private sector internet providers. In its eight-year life despite inclusion of the 2nd and 6th largest cities in Utah, the consortium has only 10,000 subscribers (SL Tribune) and has extensive annual losses. What has remained uncovered in the media is Sen. Orrin Hatch's plan to bail out two of the smallest member cities--Tremonton (pop. 7K) and Perry (pop. 3K)--with a $1M earmark to help cover these cities' UTOPIA buildout costs.

From Hatch's website Hatch proposed for FY 2011 $272K in help for Tremonton while Perry City gets $750K. That's $250 of redistribution of wealth from the hardworking taxpayers of America to every man, woman, child, and babe in Perry for a fiber optic system that only a handful of residents will use.

The earmark is contained as part of a $18M undistributed grant [taxpayer] money [I think of it as unspent money against a credit card limit as we have no money] found on page 55 of the $132B S. 3606 which has not been voted on in the Senate; the Democrats having voted to leave town October [Utah's Matheson to blame here] in hopes of campaigning to save their political lives leaving Congress to run under a "continuing resolution" fiasco. The specifics of the earmark are found on page 76 of Senate report 111-221 (pdf version), under the section "DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM LOANS AND GRANTS" where the "Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies" [Wow. Maybe we could acronym it the A.S.A.R.D.F.D.A.R.A.!!!] lead by Sen Kohl (D-WI) recommended its expenditure alongside a bunch of other pork from other states, many having Senate representation on the subcommittee.

Unfortunately this $1M bailout is only one bite of the porkulous hog Hatch has proposed for FY 2011. The website WashingtonWatch.com lists 13 pages of earmarks numbering in the hundreds Hatch has proposed. The website is interactive and one can sound off by voting for or against individual earmarks and leaving comments.

Did Hatch not get the message as to what voters want? The $18M in its entirety should be cut from the bill. No pork-barrel earmarks. Slash spending and no bailouts. A fiscal conservative is supposed to do what I'm doing and identify pork and to try and stop it. I don't know what Hatch is fiscally, but away from the spotlight he's doing the opposite of what a fiscal conservative would do: adding to the pork when he should be cutting.

¹ UTOPIA lists membership as 16 cities on their website. Wikipedia defines the additional 5 cities as "non-pledging."


+++++ Update 12/13 8pm

To my pleasant surprise, Holly on the Hill and Free UTOPIA! had wonderful write-ups on this story today. Holly pointed to the Hatch's press release statement:

"...I have always said I have an obligation as your Senator to make sure our state, our communities and our people get back the hard-earned tax dollars we contribute to the federal treasury." (emphasis mine)

The problem with Hatch's press release is that it is the antithesis of fiscal conservatism and gives reason to why he is not acting like a fiscal conservative. From this statement I extract three egregious points:

(1) The "hard-earned tax dollars" are supposed to be paying for constitutionally-defined vital federal services such as national defense and the post office and flow one-way to the government to pay for these services. That one could "get back" the money means that constitutionally the government has no place in misappropriating private property in the first place.

(2) If Hatch indeed has authority to give back money to Utah, then he must accept that all other 534 members of Congress do as well. This results in protracted bickering among equals as to who gets what share of the pie and is resolved only by everyone getting everything which does further damage to the deficit.

(3) Hatch's statement thus defines him as a believer in "redistribution of wealth," a tenant of socialism. Hatch believes it is his job, indeed his "obligation" to take money the government has coerced from the people and decide who the winners and losers are in the state of Utah to receive back the distribution.

Contrast Hatch's press release with what a fiscal conservative such as myself would say regarding earmarks:

I have always said I have an obligation as your Senator to make sure our state, our communities and our people do not pay a single excessive dime of the hard-earned tax dollars we contribute beyond what is vitally necessary and Constitutionally permitted to the federal treasury.

A Tale of Two Democratic Nebraskan Senators

With the 1978 Labor Law Reform Act (as recounted in the Orrin Hatch biography "Leading the Charge" by Lee Roderick, Chapter 7), Democrats wielding control of all of Congress and the White House [sound familiar?] sought to greatly expand the power of the Unions by easing election rules and expanding federal power exercised by the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board).

Economist Pierre Rinfret projected the measure to have a severe inflationary effect on an already bumpy economy while Carter-administration pollster Pat Caddell showed the President the people wanted unions to have less, not greater power. The Senate, then with a 61 Democratic +1 Independent supermajority needed the help of moderate Democrats to stay in line with with the party in order to avoid being filibustered by the Republicans.

The filibuster endured several weeks and repeated failed attempts by Majority Leader Robert Byrd at cloture, but the last Democratic holdout--a Nebraskan Senator by the name of Ed Zorkinsky seemed on the verge of wavering just before a record-setting sixth cloture vote on a single bill (ten years later Byrd would later push the record to eight attempts in 1988). "Leading the Charge" describes the pressure on Zorinsky thus:

Hatch calls Zorinsky and says he must have his vote today. Zorinsky sounds haunted. Hatch guesses that Byrd worked him over last night, Zorinsky confirms it: "They promised me everything."

"Ed, you didn't give in did you?"

"No, but you can only count me as a mushy no," says Zorinsky, meaning he's still with Hatch--barely. "If I change my mind I'll call you." (p. 98)

Yet Zorinsky went on to stick to his convictions and became the deciding holdout vote against big government and big unions when 58 Senators had voted for filibuster-ending cloture and a 59th had announced on the floor his conversion. The bill was defeated and the filibuster held.

When I read this story, I reflected on the contrast to the modern-day story of another Senator from Nebraska--Ben Nelson¹--and the infamous "Cornhusker Kickback" he received in exchange for his vote a year ago this month for cloture on another economy-busting Democratic bill: Obamacare.

As 2012 elections slowly begin to roll around, I hope we will not forget the damage Ben Nelson did to our country through his vote and find someone better in Nebraska with Zorinsky-like toughness to vote for what is right.

¹ Coincidentally, Nelson occupies the selfsame Class I seat previously held by Zorinsky

Hatch, GOP, Sell Out on Up-Or-Down Vote to Extend Bush Tax Cuts

A mildly bipartisan majority of both houses of Congress are ready to vote an extension of all of the so-called Bush era taxes set to expire at year's end. Speaker Pelosi and Leader Reid have had the past 4 years in their total control of Congress to get their act together on this. Instead, they close to emphasize healthcare reform and financial regulation to the dismay of We the People. Pelosi in particular punted on trying to resolve the issue before the November elections with Utah's Jim Matheson casting the decisive vote to adjourn rather than to address the issue.

Now at this eleventh hour of the expiration and on the verge of a dramatically more fiscally-responsible Congress about to be sworn in in January, Democrats want to deal. Note that the desire for a deal comes after last week's class-warfare rejection votes to only extend tax cuts for the middle class. Yet still we haven't had an up-or-down straight vote on extending the tax cuts.

And with Pelosi and Reid controlling congress, we probably won't get one. Fine. Let the Democrats show We the People that they are willing to raise taxes on everyone in a recession rather than cut taxes for everyone. In January, we will get the GOP back in control of the House and will get the tax cuts extended retroactively. The GOP will win twice, both in December as the Dems let the tax cuts expire and in January when they save everyone from those hikes.

But what some--including Sen. Orrin Hatch--want to do is to cut a deal to extend unemployment benefits to get the tax cuts to remain in place 2 more years. Huh? What? Why? Unemployment has been extended already to a record 99 weeks and we want to extend it longer? NO WAY! If you've been unemployed 99 weeks you probably aren't doing what you need to do to find a job. Either you need to move, improve or update your skills, or lower your wage expectations. Michelle Malkin points to the tremendous burden on business these record-long UI extensions are having. Folks, 99 weeks is WAY beyond a "safety net" it IS redistribution of property, a dole, socialism, welfare, or whatever name you prefer.

The GOP should not be negotiating from weakness when in a month their numbers go up and they can negotiate from strength without having to add yet another entitlement program to the deficit. They should have an up-or-down vote on extending all the Bush-era tax cuts or no vote at all. What Congress has yet to understand is we want votes simple, one-topic bills not quagmired compromises.

The Budget-Barfing, Hungry Power-Grab Act of 2010

On Thursday, the House voted 264-157 (mostly along party lines) to pass S. 3307, a 220-page, $4.5B monstrosity so-named "Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010", the brainchild of Michelle Obama and last May's congressional conceiver, now lame-quack Sen. Blanche Lincoln.

The bill--expected shortly to be signed into law by Michelle's husband--is clearly unconstitutional as it expands grasp of federal government into the domain of the states through funding of school lunches. Nowhere in our Constitution is the federal branch of government granted the right to meddle with our kids' education; indeed the 10th Amendment allows these non-enumerated powers to be reserved to the 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.

S. 3307 was first passed in August by unanimous consent in the Senate rather than a floor vote. For Utah, this means that neither GOP Senators Hatch nor Bennett stood up to voice any objection to yet another unconstitutional power-grab by the federal government. While Bennett is scheduled in January to be replaced by Mike Lee ("I will not vote for a single piece of legislation that I can’t reconcile with the text and the original understanding of the U.S. Constitution," NBC quote / C-SPAN full video of speech), the consent vote certainly leaves Hatch open for just criticism as he prepares to run yet again in 2012.

Rep. John Kline (MN-02), Senior Republican on the House Committee on Education and Labor, took a courageous stance against S. 3307. One of the truths he points out in his widely-underreported Floor Statement was in debunking the myth that S. 3307 was "fully paid for" as touted by the media. While much of the money for S. 3307 comes from cuts in the Federal Food Stamp program, this was additional unused one-time monies coming from the Stimulus bill and will leave us long-term further indebted (emphasis mine below):

...The majority claims this bill is “paid for.” They want us to believe we can grow government with no cost or consequences. But the American people know that is just not true.

More spending is more spending, whether or not those dollars are offset elsewhere in the massive federal budget. But one offset in this bill is particularly questionable.

The truth is, at least some portion of the billions in new program costs is deficit spending. This money was borrowed from our children and grandchildren in 2009 when it was put in the stimulus; that borrowed money is simply being redirected today.

This bill – with its so-called “pay for” – is merely a stalling tactic. It obscures
government expansion in the short-term so this bill can become law and its spending can become permanent. So here we stand, playing a shell game with the federal budget and hoping the American people do not notice that government continues to grow, spending continues to expand, and our children continue to fall deeper and deeper into debt.

In his statement Rep. Kline further highlights that S. 3307:

• Nets opposition from local school leaders responsible for implementing these new requirements because of rigid mandates and higher costs
• Creates or expands 17 separate federal programs
• Implements dangerous federal price controls, as highlighted by the National Governors Association

Utah's Representatives fell in line as one would expect with Matheson voting along with the Democrats to expand government and indebtedness while Bishop and Chaffetz opposed.

Hatch: Leading the Charge Against Kagan?

Some time ago I realized that simply being a voter was an insufficient enough participation level for me to consider myself a defender of the Constitution. That is a fundamental reason why I created Nacilbupera.

Likewise, with the regard to the nomination of Elena Kagan, it is insufficient enough for me to have my two Senators--Hatch and Bennett--simply verbally oppose the nomination of yet another Constitiution-ripper-upper. I need action. Every legal action possible. And with a scheduled July 13th vote in Committee, time is drawning short.

Judiciary Committee veteran Hatch must be found "Leading the Charge" (as the title of my autographed Hatch biography states he does) of a massive filibuster of this nominee Kagan whose ideology would veer from the strict power granted the Federal Government by "We the People." Hatch's judicial nominee opinions seem to carry a large amount of weight in the Senate. If Hatch is unwilling to use the power we the citizens of Utah have vested in him to defend our Constitution, then then time is ripe in 2012 to find another more willing to do so.

Senators Hatch and Bennett: will accept your duty as vested you by the People of the State of Utah and Lead the Charge? Or, Senator Hatch, must we find another to Lead the Charge as we found Mike Lee to replace Bob Bennett?

With Bennett's Defeat, The Teaparty Movement Eyes Hatch

With the GOP Senate primary race between Bridgewater and Lee in its infancy, the movement to get rid of Orrin has already well, hatched shall we say.

Never mind KNRS conservative talk show host Bob Lonsberry previously and repeatedly calling for the removal of Hatch this year, it seems like for conservative Utahns Hatch's exit can't come quick enough. And if Bennett was too old and too long in D.C. for Utahns this year, in 2012 Hatch will up Bennett's election-year age by a year with enough tenure in the Senate to lap Bennett twice and start worrying from pugatory his good friend Ted Kennedy about catching up.
SimpleUtahMormonPolitics commented in their post-Bennett defeat wrapup:

"Orrin, Thy Days are Numbered. You may also be aware that I don't care much
for Orrin Hatch as a Senator, for essentially the same reasons that I haven't
approved of Bennett's performance. A few of us spoke together after the
convention wondering whether it might be more healthy for Senator Hatch to
announce his retirement, rather than to risk suffering in two years the same
ignominy as Senator Bennett."

Voice of Deseret chimed in today with their article You're Next, Orrin: Cherilyn Eagar Has Not Yet Endorsed Either Tim Bridgewater Or Mike Lee, May Run Against Six-Term Senator Orrin Hatch In 2012 concluding:

"Orrin Hatch would be smart to decide right now that this current term will be
his last term, and walk out as an honored elder statesman. Thirty-six years will
be more than enough; it's time to turn the seat over to the next generation."

Sensing the anti-Hatch sentiment, Daily Herald political guru Joe Pyrah opined an article in which Eagar is quoted as "definitely" looking into running two years from now against Sen. Orrin Hatch. Even Jen Gulbrandsen, Eagar's daughter, tweeted a humorous reference at the closure of Saturday's convention to a possible "Eagar in 2012" run noting the musical capabilities of both:

"Eagar and Hatch should go head to head in a couple of years. They could
even have a sing off!"

With a fairly remarkable result from a complete grassroots effort in her first bid ever for public office, Cherilyn Eagar has made some friends along the way by proving true to principle and supporting the cause against Bennett. She picked up further accolades from the delegates by not avoiding endorsing Lee or Bridgewater. Here's what private commenter had to say:

"The unsung heroes for the conservative movement at the convention were Cherilyn
Eagar and her amazing supporters. Cherilyn was eliminated in the first round
and her patriotic supporters...and spread their votes to Lee and Bridgewater. They
have principle and they made history today."

Lady Logician pointed out in her blog today the anti-Bennett energy Eagar brought to the race:

"While some of the anti-Bennett energy can and should be credited to the Tea
Party movement the real Tea Party candidate was Cherilyn Eagar..."

Lady Logican is correct of course. Eagar was the only candidate to attend every major tea party in Utah including the original one on snowy day, April 15, 2009. Somewhere along the way she rallied the troops at the state capitol with the following anti-Hatch castigation:

"Senator Hatch said: 'We don’t need rookies in Congress right now. We need leaders
such as himself'…who voted to confirm two of the most liberal Supreme Court
justices [Ginsburg and Breyer]? Senator Hatch are you listening: with that kind of leadership we don’t need seniority."

Add to that list Hatch's (and Bennett's) confirmation vote just last year of radical Cass Sunstein, being 2 of only 6 GOP Senators to vote "aye" and you begin to see why Utahns want to give Hatch the hatchet on convention day 2012. (Warning to Progressives: this is a crafty play on Hatch's surname using a figure of speech: Nacilbupera strongly repudiates any intimation of actual physical violence.)

Eagar is the antithesis of a quitter at defeat. We expect she will play some roll in 2012, though nearly the entire GOP is ready to anoint Jason Chaffetz as Senator should he decide to run. And after this race, even those who didn't support Eagar realize the importance she plays in moving opinion against incumbents by holding them accountable for their voting records. Her efforts more than anyone merit her being Utah's Senator.

No Bailout for Bob Bennett in Utah Convention (Update 4)

In keeping with polls showing Utah's 3-term incumbent Senator Bob Bennett waning in support, GOP delegates at the state convention voted for Tim Bridgewater first, Mike Lee second, leaving Bob Bennett with a mere 27% percent of the vote in round two, thus stopping Bennett's advancement to a third round (2nd round results here).

Cherilyn Eagar polled a strong fourth in the first round of voting, but according to GOP convention rules, only the top 3 move on to a second round. Eagar and her supporters are strongly anti-Bennett and lean Bridgewater as evidenced by Bridgewater's removal of Lee from the top spot in the first round (first round results here). Eagar made no endorsement of either candidate.

During the convention, blogger/twitterer Frank Staheli pointed out an error in the online article by the Salt Lake Tribune incorrectly saying that Bennett had survived the second round to run against Lee.

In the third and final round, Bridgewater gained a lot of Bennett votes to advance his lead over Mike Lee by a 15-point margin (third round results here). As Bridgewater fell short of the 60% needed to avoid a primary, there will be a statewide runoff GOP primary to determine the nominee. Whatever the outcome, Bennett will not appear on the November ballot in Utah.

The ousting of Bennett is sure to send shock wave around the national politcal news as the removal of the incumbent Senator over his earmarking, vote for TARP, support of Wyden-Bennett healthcare, and violation of 2-term commitment was a major priority for teaparty and 9/12 grassroots organizations. It will also likely cause senior Senator Hatch--in office since 1977--to ponder retirement as teaparty groups begin planning his defeat as well in 2012.

Additionally, during the convention popular Governor Herbert coasted to an easy GOP November ballot place with over 70% of the vote in a sole round of voting.

Utah's GOP Senators Support PAYGO

Maybe it's because it's an election year. Maybe it's because Bennett realizes that frankly, we've had it with his "demonsheep Conservatism" and passing off of principles for compromise...and Hatch knows he's next up to bat in 2012.

But whatever the reason, Bennett and Hatch were numbered among 19 lowly GOP senators who voted in support of Jim Bunning's (R-KY) brave stance in correctly pointing out that a $10B proposition to extend unemployment benefits (read: welfare subsidies now as these folks are long-term unemployed) should be paid for by the recently-passed PAYGO provisions. Brian Darling of the Foundry at Heritage.org summed it up this way:

Basically, liberals in Congress love the idea of PAYGO, yet they refuse to enforce the statutory requirements that all new spending be offset. They do this by designating all new spending as an “Emergency Designation.” This is feel good politics at its worst, because the left can claim they are for PAYGO, yet PAYGO has yet to restrain any spending. Furthermore, the vote on PAYGO in the House helped pave the way for a $1.9 trillion increase in the debt limit. Therefore one can argue that PAYGO actually increased spending in the Congress.

Although we have been quite critical of Bennett on this blog (and quite justifiably so!) we do need to praise our elected officials when they do the right thing--and in this case, so it was. There are 79 Senators out there including every single Democrat and Obama who signed the bill who still has yet to get the teaparty message about reigning in spending.

To Bennett and Hatch: How Dare You Call Yourselves Conservatives!

Cass Sunstein, was confirmed by the Senate late last week as the new head of the OIRA (Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs), commonly known as the new "regulatory czar."

His nomination was filibustered by the Republicans, but both of our Senators--Hatch and Bennett--voted for cloture being among only six Republicans to do so. If this weren't bad enough, both Hatch and Bennett joined the Democrats in confirming him 57-40.

Nacilbupera feels betrayed. In his quest for a third term Bennett declares himself as "Utah's Conservative Choice." Yeah, right! we answer.

Since when is any of the following radical ideology promoted by Mr. Sunstein considered part of the conservative agenda?

• Giving animals "rights"
• Abolishing hunting (he recanted this in his confirmation hearing that is not his view)
• Advocates the Socialist/Communistic ideals of FDR's 2nd Bill of Rights
• Views political discussion on the Internet as a possible threat to democracy (good thing we got MSNBC and the NY Times to tell us the truth, huh Cass?)

Nacilbupera feels like challenging Bennett on his conservative position and yell out in honor of Joe Wilson: Bob Bennett You Lie! You tell us you are a conservative but you dishonor your cause with your votes. Own up to the truths of Wyden-Bennett you advocate.

My fellow Utahns and Americans, let us honor Bennett with the old chant of of the radicals Bennett confirms: Hey, hey! Ho, ho! Robert Bennett has got to go!!

Just another reason to vote for Cherilyn Eagar in 2010.

Eagar for US Senate 2010

Thank goodness the mood in Republican mood Utah has moved away from the mushy middle towards principled conservatism! Nacilbupera is committed to replacing both Bennett in 2010 and longtime-liberal-Kennedy-friend Orrin Hatch in 2012 with more principled, conservative candidates. Don't get me wrong: both of our Senators are good, honest men that have done much, but when I compare them to people like Ronald Reagan, Jason Chaffetz, or Sarah Palin I sometimes come up wanting.

Yesterday at the Utah County GOP BBQ, we had a chance to personally interact with Bennett's two top contenders: current Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Businesswoman Cherilyn Eagar. We would vote for either over Bennett but Eagar inspires us. She has decried Bennett's addiction to earmarks and his less-than-conservative Wyden-Bennett health care plan which includes government-funded abortions. She is NOT a career politician and speaks from the heart.


In the yesterday's straw poll (Nacilbupera elected not to participate) Shurtleff won, followed by Eagar and last place Bennett. As Eagar was the latest entry into the race, Nacilbupera expects her numbers to climb as the word gets out that we have a real chance for principled change (not to mention a first female US Senator from Utah--our state being an eager leader in the woman's suffrage movement including the first female state senator elected in the United States!)

Nacilbupera is committed to our local grassroots movement to right the wrongs of our GOP party which has forgotten about term limits, fiscal restraint and responsibility, and smaller not larger government. America: real change is coming and Utah is going to be part of the solution. We will not tolerate "politics as usual" but "politics for patriots."

Indeed, Nacilbupera feels there is just as much need for patriots now as during our nation's founding years who sacrificed time, money, and comfort for love of country. Although we may not be honored with bronze statues and glorious paintings, it is not the fame we seek but of preserving and restoring this back to a great nation of freedom.

Nacilbupera finished Beck's portion of "Common Sense" and highly recommends it. We agree with all the 9 principles and 12 values and have joined our 9/12 group. Perhaps the only difference we have is that we believe that we can take our Republican Party back and adhere to our party's platform through local, grassroots intervention.

Nacilbupera also predicts that Bennett will not be re-elected as Senator in 2010. We will do everything we can to support Eagar so that Bennett doesn't even make it out of our convention (if Eagar gets 60% of the vote in the convention, she can then concentrate on defeating the Democratic challenger and won't have to face a primary election against Bennett or Shurtleff.

Finally, we promise you America that although you don't know Eagar now, you will love her and what she stands for. It is then with great satisfaction that Nacilbupera endorses Cherilyn Eagar for US Senator in 2010.

Independence Day '09: The Grand Parade

(This is a first of posts on the Independence Day 2009 events)
What an awesome day we've had celebrating our country's freedoms. We started the day early staking out good seats for Provo's Freedom Festival Grand Parade, an annual event that gathered 150-200K spectators.

The parade was fantastic featuring: floats; Miss Provo & court; marching bands from the high schools across Utah County; military vets, ROTC, and active duty as well as an array of past and present combat vehicles; baby contest winners; BYU President Samuelson as well as the Cougarettes; our year-old Utah Valley University and UVU flight school, multiple Scottish bands with bagpipes in full regalia; police, fire, and public disposal depts; equestrians and llamas; Uncle Sam; LDS Elder and Sister missionaries; and perhaps our favorite: a virtual "who's who" of Utah politics.


First on the political scene was the tallest of America's Senators, 6' 6" Junior Senator Bennett walking at a brisk rate wearing a cowboy hat adding to his height, waving to the crowd. He seemed fit enough to race in the 5K and 10K Freedom Run held just before the start of the Parade. Bennett is a great asset to the conservative movement and a friend to Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.


Then came Gary Herbert, our Lt. Governor who will assume the Governorship as the Senate moves sometime this summer to confirm our current Governor Huntsman in the role of Ambassador to China. Herbert, an Orem native, will likely be an even better governor than Huntsman.



Next came Senator Hatch who has led so many valiant fights, particularly on the Judiciary Committee, on getting nominees who won't legislate from the bench on our Supreme Court.

Also in the parade were our own--the great--US Rep. Jason Chaffetz who didn't drive by close enough for a picture, our Utah County Comissioner Larry Ellertson, our retiring mayor Lewis Billings, and our Provo City Councilmembers including our own Sherrie Hall Everett. What an awesome display of patriotic power!

Before the parade was the balloon fest featuring a dozen or two balloons including this piggy bank from Bank of American Fork which looked to Nacilbupera more like the Porkulous spending bill passed the Democrats this spring complete with Obama's face on it. (Who says you can't put lipstick on a pig?)


We enjoyed the parade and want to thank all the many volunteers who helped put together the event. We are also grateful for the friendly crowd gathered from around the county who all squished together and got along just fine during the 2hr parade and few hours beforehand. We enjoyed the mood and each other.

Sotomayor: Unfit for Supreme Court

Sotomayor uses her judicial appointment to create policy.

Is this on tape? Um, Nacilbupera knows we don't make statements like this. We know. We know. Nacilbupera isn't promoting this statement or advocating this statement. Um, ok, having said that this blog is where that statement is percolating.



And what is percolating isn't good. It appears in addition to her philosophy of using the judgeship for something outside of the checks and balances of our government, she is bigoted, elevating Hispanics not equal, but superior to other races:

In her talk, she disagreed with an approach to judging expressed by former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman to serve on the US Supreme Court. Justice O'Connor was frequently quoted as saying that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion in deciding cases.

"I'm not so sure that I agree with the statement," Sotomayor said. "I would hope a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." (Christian Science Monitor)

In asserting her bigotry we also submit the pending case Ricci v. DeStefano appealed from Sotomayor's Second Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court where the city of New Haven refused to grant firefighters promotions simply because no black scored high enough on a test administered by the city. Sotomayor sided against the firefighters in favor of the city.

Judging judges is a difficult task. There are complex issues involved with reaching implications. Yet Sotomayor's actions do not seem consistent with being a blind (fair, impartial) judge of the law. Nevertheless, we have a review process in place beginning with our Senate Judiciary Committee and Sotomayor will have opportunity to discuss her positions. Interviews such as yesterday's Fox News with Senator Orrin Hatch of the Committee reveal that Hatch has many more questions about her qualifications based on her past rulings.

Nacilbupera opposes Obama's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. However, we will also reserve final judgement until the Judiciary Committee has a chance to thoroughly question Judge Sotomayor.