Tea Party Patriots Ordinary citizens reclaiming America's founding principles.

Friday, July 3, 2015

Thoughts for Independence Day

art credit: dailybail.com

Thoughts to share with family and friends 
over the Independence Day weekend

It’s more than backyard barbecues and fireworks. From military.com
On July 4, 1776, the thirteen colonies claimed their independence from England, an event which eventually led to the formation of the United States. Each year on July 4th, also known as Independence Day, Americans celebrate this historic event.
Conflict between the colonies and England was already a year old when the colonies convened a Continental Congress in Philadelphia in the summer of 1776. In a June 7 session in the Pennsylvania State House (later Independence Hall), Richard Henry Lee of Virginia presented a resolution with the famous words: "Resolved: That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved."
Lee's words were the impetus for the drafting of a formal Declaration of Independence, although the resolution was not followed up on immediately. On June 11, consideration of the resolution was postponed by a vote of seven colonies to five, with New York abstaining. However, a Committee of Five was appointed to draft a statement presenting to the world the colonies' case for independence. Members of the Committee included John Adams of Massachusetts, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania, Robert R. Livingston of New York and Thomas Jefferson of Virginia. The task of drafting the actual document fell on Jefferson.
On July 1, 1776, the Continental Congress reconvened, and on the following day, the Lee Resolution for independence was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies, New York not voting. Discussions of Jefferson's Declaration of Independence resulted in some minor changes, but the spirit of the document was unchanged. The process of revision continued through all of July 3 and into the late afternoon of July 4, when the Declaration was officially adopted. Of the 13 colonies, nine voted in favor of the Declaration, two -- Pennsylvania and South Carolina -- voted No, Delaware was undecided and New York abstained. John Hancock, President of the Continental Congress, signed the Declaration of Independence. It is said that John Hancock's signed his name "with a great flourish" so England's "King George can read that without spectacles!"
Today, the original copy of the Declaration is housed in the National Archives in Washington, D.C., and July 4 has been designated a national holiday to commemorate the day the United States laid down its claim to be a free and independent nation.
From Rush Limbaugh’s father, we learn what our Founding Fathers risked; this extract is always available at Rush’s website:  
Much To Lose
What kind of men were the 56 signers who adopted the Declaration of Independence and who, by their signing, committed an act of treason against the crown? To each of you, the names Franklin, Adams, Hancock and Jefferson are almost as familiar as household words. Most of us, however, know nothing of the other signers. Who were they? What happened to them?
I imagine that many of you are somewhat surprised at the names not there: George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Patrick Henry. All were elsewhere.
Ben Franklin was the only really old man. Eighteen were under 40; three were in their 20s. Of the 56 almost half - 24 - were judges and lawyers. Eleven were merchants, nine were landowners and farmers, and the remaining 12 were doctors, ministers, and politicians.
With only a few exceptions, such as Samuel Adams of Massachusetts, these were men of substantial property. All but two had families. The vast majority were men of education and standing in their communities. They had economic security as few men had in the 18th Century.
Each had more to lose from revolution than he had to gain by it. John Hancock, one of the richest men in America, already had a price of 500 pounds on his head. He signed in enormous letters so that his Majesty could now read his name without glasses and could now double the reward. Ben Franklin wryly noted: "Indeed we must all hang together, otherwise we shall most assuredly hang separately."
Fat Benjamin Harrison of Virginia told tiny Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts: "With me it will all be over in a minute, but you, you will be dancing on air an hour after I am gone."
These men knew what they risked. The penalty for treason was death by hanging. And remember, a great British fleet was already at anchor in New York Harbor.
They were sober men. There were no dreamy-eyed intellectuals or draft card burners here. They were far from hot-eyed fanatics yammering for an explosion. They simply asked for the status quo. It was change they resisted. It was equality with the mother country they desired. It was taxation with representation they sought. They were all conservatives, yet they rebelled.
It was principle, not property, that had brought these men to Philadelphia. Two of them became presidents of the United States. Seven of them became state governors. One died in office as vice president of the United States. Several would go on to be US Senators. One, the richest man in America, in 1828 founded the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. One, a delegate from Philadelphia, was the only real poet, musician and philosopher of the signers. (It was he, Francis Hopkinson not Betsy Ross who designed the United States flag.)
Richard Henry Lee, a delegate from Virginia, had introduced the resolution to adopt the Declaration of Independence in June of 1776. He was prophetic in his concluding remarks: "Why then sir, why do we longer delay? Why still deliberate? Let this happy day give birth to an American Republic. Let her arise not to devastate and to conquer but to reestablish the reign of peace and law.
"The eyes of Europe are fixed upon us. She demands of us a living example of freedom that may exhibit a contrast in the felicity of the citizen to the ever-increasing tyranny which desolates her polluted shores. She invites us to prepare an asylum where the unhappy may find solace, and the persecuted repost.
"If we are not this day wanting in our duty, the names of the American Legislatures of 1776 will be placed by posterity at the side of all of those whose memory has been and ever will be dear to virtuous men and good citizens."
Though the resolution was formally adopted July 4, it was not until July 8 that two of the states authorized their delegates to sign, and it was not until August 2 that the signers met at Philadelphia to actually put their names to the Declaration.
William Ellery, delegate from Rhode Island, was curious to see the signers' faces as they committed this supreme act of personal courage. He saw some men sign quickly, "but in no face was he able to discern real fear." Stephan Hopkins, Ellery's colleague from Rhode Island, was a man past 60. As he signed with a shaking pen, he declared: "My hand trembles, but my heart does not."
"Most Glorious Service"
Even before the list was published, the British marked down every member of Congress suspected of having put his name to treason. All of them became the objects of vicious manhunts. Some were taken. Some, like Jefferson, had narrow escapes. All who had property or families near British strongholds suffered.
[Many harrowing stories of the signers are here.]
Lives, Fortunes, Honor
Of those 56 who signed the Declaration of Independence, nine died of wounds or hardships during the war. Five were captured and imprisoned, in each case with brutal treatment. Several lost wives, sons or entire families. One lost his 13 children. Two wives were brutally treated. All were at one time or another the victims of manhunts and driven from their homes. Twelve signers had their homes completely burned. Seventeen lost everything they owned. Yet not one defected or went back on his pledged word. Their honor, and the nation they sacrificed so much to create is still intact.
And, finally, there is the New Jersey signer, Abraham Clark.
He gave two sons to the officer corps in the Revolutionary Army. They were captured and sent to that infamous British prison hulk afloat in New York Harbor known as the hell ship Jersey, where 11,000 American captives were to die. The younger Clarks were treated with a special brutality because of their father. One was put in solitary and given no food. With the end almost in sight, with the war almost won, no one could have blamed Abraham Clark for acceding to the British request when they offered him his sons' lives if he would recant and come out for the King and Parliament. The utter despair in this man's heart, the anguish in his very soul, must reach out to each one of us down through 200 years with his answer: "No."
The 56 signers of the Declaration Of Independence proved by their every deed that they made no idle boast when they composed the most magnificent curtain line in history. "And for the support of this Declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."
Read the rest here.

Happy Independence Day!
art credit: roadtripsforfamilies.com (Roger Mastroianni photog)

Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Ohio Health Care Compact vote postponed

art credit: autoenrolment.org. 

Ohio Patriots: The Ohio Health Care Compact (HB 34) vote that was scheduled for yesterday (Tues., June 30) has been postponed. The vote will be re-scheduled most likely after the summer break. We'll send out updates in due course.
Meanwhile, thank you to all patriots who phoned or emailed legislators in Columbus earlier this week. Ultimately, support of the bill in the House looks good.

# # #

Sunday, June 28, 2015

Ohio Health Care Compact: House votes Tuesday, June 30th

Ohio Health Care Compact (HB 34) House vote scheduled for 
 ~ Tuesday, June 30th
Calling all Ohio Patriots!
In a 6-3 ruling last week, the Supreme Court again ruled in favor of Obamacare.  The ruling upheld the federal government’s right to provide Obamacare subsidies in states that did not set up their own exchanges, despite clear language in the law that stated the contrary.
In light of the SCOTUS ruling and Congress’s failure to repeal Obamacare, it is abundantly clear that if we in Ohio are going to break free from the freedom-sapping chains of Obamacare, we must take action ourselves.
US Senators John Cornyn & James Lankford explain in this op-ed how through the Health Care Compact, we have a second chance to get health care right in our state and in our country.
Ohio is looking to become the 10th member state; the Ohio Health Care Compact (HB 34) is scheduled for a full House vote on Tuesday, June 30.
With your support and immediate action, we can move one step closer to achieving our goal of true health care freedom for all Ohio citizens and getting ourselves out from under Governor Kasich's Medicaid expansion.
Please take a few minutes to contact your Ohio State Representative and respectfully request that they support the Health Care Compact (HB 34) and put Ohioans in charge of their own health care destiny.
Click for OH House Directory. Click here and scroll down for key Committee members.

Cuyahoga County Area GOP State Reps -

Rep Mike Dovilla
Phone: (614)466-4895
Contact: Click Here

Rep. Nan Baker
Phone: (614)466-0961
Contact: Click Here

Rep Marlene Anielski
Phone: (614)644-6041
Contact: Click Here

# # #

Friday, June 26, 2015

Is a Convention of States a good idea?

art credit: redmillenial.com 

The three decisions made this week (on Obamacare, gay marriage, and the Texas "disparate impact" case) by the Supreme Court of the United States have left many of us depressed and wondering what can be done. Can anything be done?
My own e-mailbox brings a daily flow of messages from organizations, political groups, and politicians, most of which are looking for money, most of which offer conservative talking points, and most of which propose solutions based on conservative talking points. Yet we have all become aware that conservative talking points are the stock-in-trade of not only groups, but also – and especially – politicians who have no intention of voting on the basis of conservative values once they are in office. That goes for politicians in Ohio and in DC.
One suggestion that has been gathering support from politicians such as Tom Coburn and Sarah Palin, is the Article V Convention of States. Mark Levin wrote a book about it entitled The Liberty Amendments in which he lays out a case for eleven Constitutional amendments to "restore the Constitution’s moribund chief components: federalism, republicanism, and limited government." 
It all sounds good and promising. But I don’t think it is going to make any difference, and the project is already diverting time, energy, and resources away from everybody’s backyard.
Back in December 2013, someone writing under the name of Suzanne Hamner wrote a piece, “Convention of the States – Good or Bad?,” for her website, Freedom Outpost, and here are two points that got my attention [emphases added]:
Our current government is operating so far outside the Constitution, ignoring basic tenets of the Constitution regarding presidential eligibility, enumerated powers, and restrictions placed on it, that another amendment is just more words for them to ignore.
. . .
It boils down to one thing and one thing only; there is no way to legislate values and principles. Yes, the Constitution provides a remedy for our current situation in Article V; however, every tenet of government is so corrupted with the atmosphere of “the flavor of the month” causes that the risk of further damage outweighs the benefit until the people reclaim their local and state governments, then work up to the federal level. That is, if we can at this point.
Read the whole thing here.
An Article V Convention of States can pass all the Amendments it wants. They will be no substitute for citizens taking daily action in their community.
# # #

Thursday, June 25, 2015

New word of the day: SCOTUScare

Art credit: Tenthamendmentcenter.com

So the SCOTUS validates Obamacare in a 6-3 vote, leaving the Ohio Health Care Compact (HB 34) as the best available protection for Ohioans; see CTPP’s earlier blog here and scroll to the bottom for details on Columbus lawmakers.
William A. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection has posted much of Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent. Here are some key passages:
"Scalia points out that the words have a plain meaning:
This case requires us to decide whether someone who buys insurance on an Exchange established by the Secretary gets tax credits. You would think the answer would be obvious—so obvious there would hardly be a need for the Supreme Court to hear a case about it. In order to receive any money under §36B, an individual must enroll in an insurance plan through an “Exchange established by the State.” The Secretary of Health and Human Services is not a State. So an Exchange established by the Secretary is not an Exchange established by the State—which means people who buy health insurance through such an Exchange get no money under §36B.
Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is “established by the State.” …. [at 2, italics in original]
"Scalia argued — persuasively — that the overriding goal seems to be saving Obamacare, not exercising normal judicial interpretation of plain language:
“[T]he plain, obvious, and rational meaning of a statute is always to be preferred to any curious, narrow, hidden sense that nothing but the exigency of a hard case and the ingenuity and study of an acute and powerful intellect would discover.” Lynch v. Alworth-Stephens Co., 267 U. S. 364, 370 (1925) (internal quotation marks omitted). Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved. [at 2-3]
"Scalia wrote that the majority opinion rewrote the law “with no semblance of shame”:
The Court interprets §36B to award tax credits on both federal and state Exchanges. It accepts that the “most natural sense” of the phrase “Exchange established by the State” is an Exchange established by a State. Ante, at 11. (Understatement, thy name is an opinion on the Affordable Care Act!) Yet the opinion continues, with no semblance of shame, that “it is also possible that the phrase refers to all Exchanges—both State and Federal.” Ante, at 13. (Impossible possibility, thy name is an opinion on the Affordable Care Act!) [at 3]
"Scalia then delivered the best line of the day. Looking back over multiple decisions from the Court to rewrite Obamacare in order to save it, Scalia insisted that the law now should be called SCOTUScare:
Today’s opinion changes the usual rules of statutory interpretation for the sake of the Affordable Care Act. That, alas, is not a novelty. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U. S. ___, this Court revised major components of the statute in order to save them from unconstitutionality. The Act that Congress passed provides that every individual “shall” maintain insurance or else pay a “penalty.” 26 U. S. C. §5000A. This Court, however, saw that the Commerce Clause does not authorize a federal mandate to buy health insurance. So it rewrote the mandate-cum-penalty as a tax. 567 U. S., at ___–___ (principal opinion) (slip op., at 15–45).
The Act that Congress passed also requires every State to accept an expansion of its Medicaid program, or else risk losing all Medicaid funding. 42 U. S. C. §1396c. This Court, however, saw that the Spending Clause does not authorize this coercive condition. So it rewrote the law to withhold only the incremental funds associated with the Medicaid expansion. 567 U. S., at ___–___ (principal opinion) (slip op., at 45–58). Having transformed two major parts of the law, the Court today has turned its attention to a third. The Act that Congress passed makes tax credits available only on an “Exchange established by the State.” This Court, however, concludes that this limitation would prevent the rest of the Act from working as well as hoped. So it rewrites the law to make tax credits available everywhere. 
We should start calling this law SCOTUScare. [at 20-21, emphasis and hard paragraph breaks added.]
"The legacy of this Court, Scalia wrote, will live on just as Obamacare, but in infamy:
Perhaps the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will attain the enduring status of the Social Security Act or the Taft-Hartley Act; perhaps not. But this Court’s two decisions on the Act will surely be remembered through the years. The somersaults of statutory interpretation they have performed (“penalty” means tax, “further [Medicaid] payments to the State” means only incremental Medicaid payments to the State, “established by the State” means not established by the State) will be cited by litigants endlessly, to the confusion of honest jurisprudence. And the cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites.
I dissent.

Call or email representatives in Columbus (scroll down here). 
# # #

Monday, June 22, 2015

It is Time for Ohioans to be in Control of our own Health Care


With the uncertainty of Obamacare in the courts, the outcome of any ruling, even if in our favor, will not completely rid Ohio citizens from the chains of Obamacare & the federal government.

US Senator John Cornyn & US Senator James Lankford explain in this op-ed how through the Health Care Compact, we have an opportunity at a second chance to get health care right in our country.

 At the federal level, Congressman Doug Collins of Georgia filed the Health Care Compact in the U.S. House of Representatives. Once Congress passes the legislation, the nine (and counting!) states that have joined the Compact would be able to take back control of health care from the federal government.

Looking to become the 10th member state of the Health Care Compact, the Ohio Health Care Compact (HB 34) has passed out of State Government Committee and is eligible to be put on the Floor for a House vote.

The House Rules & Reference Committee sets the schedule for House votes.

Please contact the below GOP members of the House Rules & Reference Committee and respectfully request that they support the Health Care Compact (HB 34) and put Ohioans in charge of their own health care destiny.

With your support and immediate action, we can move one step closer to achieving our goal of true health care freedom for all Ohio citizens and remove ourselves from under Governor Kasich's Medicaid expansion!

Rules & Reference Committee

GOP Members

Rep. Ron Amstutz / Chair
Phone: (614) 466-1474
Contact: Click Here

Rep. Cliff Rosenberger / Vice-Chair
Phone: (614) 466-3506
Contact: Click Here

Rep. Andrew Brenner
Phone: (614) 644-6711
Contact: Click Here

Rep. Bill Hayes
Phone: (614) 466-2500
Contact: Click Here

Rep. Ron Hood
Phone: (614) 466-1464
Contact: Click Here

Rep. Stephanie Kunze
Phone: (614) 466-8012
Contact: Click Here

Rep. Dorothy Pelanda
Phone: (614) 466-8147
Contact: Click Here

Rep. Scott Ryan
Phone: (614) 466-1482
Contact: Click Here

Please call your OH House member and tell them to support the Health Care Compact - Click for OH House Directory.

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Trans-Pacific Partnership : House passes the bill

Art credit: Radix

UPDATE Thurs. From Breitbart Big Government:

Obamatrade is alive.

One week after the House of Representatives overwhelmingly rejected Obamatrade by voting against a key provision of it — Trade Adjustment Assistance — GOP establishment lawmakers resuscitated Trade Promotion Authority and rammed it through Thursday afternoon. The final tally was 218-208. . . .

. . . Because the Senate passed TAA and TPA together, the individual House version will now have to go back to the Senate for approval, where it may face a filibuster. It’s unclear how many senators would support TPA without TAA, a measure to aid workers who lose their jobs because of trade policy.
# # #

According to The Hill, the House will vote Thursday [tomorrow] on a stand-alone measure to grant President Obama fast-track trade authority.
Phyllis Schlafly explains how bad the bills are:
On Friday, Congress disrupted President Obama’s plan for a sweeping transfer of U.S. sovereignty to an unaccountable group of foreign busybodies. Hurray for the stalwart Americans who resisted the demands of Obama, the Republican leadership and the big-donor claque – but Speaker Boehner plans to give Congress another chance this week to make this dangerous mistake.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) would turn over to globalists the power to issue regulations about U.S. trade, immigration, the environment, labor and commerce. It’s called a “living agreement,” which means the globalists can amend and change the text of the so-called agreement after it has gone into effect.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., has frankly warned about this giveaway of U.S. sovereignty. Not only would Congress give up its powers to negotiate and write the terms of a treaty, but Congress also gives up its power to debate and amend the deal, to apply a cloture vote in the Senate, and to require a two-thirds vote in the Senate.
. . .
TPP puts us in a new political and economic union before a single private citizen is told about it and with public opinion running five to one against it. Remember when Nancy Pelosi said we had to pass Obamacare in order to find out what is in it?
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., warns, “TPP calls for the formation of a permanent political and economic union known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Commission, which will have power to issue regulations impacting not only trade but immigration, the environment, labor and commerce.” He added, Congress “will have surrendered its legislative prerogatives. Before a word, line, paragraph, or page of this plan is made public, Congress will have even agreed to give up its treaty powers.”
. . .
Sessions continued: “Congress would be pre-clearing a political and economic union before a word of that arrangement has been made available to a single private citizen. This has the earmarks of a nascent European Union,” and Americans certainly don’t want to belong to a European union (that’s why we fought the American Revolution).
Rep. Hunter also warns that the new global governance institution would be “authorized to issue policies and regulations affecting our economy, our manufacturers, our workers, our immigration procedures, as well as current, labor and environmental practices.”
TPP is separating us from the U.S. Constitution and from national sovereignty and replacing both with a global governance superstructure. TPP has wrapped its audacious global governance plan in the mantle called “free trade,” which is a misnomer if there ever were one.
Read the rest here.
And here’s an update from today’s Politico:  
House Speaker John Boehner and Republican leaders are moving to revive President Barack Obama’s beleaguered trade agenda with an elaborate procedural workaround that was quickly greeted with skepticism among some Democrats.
Under the emerging plan, the House would vote on a bill that would give Obama fast-track authority to negotiate a sweeping trade deal with Pacific Rim countries, sending it to the Senate for final approval. To alleviate Democratic concerns, the Senate then would amend a separate bill on trade preferences to include Trade Adjustment Assistance, a worker aid program that Republicans oppose but that House Democrats have blocked to gain leverage in the negotiations over fast-track.
When a group of House conservatives voted last week to kill a trade bill favored by President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner and other GOP leaders who support the measure steamed. Representative Mick Mulvaney (R., S.C.) celebrated the revolt as a coming-of-age moment for rebel backbenchers. “Yesterday will be the day that we look back at as the day that conservatives finally started getting organized in the House,” he wrote in a note to the Spartanburg Tea Party. 
Led by Representative Jim Jordan (R., Ohio), a platoon of conservatives demanded that Boehner agree to a series of concessions in exchange for their support for so-called Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), legislation that would give President Obama wider latitude to negotiate free-trade agreements. When GOP leadership ignored them, Jordan and his allies tried to kill the bill on a procedural vote — a rare step made more surprising by the lawmakers’ general support for free trade. It was the boldest attempt yet from the recently formed House Freedom Caucus, which Jordan chairs, to counteract Boehner’s perceived tendency to wilt in the face of Democratic pressure.
Read more here
Find your Representative here.   The Congressional switchboard number is (202) 224-3121.

Here are details for Ohio Senators:

Sen. Sherrod Brown
Phone: 202-224-2315
Fax: 202-228-6321

Phone: 202-224-3353
# # #