If the American taxpayers knew how much the federal government was actually costing them, there is no doubt that it would be much smaller than it is today. But the true burden of the federal government on the taxpayer is obscured in many ways.
President Barack Obama today signed into law the $787 billion “stimulus” bill — a.k.a. the American Recovery and Investment Act — that is supposed to help jump-start the economy. And despite the gargantuan size of this measure, it is actually just an installment in the administration's overall economic recovery plan.
Common sense tells us that government cannot resuscitate the American economy and restore it to good health by spending more money and going further into debt. The government cannot spend money for its "bailout" and "stimulus" programs, after all, without siphoning the money out of the economy in the first place.
Should the stimulus bill be amended to place more emphasis on spending, or should it instead be amended to place more emphasis on tax cuts? That question defines much of the debate on the bill that passed the House without any yea votes from Republicans and is now before the Senate.
When Sen. John McCain was campaigning in Waukesha, Wisconsin, on October 9, a supporter told him "I'm really mad" because of "socialists taking over the country," the Associated Press reported. "I think I got the message," McCain responded. "The gentleman is right." McCain then went on to talk about the Democrats' control of Congress.
Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) introduced the "American Traveler Dignity Act" on November 17 to rein in the intrusive and invasive airport searches by the federal Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
The Washington Post reported on April 20 that “the Food and Drug Administration is planning an unprecedented effort to gradually reduce the salt consumed each day by Americans, saying that less sodium in everything from soup to nuts would prevent thousands of deaths from hypertension and heart disease.” The Post also said that “the initiative, to be launched this year, would eventually lead to the first legal limits on the amount of salt allowed in food products.”
President Barack Obama said in his weekly address last Saturday that we can “get our deficits under control and move from recovery to prosperity” by getting rid of “dozens of government programs shown to be wasteful or ineffective” and, in general, making government more “efficient” and “accountable.” He also said that he has “assembled a team of management, technology, and budget experts to guide us in this work.”
When President Barack Obama discussed earmark reform last week, he favorably cited the recently enacted American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as an example of legislation devoid of any congressional earmarks. But this gargantuan $787 billion “stimulus” plan that he championed is not devoid of new spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of the bill's total cost.
According to the wisdom of the day, the left is against the war in Iraq while the right supports the war. So why do The John Birch Society and its affiliated magazine THE NEW AMERICAN support the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq? Isn’t that the position of the hard left?