You Want Smaller Government? Cut Off Their Money!


by Ron Ewart, ©2010

Washington State's Governor Christine Gregoire

(Dec. 17, 2010) — Almost every state in the Union is a microcosm of the Federal Government.  The states learned well and had an excellent teacher and role model in Washington DC.  Their class room text is entitled:  “How to spend more money than you take in ….. For Dummies.” (and “Dummies” is a kind word for these folks)

Most states are in the red, many are bankrupt and Washington State is no exception.  It has to trim close to $4 Billion  out of the state budget because those lousy, uneducated voters gutted the state’s pie-in-the-sky revenue stream in the last election.  Good for them!  Maybe they are finally getting the message.  But don’t give ’em too much credit, they also re-elected twinkle toes Patty Murray as Washington State Senator.

In the Seattle Times this morning, in a lead, front-page story above the fold, Washington State Governor Christine Gregoire is lamenting her new budget.  She says she hates it because “it isn’t moral.”  The sad, disgusted look on her face said it all.

But because the state constitution mandates a balanced budget, poor Christine had to gut all of her favorite, over-bloated social programs and she had to cut some programs out all together.  The state art commission was sacked.  Boy, now there’s a big loss.  The state tourism office was also eliminated ….. finally.  Public schools and higher education took hits as well.  Almost $800 Million was cut out of social services.  $800 million mind you!    They took some money out of the reserve fund (reserve fund, that’s a laugh) to help pay for some of the cuts.

The graph that came with the Seattle Times article told the real story though.  From the ’03 – ’05 budget to the ’05 – ’07 budget, Christine and the Democrat-controlled legislature raised the state budget by 20%, from $25.7 Billion to $30.2 Billion.  From the ’07 – ’09 budget to the ’09 – ’11 budget, Christine and the Democrat-controlled legislature raised the state budget another 10%.  Hey, let the good times roll!  Sure they put a little money away for a rainy day, but it was no where near enough.

All this cutting isn’t going to stop Seattle’s Big Dig, a tunnel along the Seattle waterfront whose cost is purported to be $1.1 Billion (winning bid), when we all know that the final cost will be 4 to 6 times that amount, just like Boston’s Mafia- operated Big Dig and Seattle’s Un-Sound Transit.  Government very seldom brings anything in at, or under, budget.  A surface or elevated roadway would have been much less than the cost of a tunnel.  But hey!  Government has lots of your money, don’t they?

The point here is that if you give the government money, it will find a way to spend it and spend it fast, even if they spend more than they are taking in.  If you allow them to tax you into oblivion, you will get used to it and they can continue their Ponzi scheme until the electorate wises up.  The only way to stop them is cut off their money supply.

In some states, like Washington State, the people have the right to initiatives and referendums.  Initiatives make new law, referendums change, alter, modify, or repeal existing law.   So if the people wise up, they can use the initiative process to slow down or cut off different sources of funding to the government.  Governor Christine Gregoire and the Democrat-controlled legislature passed a whole bunch of new taxes on bottled water, soft drinks and candy, earlier in 2010, in response to the current recession.  However, the people didn’t like that and voiced their opposition on November 2nd, 2010 by floating an initiative to repeal those new taxes.  The initiative won by a significant margin.  The voters also soundly trounced a “Trojan Horse” initiative put forth by the state legislature to institute a state income tax.  Suddenly, sad and angry looks appeared on the Governor’s and all the Democrat legislature’s faces in response to this vote of no confidence by the “stupid” voters.  Now, they couldn’t spend us into oblivion because much of their funding had dried up.  They were forced to “cut”.  All we can say is “hurrah! – hurrah!”

We attended a budget meeting for the County of King, (Seattle) a few years ago and we noticed that on one side of the room there were a whole bunch of people with black hair on their heads.  They literally took up half of the room. It turns out, all were of Asian decent.  This is not meant to be discriminatory, it is only an observation of what we saw.

These people had a spokeswoman that talked to the Council Members on their behalf, because most of them couldn’t speak English.  Now what these people wanted, according to the spokeswoman, was anything and everything they could get out of the King County budget.  They all looked healthy to this observer and one wonders what it was that they needed?  You name it and they wanted it.  Chances are, given the irrational compassion of politicians no matter what the cost (and surfacing for votes), they got it.  We didn’t stick around long enough to find out.

We got up to address the Council (we only had two minutes to speak) and told them that, contrary to what these other people wanted, we in the rural areas didn’t want anything and in fact, we wanted to be left alone.  But they had no intentions of leaving us alone.  They kept passing draconian environmental laws that only affected the rural landowner and raising our taxes to pay for it all.  Our taxes were probably paying for what these folk with black hair got out of the Council.

Unfortunately, there is no initiative process to rein in the federal government.  Our only recourse is to vote in senators and congressmen and women who would do what they could to reduce federal spending.  But as you can see from observing the Lame Duck session of Congress in the year 2010, the Democrats have no intention of reining in government spending and submitted an Omnibus Spending Bill that had between 6,000 to 7,000 pork barrel (earmarks) items in it.  Yeah, we know.  The earmarks only represented a miniscule portion of the budget, but it’s the principle of the thing.

Worse than that, the compromise between the President and the Republicans only made matters worse by extending unemployment benefits another 13 months, with no way to pay for it, thus adding to the deficit and the national debt.  Sure, the Republicans got the extension of the Bush tax cuts, but in the end, the trade off was a loser for the American taxpayer ….. as usual.

We have people in America that think that Obama has a stash of money to doll out to them, for free.  They’d vote for a rock, if it could excrete free money.  Why these people are allowed to vote is part of the reason we are where we are today.

When everything is said and done, there are only two ways to stop the government reach for more political power by over-spending and running up huge deficits, with the sole purpose of buying votes with our money to keep that power.  The first way to strip politicians of their power is to vote for individuals who hold a strong small government and fiscal responsibility ethic.  The second way is revolution and with a government as powerful as the American government is, revolution has little chance for success.  But the fact remains ladies and gentlemen, if you don’t slow down the growth of, or cut off the money flowing to the government, their power will continue to grow exponentially and your money is the fuel that feeds the fire of their power.  This applies to state government as well as it does to the federal government.  In the end, this insane fiscal policy will lead to national bankruptcy and the ultimate failure of America’s experiment with freedom and liberty.  If that is what the American people want, they are going to get it and get it in spades.


Ron Ewart is President of the National Association of Rural Landowners (NARLO).

7 Responses to "You Want Smaller Government? Cut Off Their Money!"

  1. Mia   Saturday, December 18, 2010 at 11:16 PM

    I think you’re right, Bill — there is a different kind of patriot here — the kind who recognize and understand the sacrifice LTC Lakin has made on our behalf, and know that we all deserve better. Nay — we all have a God-given right to better. We’ve borne witness to Fitzpatrick’s fight for us and our Constitution. Now it’s time we fight for ourselves.

    Sharon — I so appreciate all you’ve done and continue to do, and don’t want to cross any lines, so please let me know if I do. That said…

    We cannot trust the media. We cannot trust the White House. We cannot trust either house of Congress. We cannot trust the courts. We cannot trust the military. We cannot trust either party. We only have ourselves left. I want to believe that there are more than enough angry patriots that we could bring Washington to their knees. But it’s going to take some sacrifice on all our parts. If we don’t choose our sacrifices now, they will choose them for us later.

    I have a zillion ideas. I’ve seen great ideas from other people. I’ve seen other bloggers and posters suggest direct action by We The People with little response (just like you). Is it because not enough Americans are sufficiently informed and aware, and therefore outraged? Or is it because we haven’t successfully organized and coordinated? Do we have to hit absolute rock bottom?

    I don’t know. I don’t know how to proceed, but I’m ready, willing and able to help figure it out with other patriots.

  2. bill   Saturday, December 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM

    Wow! Mia,your quote of ” No one is going to do this for us ” is one of the wisest statements I have seen on the net,EVER ! I must also eat crow in believing no one would read or comment this thread,but apparently there is a different breed of Patriot here on post and email.The hardest thing for me to do,was my resistance to change my normal way of living and nothing I have done has been without cost,effort and some inconvenience or should I say “entertainment” :( .Since none of us are as smart as ALL of us,we can however come up with basic ideas to stop “feeding the monkeys” :) as one poster,put it. Little things,like canceling the bells and whistles off your telephone rates waiting .call forwarding ,caller ID etc/etc or disconnecting the whole mess and going “cell phone” .This causes the
    tax man a decrease in the revenue he gets,bless his greedy little heart.Boycotting products and services that each of us can learn to live without but all along advising them to why we are doing so.There are many others I am sure Patriots can come up with.Since I am a cranky old man,I decided to go for the jugular after switching to DSL for internet.This is not for
    the armchair Patriot.

    To:Comcast March 26,2010
    P.O. 660618
    Dallas Tx.

    Regarding immediate cancellation of services to Account #
    8777 70 318 0599048

    Dear Comcast,
    I request immediate cancellation of all services,TV and Internet.
    I have become offended by your clients constant deception by omission,slanted propaganda and hype of the Main Stream Media news outlets and the constant unsolicited commercial Spam without regard as to whether subscribers want it or not.Considering the channels that have been paired down (lost)and the ridiculous cost of $62.48 per month,I am frankly surprised you keep any customers at all.I view all this as a theft of subscribers money and service programming time. I will suffer it no longer.
    I have bundled your cable modem and it will be easily retrieved at your
    earliest convenience simply by having a tech. drop by. RCA Model
    DCM425 S.N. 00730-746401120
    Thank you

  3. Mia   Saturday, December 18, 2010 at 10:29 AM

    Bill and David B — I’m with you. No one is going to do this for us — or it would have been done already. I will be forever grateful for Sharon and others who have single-handedly shone a spotlight on the corruption all around us, but we need the strength of numbers. Instead we seem to be in our own “hope and change” mode… we HOPE someone else will CHANGE Washington and it’s just not going to happen. We need a Velvet Revolution American Style. We need civil disobedience. We need to stop feeding the beast that is eating us alive. We need to shut down not just Washington, but every state capitol and every airport and every major freeway and everything else that will get their attention. And then we need a few simple demands that serve all of our best interests, that all Americans can support and rally around. We cannot let the ptb continue to divide the American people, pit us against each other, or they win. We must unite under a common cause and purpose or we lose everything. Nothing scares them more than We The People presenting a united front.

    How can we do this???

  4. 1776reloaded   Saturday, December 18, 2010 at 9:47 AM

    …The People further decided to test the attitude of the Judiciary specifically challenging the nature of the First Amendment Petition clause itself. On July 19, 2004, the People filed a lawsuit asking the federal Court to formally declare — for the first time in history — the Constitutional meaning of the last ten words of the First Amendment. The title of this historic case (sponsored by the We The People Foundation) was, We The People v. United States.

    The Court was asked to answer two fundamental questions: 1) whether the Government is obligated under the First Amendment to respond to Petitions for Redress of violations of the Constitution; and 2) whether the People possess the Right to retain their money until those Grievances are redressed.

    Obviously, the correct answer to the first question is “yes” – the Government is obligated to respond. To speculate otherwise would be to call into question why the clause was even included as part of the First Amendment. It is noteworthy that the Petition clause is the only part of the Amendment which articulates a specific and direct form and process of communication from the People to the Government, thereby reiterating the potent principle from the Declaration of Independence that defines government as a servant of the People. Finally, in the words of the Supreme Court of 1803, “It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect….” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 174.

    The correct answer to the second question is also “yes” – the People must be able to enforce their Rights, or they essentially have none. The Right to withhold money as a peaceable means for the People to “weigh in” on and Redress unconstitutional governmental acts arises from the Founding Fathers and their sound reasoning as to how a Republic must operate to ensure the Rights of a Free People.

    Indeed, the Right of Petition to secure Redress against government transgressors has evolved as the cornerstone of the law of Western Civilization finding its first written citation as part of Magna Carta in 1215 A.D.

    On October 6, 2006 oral arguments were heard by the United States Court of Appeals regarding the nature of the Right to Petition.

    Traditionally, Appeals Courts issue their decisions within 4-6 weeks following oral arguments. However, the decision in the Right to Petition lawsuit was issued more than seven months after oral arguments. Why the delay?

    In hindsight, we now know activities were quietly taking place within the other two branches of the Government that appear to have directed the verdict in our case.

    Rather than work in good faith with the People’s concerns by responding directly to our Petitions for Redress, the Government chose to “clamp down,” through a (constitutionally abhorrent) tripartite treaty – a tripartition, divided among the three branches, for the purpose of (unlawfully) colluding to deny the People their First Amendment Right to hold the government accountable to the Constitution. These actions were taken in a manner to attract the least attention possible.

    First, in December, 2006, the 109th Congress passed the “Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006.” (Summary, H.R. 6111) Please note the title. This Act was meant to retroactively extend tax credits that had expired in 2005: Sounds good for the People – but look again.

    Tucked away in the Act was a provision (Title III — Health Savings Accounts, Section 407) (see full text) that authorized the (Executive Branch) Treasury Department to make law (i.e., unconstitutionally) to administratively prescribe a list of “specified frivolous positions,” and impose a penalty of $5,000 on any person who uses a “specified frivolous position” as a ground of reasoning for retaining his money from the Government. Disturbingly, there is no definition of “frivolous” in the Act.

    Then, on March 15, 2007, the Treasury Department published Notice 2007-30, a list of “Frivolous Positions”, again, without defining “frivolous.” Included on the frivolous list – i.e., subject to a $5,000 penalty, among numerous other well-researched and proven positions, is Government’s refusal to respond to First Amendment Petitions for Redress of Grievances. (See paragraph (9)b of the Notice).

    In other words, citizens who raise the issue of government’s failure to respond to First Amendment Petitions of Redress are subject to a $5,000 penalty.

    In short, all the “positions” cited in the Treasury Notice (including the full exercise of the First Amendment Right to Petition) are deemed “frivolous” simply because Government says so.

    Then, on May 8, 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit finally issued its decision in We The People v. United States (seven months after it heard oral argument), ruling that the Government is not obligated to respond to the People’s First Amendment Petitions for Redress and, therefore, the People do not have the Right to retain their money until the Government responds.

    The Judiciary fell into line with the “verdict” directed by the actions of the Legislative branch on December 9, 2006, and the Executive branch on March 15, 2007. A ruling that abused the judicial doctrine of stare decisis by relying on a principle of law laid down in two irrelevant cases.

    It is difficult to come to any other conclusion but that there has been a tacit assent by the three branches of the central government to actively thwart and quash any attempt by the People to enforce their Right to hold the Government accountable to the rest of the Constitution, even as the Government has patently refused to honor its obligation to respond to the People’s First Amendment Petitions for Redress.

    The People of America should roil when they fully realize what effect these actions have had upon their Freedom.

  5. RacerJim   Saturday, December 18, 2010 at 8:45 AM

    Well, since our current government has been telling us there’s no way it could deport the 30,000,000 +/- illegal immigrants it seems to me there’s no way it could do anything if 100,000,000 legal citizens didn’t contribute to their party on tax day!! Indeed, if all else fails…don’t feed the monkey.

  6. bill   Friday, December 17, 2010 at 4:03 PM

    Well David B,Since I hate to have anyone sit with the “sounds of silence” this is a post I made elsewhere but not one single soul will either say ,yes or no or even make a comment.Easiest way to stop a thread is ask We the People to take direct action.

    It appears to me,the usurper wishes to destroy EVERYTHING so he can rebuild it (In His image) and it is entirely up to We the People to decide whether or not We wish to let
    him or whether or not We decide to help him.The bottom line as I see it is ” $ ” “YOURS” So keep sending these corrupt folks your dollars
    and most assuredly,it will be the most appreciated Christmas present
    the usurper will ever get.It’s time to start shutting this Bad Boy down and only YOU can do it and tell them why.Your choice !

  7. David B   Friday, December 17, 2010 at 2:16 PM

    What would the government do if 100,000,000 people didn’t show up for their tax day party?? If all else fails… starve em to death.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.