Fiscal Responsibility?

While I continue working on my next post on the so called economic stimulus bill, I see that news outlets are talking about the President's "Fiscal Responsibility Summit." It seems he is getting all the kings horses and men together to deal with deficit spending. With all due respect Mr. President, you started $787,000,000,000 too late. You responded to our current financial crisis by adding to our future financial crisis. And this is better than the previous administration how?

Funny...I don't feel stimulated. Part One

President Obama has now signed the $787,000,000,000 economic stimulus bill passed by Congress last week. They are promising us prosperity by spending us into the poor house as a nation. What they actually hope is that the economy will eventually rebound on it's own so they can take credit for it. They are addicted to spending because promising money out of the federal coffers it is how they maintain their power base of beneficiaries who will vote for them. Some might think that a cynical view but what else could be the motivation behind such folly?

Since October of last year our Congress has passed and our Presidents have signed two stimulus/bailout bills totalling around $1, 500,000,000,000 (that's 1.5 trillion if the zeros confuse you.) That's additional money our government hadn't already budgeted for and money our government doesn't have since it was already overspending. The market was so confident and stimulated by the news that it promptly nose-dived with the Dow dropping about 300 points. Seems I remember the same reaction to the previous bailout bill.

In the final analysis we have only stimulated our level of debt as a nation. As the government reaches deeper into our pockets and the pockets of our children and grandchildren they are only postponing the crash that is coming if we don't reign in our unconstitutional and immoral level of spending. What is unconstitutional spending? What is immoral spending? Stay tuned.

A Presidential or a Congressional Census?

Last week it was reported on several news outlets that Republicans are upset with President Obama's reported desire to move the Census Bureau under the direct control of the Whitehouse. The Census currently resides in the Department of Commerce. Several Republicans are threatening a legal challenge if the President proceeds with this change.

Do the Republicans have a legitimate complaint? I think they do. Concerning the Census, Article One of the Constitution states :

"The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. "

Title 13 of the U.S. Code provides the charter for the Census Bureau and states that:

"The Bureau is continued as an agency within, and under the jurisdiction of, the Department of Commerce."

The Constitution grants control of the Census to the Congress as it directs by law and Title 13 of the US Code is that law. The executive branch's control on the Census is limited to Presidential appointments to the Commerce Dept. that are confirmed by the Senate. President Obama cannot legally move the Census Bureau under the direct control of the Whitehouse without Congress passing a law to amend the US Code to that effect. If Congress can muster a veto proof majority, they can also remove any level of presidential influence over the Census.

President Obama was once a professor who taught constitutional law. How is it that he is seemingly ignorant of the fact that the Constitution grants control of the Census to Congress? My guess is that he isn't ignorant at all but rather has plans for change that are best served by attempting to wrest control of the Census away from Congress. The fact that it's unconstitutional isn't high on his list of concerns. Maintaining a constitutional separation of powers and the system of checks and balances should be high on the American peoples' list of concerns.

President Obama also claims to be a Christian. It seems he is as ignorant of or unconcerned about the Bible as he is the Constitution. 1 Peter 2:13 instructs the Christian to:

"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake..."

Both as an American and a Christian the President should respect the rule of law in regard to the Census and should work within constitutional limits if he wishes to change the law. Sadly, like many of today's politicians, President Obama appears to fail on both counts.

If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.— George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

Good morning. This is my first blog posting. It will be short and to the point. This blog is nothing more than my views on the Bible and the constitution and how they relate to current and past events. I may digress to future events on occasion but will generally subscribe to the truth that, "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."