Glen was speaking to a Governor last night that did not want federal money. I couldn't understand why he could not just say no to the money.

After looking into it, I came to this conclusion.

Bills become LAW. This is an important concept of our government because it is the basis of our Republic and rule of law.

I think most of the US public view bills as just a list of stuff that congress does to implement their programs and agenda. They are not. They become the “Law of the Land”.

When viewed this way you can begin to appreciate just how wrong and misguided most bills are.

The spending bill allocates money to the States. A state that doesn't take it is breaking the LAW. This of course seems silly on the surface, states are granted autonomy to run their affairs. That is until a federal LAW is passed.

To understand if legislation is good or bad, all we have to do is ask ourselves, “Should people be prosecuted and penalized if the law is not followed?”

If we think yes, then it is probably a reasonable law. If not it should get thrown out.

So, should governors be prosecuted for not accepting this money? I can't imagine any reasonable person let alone a jury saying yes. This clearly makes the spending bill bad legislation.

Of course not every law is so cut a dry with an easy answer. However, I would say most of the recent legislation cannot stand up to this test.

We need to rally around the Fair Tax which eliminates all taxes in favor of a single consumption (sales) tax.
Summary from the back of "The Fair Tax Book" by Neal Boortz & John Linder:

What it does for the US:
1. Eliminates the IRS and tax code (and related taxes including the death tax)
2. Jump starts the economy
3. Brings business and jobs back to the US
4. Recaptures dollars lost to the underground economy

What it does for YOU
1. Keep 100% of your pay
2. Choose when to save and when to pay taxes (by buying stuff)
3. Eliminates taxes you don't even know your paying (like corporate taxes passed on to consumers)
4. Make April 15 just another beautiful day

In today's poll the Fair Tax and Sales Tax Only ideas are really the same and should get added together. The Fair Tax is the complete implementation and design of an end to end consumption tax that restores economic freedom to the US. Here is a summary of benefits:

1. Workers collect 100% of their earnings
2. Product prices remain about the same because current corporate taxes passed on to consumers go away and are replaced with the sales tax. With more dollars in your pay your buying power goes up.
3. Government revenue is generated only when we consume. This encourages saving.
4. The IRS is eliminated reducing the federal budget and eliminating the most complicated piece of legislation ever devised by man.
5. American business returns to the US and immediately become competitive in the world market!
6. The wealthiest Americans leave their money here where it helps our economy instead of putting it in shelters off-shore.
7. The underground economy is finally taxed (this is a huge amount of money!)

My mentors always said follow the money and as long as the federal government can re-distribute money to the states and others there will always be conflict of interest and poor behavior by congress.

Re-distribution is often subtle, such as in contracts to businesses in a particular district. It is also direct in terms of earmarks and programs. This always creates biased behaviors. Congress people are rewarded for maintaining bias with campaign contributions (both covert and overt), re-election, lifetime pensions, speaking tours, lobby appointments, cabinet appointments, etc...
They have little respect for fairness or what's right for the country.

Somehow we have turned the term state representative from someone who ensures state autonomy and freedom of their constituency into someone that grabs all the money they can for their state.

So we must radically change the flow of money and who is responsible for entitlements (provided we still think social security and medicare are appropriate entitlements which is a different conversation).

So...

1. Fair Tax capped at 20% of the price of goods or services. I've seen higher rates but I say any form of government should not expect to confiscate more than 20% off the backs of productive people. Read the book. It covers all the concerns including fail safes for the truly incapacitated. (

2. Cities & States keep most of this. Money stays where it is spent. They become responsible for administering and improving entitlements. The money stays local instead of going to Washington. State revenue is now roughly proportional to population. They can encourage or dissuade business and jobs as always, with programs of their own making. They won't be able to do it with tax cuts, but other concessions are many and always available.

3. The money that goes to Washington (I do not know the right percentage but off the top of my head, no more than 50%) is not allowed to be granted back to the states. It must be spent on truly federal or interstate business. Military, Immigration, Border security, Commerce Laws, Energy, and so on.

4. Amendment that States & Federal government cannot spend more than they have and must maintain a 10% reserve at all times. Its not enough to have a balanced budget. They also cannot "print" new money out of thin air.

5. Campaign funding regulation. This is very problematic and I don't have clean answers here. Bottom line - we must stop the covert funding and influence that comes from organizations not directly affiliated or funded by the campaign.

6. One law one bill. Notice this term! Bills are not to-do lists or policies or budgets or spending. They become "The law of the land" and grant power. We need to carefully look at them this way. Our form of government is rule of law (a republic), not democracy. How can we put 100 "laws" into one bill and say we have served our country? This is where congress is truly screwed up today. We have now enacted "laws" that force the government to send unprecedented amounts of money and power to places that have no business having it. One law one bill will tell who is doing what.

7. Term limits, although they do not need to be unrealistically short because of number 4, 5, & 6. If someone is doing a good job based upon these rules why give them up. What should they be paid? I have no problem paying people for quality service. We should never expect something for nothing. There needs to be something to attract quality people. With number 6 above it will be easier to vote people out that are supporting laws we don't agree with.

8. Enact "Loser" pays tort reform, including suits brought by government against its citizens. This will provide the single biggest advance in tort reform the country has ever seen. Medical costs go down. Frivolous lawsuits vanish. Insurance premiums go down.

9. English as official language. There is more prosperity for all when we unite to simply be Americans regardless of culture, religion, or race.

10. Enforce immigration law and penalize businesses that break it

11. Eliminate laws that harm economic or personal freedom.

12. Encourage laws that spot capitalist criminals and prosecute them.

13. One land, one law. Attempts to allow multi-cultural laws are unconstitutional and must be dismissed out of hand.

Done right, the job of a congress person should be the easiest job in the world. Congress is not obligated to create new laws all the time just because they are there. Wouldn't it be nice to define some simple ones that emphasize the 9 principles and not have to make any more? The government should take a lesson from the medical profession, "First, do no harm". I'm certain this is what Benjamin and Thomas had in mind!

We miss the point here.
Using public money in the first place is the problem and we should be outraged at that. Not what was done with it.

AIG (and the rest of the bailout recipients) should be in bankruptcy where existing contracts and compensation can be legitimately restructured. The market can then pick up the pieces and we can all prosper once more.

History tells us this is the correct course of action. This is what happened in the early 80's when businesses that were over-leveraged when housing collapsed went out of business. Yes it was painful for some, however, the market picked up the pieces, new jobs were created and so on. I was a young punk building houses and the company my dad and I worked for went out of business because their mortgages on speculative property were suddenly under water and there was no market for it. Sound familiar? Can you say toxic asset?

Did we cry and say please, please help me? No, we restructured, created our own business and proceeded to build houses on our own by providing exceptional value to the people who still needed houses built. I finally graduated and moved on, but it ended up one of the better moves for my father.

What about the failed business? The employees picked up the pieces with a buy out and went on to be bigger and better than before.

It would happen again if not for the meddling of the government. Instead, we make matters worse. These businesses are more likely to fail under government bail out restrictions because they no longer have the economic freedom to do what is needed to be come profitable. This includes hiring talent that can get it done.

Everyone want's their money back, so why did we give it in the first place? Buying AIG doesn't come with a warranty.

Much of this has been said before but I'll pile on...

Public money should not be given to private companies in the first place. This bill should be a moot point. Government attempts to legislate what an individual can earn goes against our basic freedoms and is the worst form of government interference. Its another form of confiscating personal property, your skills and earning potential.

We also already have ways of dealing with this. AIG should be in bankruptcy where existing compensation can be formally addressed and restructured.

A related problem is board participation. Failure should have a price. If boards were better staffed with the interests of their shareholders, there would be fewer issues with compensation for non-performance. Take GE CEO Immelt for example. Why is that man still the CEO? Because they have an agenda aligned with the Obama administration and the board is stacked.

In the end, we as a country must pay more attention to the non-performers in government (and on boards), regardless of party and get rid of them by voting better. Why are we surprised that professional politicians who have never run a business can't get it right? They don't even realize they are cutting their own throats and business will flee or shut down. Where will the government's bonuses and pensions come from then?

Government must spend less and provide more economic freedom or we will cease to be free! Next up, not only how much you can earn but what vocation is best suited to your abilities...