Since I have started posting about politics again I thought it would apropos to mention what I am or am not when it comes to politics. I am a registered independent. I am not a Republican and have just as many disagreements with their recent governance and policies as I do with the current administration. I don’t like to apply labels to myself but if forced to choose a political idealism I would call myself a Libertarian. I don’t ever vote based on party affiliation but rather based on stated beliefs and voting records on a handful of issues. While I do have a short list of what I call “non-starter” issues they are not the only things I look at in a candidate. I also look at the office for which a candidate is running and decide if the issues I usually vote on even apply before making a decision. I am not going to post the list of issues at this time, but may well later, as I am not supporting any candidates at the moment.
I will also say that my opposition to the health care take over that is being perpetuated by our federal government stems not from thinking that the Democrats involved are socialists, although some of the provably are, but rather from a base ideal that the federal government has no right to dictate to the states how to deal with the issue and furthermore has no right to force me to purchase anything from a private entity such as an insurance company. The plan on the table could be one, like Germany’s, that stood a chance of working and I would oppose it just as vehemently. I oppose almost all government meddling in the form of price fixing, dictating what any given company can offer the public, or what any private citizen is required to purchase. While I have addressed the fact I don’t think this plan will work, and history will prove me right, my opposition starts long before the question of whether any given plan will work or not. The tenth amendment sums up my feelings on the matter and while the federal government has been doing an end run around the amendment using subsidies like highway dollars and school funding the amendment exists and should be enforced. But I digress. I wanted to re-frame any debate that might take place here since the minutiae doesn’t matter concerning this bill hence this explanation.
If you take things down to a state level the things I agree with and disagree with change greatly as the states are granted all powers not explicitly granted to the federal government and while there are things that they cannot interfere with, like the bill of rights, they are afforded much more power over the existence and lives of their residents than the federal government. When it comes down to issues on a state level I will argue merits and flaws extensively and usually with great passion. In contrast with my views on the federal government which usually end with “They don’t have that authority and I wish that SCOTUS would smack them down” regardless of which party is in power.
I do not believe that taxation is illegal, that the amendment allowing it was ratified improperly or not ratified, that income is not defined properly, that I can opt out of the tax system. I do believe that a flat tax would be better this country. The figures show that a flat tax of 5% (that number may be inaccurate now as it’s been some time since I looked) with no credits, exemptions, and what not on every tax paying entity would bring in more money that our current arcane system. I know that the so-called stimulus could have paid off every dime of consumer debt in the country and had money left over but the way it was used didn’t do much of anything for the economy. I believe tax cuts will save the economy and that raising taxes will prolong the recession. I am not a truther and think that they should be kicked squarely in the teeth and I should be allowed to do so as protected political speech. I don’t believe in conspiracies for multiple reasons. And I am now rambling…
Suffice it to say I am not a huge fan of the current administration and its apparent desire to insert itself further into our private lives. I am also not happy about the other side of the coin, being Republicans, and their chosen path at the moment. I think things through on a regular basis and don’t tow any party line. So there’s my little, and completely inadequate, description of my political views. I had to post this as I have more posts planned this week where this reference will be good for my two or three readers.
Comments
Your Lovely Wife on 03.08.2010
My feeling is that any time the government does anything, it is inherently a transfer of power from the people to the state. (If the government “gives” us something, they do so with our own money, which inherently deprives us of the power to individually decide how to spend that money.) For any such transfer of power, the burden should be on the government to prove a) that they have the right to do so; and b) that it is justified. For the federal government, obviously the first requirement rules out most actions. As to the second requirement, even for the states, I think the bar should be set high. Most of the time, it’s just none of their business.