The Business section today is depressing.

In the Review Journal business section today, there were 3 articles with bad news. The first was about home prices falling again. All major cities showed declines in home prices in October.

The second article was about Las Vegas loses 13,400 construction jobs. Construction employment grow or remained steady in 120 out of 337 large cities, but Las Vegas was not one of them.

The third article was about consumer confidence fading in December. It said that holiday spending surged this year, but Americans still have their doubts about the economy. This article also discusses home prices.

It is obvious that the economy is still in trouble. With the all government looking at raising taxes, how can the economy grow? People are losing the homes, jobs, and investments. How can they pay more taxes?

New beginning: Cut here, invest there

This Review Journal article is about cutting government spending. It tells about how the mayor of Atlanta solved an out of control budget. It states,

The politicians we need are what I’d call “pay-as-you-go progressives” — those who combine fiscal prudence with growth initiatives to make their cities, their states or our country great again. Everyone knows the first rule of holes: When you’re in one, stop digging. But people often forget the second rule of holes: You can only grow your way out. You can’t borrow your way out.

One of the best of this new breed of leaders is Atlanta’s inspiring mayor, 41-year-old Kasim Reed. A former Georgia state senator, Reed won Atlanta’s mayoral race in December 2009 by 714 votes. The day he took office, Atlanta had $7.4 million in reserves, an out-of-control budget and was laying off so many firefighters there were only three personnel on a truck, below national standards. A year later, it has $58 million in reserves, and Reed has a 70 percent approval rating — which he earned the hard way.

Then it tells how he did it.

Then Reed tackled the city’s biggest problem: runaway pensions, which were eating up 20 percent of tax revenues and are rising.

Reed couldn’t cut existing pensions without lawsuits, but he cut back pensions for all new employees to pre-2000 levels and raised the vesting period to 15 years from 10.

The article ends by saying,

In a recent address, Reed elaborated: “The bottom line is that for the country to do and to be what we have been ... there must be a generation tough enough to stick out its chin and take the hit. ... It is time to begin having the types of mature and honest conversations necessary to deal effectively with the new economic realities we are facing as a nation. We simply cannot keep kicking the can down the road.”

While I don't agree with all of the article, it does make a good point about how we must be willing to sacrifice and cut back.

Was Karl Marx a Founding Father?

This is a depressing article in the Review Journal about the lack of knowledge Americans have about the Bill of Rights. It states,

Americans are woefully ignorant, correctly answering questions about the document only 32 percent of the time.

Most revealing is that 42 percent of Americans believe the concept of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" appears in one of the nation's founding documents, usually attributed to the Bill of Rights.

It is, of course, Karl Marx's central tenet for communism.

No wonder that this country is in such bad shape. The electorate is woefully uninformed and uneducated. Elections are being bought with big advertising dollars and the public is voting for the politician with the biggest budget.

Baby boomers face going bust in retirement

This article was in the Review Journal, but I could not find the link so I used this one. It points out that many have not prepared for retirement and states,

"The situation is extremely serious because baby boomers have not saved very effectively for retirement and are still retiring too early," says Olivia Mitchell, director of the Boettner Center for Pensions and Retirement Research at the University of Pennsylvania.

In another Review Journal article which is on the same topic, it states,

The oldest Baby Boomers turn 65 on Jan. 1. Then, each day of 2011 and for the next 19 years, 10,000 more will turn 65

This article points out surveys which show that the baby boomers are pessimistic about our county and the economy.

Unless the government reduces spending and eliminates regulatory agencies, we will have big financial problems.

Taxing the rich to solve the budget and other economic problems.

One article on taxing the rich, one article on what has happened when the rich were taxed, and one article on the blame for job losses show how the government is really the problem.

The first article states,

Two percent of the people in America control trillions of dollars and spend millions to get folks elected who will allow them to amass more.

Trickle-down economics never worked and it never will. Greed is a sickness, just like drug addiction and alcoholism.

This does make it sound like increasing the taxes on the rich is a good idea. However, consider this article which says,

Attempting to close its budget gap without doing what it should have done -- cut spending -- Oregon raised its "piggy-back" state income tax on the richest 2 percent of its residents last year.

As a result -- Nevada legislators, please note -- Oregon tax receipts are now ... falling. Receipts from the new tax fell from $180 million to $130 million in one year.

The article points out the the rich just either moved, moved their assets, or found other ways to avoid the tax.

Finally, the last article which says,

In her Dec. 14 letter, Joan Ivins blames our industry leaders’ greed for the loss of jobs to foreign countries. However, there is plenty of blame to go around to everyone, including:

1. Environmental laws have driven up costs of manufacturing and raw materials.

2. Safety requirements and training have increased costs and slowed production.

3. Foreign students are much more ambitious than ours, creating a superior workforce.

4. Foreign workers are willing to work harder and at a lesser wage.

5. Americans have come to expect a very high standard of living with little effort.

6. Unions have driven up wages and benefits without increasing production to a point when, combined with other factors, it is hard for manufacturers to compete.

The actual problem is government spending, taxing, regulating, and interfering in the economic process.

Many recruits too dumb for Army

This article is depressing. I had to use a non RJ link, but it is the same article. It states,

Nearly one-fourth of the students who try to join the U.S. Army fail its entrance exam, painting a grim picture of an education system that produces graduates who can't answer basic math, science and reading questions, according to a new study released Tuesday.

It continues,

The report by The Education Trust found that 23 percent of recent high school graduates don't get the minimum score needed on the enlistment test to join any branch of the military. Questions are often basic, such as: "If 2 plus x equals 4, what is the value of x?"

The military exam results are also worrisome because the test is given to a limited pool of people: Pentagon data shows that 75 percent of those aged 17 to 24 don't even qualify to take the test because they are physically unfit, have a criminal record or didn't graduate high school.

I advise you to read this entire article. We are failing our children in many ways. We are leaving them broke because they will be in debt to the government and uneducated so that they will not be prepared to earn a living.

We must stop babying our children and demand that they learn the curriculum before they can pass up to the next grade. We must not lower the standards of our schools so that we can pass every child.

Without an education, our children are doomed to poverty.

To revive economy, pull back red tape

This is another article that was in the Review Journal that I could not find a link in the RJ, so I am using this Washington Post link. This article is the effect of red tape on business expansion and about reducing the regulations. It states,

One reason often cited for this unwillingness to invest is executives' belief that Washington regulators are stifling fresh investment and discouraging innovation through new rules and requirements.

If Washington expects to partner with the private sector to lead the effort toward economic recovery, we must address the regulatory uncertainty felt by many of our small and large businesses.

I feel that this applies to the state level as well as the national level. We need to make Nevada more business friendly by reducing the red tape and restrictions faced by a new business.

In my opinion, it is not constitutional for a regulation agency to pass regulation which as actually laws. Congress is the only branch of the federal government that is given the power to pass laws by the Constitution. Congress should not give that power away.

Folly of belief in failed ideas

This was an article in the Sun. I could not find the link to the Sun article, but I found a link to the same article titled "When Zombies Win". It states,

When historians look back at 2008-10, what will puzzle them most, I believe, is the strange triumph of failed ideas. Free-market fundamentalists have been wrong about everything — yet they now dominate the political scene more thoroughly than ever.

I also believe that when historians look back at the century, what will puzzle them most is the strange triumph of failed ideas. The failed ideas that government can and should control the economy. Capitalism was responsible for the rise of the United States. When the government tried to control the ups and downs of the economic cycle, it created more problems than it solved.

The problems of today were caused by the government limiting the free market with rules and regulations. Even charities who are trying to help the poor and homeless have had to shut down due to government regulations.

Take the FDA. How many drugs have been approved that have resulted in lawsuits against the companies selling them? Shouldn't the FDA prevent harmful drugs from reaching the market place? Isn't that the reason that we have a FDA?

Take the Department of Education. Shouldn't education be better now that we have a Department of Education. An article in the Review Journal has the title."Many recruits too dumb for the Army". Our education is worse now than it was 60 years ago.

Government spending, taxing, and regulations are ruining this country.

Closing ranks

This Review Journal Article states,

Earlier this month, an audit of state contracts with current and former state employees revealed sweetheart deals that have led some lawmakers to suspect "criminal activity."

The irregularities include one employee billing the state for working 25 hours a day -- talk about dedication! -- and another receiving $350 an hour for a job usually rated at $65 an hour. The audit also found numerous cases when employees billed the state for doing contract work at times they were supposed to be working their regular state jobs.

Until waste like this is eliminated, the budget should not be increased.

The article continues,

If you listen closely, the snorting and foot-stomping you will now hear are the state bureaucratic equivalent of the way a herd of musk ox signal each other to form their defensive circle, with all horns pointing outward and each beast's unarmed posterior thus perfectly protected.

It is time to name names and fire the people who are responsible for this waste.

Health care and interstate commerce

This article was in the Review Journal, but I couldn't find the link so I used this one. It is about the legislature's abuse of the government's authority to regulate commerce. It states,

U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson took a stand for the principle that Congress may exercise only those powers that are specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

It's about time someone did. Over the years, the Supreme Court, acceding to the legislative branch's power grabs, has transformed a provision aimed at eliminating internal trade barriers into an all-purpose excuse for nearly anything Congress decides to do.

In 1942, for instance, the court ruled that the Commerce Clause authorized punishing a farmer for violating federal crop quotas by growing wheat for his own consumption. Although the grain never left his farm, let alone crossed state lines, the court reasoned that such self-sufficiency, writ large, had a "substantial economic effect" on interstate commerce in wheat.

I agree. We have let the government expand its power and authority to the point where soon the government will have control of our lives.

The article continues

In Obama's view, the failure to buy medical coverage can be treated as a federal offense because that failure, aggregated across millions of people, has a substantial effect on the interstate market in health care. But the same thing can be said of the failure to exercise, the failure to get enough sleep, the failure to brush your teeth, the failure to wear a coat in cold weather and the failure to eat a proper diet.

We must elect legislators who will uphold the Constitution as they swear to do when they take office.

Spreading wealth, trapping poor

This article in the Review Journal states,

There's an economic parable that has been floating around for several years that hits this nail on the head. It's titled: "The tax system explained in beer." There are a number of variations, but here's the quick version:

"Ten men go out for beer, and the bill comes to $100.

"They paid their bill the way Americans pay taxes.

"The first four men (the poorest) paid nothing. The fifth, $1. The sixth, $3. The seventh, $7. The eighth, $12. The ninth, $18. The 10th (the richest) paid $59.

"One day, the owner threw them a curve ball. 'Since you are good customers, I'm reducing the cost of your daily beer by $20.'

"The group still wanted to pay their bill the way Americans pay taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They drank for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

"They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

"So the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow American tax principle.

"And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100 percent savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (a savings of 33 percent). The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28 percent savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25 percent savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22 percent savings). The 10th now paid $49 instead of $59 (16 percent savings).

"Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

" 'I only got a dollar out of the $20 savings,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the 10th man. 'But he got $10!'

" 'Yeah, that's right,' they all exclaimed, 'The wealthy get all the breaks. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

"The nine men surrounded the 10th and beat him up.

"The next night, the 10th man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered they didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill."

I know supporters of the president discount this as stupid spam. But there's truth behind it. When you "spread the wealth around" in this way, you legitimize citizen freeloaders. And that is most definitely not "good for everybody."

Supersized Government?

In this article in the Orlando Sentinel, it states,

People who wonder what America's budget problem is ultimately about should look to Europe. In the streets of Dublin, Athens and London, angry citizens are protesting government plans to cut programs and raise taxes. The social contract is being broken. People are furious; they feel betrayed.

Modern democracies have created a new morality. Government benefits, once conferred, cannot be revoked. People expect them and consider them property rights. Just as government cannot randomly confiscate property, it cannot withdraw benefits without violating a moral code.

The idea of individual responsibility has given way to government responsibility. A lady spills hot McDonald's coffee on her legs while driving and it is the McDonald's fault for not warning her.

As soon as something happens that we don't like, we ask the government to fix it. It is time that we take responsibility for our own actions.

The writer points out that,

If everyone feels morally entitled to existing benefits and tax breaks, public opinion will remain hopelessly muddled: desirous in the abstract of curbing budget deficits but adamant about keeping all of Social Security, Medicare and everything else. Politicians will be scared to make tough decisions for fear of voter reprisals.

How true. It will take courage and fortitude by the people and the politician to cut government spending. I fear that both qualities are lacking in most people and politicians.

Jobless-tax rate for employers raised

This article in the Review Journal states,

State Employment Security Division administrator Cindy Jones decided Tuesday to increase the average unemployment tax rate paid by employers by 50 percent starting in January.

Later, it states,

Because of Nevada's highest-in-the-nation unemployment rate of 14.2 percent, the state has had to borrow more than $579 million from the federal government in the past 14 months to keep paying the state portion of unemployment benefits.

It continues later saying,

Even with the higher rate, Jones expects the state to have to borrow an additional $250 million from the federal government by Sept. 30.

With Nevada's unemployment at the highest in the nation, the state is raising taxes on employers based on the wages paid. Employers will be looking for ways to reduce employees. They will not be trying to hire more.

The Nevada legislature will also be looking at additional taxes on businesses in their next session. No wonder Nevada has the largest unemployment in the nation.

I suggest that we pass immigration legislation similar to Arizona or Oklahoma. The money saved on health care and schooling of illegal aliens could be used instead of raising taxes.

Greenbacks ain't what they used to be

This article is about inflation and our fiat money. A reader sent a letter that said,

"No, our money is just fine, Vin," writes in one correspondent, answering my column of Nov. 21. "In spite of what the gold bugs would have you believe; the value of the dollar is still, historically and relatively speaking, at the place it was a century ago."

The author replied,

It's hard to believe anyone who's allowed unsupervised use of a computer can think the dollar is worth as much as it was a century ago -- or even 50 years ago, for that matter.

Later, the author states,

"No, our money is just fine, Vin," writes in one correspondent, answering my column of Nov. 21. "In spite of what the gold bugs would have you believe; the value of the dollar is still, historically and relatively speaking, at the place it was a century ago."

He continues,

Still, I suppose there's no convincing anyone who insists on believing their paper dollars have not lost value, that someone who was promised years ago their widow would be fine on a $2,000-a-year railroad pension was not cheated in any way by the banksters printing up all their new Monopoly money at the Federal Reserve.

The point is that fiat money is not real money and that when the United States stopped backing its money with gold, the people were being robbed of their savings.

The Federal Reserve has not prevented recessions or depressions like the government expected it to do. The Fed has actually caused more problems.

We need to get back to real silver and gold money. In fact, soon there will be an organization in Nevada that will provide a means to use real silver and gold money as currency as it should be used.

Potential costs of new law worry officials in Nevada

This is an interesting article in the Review Journal. It states,

The stakes are high for Nevada in the cases seeking to block implementation of the law overhauling health care.

If the law were struck down, it would save taxpayers in the economically depressed state as much as $574 million in costs to the state's general fund through 2019, according to the latest state estimates.

Wasn't this supposed to cut health care costs? You can not get something for nothing unless you live in socialistic country, but in the end, someone has to pay.

The article also states,

Hutchison is representing Nevada in the case pro bono. Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto refused a directive from Gibbons to join the lawsuit, arguing that she thought the plaintiffs' case was frivolous.

Either the Attorney General was playing politics or she doesn't know her law because the case must have had merit since the ruling by U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson in Richmond, Va.declared the heart of the legislation is unconstitutional.

How did she get reelected? Even the Review Journal before the election said that she was a disappointment.

If the people of Nevada continue to vote by party instead of voting for the best candidate, we will continue to lose our liberty and freedom.

Job licensing

This article in the Review Journal states,

Anyone who argues state government has been cut to the bone hasn't visited Nevada's website.

Clicking on the "Boards & Commissions" button reveals flab begging to be carved away. More than 160 panels are listed alphabetically. Most of them serve dubious purposes -- especially licensing boards that exist solely to deny low-skill workers the chance to earn a living while protecting regulated industries from new competition.

I wonder how many people died from a bad haircut before we had licensed barbers. How many people died from unlicensed landscapers? These licensing boards are also just a way for government to get more money.

The article continues,

With so many Nevadans unemployed, licensing standards make it extremely difficult for the jobless to start businesses, especially home-based ones. The state needs a culture of opportunity, not bureaucracy, to grow its battered economy.

If we want Nevada to grow and if we want to stimulate Nevada's economy, we must make it easier to do business in Nevada.

Obama proposes pay freeze

This article was in the Review Journal, but it is from the Washington Post. It states,

President Obama on Monday announced a two-year pay freeze for most of the 1.9 million civilians who work for the federal government, as he tried to address concerns over a mushrooming deficit and placate Republicans who have targeted the workforce for big cuts.

While I am against the federal government ordering pay freezes, since they are the employers, they have the right to determine the salaries of their employees. This is a very good idea.

The article also states,

The freeze, which must be approved by Congress, would be the first two-year halt to federal raises in modern history.

The private sector has had to deal with the economic slow down for several years. It is time that the federal government stops spending money that it doesn't have and starts to balance the expenses and income like the rest of us.

Cutting the national debt

This article in the Sun states,

Bowles and Simpson call for a wide range of cuts, including in Social Security, Medicare and the Defense Department. They suggest overhauling the tax code to reduce rates while eliminating many loopholes. And they also call for raising the gas tax to pay for roads.

Why aren't they suggesting the elimination of some ot the regulatory agencies which can create laws in violation of the Constitution? The Constitution says that only congress has the power to legislate.

It also states,

During the Bush administration, for example, the nation entered two wars, and the Republican Congress went on a spending spree — on credit. Republicans also pushed tax cuts, as they are doing now, but trickle-down economics doesn’t work — it has only added to the debt.

This statement is illogical. Just because the national debt increased during the Bush administration doesn't prove that tax cuts don't work. What it does prove is that increased government spending increases government debt.

Here is a novel concept. Control government spending. However, our politicians don't want to do that.

Real Shocker-Consumers not gaga over electric cars

In this article in the Review Journal, it states,

When the Obama administration took over financially ailing General Motors, more than one observer dubbed the resulting enterprise "Government Motors."

Since then, GM has geared up production of pricey "hybrids" that supposedly cause less pollution, until one considers battery disposal.

Critics complained the central state was mandating production of a kind of car that truck- and SUV-hungry American consumers don't want. The Obama administration responded, in effect, "Not so: Lots of the hybrids are selling."

But an examination of just where those sales are coming from gives the "Government Motors" label new relevance. President Barack Obama's own administration has bought almost a fourth of the Ford and GM hybrid vehicles sold since he took office, Bloomberg News reports, accelerating federal purchases to make up for waning consumer demand.

Once again the government is interfering with supply and demand. The liberals complain that capitalism doesn't work, but the government has been interfering with capitalism for years. The more that government interferes, the more that our government becomes socialistic. That is why we are an economic crisis today.

Putting the insurance business out of business

In this article in the Review Journal, it states,

Many -- even "moderate" Republicans -- have been heard of late to say, "There are sections of Obamacare that need tweaking, maybe even repeal. But there are some provisions that should be kept, that we can all agree make sense, including the ban on insurance companies refusing to cover people with pre-existing conditions."

This seems like a very good idea except that it will not work. As the article states later,

No insurance enterprise -- which spreads among participants the risk of future misfortunes which cannot be precisely predicted -- could long survive if people were allowed to buy "insurance" against unhappy events which had already occurred, paying in (say) $6,000 to get back a guaranteed $100,000.

The article ends by stating,

Certainly it's not a happy thing that one can't sign up for fire insurance on a house that's already burned down. But the laws of physics, economics and mathematics cannot be repealed by the central state, as they must eventually learn.

Unless, of course, the whole point is to drive the private insurance firms out of business.

Insurance is should be available to everyone. If one decides that they do not want insurance, they must suffer the consequences. However, the problem is that insurance is provided by employers in most cases and is cancelled when you lose your job. Then if you have pre-existing conditions, you cannot get insurance.

One suggestion is to have insurance which is yours as long as you pay for it. Your employer would reimburse you for the costs. The employer should be able to deduct it as an expense as they do now and you would not have to declare it as income. It would then go with you from employer to employer.

Public employee pensions--We can't afford them

In this article in the Review Journal, it states,

If there's one good government idea out there, it's the concept of moving public workers from anachronistic defined-benefit plans to modern 401(k)-style retirement plans.

This is a good idea. In fact, it is something that the IAP working on getting passed in the 2011 legislative session.

The article also states,

Defined-benefit plans stem from a bad moment in time in which employers -- and now unions -- cared for employees like children incapable of planning for their own retirements. Over time, these plans metastasized into grotesque shadows of their initial good intention.

We have to face facts. We cannot avoid this type of public pension plans. In fact, we should also require that all politicians be part of the public pension plan. They should not be able to vote on something that affects everyone but them.

Critics see few licensing panels needed

This article in the Review Journal states,

Nevada's outgoing governor isn't the only one questioning the need for licensing boards that set standards and license workers in many occupations.

While defenders say the boards protect the public from harm, others suggest they are unnecessary for occupations that don't require high skill levels.

I think that we have too many licensing boards now. You have to have a license to cut hair for a living.

How many people were harmed by haircuts before they were licensed? If someone gave you a bad haircut, you just didn't go back the next time you needed a hair cut.

The article later states,

During recessions, workers who lose their jobs need the opportunity to start their own businesses, and licensing agencies often make that difficult, Berliner said. "Many, if not most, make it difficult to start home-based businesses. That is important for people who have lost their jobs."

People should have the opportunity to start their own businesses any time. That is what made America great.

What we need is less licensing and more freedom. As it says in The Declaration of Independence, we are endowed "with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".

Government too large for our good

This letter to the editor in the Sun states,

I want the size, scope, power and reach of the federal government reduced. Why? Because when any human driven entity becomes very powerful, it eventually becomes “out of balance,” and it abuses its “power and reach.”

Later, it states,

Creating giant deficits through awful economic policy, manipulating the housing market leading to a housing value collapse, going to war without proper taxes to fund the effort, stealing money from the Social Security Trust Fund to pay for other government priorities, enacting immigration laws and then not enforcing them, spending billions of “borrowed” dollars on foreign aid and nation-building efforts, allowing our national infrastructure to age because revenue was spent foolishly on other items, using the power and reach of the federal government to attempt “social engineering” of American society, etc. — all this carnage was caused by our federal government and its size, scope, power and reach.

This seems to summarize the effects of big government very well.

We have let 2 parties control our government for over 100 years. It is time for new management and smaller government.

Back up

Regarding the editorial entitled “Back up”, the problem of the backlog of immigration cases could be solved by passing a law similar to the SB 1070 in Arizona. By fining employers of illegal aliens, the illegal aliens would have trouble fining work and many would leave the state.

Illegal aliens would also be concerned with any traffic violation that may lead to their deportation. The economic situation here in Nevada would also be another incentive for them to leave the state.

Since Oklahoma and Arizona have passed stiff immigration laws, many illegal aliens have left those states. I fear that many of them have moved to Nevada.

We shouldn't allow politicians to deceive us.

In this letter to the editor in the Sun, it says that,

Why let political shenanigans decide who and what gets our vote instead of using common sense and putting country and all American people first? Of course, this is something about which we don’t usually think, as is the fact that we never learn our lesson nor see that power-hungry political parties are not interested in the welfare of the country or the American people, but only in themselves.

With 2 parties in complete control, this is what you will get. We need to have 3 or 4 major parties to provide a choice for the voters.

In Nevada, the voters have a great opportunity to have a 3rd major political party. the Independent American Party is the 3rd largest party and the fastest growing party in Nevada. 4 IAP candidates were elected in the last election.

Now is the time to register as an IAP voter. You can still vote for the candidate that you feel is best, but you will have helped the IAP become the 3rd major political party in Nevada and sent a message that you have had enough and will fight back.

The Election Results

I want to thank everyone for their support and prayers. Unfortunately, I didn't win the election. Here are the results.for Nevada State Senate District 9.

Elizabeth Halseth-Republican 41,658 votes 50%
Tom Jones-Indenpendent American Party 4,575 votes 5%
Benny Yerushalmi-Democrat 37,152 votes 45%

I learned a lot about campaigning and really enjoyed meeting everyone.As the Clark County IAP Secretary, I plan to continue working hard to help the IAP become the third major political party in Nevada.

The Independent American Party is the third largest party in Nevada. It is also the fastest growing party in Nevada. In this last election, the IAP had four candidates win their races. The winners were
John Lampros of White Pine County was elected to County Commissioner in Seat 5
Falkon Finlinson was elected as Public Administrator in Nye County
Arthur Wehrmeister was elected as the Esmeralda County District Attorney
and Jackie Burg was reelected as the Eureka County Clerk County.

With a major effort beginning now, the IAP plans to be a major party by the end of 2011. The IAP is reorganizing to become to become an effective force in the 2012 election.

Once again, I want to thank everyone for their help and support.

Our comtemptible, oath-breaking Congress

This is a great article in the Review Journal. It is about how our Congressmen are breaking their oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I could not find a link to the Review Journal article so I am using this link to the same article.

The first line in the article states,

Most people whom we elect to Congress are either ignorant of, have contempt for or are just plain stupid about the United States Constitution.

The article then shows the ignorance and contempt that our congressmen have for the Constitution. It ends with this.

If congressmen, judges, the president and other government officials were merely ignorant of our Constitution, there'd be hope -- ignorance is curable through education. These people in Washington see themselves as our betters and rulers. They have contempt for the limits our Constitution places on the federal government envisioned by James Madison, the father of our Constitution, who explained in the Federalist Paper 45: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."

We cannot elect and allow people to break their oath to uphold the Constitution.

Schools budget cuts, maintenance, and salaries

On October 26, the Review Journal ran an article on school spending and the Sun ran an article on school spending. The Sun's article was about how budget cuts are taking a toll on school maintenance.

So it is with the 356 schools — more than a third over two decades old — that are cleaned, cooled and repaired by the Clark County School District.

Spread over an area the size of Delaware and Connecticut combined, the schools are at risk because of current and imminent budget cuts, depleted funds from a big construction bond and relentless Father Time amid brutal summers.

The immediate future is worrisome, said Paul Gerner, chief of school construction and maintenance. “You’ll have more roofs that leak, you’ll have more days without air conditioning and you can’t operate schools,” he said. “It’s mission critical.”

The Review Journal's article was about how the school district approved a #270,000 salary and $89,000 in various miscellaneous bonuses. He was making $225,000 in Colorado and the old superintendent made $245,000.

Critics want to know who is paying for the house Dwight Jones will soon be living in.

The Colorado education commissioner has signed a four-year contract -- worth $358,000 in total, annual compensation -- to become the next superintendent of the Clark County School District.

How can the school district spend more money when it doesn't have enough to maintain the schools? This is just another example of the waste and careless spending in the school district and the state's budget in general.

These people just think that they can spend and we the taxpayers will continue to pay more and more.

It has got to stop.

Payroll Tax increase protested

This article in the Review Journal is about the 50% hike in unemployment taxes which will take effect January 1, 2011. The article states that,

The tax is being increased because the state unemployment trust fund was exhausted in October 2009 and the state so far has been forced to borrow more than $500 million from the U.S. Department of Labor to keep paying benefits. The heavy borrowing occurred largely because Nevada's unemployment rate has tripled in three years and now stands at 14.4 percent, the highest in the nation.

With no signs of recovery looming, the state borrowing is expected to reach $830 million by Oct. 1, 2011. Just three years ago, the state trust fund was more than $800 million in the black.

This tax will reduce jobs and increase unemployment instead of increasing jobs.

I suggest that instead of raising the unemployment tax, the state should stop illegal aliens from receiving health care and education by passing laws similar to Arizona's SB 1070.

The millions of dollars that are saved by stopping illegal immigration could be used to offset the unemployment insurance deficit.

Immigrant veterans facing deportation

This Review Journal article shows an example of how inept our government is in almost anything that it does. The article states,

Up to 8,000 non-citizens enlist in the U.S. Armed Forces every year and serve alongside American troops. As of May 2010, there were 16,966 non-citizens on active duty. The military does not allow illegal immigrants to enlist.

If non-citizens die while serving, they are given citizenship and a military funeral. If they live and get in trouble with the law, as Coombs did, they can get caught in the net of a 1996 immigration law that greatly expanded the list of crimes for which non-citizens can be deported.

The first mistake is letting non citizens enlist in the military. Then, we compound the mistake by deporting them after they have served our country.

If they die while serving, they are given citizenship, but, if they live, they can be deported. To me, this is criminal. If they serve our country even if it is a mistake, they deserve citizenship.

In the Coombs case, he was court-martialed for possession of cocaine and marijuana with the intent to distribute, and was given 18 months of confinement and a dishonorable discharge.

This is not what I would consider completing your obligation to serve in the military. We could eliminate this problem by not allowing an non-citizen to serve in the military or, if they fulfill their obligation completely, give them citizenship.

The painfull, costly results of slashing state programs

This Sun article demonstrates how the liberals try to justify spending. It uses the disabled as an example of the hardships that cutting spending will include.

If you look at the last 50 years, you will see that our economy is worse than beforre, that people are losing their homes, that our schools are lacking, that we are not any safer, and that more people are living in poverty than ever before. Government is spending more than ever before and we are in worse shape.

50 years ago, one person working could support a family. Now it takes two people working. To look at it another way, it takes 2 jobs instead of one job to support a family. Why? The answer is increased taxes. We pay 50% to 60% of our salary in various federal, state, and local taxes.

Everyone has to cut back. However, we can decide where to cut back and it is not necessary to cut back on the disabled. If we stop illegal immigration with a bill like Arizona's SB 1070, we would save millions, if not billions, of dollars on education and health costs.

We cannot afford more taxes. It would be disastrous for the economy and Nevada.

No good choice for Attorney General

In this Review Journal editorial about the attorney general race which is

the most high-profile -- and, arguably, important -- state constitutional officer.

it stated that,

While we initially had high hopes for Ms. Masto, she's proved a disappointment. Mr. Barrick is marginally qualified. Joel Hansen, with perhaps the best ideas, is an Independent American with little chance of being elected.

Voters don't have a good choice for attorney general this election cycle. More's the pity.

After reading the article, it seemed that you felt that Mr. Hansen was the best candidate. One of these three will get elected. Do you base your endorsements on who is the best candidate or do you just endorse the candidate who you think will win?

For State Senate

In the Review Journal’s article on the State Senate Races, the only candidates mentioned were the Democratic candidates and the Republican candidates. Why? I am sure that there are many very qualified third party candidates or independent candidates.

In fact, I am a candidate in the State Senator District 9 race and feel that I am more qualified that the other two candidates mentioned by the RJ. Did the RJ visit my web site, listen to my interviews on the radio, come to any events, or read the interview that I gave to the RJ before the decided who to support in this race?

If they did research my platform, they should have at least mentioned my candidacy and commented on why they didn’t feel they could support me.

Several weeks ago, an RJ editorial said that the 2 party system had failed and we needed more political parties, but then the RJ doesn’t even mention all the candidates in a race It could at least list the other candidates running.

An education in spending

This Review Journal article states,

The last thing our education system needs is more money.

Of all the things the Newark, N.J., school system needs, the last of them is more money. Newark spends more per pupil than any other city in the country, and gets dismayingly little for it. For $22,000 per pupil — more than twice the national average — it graduates half its students.

Later in the article, it states,

We have tripled per-pupil spending during the past four decades, while results have largely stayed flat.

I believe that, if we used the testing standards of the past four decades, we would find that the results are terrible and getting worse. The drop out rate is higher than ever.

When we pass students in the K to 5 without requiring that they have learning the curriculum, we cannot expect them to be able to learn the curriculum when they get to high school. Therefore, they give up and drop out.

We do not need more money for education. We need more education for our money.

State council votes to increase unemployment tax

This article in the Review Journal states,

Happy New Year, Nevada employers.

Starting Jan. 1, you will be hit with a 50 percent increase in the taxes you pay to provide unemployment benefits to workers, the state Employment Security Council decided Tuesday.

But that won't be the last of your increases.

As early as September, your unemployment taxes are expected to be boosted again to help the state pay back another $300 million it will borrow from the federal government.

With Nevada already leading the nation in unemployment, the State has to raise taxes on employers because of the deficit in the unemployment insurance fund. It can only lead to more unemployment or, at best, no new jobs.

It seems to be a vicious circle. Raise unemployment taxes on businesses. Unemployment increases. Raise taxes again to pay for the increased unemployment.

Increased taxes will not stimulate the economy and create jobs.

Congress can't repeal laws of economics

This article was in the Review Journal, but I had to use this link. It is about the unintended consequences of passing laws without considering the laws of economics.

It states,

It's raining! I don't like it! Why hasn't Congress passed the Good Weather Act and the Everybody Happy Act?

Sound dumb?

Why is it any dumber than a law called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which promised to cover more for less money?

It than points out the effects of ObamaCare and how you cannot expect businesses to do things that will cost them money and lose them money.

It states,

In other words: "We have repealed the basic laws of economics. Insurance companies must now give people more but not charge them for it. If you do charge more, you must not tell your customers why. Shut up, obey, and don't complain. We are your rulers."

Vegas a hot spot for welfasre recipients from California

This article was in the Sun, but I could only find this link. It is about how California welfare recipients are spending their welfare money on trips to Las Vegas and cruises to other places.

It states,

More than $69 million in California welfare money, meant to help the needy pay their rent and clothe their children, has been spent or withdrawn outside the state in recent years, including millions in Las Vegas, hundreds of thousands in Hawaii and thousands on cruise ships sailing from Miami.

How much of Nevada's welfare is also being spent unnecessarily? This is just one example of the wasteful spending in government.

We need to control spending and stop raising taxes.

Likely voters find state spending decisions difficult

This front page article in the Review Journal states,

The more Nevadans think about the state's projected $3 billion revenue shortfall, the more they want to cut spending and increase taxes.

At least that's what the Impact Nevada survey found when 600 likely voters around the state were polled from Sept. 6-16

The problem with this poll is that is assumes that the state will have a $3 billion deficit. This is not true. The actual deficit if the state doesn't increase spending will be $1.5 billion which Steven Horsford, the Senate Majority Leader, says can be cut from the budget.

The question that should be asked is,

if the people want to spend more money when it will mean more taxes

.

Food Stamp Nation

This article was in the Review Journal, but I could not find it on the RJ site so I used another site.

'The lessons of history ... show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit.'

These searing words about Depression-era welfare are from Franklin Roosevelt's 1935 State of the Union Address. FDR feared this self-reliant people might come to depend permanently upon government for the necessities of their daily lives. Like narcotics, such a dependency would destroy the fiber and spirit of the nation.

What brings his words to mind is news that 41.8 million Americans are on food stamps, and the White House estimates 43 million will soon be getting food stamps every month.

A seventh of the nation cannot even feed itself.

The government just released figures that show that more people are living below the poverty level than ever before.

Welfare isn't working. Before food stamps and welfare, this article points out that,

No one was starving. There had been no starvation since Jamestown, with such exceptions as the Donner Party caught in the Sierra Nevada in the winter of 1846-47, who took to eating their dead.

Sure there was poverty, but people and charities helped to prevent starvation and helped people through their tough times.

I just don't think that increasing taxes to pay for more services will help. In fact, I believe that more taxes will cause more poverty and problems.

Consider all sides before casting a vote

This letter to the editor in the Sun, states,

The Tea Party/Republicans encourage voters to focus on the deficit, the deficit, the deficit. Yes, the deficit is a major problem. But it is only part of the problem. Other major challenges that are rarely mentioned are Wall Street, big business, the whole military/industrial complex, insurance companies and Big Pharma. Abuses by all of the above are undermining our economic system and have wiped out many a retirement fund. As laws that were instituted to curb these abuses have been watered down or eliminated, we the people have been saddled with rapidly increasing premiums and fewer safeguards, while the profits of the institutions have become exorbitant.

The problem is the deficits. The tax and spend Republicans and Democrats have been in control for over 100 years. Look back 30 or 40 years. Is the economy any better? Is education any better? Are you any safer? Do you have as many freedoms?

We have more people living below the poverty level than ever before. We pay 50% to 60% of what we earn in taxes. We are facing 2 historic tax increases.

The government cannot and should not spend more than it takes in. It cannot keep raising taxes and continue spending. It has to stop.

The $3 billion deficit doesn't exist.

This article in the Sun is about Steven Horsford discussing the Nevada 2011 budget.
Senate Majority Leader Horsford states,

With the state facing an estimated $3 billion shortfall, Horsford, D-Las Vegas, proposed in an interview with the Las Vegas Sun that the state should cut programs or shift them along with their costs to local governments.

These spending reductions would total about $1.5 billion.

First, Nevada is not facing a $3 billion deficit. According the Nevada Budget Direct Andrew Clinger, the projected revenue is $5 billion and, according to Sean Whaley, Capital Bureau Chief of the Nevada News Bureau, the budget is about $6.5 billion. Therefore, the deficit is $1.5 billion. The $3 billion deficit is based on a wish list for the next 2 years. They are asking for an increase in spending of $1.5 billion.

Second, since the deficit should be $1.5 billion and Horsford said that we can cut $1.5 billion in costs, we can balance the budget without the need to raise taxes.

By passing illegal immigration laws similar to Arizona's SB 1070, we could save millions of dollars on illegal alien healthcare and educational costs and maybe even reduce taxes.

We cannot afford another tax increase. Do not be brainwashed into thinking that a tax increase is necessary. It isn't.

Reveiw Journal Impact Opinion Poll Articles

This is the letter that I wrote to the Review Journal about their series of articles using the impact opinion polls.

In your series of articles about the impact opinion polls on taxes, you have neglected to ask some of the most important questions of all.

Would you be willing to cut services to avoid tax increases?

Would you favor an amendment like the Tax and Spending Control amendment which would limit budget increases to inflation and population growth?

The questions that are being asked all assume that a tax increase is necessary. This 2011 tax increase will be the third record tax increase in less than 10 years. With people struggling to survive due to inflation, people losing their businesses, people losing their homes, and people losing their jobs, we cannot afford any more tax increases.

In the latest figures by the government, more people are living in poverty than ever before. Higher taxes will create even more people living in poverty.

The rich begin to move away

This article was in the Review Journal on October 1, but I cannot find the link so I used a link to the same article on another site. it states,

As I've said before, a tax cut is not a handout. It simply means government steals less. What progressives want to do is take money from some — by force — and spend it on others. It sounds less noble when plainly stated.

That's the moral side of the matter. There's a practical side, too. Taxes discourage wealth creation. That hurts everyone, the lower end of the income scale most of all. An economy that, through freedom, encourages the production of wealth raises the living standards of lower-income people as well as everyone else.

Then the author gives a couple of real life examples.

"The rich have always cried wolf like that," Hill says.

But the wolf is here. Maryland created a special tax on rich people that was supposed to bring in $106 million. Instead, the state lost $257 million.

New York billionaire Tom Golisano isn't stupid, either. With $3,000 and one employee, he started a business that processes paychecks for companies. He created 13,000 jobs.

Then New York state hiked the income tax on millionaires.

"It was the straw that broke the camel's back," he says. "Not that I like to throw the number around, but my personal income tax last year would've been $13,800 a day. Would you like to write a check for $13,800 a day to a state government, as opposed to moving to another state where there's no state income tax or very low state income tax?

He established residence in Florida, which has no personal income tax.

Legislatures pass laws without considering the unintended consequences. The greatest motivational principle is that people do what is best for them. This applies to legislators, rich people, middle class people, and poor people.

Avoiding Mandates

This Review Journal editorial points out that Obamacare is not working. It states,

As a matter of fact, today was the day when those provisions of the new law were set to take effect. But it didn't work out quite as planned.

"Major health insurance companies in California and other states have decided to stop selling policies for children rather than comply with a new federal health-care law that bars them from rejecting youngsters with pre-existing medical conditions," the Los Angeles Times reported Tuesday.

Anthem Blue Cross, Aetna Inc., Cigna Corp. and others said they were taking the step because the new federal mandate "could create huge and unexpected costs for covering children," by prompting parents to buy policies only after their children became sick.

What a surprise! Who would have thought that insurance companies actually want to protect themselves from losses and want to make a profit?

ObamaCare is perfect example of government at its worst. A bill rushed through congress without being read and consequences being considered.

Clark County middle school system is broken

This is a major problem with our school system and is one reason why I don't think that more money will fix the problems.

This letter to the editor states that

It is painfully obvious that the middle school structure as it stands is not working for today's children. Many children are coming to middle school reading below a fifth-grade level and/or not knowing their multiplication tables. Because the district requirements to pass from one grade to the next are so lenient in middle school, students can fail most of their classes and still be promoted to the next grade. The students are aware of these low expectations, and many take advantage of the opportunity to pass with limited effort.

I have made it one of the steps that Nevada needs to take to improve the educational system. We need to require that students learn the material or they will fail. This must start at the first grade.

Staying alive.

This article in the Review Journal states,

Two parties are simply not enough to represent all the principles, values and interests of the citizens of this country. We need more parties -- especially more viable ones -- not fewer. Voters should have real choices each election cycle.

That is why I suggest that voters change their voter registration to the Independent American Party. If enough voter would change, the IAP would become the third major party in Nevada. Voters could still vote for any party, but it would send a message that voters have had enough.

Getting Nevada running again

This article in the Review Journal by Danny Tarkanian states,

Nevada is suffering through the worst economic crisis in our state's history. Where our state leads the nation, we do so in unenviable categories: unemployment, foreclosures and bankruptcies. Our $6.5 billion state budget is projected to have a $3 billion deficit. Yes, you read that right -- Nevada can only fund a little over half of its current obligations.

This is because of the additional expenses that will be added to the budget in 2011. We should refuse to increase the spending when we are in this economic crisis.

He continues by saying,

Although an increase in economic activity in the private sector will certainly help Nevada's economy, it alone is not the solution. Neither is raising taxes or cutting $3 billion in spending (though undoubtedly some unnecessary spending must be cut).

I agree that another record tax increase in not the answer, but I do think that we should cut the budget to the 2008 budget figure of $2.8 Billion. We have to continue the pay freezes and one-day-a-month furloughs of state agencies and education until the economy improves.

We need to have the state post financial reports for each year on the internet in an easy to read format so that the actual figures are available to everyone.

Personal responsibility can untangle government's mess

This article in the New York Times and the Review Journal states,

The heart of any moral system is the connection between action and consequences. Today’s public anger rises from the belief that this connection has been severed in one realm after another.

Financiers send the world into recession and don’t seem to suffer. Neighbors take on huge mortgages and then just walk away when they go underwater. Washington politicians avoid living within their means. Federal agencies fail and get rewarded with more responsibilities.

What the country is really looking for is a restoration of responsibility. If some smart leader is going to help us get out of ideological gridlock, that leader will reframe politics around this end.

I think that the author is correct about this is really the heart of our problems. We are asking the government to solve all our problems and to protect us from any difficulty.

Our legislators are taking advantage of this and using it to stay elected and spending our money.

4 interesting articles on the Review Journal Nevada section front page

One is about question 4 which seeks to revise the PISTOL amendment about eminent domain. It says that

If voters approve the question, then they revise the Peoples' Initiative to Stop Taking Our Land (PISTOL) constitutional amendment that 60 percent of them approved in 2008.

Why should the government be able to take land from an owner to give to a private company for any reason?

Another is about voters demand balanced budgets. It says

A majority of Nevadans say they believe it is time to revive a proposed constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget, according to a new poll.

I am sure that they would support the Tax and Spending Control amendment here in Nevada.

The third one is about the school district spending. It says

In a year when the Clark County School District budgeted for a $140 million shortfall and contemplated teacher layoffs, it might seem odd that it spent $200,000 to recruit and retain 80 teachers with one year or less of experience.

But district officials have a contract they must honor with Teach For America, a non?profit organization that recruits outstanding college graduates who are not professionally licensed for education.

This is a complete waste of educational dollars. It has to stop.

Finally, an article about an immigration operation that nets 38 fugitives. It says

The operation focused on people who had prior criminal convictions and failed to leave the country after being ordered to do so.

What was interesting about this article was that these were people who had be ordered to leave the country and didn't leave. My question is why weren't they deported immediately.

Constitution Day today

This is an email that I received.

Dear Friends,
Today, September 17, is Constitution Day. We commemorate the signing of the Constitution 223 years ago today. How blessed this nation has been because of those who “pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.”

Then having risked their blood they started us on the grandest experiment of liberty in history…the Constitution of the United States of America.

In Article VII of the Constitution our Founders made a very important declaration that is often overlooked. They recognized the Lord of this Land, the author of our Liberty when they said, “Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of Our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven…”

Alexis de Tocqueville said, “America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

Let us all remember this day to whom we owe our liberties.

With that clearly in mind we must then pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor to rekindle the spirit of liberty in our blessed land.

Janine Hansen

I agree with her.

It's a big job, but school meals guru is happy to do it

This article in the Sun states that

Each school day, 300,000 high-spirited children and voracious teenagers — virtually a city the size of Pittsburgh — converge on the public schools to eat.

Of these, about 156,000 qualify for free meals.

It is very important to make sure that children are fed. However, it is sad that in America over half of the children going to public school qualify for free meals.

We have people closing their businesses, people losing their jobs, people losing their homes, people not able to provide lunch for their children in school. What happened to America the land of opportunity?

The government has spent and taxed America into the land of poverty.

A higher tax rate on wealthy would force investment

This letter to the editor in the Sun states,

We often read how more tax cuts will provide increased employment. If so, we should not have lost any jobs and should not have high unemployment with the Bush tax cuts still in effect. Where are all the jobs that were promised with those tax cuts?

Those tax cuts were made in 2001 and 2003. The economy started growing. As it grew, government spending increased. Here, in Nevada, we had the largest tax increase in history in 2003. Then in 2005, we had a 30% increase per capita in state spending. In 2009, we had another record tax increase.

It was the government encouraging risky loans, financial institutions greed, and the government taxing and spending that resulted in our economic problems today. If anything, the tax cuts helped to prevent even more damage. When they expire in 2011, we will have another huge tax increase.

Blame Barrack

This letter to the editor in the Review Journal states,

Any CEO or business executive who for almost two years continually blamed the person or group who previously held the job would be terminated for non-performance.

Considering the Democrats have been in control of the House and Senate for almost four years, and given the current state of the economy, they need to be voted out of office in November.

I think that we should consider that the Democrats and Republicans have been in control of our country for over 100 years. Isn't is time to vote them out of office for non-performance?

Register and vote Independent American Party now.

Threat of higher taxes hurting the economy

This letter to the editor in the Review Journal states,

This threat of future tax increases is currently causing businesses to hunker down and curtail any hiring or expansion.

An uncertain future hinders economic growth because a businesses do not risk expansion.

This letter makes a lot of sense, but I have not checked any of the statements for accuracy.

A taxing debate?

This article in the Sun states,

For years there has been a fierce resistance against increasing taxes in Nevada, and it is polarizing. Some conservative groups have made taxes a litmus test for candidates, urging them to sign a “no new taxes” pledge. Some people on the right wing have vilified government as bloated and out of control, even though the fact is that government in Nevada is among the smallest in the nation. The state has struggled to provide services over the past few decades.

This fierce resistance against increasing taxes is a result of the 'largest tax increase' in Nevada history in 2003 and then another 'largest tax increase' in Nevada history in 2009. Now we are facing another 'largest tax increase' in Nevada history in 2011. When will it end?

Will more taxes help the economy? Will more taxes create jobs? Will more taxes save people's homes?

Due to the faltering economy, everyone is spending less. The government should also spend less.

Social Security is not guaranteed to anyone.

In the 1960 case Flemming v. Nestor, the Supreme Court held that workers have no contractual right to Social Security benefits. And those benefits can be cut or eliminated anytime. Something to think about as we’re now, according to some estimates, just 30 days away from Social Security officially going into the red.

Will the younger generation be willing to support the boomers? In my opinion, it is not fair to ask them to support the older generation, but they will be asked to support them.

Stop ObamaCare lawsuit. Join now

WOW!

Yesterday, in an historic move, a class action lawsuit was filed providing individual citizens an opportunity to sue to overturn Obamacare! You can join the lawsuit at www.peoplev.us.

Unlike other lawsuits by States Attorney Generals this is a lawsuit “by the people” charging the Obamacare violates the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, Tenth and 13th Amendments of the Constitution thereby violating our individual rights.

Don’t let this opportunity pass you by to challenge Obamacare! Find out more at www.peoplev.us.

Nevada Eagle Forum and the Independent American Party as organizations are part of the lawsuit.

Link to an Article from the Las Vegas Review Journal today.

Media supports only the Republicans and Democrats

This article, discusses the gubernatorial debates. It tells how the media is discriminating against 5 of the candidates.

How much longer will Americans tolerate being led to vote for the chosen 2?

It is time to fight back.

Had Enought? Fight Back!

This is a post by Chuck Muth. The link to this post is here.

A growing number of conservative Republicans have opted to support the independent conservative candidacy of longtime conservative activist Janine Hansen in Elko-area Assembly District 33 race instead of the moderate GOP nominee, John Ellison. As such, they recently formed an informal group called “Republicans for Janine.”

And Elko County GOP chief Charlie Myers is having a cow over it.

After the Elko Daily Free Press reported on the establishment of the “Republicans for Janine Hansen” group last week, Chairman Myers sent a rant-to-the-editor which was subsequently published by the paper.

In it, Myers complained about a “conspiracy” of some kind (no, no black helicopters are involved ... and they’re dark blue anyway), declaring that the paper’s headline — “Republicans for Janine Hansen” Announced — misled voters into thinking the Elko County Republican Party had endorsed Janine.

Oh, puh-lease. Does Chairman Myers really think Republican voters in Elko are that dumb?

“Our mission is to elect those that have sound conservative values, understand and follow the Constitution of the United States, are Republican and have a solid track record in demonstrating our core values,” Chairman Myers wrote to the Free Press.

Well, here’s the problem for Chairman Myers and the party establishment folks in Elko: When it comes to sound conservative values, understanding of and adherence to the Constitution, and possessing a track record demonstrating core conservative principles, Hansen beats the party’s nominee hands down.

Not just beats ... crushes. And twice on Sunday.

In fact, the only department in which Ellison beats Hansen is in being a registered Republican. But I guess if you’re an unthinking, lockstep party-line voter, that’s enough.

By the way, when asked this week whether or not he supports Republican Assembly Minority Leader Pete Goicoechea’s outrageous proposal to tax groceries as a way to raise an additional $500 million for the government, Mr. Ellison replied, “It depends on how they are going to do it.”

Which raises two questions for Chairman Myers:

1) Is raising taxes by a half-billion dollars by taxing milk and butter and eggs and cheese one of the Elko County GOP’s “sound conservative values” and “core conservative principles”?

2) If not, then why is the Elko County Republican Party supporting a candidate who says he might vote for just such a tax hike and refuses to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge?

Oh, that’s right ... because he’s a “registered” Republican.

Whether or not he embraces “sound conservative values” and supports “core conservative principles” is of secondary importance. As long as he has an “R” after his name, that’s good enough, right? My party, right or wrong ... right?

In concluding his rant, Chairman Myers asked: “What is the difference in this (“Republicans for Janine Hansen”) and Republicans for Harry Reid? I would say none!”

And you would be dead wrong, Charlie.

The difference is — and it’s a huge difference — that Janine Hansen is a conservative and Harry Reid is a socialist ... er, I mean liberal. And Sharron Angle is a conservative, while John Ellison is a moderate who apparently would vote for a new tax on baby food “depending on how they do it.”

The fact that Republican Party leaders continue to promote, support and shove wishy-washy moderates like John Ellison down our throats is why so many former Republicans, such as me, have gone independent, while others have re-registered with third parties that are more consistently conservative.

It’s also why a growing number of registered Republicans are rebelling against the GOP establishment and are supporting conservative independent and third-party candidates instead. That’s why so many Republicans have joined “Republicans for Janine Hansen.”

And that’s why there’s a darned good chance in this campaign cycle and this election environment that an independent, third-party candidate like Janine Hansen could actually win the general election.

Wake up and smell the soon-to-be-taxed-if-Goicoechea-and-Ellison-get-their-way coffee, Chairman Myers. You don’t have a conspiracy on your hands; you have a full-blown mutiny.

It is time to fight back and join the Independent American Party. You can vote for anyone, but send a message that you want quality candidates.

Taxes, immigration, and government salaries

In a letter to the editor in the Sun, this gentleman states,

The two wars and our foreign policy spending need to be reviewed. If we decide the spending is necessary, then taxes should be raised to pay for it. If not, the expenditures should be severely cut.

The fact that salaries and benefits of government workers have risen a good deal above what exists in the private sector is unfair, wrong and dangerous. These salaries and benefits should be cut to equal private-sector compensation.

Illegal immigration requires that we impose tough economic sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants, set up a system so people can come here to work temporarily and be tracked, and provide a way for noncriminal illegal immigrants already here to become legal or return to their home countries. If all that were done, border agents could work to block illegal drug traffic as their primary duty.

He makes some good points. I don't agree that we should raise taxes to pay for the military spending, but we should spend what is necessary to support our troops. I also do not agree in amnesty for illegal aliens, but I do think that we should provide a noncriminal way for illegal aliens to return home and still have the opportunity to come back legally.

I am frightened.

This is an article in the Sun. It is about a 51 year old man who is on verge of homeless. It is a heart wrenching story. This man is in a desperate situation.

However, this story is has a lesson for us all to learn. That is that you have to take responsibility for yourself and your future. You have to save for the financial disasters that will occur in your lifetime.

Sometimes, people will save and still fail when financial disasters destroy their savings. However, you must still save and plan for the future. You cannot reply on the government to take care of you.

That is the problem with our society. We feel that the government should take care of us, that the government should protect us from everything, that the government should make our life perfect. It isn't going to happen.

This gentlemen states in this article that he receives $926 a month in disability payments from the government. He also states that for 8 years he has kept his earnings under $1000 a month to avoid losing his disability payments. What has that plan got him? He is going to be homeless in a few days.

When people rely on the government for support, they do not grow or improve their life. They stagnate and end up living in poverty.

John F. Kennedy said,

And so my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country

It is time for Americans to take responsibility for themselves, help others when they can, and not expect the government to support them.

Reid, Angle stop the garbage commercials

This is one of the letters to the editor that I mentioned in my last post.

The fact is our national outlook is not getting any better, but much worse. The confidence we have in our political leaders is now at a miserable low.

It goes on to say,

This could be one elections in which "None of These Candidates" receives more votes than the politicians.

There are 6 candidates in this race. I am sure that one of the six would be a good senator.

This is the reason that we are in this mess. The media doesn't cover the campaigns of all the candidates and misleads the public into choosing between only the Democratic and Republican candidates.

You can fight back by voting for the best candidate Don't worry about who will win. Just vote your conscience.

You can also send a message by changing your voter registration to the 3rd largest party in your state. You can still vote for any candidate, but you will be helping that 3rd party grow to provide more choices.

Today's Review Journal's Opinion section

Today, you must read the Opinion section in the Review Journal. It has a good editorial on teacher data and several excellent letters to the editor. This post will concentrate on the editorial. It states,

Shouldn't teachers under whose tutelage kids don't do as well at least be told the problem so they know to seek help? In worst cases, shouldn't they be told to seek other work?

It also stated that,

The data should be used to grade and reward the best teachers. It should also be made public, allowing parents to choose their kids' teachers.

For that matter, data on the schools themselves must be made public, and parents allowed to opt out of schools that consistently fail their students.

Instead of more money, we should demand this information and data.

Jon Ralson and the Budget

In Jon Ralston's column on the Rory Reid Budget proposal, he states,

This is a math problem, folks. For those who hated algebra, prepare to wince: You can change the variables to make the numbers work, but you can’t make both sides balance without a plus sign somewhere.

Don’t believe me: No one who really understands the state budget — past and current budget directors, knowledgeable lawmakers and private sector fiscal mavens — believes it can be balanced with cuts alone.

He then quotes Guy Hobbs as saying,

Essentially, cutting $3 billion from the state budget ... you’ve heard this comparison before ... if you funded just education alone, you could fund nothing else in the state budget.”

The problem is that any tax increases will hurt Nevada's economy which cannot withstand any more problems.

We are facing 2 large tax increases in the next few years. One is the tax increases that are Federal Tax Increases. That would be the increase in the marginal income tax rates, the possible return on the death tax, higher income taxes on marriage and family, capital gains tax increase, increased taxes on health care due to ObamaCare, and the The Alternative Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes.

The second is the increased state tax increases. The next session of the Nevada State Legislature will be considering a state personal income tax, a corporate income tax, a sales tax increase, and other miscellaneous tax increases in a desperate effort to balance the budget.

It is time to take a stand. Once taxes are increased, they are seldom, if ever, reduced permanently. However, we can cut the budget and when the economy gets better; we can expand it as necessary and only as necessary.

Debate should include all the candidates

This letter to the editor in the Review Journal on Thursday stated,

So the debate sponsors -- 8 News Now, the Review-Journal and Vegas PBS -- are the new election board that decides who is a candidate and who isn't?

And the decision is based solely on a candidate's fundraising?

This appears to be nothing but a ploy by the media to control an election instead of taking the high road and giving Nevada voters exposure to all the candidates. Politics never changes: Nevadans continue to receive the best politics money can buy.

Then in Friday's Review Journal a front page article stated,

Nearly eight of 10 voters who remain undecided or who don't like Angle or Reid say they, too, would have preferred if the staunch conservative hadn't won the June 8 primary over her more moderate foes. And 58 percent of such nonaligned voters say they wish Reid hadn't won the Democratic nomination, suggesting a majority of Nevadans are unhappy with their choices.

There are 6 candidates in this senate race, but, if you just listen to the media, there are only 2.

The problem is that the media doesn't give the other candidates any publicity and they do not have the funds to buy advertising.

The Democrats and the Republicans control our government and they got us into this economic mess. Do you really trust them to get us out?

Nevada Allance for Retired Americans

Today, I was interviewed by the Nevada Allance for Retired Americans (NARA). I discussed the how the next session of the Nevada legislature would be discussing a personal state income tax, a corporate tax, a sales tax increase, and several other miscellaneous tax increases in a desperate attempt to balance the budget.

How, with the Federal Government creating huge budget deficits, inflation will increase, health care costs will increase, food costs will increase, utility costs will increase, and the cost of living will increase. How we will be faced with many difficult financial decisions. How we cannot afford another huge state tax increase.

You can ignore history and vote for a Democrat or Republican with their tax and spend policies, or you can fight back and vote for me, an Independent American Party candidate, who will fight to lower the budget and lower taxes. It is your choice.

The gubernatorial debate

This debate is sponsored by 8 news now, the Las Vegas Review-Journal, and Vegas PBS. It will feature only 2 of the 7 gubernatorial candidates. Why are five of the candidates not invited?

Once again, the voters are being treated like sheep being lead to the slaughter. I am really surprised and very disappointed that Vegas PBS would be part of this. Vegas PBS likes to say that they want to give the public things that they would not get on regular television.

The public deserves to hear from all the candidates so that they can make an informed decision.

What are the Republicans and Democrats afraid of?

Social Security

A letter to the editor in the Review Journal stated that

I want to quote directly from the front page a statement by Michael J. Astrue, the commissioner of the Social Security Administration:

"Social Security is a compact between generations. Since 1935, America has kept the promise of security for its workers and their families. Now, however, the Social Security system is facing serious financial problems, and action is needed soon to make sure the system will be sound when today's younger workers are ready for retirement. In 2016 we will begin paying more in benefits than we collect in taxes. Without changes, by 2037 the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been in a position to "fix" Social Security for how long now? How much longer does he need? All he can do is mock, twist and bend any solutions offered by his opponent.

In my opinion, we should replace Social Security with a 401k type account for individuals. Let everyone over 30 or 35 decide if they want to continue with Social Security. Anyone younger is out automatically. They would use the 401k account.

Federal mortgage aid effort struggles

This article in the Review Journal points out the failure of the governments efforts to help with the housing crisis. It states,

Nearly half of the 1.3 million homeowners who enrolled in the Obama administration's flagship mortgage-relief program have fallen out.

The program is intended to help those at risk of foreclosure by lowering their monthly mortgage payments. Friday's report from the Treasury Department suggests the $75 billion government effort is failing to slow the tide of foreclosures in the United States, economists say.

The bailout and this mortgage-relief program have failed miserably. I ask why didn't the government use the bailout money to give vouchers the mortgage troubled people. These vouchers would be payable to the banks if the bank refinanced the loan.

This way the banks would still have received the money, but only if they refinanced the mortgage. As the mortgages were refinaced, the foreclosure rate would have been stopped or at least slowed. The people would have saved their homes.

If the government was going to give the money away, at least they should have made sure that it would accomplish something.

Focusing on Nevada businesses can help us all

This article in the Sun states that,

So what can we do? What should we do?

Focus on job growth. How about a “Nevada First” campaign? Why do our state’s businesses send their tax payments to an Arizona post-office box? Why should out-of-state businesses win construction bids on Nevada stimulus-funded projects?

It’s time to help the businesses here that are struggling. Oregon and other states have aggressively promoted opportunities for their own states’ businesses.

I agree that we have to help the business that are here and to also try to get businesses to move to Nevada. It is my first priority. However, we must also improve education, stop illegal immigration, and balance the budget as part of helping businesses and stimulating the economy.

While campaigning, I have a program for helping local businesses by distributing their advertising brochures. They can also advertise for free on www.ecouponfile.com. Also, consumers visit the site and get money saving coupons from these local businesses.

It also states that,

Democrats and Republicans examined the budget from top to bottom and created a budget that was lean and austere. Positions were cut and programs eliminated, but we rejected cuts aimed at stopping home health care for medically fragile infants and payment for bathing and toileting of elderly and disabled Nevadans.

I disagree. I believe that the budget is not lean enough. We can still cut more from the upper management costs. We must first cut the budget to the bone before we look at revenue. Once the budget is as low as possible without cutting necessary services, we can look at the revenue problem.

Social Security as a Ponzi scheme

A letter to the editor in the Review Journal is reply to an earlier letter on Social Security. The letter states,

James Bragge had an interesting letter Friday, whereby he defended Social Security as being solvent, at least until 2037, and took issue with previous writer Tom Cameron's description of Social Security as a Ponzi scheme.

To quote Mr. Bragge, "The idea that Social Security is filled with IOUs is dishonest rhetoric promoted by partisan hacks. Social Security funds are invested in U.S. Treasury bonds and securities, the safest and most reliable securities in the world."

Oh really?

Actually, the $2.5 trillion in the trust fund (I use the term loosely) is not in the form of U.S. Treasury bonds, which can be bought and sold in the open market anywhere in the world. Nope, they are non-negotiable "special bonds," denominated in the billions, which can only be redeemed by the U.S. Treasury. They are in fact IOUs from one branch of the government to another.

Actually Social Security wasn't able to sustain itself before this economic collapse. In order to survive, it was necessary to raise the percentage taken from your pay from 1% to over 7%. It was also necessary to set to raise the age of eligibility.

The fact is that Social Security cannot survive as it is today.

Is the government taking advantage of illegal immigrants.

This is part of a newsletter that I receive. I have edited some of this so it is not an actual quote from the newsletter.

As an owner of several small construction-related businesses in Virginia, we have hired upward of 20-30 immigrant workers during the 'good times.' All had 'proper' paperwork and Social Security cards. We followed all the rules, etc., in the hiring of 'immigrant'-type workers.

I then reviewed all of the employment files and determined that at least two-thirds of this work force was probably illegal, if not all.

After thinking about it, I immediately let all of them attrition out After more thought, I wondered why hasn't the government contacted us regarding these obviously fake Social Security cards. There has to be some kind of contradiction within the system that would raise a red flag. WHY?

Because the government is taking the illegals' deductions in order to fund today's retirees KNOWING that they, the government, will never have to pay out for these illegals, as they will, at some time, go back to Mexico or wherever they came from. It's a perfect scam for the government to hold up Social Security.

They are knowingly supporting the illegal immigrant situation here in the U.S. in order to fund the government. Why do you think the 'cost deficit' for Social Security has mysteriously increased over the past year? It's because a large proportion of the illegal immigrant population has gone back to their home country due to the nonexistent construction spending and is no longer paying into the fund.

It is interesting that the government hasn't taken steps to prevent fake SS numbers from being used.