The Supreme Court has ruled on the constitutionality of Obamacare – at least part of it. But, where in the Constitution does the federal government, including the Supreme Court, have the authority to even address the subject? The real question is not what is in the Affordable Care Act or what the Federal Supreme Court says about it or what the Department of Health and Human Services does when implementing it. The real question is by what authority are any of them doing this?
Where is it among the enumerated powers of the federal government to dictate our healthcare or how we pay for it? The tenth amendment is clear: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Until recently the power of regulating healthcare and its financing belonged with the people and, to the degree the people of a state wanted it, with the several states.
We do not need an examination of the history of this over-reach of the federal bureaucrats – we need it stopped and we need it reversed. Yes, the cost of healthcare has skyrocketed. Yes, much of that cost is due to better technology and drugs which are more expensive. But, much of the increase is due to government programs that separate the patient from the ability to control payment as well as from the huge costs incurred by providing free medical care to illegal aliens and others. Healthcare providers are being stiffed for their costs and are passing it on to their paying customers. In short, we see how expensive free healthcare can be. Increasing free healthcare will only make all healthcare more expensive.
To a large degree, government caused this problem and federal government action to solve it has only made it worse to the point that they are now dictating who will get what and who must pay. This gets beyond healthcare to the unlimited power of the federal government. What next? Mandatory pet insurance? Why not. If it increases the power of the government over our lives and gives the bureaucrats more government jobs then it is not beyond them to cram it down our throats.
We have only one hope. That hope is that enough state legislatures refuse to allow this travesty to continue. We need states that are willing to stand up to the federal government and re-establish the constitutional limits on that government. Otherwise we have unlimited government and that is not what the American Republic is all about.
The Supreme Court of the United States just ruled on an Arizona law that is an exact copy of the federal law. Without getting into all the complexities of the case, Arizona law enforcers, according to the court, may check the status of people they stop and detain them if they are suspected of being in the country illegally. But, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) says that they will not cooperate with the Arizona authorities and will not take the detainees into federal custody.
Last week the President stated that he will not enforce deportation laws when “children” up to the age of thirty are discovered to be in the country illegally and now the DHS will not cooperate in the removal of illegals detained by state authorities. These two actions make clear that this administration has no interest in protecting the country from invasion and take over by foreign populations.
We are being – no, actually, we have been invaded by a force greater than any army in history. The total Allied Armies of WWII sweeping through Europe did not match the numbers of invaders we now have here. All without firing a shot (well, there is all that drug war stuff and gang related violence, etc.). But, our borders are a joke – worse they are an insult to Americans. This is not just a Democrat fiasco – there is plenty of glory to go around and much of the problem falls at the feet of Republicans. The Democrats are looking for cheap votes and the Republicans are supporting cheap labor. They are both wrong – legally and morally. Those responsible, regardless of party have betrayed their country. Generations of Americans fought and died too preserve, protect, and perpetuate these United States of America – not to give it away.
WE ARE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS. Ellis Island is held up as an example of how we once truly lived up to the inscription at the base of the Statue of Liberty concerning the masses yearning to be free and “send these, the tempest-tossed, to me.” However, one third of the immigrants landing at Ellis Island were turned back because of medical or moral reasons. Immigrants landing at the Island were examined and their backgrounds checked for public health and safety reasons. Illegal immigrants get no such screening – hence the increase in tuberculosis and other diseases and the tremendous increase in gangs and the very large prison population of illegal aliens. If we are to return to the days of Ellis Island then we must have close screening and strict standards for LEGAL immigrants.
The really sad part is that we need more immigration – only the legal kind. We need workers and entrepreneurs at all levels. The right mix of immigrants will actually help our economy and create jobs for Americans – just as it has in the past. But our legal immigration policy and bureaucracy is broken. This has lead to a buildup of demand here for workers and a great frustration outside of the country on the part of those who are trying to get in. At the very least we need an efficient screening process to identify the true undesirables that for any reason should not be allowed in and a reasonable process for those who should.
The stupidity and inefficiency of the current “system” is the root cause of the problems we are facing. This can and must be fixed. Illegals must be encouraged to return to their country of origin to apply for legal immigration. That system that caused them to be illegal in the first place must be corrected so that we can bring in those we need in a rational, reasonable manner. Illegals returning to their country of origin must be allowed to apply for appropriate visas and go through the screening process – without prejudice because of their previous status. Criminal and other such history should be disqualifying. In other words, have them all go back and apply to be screened for legal immigration – and make sure that we have the system in place to do it right and expeditiously.
Without an effective immigration policy and procedures we will continue to endanger our citizens, harm our economy, and continue the exploitation of the illegal immigration populations. Everyone needs to understand that what we have now is not working and it must work for the betterment of all – our survival as a nation depends upon it.
Enforcing the laws is an essential first step – my hat is off to the State of Arizona for facing the problem and taking action. The federal government needs new leadership – January 2013 cannot come soon enough.
There has been concern, expressed on Facebook and elsewhere, that I have waited until after re-districting to file for the Kansas Senate, 5th District. This has been portrayed as self-serving and a disregard for the good of the Party. I respectfully disagree and ask you to consider that I filed on time, after redistricting, as did a large number of candidates. Also, primaries are an American tradition that can serve the people and the parties well as they help to get the issues out and result in stronger, not weaker, candidates. The issues facing Kansas and the country today are extremely serious and they deserve careful consideration and thoughtful action based on consistent principles which we share. I would prefer to address those issues rather than who got here first. This is my attempt to put the matter to rest as we enter the campaign.
Here is the rest of the story:
1. Why wait? I have been the Republican candidate for this seat since I filed in June of 2004 and my financial filing has been consistently on the Secretary of State’s website since then. This is not the same as filing or announcing; but, I did announce at the State Party Convention in February, followed by a local announcement the next week and both were immediately posted on Facebook and the local announcement on the front page of the local newspaper. I also made it clear to state and local party leadership in Nov. 2009 that I would not run for re-election in 2010 as the Kansas Republican Treasurer because I would be running for this office. I also discussed this with the Chamber of Commerce last August and with David Kensinger last October. In the meeting with Kensinger I noted that Mark was maneuvering to have my address drawn out of the district – spliting it out of Leavenworth City. At that time I told him that I would be working for a separate district for Leavenworth County, which would avoid the current situation.
2. Why file only after redisricting? Because behind the scenes Mark was attempting to draw my address out of the district and I wanted to retain the flexibility to change my address should he succeed. I have correspondence from Mark Gilstrap to his friends in the Senate describing his prefered district and expressly asking that I be drawn out. This was given to me annonomously when Mark filed. Subsequently I was shown a map that in fact did draw my house and a surrounding block or two out of Leavenworth city. I told the senator that showed it to me that I if that map succeeded I would change my address. I had no intention letting such skulldugery succeed.
3. Why not bring this up earlier? Because there seemed to be a good chance that Mark and I would be in separate districts. The Governor publically supported in writing a separate district for Leavenworth County and that would have put the matter to rest. I have always had excellent support in Leavenworth County, winning up to 60% of the vote – against Mark in the general election in 2004. I saw no reason to air all of this prematurely and hoped to let it die away as I knew it would be harmful to Mark and did not want to hurt his chances if we were to be in separate districts.
4. Why run against Mark at all? I ran against Mark in 2004 for a number of reasons. Those reasons are still there. While I appreciate his pro-life and pro-gun votes, he has not been good for Leavenworth County, not been good for business overall, not been good on containing government spending, and not been good on illegal immigration. During the campaign I will address these and other issues.
5. Isn’t this late filing a disregard for the good of the Party? Well, no. As I have mentioned I filed on time. And in this district Mark will lose against Kelly Kultala and that is not good for the Party, and worse, not good for Kansas. Even if he could win, Mark’s record in the senate is not good – ending in 2008 with the lowest rating by the NFIB among all Kansas senators. I ran against him in 2004 for good reasons – those reasons are still there. History was not rewritten when he got tossed from the Democrat Party –rather than voluntarily converting like many others. Again, I will make the case during the campaign by reviewing, among other things, his votes on business, spending, and illegal aliens.
I understand the desire to see a former Democrat succeed as a Republican and I applaud the help that has been so generously given to conservative candidates in the past. However, the situation is very serious and it is the issues that count. We must win this election and help get Kansas back on track to prosperity. In all humility I believe that I have taken the proper course to preserve the best chances for all involved and the best course for Kansas. I hope that this explaination is helpful and I welcome the opportunity to provide further clarification if desired. Once again, it is not my intention to disrupt or harm the Party in any way – quite the opposite. I have put many years into building up the Party and helping to lead it to a more Conservative understanding of government. That includes winning the county party for conservatives, working as county chair for Kline, Brownback, Carter, and Shallenbarger and at the precinct, district, state level which was recognized by my election as State Republican Treasurer in a very difficult time of rebuilding through a Federal Election Commission audit. Finally, I helped found and still help run The Leadership Series (the male counterpart of the women’s Eisenhower Series) which in the last two years has trained over eighty men for leadership. Our Party is being used for selfish political gain, only, not by me.
“As important as Reagan’s dramatic call to “tear down this wall” was, we should not forget what else he said that memorable day 25 years ago. His speech contained the most eloquent paean to religious freedom we have heard.”
“Real Republican leaders have always defended individual liberty- including the freedom of religion. It has been one of America’s great strengths and one of the reasons that we won the Cold War – without firing a shot. We need that same leadership today.” ~Steve Fitzgerald
11 JUNE 2012, 10 AM
Republican Steve Fitzgerald Files for Senate Seat
“The people want straight talk” said retired Army officer and small businessman Steve Fitzgerald as he filed last Friday for the Kansas Senate, District 5, Fort Leavenworth, Leavenworth City, Lansing City, Piper, Bonner Springs, Edwardsville, and a part of Kansas City, Kansas generally west of 83rd Street and north of Georgia Avenue – including the Legends area. The district was drawn last week by the Tenth Federal Circuit Court and has few but important changes from the previous district. The court added Edwardsville in Wyandotte but shaved off significant parts of the eastern parts of the district.
Fitzgerald consistently has been the Republican standard bearer in the 5th Senate District since filing in June 2004. Fitzgerald will be facing Mark Gilstrap in the primary and incumbent Kelly Kultala in November.
Fitzgerald says he likes the new boundaries, although he favored Leavenworth County having its own senate district. “I have always been happy to run in the 5th District and look forward to campaigning again with my friends in Wyandotte. Leavenworth County should have had a home senate district. But, the court has spoken.”
Things will be different this time, Fitzgerald says. “I have always done very well in Leavenworth County and pretty well in the western part of Wyandotte. The district is becoming more Republican. Even Gilstrap became a Republican after losing favor with then Governor Kathleen Sebelius. I am in favor of economic growth and small business and intend to highlight differences with my Democrat and recent-Democrat opponents.” Emphasizing his Republican credentials, Fitzgerald pointed out that he has served several terms as a precinct captain, district and state delegate, and as treasurer of the Kansas State Republican Party, as well as playing important roles in state-wide Republican campaigns. He has also served as vice-president of the Leavenworth School Board and is co-founder of The Leadership Series which has trained over eighty men in political and community leadership.
“This election is about how to get our economy moving again, it is about jobs, more efficient,limited government, and especially about respecting the rights of the people to keep what they earn. Kansans do not need and should not have government at any level interfering in their lives. Government must provide essential services, help set the conditions for success, and get out of the way. My opponents have voting records that prove that they do not share these values. Both have miserable ratings from business advocate agencies. This election provides clear choices for the residents of the district and I look forward to making that case to the voters” Fitzgerald said.
Contact: Greg Beck, Information Director, Fitzgerald for Senate, at 913-727-1258, firstname.lastname@example.org
Steve Fitzgerald at 913-306-1838, email@example.com