Remember back in May when Republican candidate Steve Stivers attempted to walk back his response on a 9/12 Tea Party group’s questionnaire that asked if Steve Stivers would support repealing the 17th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that allows for the direct election of the Senate by the people? (If not, click on the link.)

Well, what about the rest of that questionnaire?

912Survey-Stivers

Of all the bills that are pending in Congress, which one did Stivers think was the most important one to note he would have supported?  Something that wasn’t even a bill, but the Stupak Amendment to the health care reform bill to ban constitutionally protected and lawful abortions from being covered by “government-run” health care plans.

Of course, how important could even that amendment be, given that Stivers goes on and says that he opposed the bill it was included?  Nice to know that Stiver’s fantasy Congressional career has as his crowning moment getting an amendment into a bill he then would vote against anyways.

How is Steve Stivers going to reduce the budget deficit? “Reducing entitlements”  Hear that seniors?  (Why isn’t this in a Kilroy ad already?)

Stivers then goes all Rand Paul, Sharron Angle, And Christine O’Donnell on the very next page:

[Y]ou could eliminate the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Interior, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, and others.”

What others?  Well, by the standards Stivers sets out you could also eliminate the Departments of Health and Human Services, Veterans Administration, Commerce, the Federal Reserve, the SEC, FEC, FCC, NASA, FDA, CDC….

But wait, there’s more…

The idiot believes in trickle down economics.  He says that the BEST way to increase federal revenues is a permanent income tax rate reduction.

Anyone remember why the Bush tax cuts are set to expire?  Because the GOP couldn’t pass them permanently using reconciliation because it was projected to increase the deficit so they could only last ten years.  And what happened?  Our deficit grew specifically because revenues did not increase to pay for those tax cuts.

This makes Steve Stivers dumber than Bush and the last Republican Congressional majority on fiscal policy.

Even when he’s pandering, Stivers can’t be consistent.  On one hand, he says that government assistance for the poor should be temporary emergency assistance that only fills the gap that charities and churches can’t fill.  On the other, he says that “charity is no part of the legislative duty of government.”

Wonder what Stivers would say to people who needed extended unemployment benefits in this economy?

He wants to repeal the 16th Amendment and replace a progressive income tax system with a regressive “flat tax” that would increase the tax burden on the working poor and the middle class while giving the top income earners… a massive tax break.

He supports eliminating the automatic withholding of taxes.  Imagine how the federal government could function if they had to wait every April 15th to get paid.

He’s undecided whether waterboarding was torture but supports the Bush Administrations use of it and other “enhanced interrogation” techniques against so-called enemy combatants.

He opposes any mandate to federal funding that goes to local government or education systems… mandates like, I presume, a recipient may be subject to federal review on how the money was actually spent?

Steve Stivers has told this 9/12 group that he’s no nuttier than Sharon Angle or Rand Paul.

Still don’t think voting in this election matters?

  • Milton Friedman’s biggest regret was his involvement in income tax withholdings. Methinks things would be interesting if one had to pay their income tax every month… perhaps in person in cash.

  • Anonymous

    Yep. Or make election day April 15th.

    And senators should be chosen by the states legislatures. That would be a big step in motivating them to serve their STATES – any (or most) influence would then be channeled through the state legislatures, instead of out of state special interest money flowing directly to the senate campaigns and bypassing state interests. Not perfect, but it would add one more hurdle for big money to buy senators.

  • we should be required to carry our taxes on our backs to the tax office and count what we owe by hand…in pennies. then we’d be REAL good and pissed off and vote Republican.

    …not

  • Footnotes:

    1. Ronald Reagan 2. Ronald Reagan 3. Ronald Reagan. 4. Ronald Reagan 5. All the kids with the first name Reagan 6. Nancy Reagan 7. Ronald Reagan’s divorce lawyer 8. Jayne Wymann

  • Anonymous

    LOL…. You apparently need to read why we passed the 17th Amendment.

    From Wikipedia:
    “Nine bribery cases were brought before the Senate between 1866 and 1906, and 45 deadlocks occurred in 20 states between 1891 and 1905, resulting in numerous delays in seating Senators. In the worst case, Delaware failed to elect from March 1899 to March 1903; by the end of this period both of Delaware’s seats were vacant for two years.”

    Yep, all repealing the 17th Amendment would do is help state lawmakers attract more special interest money.

    Sherrod Brown would not be a U.S. Senator if the General Assembly had its way. Mike DeWine would probably still be in the U.S. Senate.

  • Anonymous

    And that would be fine with me. (Not the DeWine part. I don’t give a shit about him.) It would make it MUCH more difficult and expensive for the special interests to influence senators, as they would have to influence dozens of state legislators instead of one senator. It would decentralize power. As it stands right now, there is no linkage between the states and the federal political process. Between this and the Supremacy Clause, the states are forced to bow at the alter of the centralized federal government. But maybe you think that’s a good thing.

    And any state legislature that can’t get their act together, well, to bad. I guess that means they would be without that vote until they did their jobs.

  • Modern Esquire

    You’re right there’s never been any example of political bosses be given wide appointment board leading to corruption and influence by special interest? Just don’t tell that to the Feds in Cuyahoga COunty.

  • Anastasjoy

    In way too many states, legislatures are cesspools of corruption and special interests. It would make the “election” of Senators a far more venal and wheeler-ddealer type deal. And it’s fascinating to me that all these crash-the-government, power-to-the-people-and-the-grassroots types now want to take the vote for Senator AWAY from the voters and place it in the hands of bought-and-paid for, usually way underqualified and undereducated state legislators. No, it wouldn’t add ANY hurdles; it would level hurdles because special interests could buy a Senator for pennies on the dollar. My guess is that shadowy special-interss money is behind this insane and ideologically inconsistent push. The REAL way to remove big special interest money from campaigns is with campaign-finance reform, especially stripping corporations of “personhood” rights and returning them to what they were intended to be: financial protection for business investors.

  • Anonymous

    I won’t disagree with your points on corruption, except to say that they apply to the federal senate also. Every bit as much.

    In fact, on reflection, this argument is absurd. And I mean that from both yours and my point of view. It’s like trying to choose your form of torture. Do you want your fingernails pulled out or do you prefer to have your eyeballs burned?

    Hell, the voters themselves are bought and paid for (unions, welfare, businesspeople – everybody’s on the dole somehow) and when it comes to the issues, I’ll contend that the voters are “unqualified and undereducated”. Which leads to the inescapable conclusion that democracy is a sham.

  • Dear Constitutionalist,

    My name is David Ryon. I am running to be your Congressman in Ohio’s 15th Congressional District. I won the nomination of the Constitution Party on May 4th. I have been endorsed by the National Veterans Coalition and Don Eckhart (2008 pro-life candidate for Ohio’s 15th Congressional District). Don Eckhart received the Ohio Right to Life and Family First endorsements in 2008.

    I served my country as a soldier in the Army at the beginning of Operation Desert Shield. I enlisted as a buck private after high school and completed Basic Training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. I continued my military training at Fort Huachuca, Arizona in the field of Counterintelligence. Following that I was assigned to the New York Resident Office (NYRO) at Fort Hamilton, New York and received three promotions in under 2 years. I was awarded an Army Commendation Medal, Good Conduct Medal, Army Service Ribbon, and Army Superior Unit Award while a member of the 902nd MI Group under the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM).

    I believe that life experience and a genuine understanding of and allegiance to the U.S. Constitution are of utmost importance when determining who to support for our governing representatives. As your next Congressman, I believe that I have these characteristics to best protect your unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and I intend to take my oath of office seriously.

    I understand the pressures many of us face taking care of our children and keeping a home’s head above water during one of the worst economic downturns in our history. My family has had to tighten its belt by becoming a one car family and getting rid of our cell phones so we can put food on our table. I believe that much of our economic problems in this nation stem from a federal government run amok of its Constitutional limitations. It has inserted itself into nearly every aspect of our lives and both major parties are culpable. No matter what their rhetoric, neither seems committed to reversing this dangerous trend toward centralized government. As the Constitution Party Nominee, I am committed to reversing this trend.

    We know as Constitutionalists that Article I. Section. 2 Clause 2. does not require a candidate to live in the district – only the state in which he or she is running for office. Our Founding Fathers wrote these requirements for a reason which was to allow a candidate to step forward when no other in a district is willing to protect our Constitution.

    I moved into the 15th District in 1993, lived there for 13 years and worked there for 15 years. While moving to the neighboring 12th District in 2007 after marrying my wife, I still maintain strong ties to the 15th District. I have two daughters that will attend Hilliard-Davidson High School and a son that will attend Weaver Middle School.

    I ask for your vote in the General Election November 2nd. Please consider a financial contribution as well. Your financial support of $25, $35, $50, $100 or even $250 or whatever you can afford could help me fight back and make sure the people of the 15th District hear the truth about my opponents and the people who are backing their campaigns. Please visit http://www.RyonforCongress.com for more information about the campaign and if possible to offer a contribution. Also visit http://www.constitutionparty.com for information about our constitutional conservative platform. Fiscal and Social Conservative Republicans, Pro-Life Democrats, and Independents don’t have to settle for pro-abortion candidates like Stivers and Kilroy.

    Yours in Liberty,
    David Ryon
    2010 Constitution Party Nominee for U.S. Congress
    Ohio’s 15th Congressional District

    PS: John Quincy Adams stated, “Duty is ours; results are God’s”. Lets make history Central Ohio by electing David Ryon to U.S. Congress.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!