‘Tenther’ Nullification Nonsense

July 10, 2012

Posted by AzBluemeanie:

The Checks and Balances in Government initiative by eccentric millionaire Jack Biltis is an attempt to do by citizens initiative what disgraced former Senator Russell Pearce failed to do in 2011 (before he was recalled) with SB1433. I posted about his bill and the history of the nullification theory in Neoconfederate insurrectionists in Arizona Legislature revive discredited 'nullification' theory:

[SB 1433] creates a 12-member committee within the legislature that could "vote by simple majority to nullify in its entirety a specific federal law or regulation that is outside the scope of the powers delegated by the people to the federal government…"

Committee members themselves would decide this, then pass along their recommendation to the full Legislature. If, in turn, a majority of state lawmakers go along with the committee then, according to the bill, "this state and its citizens shall not recognize or be obligated to live under the statute, mandate or executive order."

The nullification committee also would be permitted to review all existing federal laws to see if our legislative geniuses want to toss them out as well.

This "Tenther" bill failed in the legislature. But now it is back in another form, the Checks and Balances in Government initiative. Alex Seitz-Wald writing at Salon tales a look at the intiative. Arizona’s secession-lite plan – Salon.com:

If Jack Biltis has his way, Arizonans may soon get to pick and choose which U.S. laws they don’t want to abide by, like a buffet of federalism.

* * *

[The initiative] would allow Arizonans “to reject any federal action that they determine violates the United States Constitution,” as the ballot measure reads.

* * *

[T]he Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate is the “flagship” example of why the law is needed, he has said, but also points to some Republican-backed measures like the Patriot Act. Federal overreach also comes in more quotidian varieties, like speed limits and the ban on incandescent light bulbs. “Besides the insanity of it, if you have a federal government that can choose to ban a light bulb that has existed for 100 years, that served us pretty well, what can’t they do?” he asked reporters.

Romney crashes the Antoinette family reunion

July 9, 2012

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings   OK, not really, but he spent the weekend partying with his friends in the Hamptons, and charging the "friends" $50K a head for that rather dubious privilege. But at least he wasn't gauche enough to make the party "BYOB"… h/t to Taegan Goddard's Political Wire for the … Read more

Romney’s top 2% supporters in the Hamptons think you are all just stupid

July 9, 2012

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The über-rich live in an insular world, completely out of touch with the lives of average Americans. They look down their patrician noses and sneer at average Americans — they think you are all just stupid.

Steve Benen has this great post about a Willard "Mittens" Romney fundraiser at the home of David Koch in the Hamptons over the weekend. When the GOP elite slips into self-parody:

Imagine if Thurston Howell III and C. Montgomery Burns were real people. Then imagine they were attending a fundraiser for Mitt Romney in the Hamptons. Then imagine they spoke to reporters about why, exactly, they want to see President Obama defeated.

It turns out, you don't actually have to imagine any of this, because yesterday, it actually happened. The multi-millionaire Republican — dodging questions about his controversial shell corporation in Bermuda, hidden cash in the Caymans, and inexplicable Swiss bank account — thought it'd be a good idea to spend the day in the Hamptons, attending several posh fundraisers with the hyper-elite, including an event at David Koch's home.

I couldn't make up stuff like this if I tried.

A New York City donor a few cars back, who also would not give her name, said Romney needed to do a better job connecting. "I don't think the common person is getting it," she said from the passenger seat of a Range Rover stamped with East Hampton beach permits. "Nobody understands why Obama is hurting them.

"We've got the message," she added. "But my college kid, the baby sitters, the nails ladies — everybody who's got the right to vote — they don't understand what's going on. I just think if you're lower income — one, you're not as educated, two, they don't understand how it works, they don't understand how the systems work, they don't understand the impact."

I'm not sure which of those sentences is the most ridiculous. Let's call it a tie.

GOP to hold middle class tax cuts hostage to the top two percent (again)

July 9, 2012

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

If the top two percent of income earners are the mythical "job creators" as the Tea-Publicans keep telling us, shouldn't America be awash in new jobs by now after a decade of the Bush tax cuts? Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?

President Obama today proposed a one year extension of the middle class tax cuts for those earning under $250,000. Greg Sargent writes Obama dares GOP to oppose middle class tax cuts:

We should all agree to extend the tax cuts for the middle class. Let’s agree to do what we agree on. Right? That’s what compromise is all about. Let’s not hold the vast majority of Americans and our entire economy hostage while we debate the merits of another tax cut for the wealthy. We can have that debate. But let’s not hold up working out the thing that we already agree on.

In many ways the fate of the tax cut for the wealthiest Americans will be decided by the outcome of the next election. My opponent will fight to keep them in place. I will fight to end them. That argument shouldn’t threaten you. It shouldn’t threaten the 98 percent of Americans who just want to know that their taxes won’t go up next year. Middle class families and small business owners — they deserve that guarantee. They deserve that certainty. It will be good for the economy, and it will be good for you.

Obama’s political imperative is to separate the battle over the Bush tax cut into two fights: One over whether to extend the middle class tax cuts; and a second one over whether to end the tax cuts on the rich. By contrast, the political imperative of Mitt Romney and Republicans is to do all they can to conflate these two battles, because if the first one were to be resolved, then they’d lose all their leverage in the second one.

What’s more, the GOP position in that second battle — whether to extend the tax cuts only on the rich — is very unpopular. Republicans can’t agree to Obama’s proposal, because it would then mean the battle over whether to extend just the tax cuts for the rich would be isolated. Obama knows this. So he’s hoping that their opposition to his proposal will clarify and separate out the two battles — and who stands for whom — in the public mind.

Meanwhile, Obama’s push will soon get a vote in the Senate. Harry Reid announced today: “Republicans have claimed they want to reduce our deficit; in the weeks ahead, they will have a chance to do so by joining Democrats to vote to extend tax cuts for all middle class American families on the first $250,000 of their income.”

[The GOP will hold middle class tax cuts hostage to the top two percent (again)].

Romney lays out his agenda

July 9, 2012

by David Safier I got my latest "Dear Fellow Republican" fundraising letter from Mitt Romney. Now, I know people say Mitt is short on specifics about his policies, so I read through the voluminous Obama bashing in the letter, and I found what Mitt stands for . . . "a new path of conservative, commonsense … Read more

Voodoo economics is so 1980

July 8, 2012

by David Safier Congrats to ASU Law School prof Adam Chodorow for making the Iowa Law Review with his article, "Death and Taxes and Zombies." The essay in the NY Times about the article describes it as "a playful examination of serious tax-code issues from a refreshing perspective." Law review abstracts generally don't make for … Read more