Obama's EPA invades your property
The Environmental Protection Agency is out-of-control. And your property could be next.
Too often, our rights are being violated by abusive and power-hungry EPA bureaucrats, using threats, coercion and force to implement their power grabs.
These regulations have hampered landowners' ability to manage their private property as they please and have impaired job creation. Americans are suffering from the overreach of regulatory agencies such as the EPA.
Our economy, job growth and private property rights are at stake.
Today, I'm asking you to stand with me and start to fight back against an out-of-control federal government.
Please take a minute to sign the "Defense of Property" petition I've had prepared for you, and if possible, lend your support today to our effort to stop the Obama EPA in its tracks.
I'll give you a link in a moment, but I want to tell you why this legislation is so vital.
When power is left in the hands of the executive, it will ALWAYS grow. There is no mechanism to stop it within the executive branch.
Budgets will balloon.
Pages of regulations will proud. And power will cause those in charge to act like masters instead of servants, something that happens all too frequently in our government these days.
** EPA regulations cost more than 5 percent of
our annual gross domestic product, the equivalent of the costs of defense and homeland security combined.
** Since EPA
regulations have been taking property, jobs and businesses away from citizens, unemployment in America has increased by 33 percent.
** This
abuse of power by the implementation of regulations infringes upon our basic rights, and it harms each and every one of us
whether or not we are affected directly by one of their rules.
But that's not all.
These are the facts, but there are also the stories, the faces, the suffering.
The omnipresent harassment of the government in the lives of ordinary Americans.
In Pennsylvania, take the story of John Pozsgai, an immigrant from Hungary, who worked as a mechanic and eventually saved enough money to purchase the land bordering his home in Morrisville, Pa.
This land was an old auto junkyard, and Mr. Pozsgai, taking pride in his home, proceeded to clean up this landfill by removing 7,000 old tires and rusted-out automobiles.
However, the EPA did not view this effort as a clean-up but rather a violation of the Clean Water Act.
You see, Mr. Pozsgai's property was a "wetland," ambiguously defined by the EPA as any property that has some sort of connection to a wetland. That connection to a wetland was a small drainage ditch located on the edge of his property.
Mr. Pozsgai did not need a permit to dump topsoil on an isolated wetland.
However, the Army Corps of Engineers insisted he apply for one. Next, the EPA set up surveillance cameras to capture Mr. Pozsgai filling his land with topsoil. EPA agents then arrested him for "discharging pollutants into waters of the United States."
These "pollutants" consisted of earth, topsoil and sand. The EPA openly admits that no hazardous wastes were involved in the case, yet Mr. Pozsgai was found guilty and sentenced to three years in prison and fined $202,000. Mr. Pozsgai spent 1 1/2 years in prison, 1 1/2 in a halfway house, and was under supervised probation for five years. His family went bankrupt and was unable to pay its property taxes on the land.
You may have recently heard the case of Mr. and Mrs. Michael Sackett, of Priest Lake, Idaho, who have also fallen victim to the EPA's abusive and overbearing practices.
The Sackett family sought to build a house on their half-acre of land, yet after construction broke ground, the EPA interfered, claiming the family violated the Clean Water Act by placing fill materials into "wetlands."
Their property was designated as a wetland, yet their neighbors have built houses on either side of their lot and their lot already has established sewage lines.
Their lot does not harbor a lake, pond or stream, yet the EPA is requiring them to obtain a building permit that would cost more than the value of their land.
The Sacketts proceeded by filing suit, but the request was dismissed by a federal judge. This past month, the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 in the Sackett's favor, giving them a partial victory, but leaving the regulations that harassed them in place.
The repeated abuse of power by the EPA has been noted across the country, infringing on the lives of all Americans.
Property rights were once regarded as fundamental to the protection of liberty, and it is time that legislators restore the value of personal property and do something about governmental overreach.
That's why I introduced the Defense of the Environment and Property Act, which would finally define wetlands and navigable waters in the law, and stop the out-of-control EPA and its war on private property.
And that is why it's vital you act today to help pass this crucial bill.
You can start by sending a Petition to your Congressman and Senators.
The bill is gaining steam and supporters every day in Congress, as more and more of these stories are told.
RANDPAC wants to keep telling these stories, keep up the pressure to take on the EPA and restore our liberty.
That's why it's also important you help RANDPAC with a contribution today of $100, $50, $25 - or whatever you can afford.
You can sign the Petition and contribute HERE.
One American can help take a stand and make a difference. But millions of Americans standing together can win the battle. Please consider joining this fight to restore our property rights and rein in out-of-control government.
For Liberty,
Rand Paul
United States Senator
P.S. Our economy, job growth and private property rights are at stake.
Today, I'm asking you to stand with me and start to fight back against an out-of-control federal government.
Please take a minute to fill out the "Defense of Property" petition I've had prepared for you, and if possible, lend your support today to our effort to stop the Obama EPA in its tracks.
After you complete your petition, please make your most generous contribution of $100, $50, $25 - or whatever you can afford - so RANDPAC can turn up the heat on Congress to end the EPA's war on private property.
Ron Paul delegates may have found a way to even the odds with abstention
Photo credit: Ron Paul 2012
The 2012 Republican nomination for president is now down to two candidates, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. Newt Gingrich is expected to suspend his campaign on Tuesday, leaving his campaign over 4 million dollars in debt. The Republican National Committee endorsed Mitt Romney last week, on the very day that the Gingrich campaign started to discuss exiting the race.
Ron Paul supporters will not let this news get them down. In fact, supporters of the 12-term Congressman from Texas have continued to grasp delegate positions in states where, despite the caucus winners, delegates are unbound. There are thirty states where delegates are able to vote for whomever they chose, regardless of primary and caucus results.
The act of abstention is when a participant in a vote is present for the roll call before the vote, but then purposefully casts either a blank vote or marking the ballot incorrectly. In many cases, the abstention of voting may be considered an act of protest. In fact, during the Republican National Convention in 2008, 14 delegates did not vote. These delegates were present during the roll call, but would not vote for any of the candidates at the time. Ron Paul supporters claim this would improve the ratio of votes in Ron Paul's favor. An example of this is explained with no one abstaining (and a tiny voting pool) Mitt Romney would get ten votes while Ron Paul would get five votes. Mitt Romney would win, having obtained the 50% +1 needed to grasp the nomination. With delegates abstaining, this could change drastically. Mitt Romney could get five votes, Ron Paul would maintain his five votes, and five voters would abstain. As long as all the abstentions had participated in the roll call, no one would win the 50% +1 votes needed to become the nominee and on to the next round and a brokered convention.
This was a considered option for Hilary Clinton supporters in the 2008 election and was widely discussed. The question remains will delegates be kicked out of the convention if they abstain from voting.
RNC for Life discusses, state by state, how many delegates are bound and how many are unbound after the primaries, but it has no mention of the Republican state laws regarding abstaining from voting. There are fines of up to $1,000 for "faithless electors" who do not vote as bound, and many are considering this to apply to the Republican National Convention. These are not applicable. An elector is not a delegate. An elector is a member of the Electoral College, voting in the final election.
Many in the Republican Party are "outraged" at this suggestion by Ron Paul supporters. They dislike the concept of these "Ron Paul Republicans" breaking the party's rules to support their candidate. However, Ronald Reagan's campaign considered the exact same option in 1976. Check out this 1976 headline: "Reagan Forces May 'Steal' Ford Votes".
It seems that each delegate must analyze the Republican Party rules in their own state to see if this form of protest voting would cause the delegate to be kicked out of the convention. At least 14 delegates did this in 2008. It seems the Republican race is not over yet.
Ron Paul supporters will not let this news get them down. In fact, supporters of the 12-term Congressman from Texas have continued to grasp delegate positions in states where, despite the caucus winners, delegates are unbound. There are thirty states where delegates are able to vote for whomever they chose, regardless of primary and caucus results.
"The dirty little secret is: At the end of the day, these guys and gals can vote any way they want," said a Republican who has attended national conventions for decades. "Each state has different (laws) on pledged delegates."Ron Paul supporters claim to be dedicated to a movement, not a candidate, and have announced they will support "no one but Paul". They have currently been discussing whether bound delegates may legally abstain from voting in the first round of voting at the Republican convention.
The act of abstention is when a participant in a vote is present for the roll call before the vote, but then purposefully casts either a blank vote or marking the ballot incorrectly. In many cases, the abstention of voting may be considered an act of protest. In fact, during the Republican National Convention in 2008, 14 delegates did not vote. These delegates were present during the roll call, but would not vote for any of the candidates at the time. Ron Paul supporters claim this would improve the ratio of votes in Ron Paul's favor. An example of this is explained with no one abstaining (and a tiny voting pool) Mitt Romney would get ten votes while Ron Paul would get five votes. Mitt Romney would win, having obtained the 50% +1 needed to grasp the nomination. With delegates abstaining, this could change drastically. Mitt Romney could get five votes, Ron Paul would maintain his five votes, and five voters would abstain. As long as all the abstentions had participated in the roll call, no one would win the 50% +1 votes needed to become the nominee and on to the next round and a brokered convention.
This was a considered option for Hilary Clinton supporters in the 2008 election and was widely discussed. The question remains will delegates be kicked out of the convention if they abstain from voting.
RNC for Life discusses, state by state, how many delegates are bound and how many are unbound after the primaries, but it has no mention of the Republican state laws regarding abstaining from voting. There are fines of up to $1,000 for "faithless electors" who do not vote as bound, and many are considering this to apply to the Republican National Convention. These are not applicable. An elector is not a delegate. An elector is a member of the Electoral College, voting in the final election.
Many in the Republican Party are "outraged" at this suggestion by Ron Paul supporters. They dislike the concept of these "Ron Paul Republicans" breaking the party's rules to support their candidate. However, Ronald Reagan's campaign considered the exact same option in 1976. Check out this 1976 headline: "Reagan Forces May 'Steal' Ford Votes".
"In secret strategy sessions, Reagan aides have toyed with the idea of asking delegates to abstain as long as their state laws require them to honor the primary verdicts. This would prevent the President from riding up an early-ballot victory. Then, in subsequent ballots, they could legally switch to Reagan."In fact, Rick Santorum, before suspending his own campaign, had hinted at the fact that he may ask delegates to abstain from voting for Mitt Romney. Gingrich seemed to imply the same thing. Ron Paul supporters and looking into this without any urging from the Ron Paul campaign.
It seems that each delegate must analyze the Republican Party rules in their own state to see if this form of protest voting would cause the delegate to be kicked out of the convention. At least 14 delegates did this in 2008. It seems the Republican race is not over yet.
Breaking News from Western Journalism
Apr 30, 2012 02:48 pm | Doug Book
On
April 25th the Tennessee State Senate voted unanimously to allow
federal and state law enforcement officials full access to the medical
records of the citizens of Tennessee. According to SB 2407, “…state and
federal law enforcement personnel authorized to have… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:47 pm | Thomas Lucente
There
he goes again.
We’ve all grown accustomed to President Barack Obama spending our money
like water but most of the time it is for his communist … I mean liberal
… political agenda of creating a single class —… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:38 pm | Alan P. Halbert
Part
11: Conclusion
Facts and nothing but the facts with documents that have been deemed
forgeries by a credible Law Enforcement Agency of the State of Arizona
A press gaggle had been hastily called on the afternoon of April 26,… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:35 pm | Floyd Brown
Apr 30, 2012 02:34 pm | Cagle Cartoons
Apr 30, 2012 02:33 pm | Breaking News
Barack
Obama opened last night’s White House Correspondents Dinner – an annual
chuckle-fest with D.C. reporters and pop culture celebrities – with a
pair of jokes and a wink about his supposed Hawaii birthplace.
He began with more veiled joke… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:33 pm | Herbert W. Titus and William J. Olson
On
April 25, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Arizona
v. United States, involving the constitutionality of the State’s effort
to combat illegal immigration. In one sense, it was a rematch between
former Solicitor General Paul Clement,… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:31 pm | Kris Zane
Apr 30, 2012 02:30 pm | Breaking News
(CBS
News) — House Republicans investigating the Fast and Furious scandal
plan to pursue a contempt citation against Attorney General Eric Holder,
senior congressional aides told CBS News.
The resolution will accuse Holder and his Justice Department of
obstructing the… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:30 pm | Floyd Brown
Apr 30, 2012 02:27 pm | Matt Vespa
YES!
It is finally here! A reality television show that pits two of the most
visible and vociferous political grassroots groups against each other
in a battle of epic proportions. Occupy vs. Tea Party is the brainchild
of Mr. Gordon… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:26 pm | Matt Vespa
The
core team at Resistance 44 had a conference call last Wednesday night
to codify their mission statement and their objectives. In other words,
they were preparing for war with the left-wing dependency culture and
it is about time!
1)… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:26 pm | Marita Noon
The
revelation of the EPA’s “philosophy” used in their regulation of oil
and gas companies—“crucify” and “make examples” of, just as the Romans
crucified random citizens in areas they conquered to ensure
obedience—provides proof of what many have known: policy… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 02:25 pm | Kris Zane
Apr 30, 2012 01:57 pm | Kevin Probst
1.
This administration’s sense of entitlement:
Obama has played over 100 rounds of golf since becoming president. He
has taken or sent his family on more vacations than we can count. He
has no concern about the fact that he… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 01:33 pm | Floyd Brown
Apr 30, 2012 01:19 pm | Breaking News
Despite
media fixation on the scream of the week, most Americans remain focused
on the essentials, and their views on them are consistent over time,
even if the Political Class continues to ignore them.
Take the auto bailouts. They’ve been… Continue to Post
Apr 30, 2012 12:33 pm | Floyd Brown
Apr 30, 2012 12:19 pm | Breaking News
Forget
Competing Theories … What Do the Facts Say about Quantitative Easing?
Paul Krugman says that QE, expansive monetary policy and inflation help
the little guy (the 99%) and hurt the big banks (the 1%).
Of course, followers of the… Continue to Post
Weekly Republican Address 4/28/12: Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)
April 28, 2012
In this week's address, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan
discusses the House Republican Budget, The Path to Prosperity. It is a
responsible budget that tackles our fiscal crisis and protects future
generations from a crushing burden of debt. This weekend (April 29)
marks exactly 3 years since the Democrat-controlled Senate last passed a
budget. That's inexcusable. We must stop Washington's reckless spending
to save our country from fiscal collapse.
April 30, 2012 Sessions marks three years without budget: ‘Deliberate plan’ by Democrats
WASHINGTON - MARCH 24: Sen. Jeff Sessions
(R-AL) speaks during a press conference on President Obama's proposed
budget at the U.S. Capitol March 24, 2009 in Washington, DC. Republicans
contend that the budget with double the size of the national debt by
2016. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
April 29, 2009 was the last time the Senate passed a budget — three years ago today. Articulating a budget for the United States is among senators’ legally required duties.
Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, told The Daily Caller that Senate Democrats’ obfuscation is to blame.
“This is a deliberate plan that the Democratic majority has executed for three years to avoid the responsibility of laying out a financial plan for America,” he said in an interview.
The Democratic majority in the Senate, Sessions said, “cannot lead.”
“When your party cannot coalesce around a plan that your members can support and the American people can support, then you’ve got a very deep, serious problem. And I think that is basically what it is,” he explained.
“So you’ve got to hide that by avoiding any public accountability. So you have secret meetings, the gang of six, and those kind of things — trying to move along without every having to lay out their vision.”
In the three years since the Senate last passed a budget, the federal government has spent $10.4 trillion and accumulated $4.5 trillion in debt, an amount that equals $13,000 in new debt for every individual American and $34,000 per family.
While Republicans lodge thir protests, Senate Democrats claim the blueprint for 2013 was decided upon with the August debt ceiling compromise.
“We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year — it’s done, we don’t need to do it,” Majority Leader Harry Reid said of the 2013 federal budget in February.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad has indicated that he likely will not mark up a budget until after the November election, canceling a planned budget markup and vote last week.
Sessions said such delays are par for the course with this Congress, whose modus operandi in recent years has been last-minute patch-up jobs.
“The only thing that has worked is when we get into a crisis, like when we had to have the debt ceiling raised and the Republicans were able to force $2.1 trillion in spending reductions over ten years,” Sessions said. “It was a step — not enough — a step”
“Already they are trying to undermine that. The president’s budget wipes out half of that $2 trillion in savings. All we’ve done is lurch through deadlines and crises, which is not good for the economy.”
He added that he believes the American people should take this into account when the vote in the fall.
“The message of the 2010 election was not heard by the majority party in the Senate,” Sessions said. “I mean, they demanded more public accountability on their representatives, that you do something about the debt course of America, and you stand up and be accountable.”
“I think it is fair to say it has gotten worse. There is nothing but secret meetings and an effort to avoid public debates and votes.”
The Conservative Byte Headlines
Today's Politically Incorrect Laugh:
(Click to Enlarge)
(Click to Enlarge)
Today's Politically Incorrect Headlines:
Personal Liberty Alerts
| Latest From Bob Livingston | April 30, 2012 |
 |
|
|
|||||
| On Your Own | |||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
| Personal Liberty News | |||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Questions For Bob | ||
|
||
|
What About Mitt Romney? Dear Mr. Livingston: At a crucial point in the presidential campaign, I find it appalling that you will distribute a newsletter urging the financial support of a Congressional candidate from Arizona, which follows a newsletter some months ago, encouraging support for Rick Santorum in his presidential campaign. Other organizations have sent out similar newsletters urging support for Newt Gingrich. However, not once has Personal Liberty Alerts or any other religious and/or non-profit organization sent out a newsletter on behalf of Mitt Romney who has been the frontrunner of Republican Party for many months; and after winning five large primary elections last night it is obvious that he will be the nominee. Bob's Response » | ||
WND News Alerts
| Is violence about to erupt in your town Tuesday? |
| May Day isn't just for Commies anymore, and at least one American mayor fears the worst, warning that protesters may use Occupy May Day events tomorrow to "commit violence, damage property and disrupt peaceful free-speech activity." |
| Read the latest now on WND.com. |
| Plus! |
| It just gets more mysterious. Medical examiners in Los Angeles are now investigating the possible poisoning death of one of their own officials who may have worked on the case of Andrew Breitbart, the conservative activist who died March 1, the same day Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced probable cause for forgery in President Obama's birth certificate. |
| Click here for details. |
| Must Read News |
|
| Other Highlights |
|
| Make WND your homepage today! |
| Daily Blessing |
|
Your daily dose of spiritual inspiration Today's Scripture reading from the Holy Bible |
| Joke Of The Day |
| Today's Poll |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)