Tag Archives: Idaho

PRIMARY ENDORSEMENTS REPUBLICAN PARTY 2012

Lucas Baumbach’s picks are all

pro-life, pro-gun, against special

interests, honor their oath to the

constitution and profess repealing

taxes to low levels.

CONGRESS

Raul Labrador (District 1)

M.C. Chick Heileson (District 2)

IDAHO HOUSE REPRESENTATIVE

Pam Stout (District 1)

Phil Hart (District 2)

John Blattler (District 8)

Judy Boyle (District 9)

Mark Patterson (District 15)

Patrick Malloy (District 20)

Chris MacCloud (District 20)

Lori Shewmaker (District 21)

IDAHO SENATE SENATOR

Danielle Ahrens (District 1)

Steve Vick (District 2)

Gresham Bouma (District 5)

Sheryl Nuxoll (District 7)

Monty Pearce (District 9)

Kent Marmon (District 10)

Maurice Clements (District 11)

Hubert Osborne (District 12)

Thomas Bullock (District 17)

Brian Schad (District 33)

ADA COUNTY COMMISSIONER

Steve Halvorsen

ADA COUNTY SHERIFF

Curtis Cattau

PRECINCT COMMITTEEMAN

Lucas likes the candidates on the red

anti-Obama card.  Ignore the fraudulent

precinct postcard sent by the Romney campaign.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Freedom Exchanges

Freedom Exchanges
by Lucas Baumbach

Healthcare exchanges are a major topic of legislative discussion in 2012. Butch Otter of Idaho accepted millions of dollars from Obamacare to fund their development. Otter’s rationale for taking the money: exchanges are a government concept whose time has come, even if Obama invented the idea.

Exchanges, it turns out, ARE a great idea. Sadly, Obama thought of them before I did. The greatest benefit of the healthcare exchange is not the exchange. The last thing we need is another government bureaucracy to manage another aspect of our lives. The benefit is the question itself: when would it be appropriate for government to exchange things? One example jumps out in front. Government should be self-sacrificing and exchange bureaucratic largesse for freedom. Freedom (Liberty) is the goal. It fosters efficiency and progress. And, a free man gets to keep the product of his labor, or freely exchange it for money! What a motivator would be a freedom exchange!

Setting up a freedom exchange will take a lot of volunteers. But, it will not require a single taxpayer dollar. Everyone can opt in or opt out. It’s that easy. Liberty lovers will opt in and slave-minded folks will not. Later on, states can offer big programs to test the resolve of the liberty folks, and they may again opt for the slavery of public debt, if they aren’t careful.

Exchanges should always involve trading up for a better value. Public debt would be traded for freedom from debt. The aim is prosperity. Social Security is one of these public debts. This thirty-year-old wants a retirement income, when I retire in 2040. But, my grandparents and parents cheated the country’s future. Even if SS was completely solvent (which it isn’t), I could double my return on investment through private retirement decisions. That’s freedom to prosper!

Medicare would be the next government debt to exchange for medical liberty. 46% of US births are paid for by government Medicare. As customer #1 the government is writing the rules for healthcare; the sad result is less health liberty and fewer options.
Medicare is in debt on many levels. First it is indebted to doctors. They don’t get paid for their services. Medicaid approved doctors are cheated out of 25% of their services by legislated reduction in reimbursements. It just doesn’t pay, unless they rush patients through, like cattle. It is institutionalized malpractice.
Prices also have to go up so doctors can stay in business (or at least pay their student debts). The cost to quality is dire: the doctor gives me 25% less service, just because I’m on government healthcare. 25% less service results in 25% less lifespan, if not 100% less lifespan. Freedom to survive illness would be the exchange. That’s my preferred option, but I am called an extremist.
Of course, as a good politician, I am told to preserve this inferior health program for the legions of statist seniors. Why not? They didn’t care enough about my future to preserve a superior free market. Why should I want to do them a good turn by giving them a free system?

The debt of income tax is an assault on individual liberty. Freedom exchange would allow you to keep more of the money you worked for and own. But, today, the government says you are in debt. By default you owe a portion of your labor. That is the definition of slavery. If freedom doesn’t include owning the fruit of one’s labor, what does it include?
Even Marxist materialists acknowledge that alienation from one’s own labor is an a priori issue. On the other hand, Christians shouldn’t find this hard to swallow. Tax-free income is a God-given right. Labor is property. Each individual owns his labor and the product of his labor. Not even God taxes income. Tithes are to be freely given not mandated. Increasing freedom requires eliminating the tax that comes out of the wage earner’s paycheck. The Bible says to pay the wage-earner in a timely fashion, lest he curse the master for not paying in a timely fashion. Millions of Americans are cursing their government. Income tax is a wedge between the people and their government that must go.

Exchange unemployment tax for freedom. Unemployment tax is really employment tax. Does it really make sense to punish a business for employing a man? This doesn’t show up on your pay stubs, like the first three taxes mentioned here, but it is an income-related tax. This tax is a percentage of your paycheck paid by your employer; it is money he could have given you a raise with. Instead it goes to Washington DC. Consumers of products pick up the cost of this in the inflated cost of goods that a company makes. Unemployment (ie employment tax) is a perfect example of how government taxes anything that moves, coming and going. If they could, they would institute a pre-employment tax, or a post-employment tax. Maybe even an employment interview tax. Why not? The obvious exchange here is an exchange of government-owned labor for individual-owned labor. And, this one is a liability to business.

Exchange worker’s compensation tax for freedom. Workers compensation is required by law. This is the original catastrophic health insurance. If you get injured at work, your injury-related costs are paid by worker’s compensation. First, it increases workplace carelessness. Employees that don’t worry about consequences are accident prone. The insurance is paid by the employer 100%, so it is hidden. The employee doesn’t even have skin in the game, no pun intended. Allegedly this tax keeps the burden of injured employees off society. That would be true, if it weren’t mandated upon every employer and raising the cost of goods. Again exchanging a government mandate for individual responsibility (FREEDOM), would be a great idea.

Exchange public schools for homeschooling: You can exchange education taxes that you don’t use for freedom! Yes, you can! Just stop paying property taxes, and support reforms to protect property from tax foreclosures. They are teaching your child about homosexual marriage and how to have en-condomed, pre-marital sex. Do you support that? It is the right and responsibility of every parent to feed and educate their own children. Foisting child husbandry on government is not the wisest use of your tax dollars. Does government feed and care for our domestic pets? No! Maybe we should give our children the same respect and freedom we give to Fido. Government-free education.

Exchange registration (the insurance mandate and licensure of motor vehicles) for the freedom to move and transport in any fashion. It is pure inequality to require motor vehicle registration and not horse and carriage registration. Why doesn’t government demand bicycle registration, canoe registration, and snow-shoe registration? Does the use of a motor really require a government tax? The government rule is, “If it moves, tax it.” Make registration voluntary. And, if you neighbor doesn’t get his skateboard registered, then you shun him. Or, just let communities track themselves.

Federal tyranny: most people haven’t heard of this. That’s because the federal government is so kind. The federal government follows the limits of the constitution, and it never, ever interprets two little clauses to indefinitely expands its own power.

But, if this ever ceases to be the case states can exchange federal tyranny for freedom. A synonym of freedom in this case is state sovereignty. The federation is made of many sovereign nation states, just as described by Alexis de Tocqueville. The concept that primacy rests in the 25 square mile swamp in Maryland is silly. The politicians of the individual sovereign states are problematic enough without giving them the excuse continually that they are just following orders from DC. It is the Nuremberg trial syndrome every day in each of the 50 state capitols. Freedom from federal distractions is a must. We can then focus all of our dissatisfaction on our local politicians. I know they will love that.

The free marketplace of goods is rivaled only by the free marketplace of ideas. Exchanging bad ideas for good ideas is good. Exchanging socialism for self-governance is good. The idea that government can do most everything in a productive and beneficial way is bad. So, by all means exchange, but do not exchange liberty for slavery. Exchange debt (slavery) for liberty!

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Blue Republicans and Ron Paul

When a presidential candidate gets endorsements from pastor Voddie Baucham, Herb Titus, Norma McCorvey, Oliver Stone and Blue Republicans (who are really Democrats), what does that mean? Are you a right wing nutcase or a liberal fruit loop?

Voddie Baucham is a pastor well-known for his movement to reform the Southern Baptist Convention to be more patriarchal and to abandon public schools. Baucham says that sending your christian child to public school is like sacrificing him to Molech. Strong language. Baucham calls homeschooling the christian alternative. He endorses Ron Paul, calling him essentially the Christian choice.

Norma McCorvey is Jane Roe from the case that enshrined abortion as a federal issue, Roe v Wade. It was her lawsuit that made it to the Supreme Court of the United States and lead to the death of tens of million unborn children. Today Norma is a vocal pro-life activist. And, she endorses the Ron Paul approach to returning jurisdiction to the States. No pro-lifer disputes her credibility.

Herb Titus is a constitutional attorney that has won at the Supreme Court level, working with Judge Roy Moore’s team defending the State of Alabama’s display of the ten commandments in a courthouse. Titus is also party to a lawsuit that questions Obama’s credentials as a natural-born citizen. That lawsuit is currently before the Georgia Supreme Court. If successful at proving that natural born means born of two American citizens, it may be that not only Newt Gingrich fails to make the ballot in several states but also Obama fails to make the cut. Titus says that Ron Paul is the constitutionalists’ choice.

Oliver Stone, the liberal Hollywood blockbuster production machine, known for rated-R films of grotesque content, said in an interview that he would vote for Ron Paul instead of Obama, if given the opportunity. Stone cites not Paul’s anti-isolationist foreign policy, but instead economic reasons. Stone says he’s sick of the spending spree, and that Ron Paul’s view of the future is the only intelligent view. The world economy is on the brink of collapse, an increasingly non-partisan finding of fact.

Blue Republicans are supporting Ron Paul as well. Is that a Reagan Democrat or a depressed Republican? It turns out that Democrats are disaffected by Obama’s foreign policy (attacking countries unpredictably), corporate welfare bailout schemes (TARP and stimulus), violation of the 4th amendment (patriot act extension), and expansion of TSA. The founder, Robin Koerner, says that Obama is Bush III, if judged by the size and valency of his programs. Some Democrats thought Obama would make the USA more free. They were wrong. But, they are coming out for Ron Paul to make up for their mistake. See this local BSU event for more.

Blue Republican Event
Saturday, January 28, 2011
Boise State University,
Jordan Ballroom
7:00 – 9:00 PM

In primary elections the old-guard Republicans warn against choosing the most conservative candidate, citing the need to attract independents in the general election. In general elections the same Republicans say it is necessary to move to the center to appeal to the independent voter. Ron Paul consistently scores very high among independents. So, it follows logically that Ron Paul would do well in a general election.

Paul doubters either want to maintain power or are convinced that constitutionality is a concept beyond which we have long since de-evolved. They say of the constitution what they say of Ron Paul, “We like it but it will never happen.” Newsflash! if it doesn’t happen, we will likely live a worse future than we have seen in Oliver Stone’s movies.

The last note is for Christians. For those that can’t bear to eat with sinners, remember that God’s ways are mysterious and he confounds the logic of the world. Who are you to say that God will not use unusual circumstances to glorify himself and perhaps preserve an undeserving America, just as he saved Ninevah?

Blue Republican Event
Saturday, January 28, 2011
Boise State University,
Jordan Ballroom
7:00 – 9:00 PM

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Bowe Bergdahl: Pray for your brother today?

The consequences of war are not and should not be easy to forget.  Let’s not be glib about war.  The least a free man can do is pray for his brother in bondage.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Healthcare Exchange is Bureaucratic Expansion

The little-discussed basis of the healthcare-exchange idea is that government sets it up, runs it and writes the rules governing it. Many right-wing politicians are talking about how great the idea is, and how it will save Idaho from Obamacare. But, will it? One of the backdoor mandates, which is the motive behind Otter’s move to seize the federal funding ($40,000,000), is that Idaho has been threatened with an ultimatum. Create a health exchange or else. Or else what? Or else the Obama administration will set one up. That doesn’t sound like much of an option. Idahoans don’t want government to expand its already bloated bureaucracy.

Even if she wanted to, Idaho, coming off of a 25% decline in revenues, can not afford to set up a new bureaucracy. Nor should it want to set one up. The taxpayers are perpetually on the line for bureaucratic largesse, especially after the grant monies dry up. Talk about esto perpetua.

The preferable option is to just say no. Kansas recently joined Oklahoma and gave back federal money for an exchange. Otter on the other hand is running Obama’s way. See the following excerpt from the August 11th, 2011 story:

“The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has dispensed more than $240 million in taxpayer-funded grants to six states and a multi-state consortium to facilitate the creation of “Obamacare” health insurance exchanges. However two states and counting — Oklahoma and, more recently, Kansas — have sent the money back, which essentially marks their refusal to comply with the health care bill’s unconstitutional mandates.” -NaturalNews.com Jonathan Benson

So, what exactly is this exchange? Politicians in Boise say it will decrease costs, and we should do it even without Obamacare money. But, that argument is really dishonest. Without the federal dollars this would never be a preferred solution to inflated costs.

A healthcare exchange is a centralized marketplace. Like a healthcare bizarre you would go there to shop for the best deal. And, the government owns the bizarre. Even if it doesn’t own it. It writes the rules for a quasi-governmental agency (non-profit) to run it. A rose by any other name is still a rose.

The bad thing about the bizarre is that if you don’t come to it, you can’t sell anything. You can’t buy anything either. That doesn’t sound like a free marketplace. It sounds like the Idaho-owned Liquor store. It sounds like the bizarre is really a government monopoly, because you have no other choice. And, companies like Blue Cross are going to want to employ their lobbyists to write the rules. If I want to sell insurance or participate in private healthcare sharing or even want an exemption for my Amish family, I have to go to the government market. It is a lot like requiring all students to register for public schools, even if you go to a private school. Does your health belong to the government any more than your education decisions or your child belong to the government?

Privacy becomes obsolete. At the door the government requires you to register to participate. Your healthcare information and your purchasing choices will now be centralized. Centralization is not the American way. Freedom involves a sometimes chaotic, decentralized system, in which smart consumers find the best deals on their own. Since when can government choose better than the consumer? Since Obama took over, that’s when. And, careless, misguided politicians are not good defenders of your freedom. They are too willing to fall for big-government under the guise of local control. But, Americans are smarter than that. “Government is the problem.” said Reagan. If only so-called Reagan conservatives in Boise knew better.

Even healthcare sharing organizations, which give people a much cheaper alternative to insurance, would be subject to the rules of healthcare exchanges. Under the current department of insurance, healthcare sharing is not considered eligible for regulation by government, according to the Idaho Department of Insurance director. So, why would we want to expand government jurisdiction to control free-market innovation that works to reduce costs?

Although every free-marketeer understands that decentralization and free-market regulation (risk) are the keys to a cheap and productive healthcare system, many Republicans (like Butch Otter) are supporting the implementation of Idaho’s own healthcare exchange. Healthcare exchange has been called “Travelocity” of healthcare, but it is more like a centralized database, where every citizen will have to register. And, last time I checked, Travelocity was not government owned or regulated. The comparison is absurd at face value.

It is another governmental panacea, which will do harm to Idaho’s healthcare, by centralizing control and power. If it is such a good idea, the free market would have thought of it. Free market and free men work well together. Centralization and spending don’t.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Nullification of Federal Gun Control Act 1968 Resolution

From “Resolutions Submitted to the Idaho Republican Party State Central Committee”:

Resolution 2011-23
Nullification of Federal Gun Control Act 1968 Resolution

Submitted by Mark Patterson, Chairman District 15, Lucas Baumbach, Chairman District 17

Whereas, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution is the law of the land for firearms and firearm ownership, directly contrary to “gun control” law.

Whereas, the Gun Control Act of 1968 created a burdensome regulating agency, the ATF, the mandate of which, is to control guns, especially by mandating registration of firearms by manufacturers,

Whereas, the NAZI Weapons Laws of 1938 are very similar in scope and aim to the U. S. Gun Control Act of 1968 (Aaron Zelman’s Gun Control: Gateway to Tyranny)

Therefore be it resolved, that the Idaho Republican Party supports the primary and residual effects of the Gun Control Act of 1968 be nullified by the legislature and executive of the State of Idaho.

Be it further resolved, that the Idaho Republican Party agrees the Gun Control Act of 1968 is clearly superseded by both the Idaho Constitution’s prohibition of firearm registration and the Federal Constitution’s declaration of the right to bear arms.

Be it further resolved, that the Idaho Republican Party supports Idaho condemnation of the policies that enabled the murders of millions of Jews, Gypsies, religious and political dissidents by removing their ability to defend themselves.

http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2011/02/matter-of-resolve.html

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Have a Hart Press Conference

Phil Hart Press Conference tomorrow – Wed. 12:30AM Capitol steps


Friends,

As mentioned previously, we will be having a press conference in support
of Phil Hart tomorrow (Wednesday.) Here are the details:

The press conference will be at 12:30 PM on the steps of the Idaho
Capitol. The purpose of the press conference is to show that there are
people from around the state who support Rep. Phil Hart’s fight against
the IRS. Lucas Baumbach will be the spokesman at the press conference.
When he is giving his statement to the press, please stand behind him to
show the cameras that there are a lot of people who support Phil. If
the press tries to interview you, please stick to the soundbites, no
matter what they ask. Simply state that you support Phil and his fight
against the IRS, and that he is being politically persecuted for
challenging the constitutionality of the income tax. If you are not
comfortable speaking to the press, don’t do it.

Defer any questions to Lucas and let him answer if you don’t know what
to say. Also remember that we need as many people as possible to show
up to the ethics committee hearing on Thursday, 9AM at the State House.

Idahoans for Liberty
353-8157

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Letter to support Phil Hart

TO: Ethics Committee Members

RE: Phil Hart

FROM: Lucas Baumbach

imwithlucas@gmail.com

I am writing this letter in support of Phil Hart.  After reviewing the facts, I am concerned that the ethics hearing is a partisan attack that was precipitated after a primary election.  There is no reason for this issue to come up during a general election, except that Democrats want to paint Republicans in general as bad legislators.  Phil Hart is one of the most productive and hard-working legislators.  I once met him at a pro-life event, and around 10PM Representative Hart said he was returning to the capitol to work on legislation.  I was impressed by his dedication to research and writing good legislation himself.  The charges of carelessness and impropriety couldn’t be leveled at a more conscientious man.

It is clear that a fair hearing will find Hart innocent of any misuse of legislative privilege.  It is pointless to have legislative privilege to avoid the distraction of polemical civil filings, if the legislature is going to convene an ethics hearing each time the privilege is invoked.  To punish Representative Hart would be to open the entire legislature up to frivolous lawsuits.  This ethics charge alone will have a chilling effect on the legislative process itself.  Setting this precedent would ensure that no conscientious citizen will want to serve in the state legislature.  A citizen legislature can not continue to impose such draconian measures on the integrity of the legislative process.  To act in contradiction of this reality would be to deny that good legislators are needed.

It has come to my attention that the committee has chosen to take legislative counsel from the same office that is actively opposing Phil Hart in appellate court.  The current attorney should immediately recuse himself from advising the ethics committee.  This is also a question of separation of powers; as the attorney is a part of the executive branch.  The State Bar should be apprised of this conflict of interest.

I would expect the committee of Phil’s peers to consider the accusations as peers and not transform the ethic hearing process into a staged, quasi-prosecutorial, trans-governmental charade.  The charges originally leveled have expanded into a whole host of unfocused questions that were not the original intent of the ethics panel.  This attempt to expand the inquiry to include questioning Hart’s voting record is part of the political theatre.  In a sense no good legislator can entirely avoid personal gain, as all laws should effect all citizens (even legislators) positively.  It is the legislator’s job to benefit everyone, himself and the entire public by virtue of limited government and taxation.

But, even accusing Phil Hart of self-serving is a red herring.  No law can be enacted ex post facto.  Even if a legislator voted on a bill to cut taxes, that vote could not effect past tax debts.  Only an amnesty bill would clear past tax debts.  And, there have been no amnesty bills before the legislature.  Any legislator, even a Democrat, should know this.  I suspect either a fundamental lack of legal knowledge by Democrat accusers or a deliberate Democrat attempt to despoil the Republican majority by virtue of innuendo, media propaganda and hyperbole.

This ethics panel request was made as an act of desperation by a political party bent on fundamentally changing the character of our State and Country.  They will say anything to further their socialist cause.  They will seek to destroy men, like Hart, who oppose big-government panacea at every turn.  If you think that Democrats in Idaho’s legislature are unlike those in DC, just look at the votes in the last legislative session.  The local Democrats are more partisan than ever.  What’s worse: our society has been on a downward trajectory for so long that we think it’s right.  It’s not only wrong; it’s evil.  In the tradition of Ronald Reagan, we must call evil by its name.  That’s the true question of ethics.

Best,

Lucas Baumbach

http://www.imwithlucas.com

imwithlucas@gmail.com

208-473-7215 office

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

POLL: Idaho Governor

With the information that you have today, who would you like to be the next Republican candidate for Governor of Idaho in 2010?  Take the confidential poll to help us learn what people are thinking.  Share the poll with a friend.  The primary election is in May.

15 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

FUNDRAISER RAISES QUESTIONS

Ms. Erin Casey is Ward’s key DC fundraiser.  It’s clear that without her his campaign would be as broke as it was last April.  She is the most frequent line item on his annual campaign report.

I wanted to know more about this key DC fundraiser.  So, I tracked down  www.erincaseyconsulting.com,  ”Her on the job training translated into a record setting effort as the Finance Director on the Chocola for Congress campaign.  Once her work in Indiana was complete Erin headed east to begin work for the Maryland Republican Party.”

There’s one important name in that excerpt, Chocola.  Chocola is the president of a very powerful PAC.  It’s a PAC that has spent over a million dollars in Idaho electing Republicans.  CLUB FOR GROWTH.

“In April, 2009, Chocola became president of the Club for Growth, a conservative political action committee that focuses on fiscal issues.”  from Wickipedia.  This was the same month Ward started his campaign.

It is unclear how close Ms. Casey is to Chocola.  But, it is her job to use her connections to make money.  It would be good to know how compromised CLUB FOR GROWTH is, and whether they are manipulating would-be donors in a general election to get behind Ward in the primary.

Did Chocola introduce Ward to Casey?  It would look very bad if Chocola had come out early for Ward, despite the controversy over Ward’s residency in Idaho.  The tangled web we weave begs the question, Is Ward a new “young gun” or a deeply-entrenched DC political insider?

This is a picture of Erin Casey and an unidentified guy.


1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized