As I was sitting here this evening contemplating the passage of the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade bill yesterday evening I continued to get more and more irate. Sure I have been opposed to any form of cap and trade legislation because I firmly understand that it is a job killer, an economy killer. I understand that it is nothing more than a massive tax on all Americans. I understand that it does have good intentions, however I remain unconvinced that it will achieve the objectives that the bills supporters have been claiming. I understand that it will drive good paying employers from our country. I understand that it will drive the cost of energy beyond the reach of many families. I understand that it will drive the cost of many products beyond the reach of many families. Be that as it may, these are not the reasons that my anger continues to rise as I contemplate the bills passage.

I will admit that I was pissed that this bill was even considered for the reasons stated above. But it was the circumstances in which the bill was passed that put me over the top. The speed in which this legislation was pushed through the House of Representatives prevented many Representatives from even conducting a rudimentary review of the bill. There was just one copy of this legislation available for review on the day of the debate which further exacerbated any attempts at genuine review of the bill. To further stifle any true review of the Democratic leadership successfully placed a limitation on any debate yesterday. I find it laughable that any of the Representatives that voted for this bill could actually have a firm grasp of what the plan entailed. For all the 219 legislators know the bill could have included wording that would change the name of our country to the United States of Ignorance. My point is that passing this legislation of this magnitude in this fashion constitutes a dereliction of duty.

Upon further inspection I have found that the Iowa delegation split in a party line vote. Iowa’s two Republican Representatives; Steve King and Tom Latham; voted against the legislation. Our three Democrat Representatives voted to approve the plan. I had fully expected Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack to vote for the bill as they are nothing more than pawns used by their puppet master, Nancy Pelosi. I had higher hopes for Leonard Boswell. As the debate raged in the House I had heard rumblings that Boswell was on the fence. As more and more Americans called in to voice their disapproval of the plan I thought that Boswell would succumb to the pressure of the public. That was not to be though. Ultimately he fell on the side of the puppets.

As I contemplated the actions of these three I decided to see if they had any press releases rationalizing their affirmative vote for this legislation. It should come as no surprise that there is no statement yet released by them. I would love to hear what these three puppets have to say in defense of their vote. I would contend that in voting to pass the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade bill without a full understanding it’s contents amounts to a dereliction of duty. Iowan’s elected these three to competently represent Iowa in the US House of Representatives. But when they act in this fashion they have failed miserably. The fact that they have remained silent on this action should be an indictment as to the character of all three men. They are not fit to represent the wise and honest people of Iowa. If you are as upset about their actions as I am, please contact their offices in Washington, D.C. and urge these men to do the honorable thing and resign. They have become an embarrassment to all of Iowa.

1^st District Bruce Braley

Email

Phone: (202)225-2911

2^nd District Dave Loebsack

Email

(202)225-6576

3^rd District Leonard Boswell

Email

(202)225-3806

Wednesday the I-Jobs board selected the first applicants to be awarded money from Governor Chet Culvers bonding plan. All of the projects approved are located in the city of Cedar Rapids, a city still recovering from the record breaking and devastating floods that decimated the city last year. For the most part the projects awarded the funds can be considered vital infrastructure needs. Here is the list of projects with the amount awarded along with a short explanation of the projects needs:

Cedar Rapids Public Library; $5 million.

Apparently the Cedar Rapids Library was heavily damaged in last years historic flooding. According to the I-Jobs board the library sustained more than 50% damage during the catastrophe.

Paramount Theater, Cedar Rapids, IA; $5 million.

This historic theater was heavily damaged during the 2008 floods that inundated this city. This money will be used to restore the theater to pre-flood condition while also adding a bar/café to the facility.

Public Works Building, Cedar Rapids, IA; $5 million.

The city of Cedar Rapids Public Works Building is another building that was heavily damaged during the flooding that invaded the city last year. As such the building is in desperate need of rehabilitation.

Steam System Customer Relief, Cedar Rapids, IA; $5 million.

The City of Cedar Rapids operated a steam heating system in the city. The flooding that struck the city undermined and damaged the boiler and delivery system. This funding will be used to help the city’s customers convert to a heat system other than steam.

Linn County Human Services Campus, Cedar Rapids, IA; $10 million.

The flooding last year displaced several non-profit service organizations. These funds will be used to construct a new Human Services Campus in downtown Cedar Rapids with room for 7 to 10 non-profit organizations.

Options Building, Cedar Rapids, IA; $5 million.

A large portion of Linn County’s infrastructure was damaged or destroyed during last years floods. This project is proposed to replace two separate buildings damaged during the flooding last year, the Options Building and the Witwer Building. The plan is to replace these two buildings with just one.

National Czeck and Slovak Museum & Library, Cedar Rapids, IA; $10 million.

This project is rather large in scope with four separate phases. They include the restoration of a historic building, the restoration of two historic homes, construction of an exhibition center and research library, and construction of a permanent exhibit.

Also considered but not awarded funding was a request for $500,000 for the construction of a new fire station in Elkader, IA. It would seem that the city’s current fire station has suffered considerable damage as a result of last years flooding.

Like I stated before, for the most part the funding will be going to rehabilitating infrastructure hit hard by the flooding of the Cedar River. However not all of the funds allocated will be going toward necessary infrastructure needs. For instance, I understand that the Paramount Theater is a city landmark. And I understand that it can and should be a source of community pride. But at the same time I also question the use of public funding to restore the theater to its original state. I wonder if the backers of this drive have attempted to secure private donations to help them rehabilitate the building. The same holds true for the National Czech and Slovak Museum & Library. I have to question if this is an appropriate use of taxpayer money. Should not the first order of business for the I-Jobs board be to ensure that necessary infrastructure is rebuilt? That is clearly not the case here.

I will not pretend that I was supportive of this massive debt funded program. But since it has been approved and there is nothing I can do to prevent this money from being spent, we must ensure that the money goes toward vital infrastructure needs and not unnecessary projects. With their first approval meeting out of the way the board has shown us an indication that they are looking to spend the money on high dollar projects without regard to the necessity of the project.

During my twenty years of service in the U.S. Navy I lived in and visited many foreign nations. I was stationed in the Philippines during the “People’s Power” revolution and participated in a historic port visit to Shanghai, China in May, 1989, during which the Chinese took to the streets to protest the communist regime (remember Tieniman Square?). In both cases, I always wondered, at what point did the people risk their lives to stand up against their tyrannical government. More specifically, at what point did the military and police decide to side with the people and rebel against the government.

Searching for an answer to this question is not just an academic exercise for me. Although I am retired from active duty, I am still obligated in my oath to support and defend the Constitution. In my current capacity as a Police Chief, I am sworn to uphold the law. So, at what point would I, and all others in my position, determine that the assault on our Constitution is so severe it would warrant us from disobeying laws and regulations that are clearly in violation of the powers granted by the United States Constitution?

               The principles upon which our Nation was founded have been slowly eroding over time.   Due in part to changing social values and a diffusion of personal responsibility, the words and philosophies of our Founding Fathers do not ring true to many of today’s citizens.   Apathy, which has replaced the natural fear of government, and the ever increasing reliance upon government institutions have created a ripe environment for the growth of abusive power by our elected officials. The power of “We the People” has slowly been ceded to elected officials, which in turn, emboldens them to slowly usurp the Constitutional principles and move towards a socialist approach.

               Smugness and arrogance seem to rule the political scene today. Just look at how the Tea Party protesters, who merely exercised their right to assemble and redress their grievances, were ridiculed. Recently, the Department of Homeland Security released an intelligence assessment which demonized veterans as potential domestic terrorists.   The huge amount of federal borrowing in the effort to create an economic stimulus has just enslaved our grandchildren to the government. The Iowa Supreme Court recently created a “right”, where none such existed, when it proclaimed Iowa’s law limiting marriage to one man and one woman unconstitutional.   

Although it is not recognized by most, tyranny, in the form of increasing government intrusion into the citizen’s private lives eerily marches on. One day we will wake up and say, “Where have our freedoms gone?” Freedom lost will not be regained. So again, at what point during the slow transformation from a republic to a socialist state we will say, “Enough is enough.”   Abraham Lincoln had the following to say during his First Inaugural Address, March 4^th 1861, “This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their “constitutional” right of amending it or their “revolutionary” right to dismember or overthrow it.” 

               It is my greatest desire that I should never have to face the decision that our forefather’s had to make. One cannot comprehend the gut-wrenching choice that was laid before them when they had finally reached “their point.”   What courage and bravery they showed when they risked life and property to stand against tyranny. With the growing fear and distrust of government at all levels, will there be an incident which sparks a nationwide rebellion? If so, at what point do the military and police side with “We the People” and determine that defending the Constitution overrides protecting the sitting government? I pray that America continues to use the peaceful political process to work out its differences and that I may never have to determine “At What Point.”

Tom Shaw is an independent candidate for Iowa House District 8.

Remember this date, Friday April 3^rd 2009. This is the day that the Iowa Supreme Court committed a grave injustice against the people of Iowa. For on this day the court issued its opinion on gay marriage which far too many people take as a decree from on high. This is what is called legislating from the bench and oversteps the bounds of their limited powers. But that is neither here nor there. And that is not what I have deemed to write about in this post. What I am going to write about is the fact that after this opinion has been announced it can and will create a flood of unintended consequences that will be felt for years to come. What the Iowa Supreme Court did yesterday is open up Iowa’s very own Pandora’s Box.

For years Iowa, and the United States for that matter, have been ruled by moral absolutes. For those of you that had to endure the public education system, moral absolutes are values that the public held above all else. These values were non-negotiable, the people stuck to these values through the good times and the bad. These moral absolutes served this nation well, allowing it to become the greatest nation to have ever graced the planet.

But recent time’s moral degenerates have waged a ferocious attack on traditional American values. They rebelled against the set of values that made it possible for America to thrive. The first value that they targeted was the sanctity of life by proclaiming that a woman should be able to abort her child. As a result we have legal abortion on demand where irresponsible women can rid themselves of that inconvenience in her womb. And now we have the attack on that goes beyond the sanctity of marriage. It is an attack that if successful will nullify moral absolutes and risk throwing our nation into utter chaos.

As with anything that our government does there is a little something called unintended consequences. By coming forth with an opinion as morally bankrupt as this one the Iowa Supreme Court has opened the door to a large variety of perverted and immoral acts and behaviors. Think about it, if homosexuals are now allowed to marry legally in the State of Iowa, how can the state rationally ban polygamy? How can the state maintain that incest should be against the law? How can Iowa legally proclaim that bestiality is unlawful? Do you have an answer for that? How can the state prosecute someone for murder? Well I do, the state can’t outlaw them if this Iowa State Supreme Court ruling is allowed to stand.

As a commenter in another post has said, these are indeed dark days. It is only a matter of time before another sick and twisted individual challenges an Iowa law by claiming it is discriminatory. When will the government of Iowa wake up and see that moral absolutes are what are needed to maintain law and order? Let’s just hope that it is not too late to close Iowa’s Pandora’s Box.

As most people are by now aware the Speaker of the Iowa House Pat Murphy ordered the removal of hundreds of concerned citizen’s from the gallery during the course of a public hearing on a bill attempting to remove federal deductibility from Iowa’s tax laws. Contrary to what you will hear or read in the mainstream media there were no demonstrations, just applause. Speaker Murphy rationalizes his actions by claiming that “decorum” must be maintained. I could live with this if this standard was applied fairly across the board. However I have come across a video that clearly shows that this is not the case. Earlier this year when Governor Culver delivered his Condition of the State address in the Iowa House Chamber members of the General Assembly as well as visitors erupted into applause and cheers much as the concerned citizen’s did on Tuesday.  As the video that I have linked shows there was no attempt to maintain “decorum” and there was no attempt to regain order only continued “chaos.”

 http://www.iptv.org/video/detail.cfm/3233/cos_20090107_condition_state_2009

Without a doubt the events of April 1^st at the Iowa Statehouse will live in infamy for they were a manifestation of the tyrannical mindset that Speaker Murphy holds. The only logical conclusion that a rational human being can come to is that Speaker Murphy has no regard for the will of the people. There were several messages delivered that evening. Perhaps the most important is that the people of Iowa are angry, they are frustrated, and they are growing more and more restless. The legislative leaders would be wise to take heed to the message because that restlessness is growing.