Statement: HR 325 No Budget, No Pay Act

Executive Summary: The B/CS Tea Party rejects the HR 325 No Budget, No Pay Act as being unconstitutional (27th Amendment), and yet another example of trying to use human nature to fight human nature, rather than doing so with right constitutional principles.

The Tea Party Movement began as a national movement on Tax Day, April 15, 2009. The two topics that brought the people out to the public square were the National Debt and ObamaCare—the federal government’s unconstitutional  takeover of the healthcare industry. Today after almost four years of activism, the two topics the Tea Party Movement remains concerned about are the National Debt and unconstitutional overreach such as ObamaCare.

Human Nature: Small Gov’t Advocates are a threat to Big Gov’t Advocates.

While the anti-fact culture dismisses the concept of an understandable set nature of man,  objective truth continues to state that individuals who benefit from the largesse of government spending will do everything in their power to avert any threat to that source of largesse. Those who benefit from big government will see those promoting small government as a threat to their well-being. An oppressive status quo will always protect the oppressive status quo. Human nature and its instinct for survival is capable of the most heinous deeds imaginable with the conscience-erasing  pragmatic statement:  “If I don’t do it, someone else will.”

The Constitution is the answer.

Tea Party Rally in DC 9.12.09

Tea Party Rally in DC 9.12.09

The Tea Party Movement rallied across the nation in 2009 because we realized the futility of human nature to negotiate with human nature. We demanded application of the rules of the Constitution to solve the nation’s oppressive status quo impasse regarding the National Debt and ObamaCare.

The typical Human Nature Solution:  Two wrongs can sort of make a right….

The H.R. 325, the No Budget, No Pay Act. of January 23, 2013 is nothing more than a continuance of the failed method of human nature negotiating with human nature.

No Budget No Pay—it may sound good but it’s unconstitutional

The negotiation gimmick of “No Budget, No Pay” is in fact unconstitutional according to the  27th Amendment to the Constitution which “prohibits any law that increases or decreases the salary of members of the Congress from taking effect until the start of the next set of terms of office for Representatives.” Further, it is illogical to negotiate in good faith with those that have no regard for the rules.

The B/CS Tea Party rejects negotiation “gamesmanship” based as it is in human nature with all its self-evident self-centered attributes. Big-government acolytes know no political party boundaries. Continuing this way is a merely the pretense of “conservative” Congressmen to appear as though they’re respecting the will of the people.

However, doing anything OTHER than application of the Rule of Law is perpetuate the current reign of lawlessness. To pragmatically assert that in continuing to break the rule of law, Congress is “successfully” averting the results of fiscal objective truth is to join the anti-fact culture’s denial of Natural Law. Ignorance of the law does not nullify the consequences.

Our national debt MOCKS and HARMS future generations.

Just as slavery within our nation’s borders mocked the foundational philosophy of The Declaration of Independence which proudly established for all men, for all time, the truth that all men are equals with the Creator endowed right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, our National Debt nullifies the freedom of future generations.

Faith determines actions.

The B/CS Tea Party has faith in the Constitution —the Rule of Law—as the transcendent authority to both halt lawlessness and ensure the continuance of our nation’s founding philosophy. When Congressmen exhibit faith in the Constitution, their actions will be based upon application of the rules – especially in regards to lawbreakers – not the latest negotiation gimmick conceived through man’s feckless human nature.

Comments

  1. Bruce Fuller says:

    I agree wholeheartedly with your rejection of HR325. On it’s face, it appears to be unconstitutional but the politicians in Washington DC left themselves an out. The salaries will be put in escrow to be paid at the end of the current session of congress regardless of the outcome. As soon as I heard about the bill, I called Mr. Flores’ office in Washington and registered my objections to the action. We have basically just given the administration the ability to spend approximately $250 billion more that we don’t have and without any type of control over that spending. Mr. Flores and the other republicans caved on the supposed fiscal cliff and lost a great opportunity to focus the debate in Washington on debt. Now they have kicked the can down the road again and lost more time. Recently, I heard Flores talking on the radio about immigration reform. His excuses as to why we needed reform read like a liberal christmas wish list. Only as a parting thought did he mention border security. Perhaps we should change his name to Chet Edwards. He has only been in Washington for two years and he already has drunk the kool-aid. If Mr. Flores needs a reminder of why he was sent to Washington, this should do it – STOP SPENDING, then STOP SPENDING NOW NOT IN TEN YEARS. If this means shutting the government down for an indefinite time, so be it. The government has done this many times in our history. Lay them all off with no retroactive pay.

Speak Your Mind

*