Another Step for Government Largesse
The Hill reports that in a "Sunday-evening surprise," the Senate unanimously passed the food safety bill that had originally been stalled because it was a revenue-raising measure that erroneously began in the Senate. Interestingly, the Hill referred to that little constitutional infraction as a "technical objection" and a "clerical error." Oh boy. Even Sen. Coburn, who had been blocking the bill, ended up lifting his objection to the bill for some unreported reason.
Have you noticed how many feel-good measures are being promoted and passed these days with little thought given to the freedom draining ramifications? Well, I'll tell you this. The commenters following the Hill's article are thinking about them, and, if they're any indication, Tea Partyers will be plenty upset as well. More money and more power to federal bureaucracies: the legislation will "provide FDA with the resources and authorities the agency needs to help make prevention the focus of our food safety strategies." Doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy?
Not everyone is buying into the soundness of this legislation. The Heritage Foundation has said this is "The Wrong Remedy for a Phony Crisis," that the nation's food supply has never been safer "thanks largely to technological advances and market forces." Heritage concludes, "The Reid bill clearly contradicts the message sent by voters just two weeks ago: Americans do not want and cannot afford yet more unnecessary regulation and expansion of government. This proposal constitutes a costly and ineffective answer to a manufactured crisis."
The march of the Democratic progressives is relentless and it seems we cannot take a breather for even a second lest yet another statist leap is taken by these people. It's as if Republicans are battle fatigued and can only fight so many things at a time. What is it: do they feel it's impolite to oppose these statists too often? That if they successfully block one terrible measure, e.g. Omnibus, they must let the libs slide on the next one? I don't get it.
What say you?
- Comment (7)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Another Step for Government Largesse
Just because the Republicans have been chastised by the Tea Party doesn't mean they've grown a new set of principles. While you and I understand that each new law represents an incremental erosion of freedom and engorgement of Big Government, they simply cannot yet divest themselves of the idea that we sent them to Washington to "do something".
Besides, "food" and "safety" are such nice words; put them together and they're double-nice. And double-bad if your opponent in the 2012 general election puts up ads claiming you oppose safe foods.
If we're going to save this country, it's essential that we elect candidates who are rock-solid on the Constitution. Without that anchor, they'll always drift.
Dec '10
Re: Another Step for Government Largesse
You know who the first health Nazis were?
The actual Nazis.
Re: Another Step for Government Largesse
Kenneth: Just because the Republicans have been chastised by the Tea Party doesn't mean they've grown a new set of principles. While you and I understand that each new law represents an incremental erosion of freedom and engorgement of Big Government, they simply cannot yet divest themselves of the idea that we sent them to Washington to "do something".
Besides, "food" and "safety" are such nice words; put them together and they're double-nice. And double-bad if your opponent in the 2012 general election puts up ads claiming you oppose safe foods.
If we're going to save this country, it's essential that we elect candidates who are rock-solid on the Constitution. Without that anchor, they'll always drift. · Dec 19 at 8:12pm
I agree with every syllable, Kenneth. On your point about their obsession to just get something done, I've been making that very point (somewhere, though I can't remember where). It's got to be an almost inevitable Beltway-born affliction.
Re: Another Step for Government Largesse
AmishDude: You know who the first health Nazis were?
The actual Nazis. · Dec 19 at 8:15pm
Yes, Amish Dude, I do remember that. But far be it from me to start calling Harry Reid a Nazi or fascist. I'm sticking with Commie for now.
Oct '10
Re: Another Step for Government Largesse
They goodness they passed this law, otherwise, going to the grocery store might as well be like shopping for poison...because that's what businesses in the food business like to do - poison their customers.
Nov '10
Re: Another Step for Government Largesse
I am the Voice of Pessimism on Ricochet, and I see no reason to alter my thinking. It is frighteningly obvious that, in spite of the 2010 mid-terms, America has passed some sort of "political event horizon." We are being pulled remorsely, inevitably into the Black Hole of Socialism. Government is now expanding exponentially. Day by day, hour by hour, its power increases and our liberties wither. Nothing will stop it short of actual Revolution.
The Tea Party has come too late to the party, so to speak.
As for the FDA, they can go stuff themselves. I do not need an idiot bureaucrat telling me that I cannot eat a hot dog. I get cranky without my daily required allowance of rat whiskers.
Right now, I am in the mood to vote for any candidate who runs on this message:
"If you send me to Washington, I will do nothing — absolutely nothing — for you; but I will use all my power to prevent the government from doing things to you."
Edited on Dec 19, 2010 at 9:11pmRe: Another Step for Government Largesse
Lady Kurobara: Right now, I am in the mood to vote for any candidate who runs on this message:
"If you send me to Washington, I will do nothing — absolutely nothing — for you; but I will use all my power to prevent the government from doing things to you." · Dec 19 at 8:57pm
Edited on Dec 19 at 09:11 pm
Yes LK, it seems that even the conservatives there are uncomfortable opposing everything that ought to be opposed on constitutional and freedom grounds, a point I think Kenneth was echoing as well. That's what I meant in the post when I raised the question whether they feel it's impolite to oppose every single measure that needs to be opposed, or they convince themselves there are innocuous things that just don't matter? It's baffling. Honestly, I don't see how we can be for anything that Harry Reid adamantly supports. The fact that he's fervently for about anything is a sufficient red flag that constitutes more than a prima facie case against it. Anyone as wrongheaded and wrong-worldviewed as he is can't be for too many things we are for.