One way to restrict an organization's activities is to limit its funding. This is an important concept in government and much of the current tax code is designed to do just that. By protesting, we can get in on a little of that, too. And, we should.

How well do you believe Congress is representing you? Are they following the job description -- the Constitution -- given to them by the People of the United States? If so, do they deserve more money so they may easily accomplish more of the same? You decide. But here are just a few pertinent facts.

Currently under discussion is another increase of the funding provided for the "members' representational allowances" fund, which is used to pay for House members' staff salaries, mail, rent and other expenses. Nearly every year, they give themselves an increase in this slush fund.

For instance, in 1995 the expenses cost the taxpayers $351 million. By 1997, it was up to $363 million. This year, it's $385 million. For Fiscal 2000, they want a hefty increase to $414 million.

The increase is hidden in a $1.92 billion bill to finance all of Congress' operations next year. The bill will probably be considered by the full House as early as next week and should be great fun to watch -- if they discuss any of it publicly. And, by the way, that $1.92 billion doesn't even include Senate expenses. The Senate gets to add their part later, without comment in the House.

That slush fund not only pays for Congressional aides, it is also stealthily used for many campaign purposes. So, trying to cut members' office accounts "is where it gets very personal," Rep. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.) told the AP. He said lawmakers think, "You're talking about my chances of getting re-elected."

Yeah. Elected with our tax dollars, no less. The fund is one of the reasons few Members of Congress ever loose their seats. It provides an huge unfair advantage over challengers in free mailings and other important considerations.

The bill would increase House members' office accounts from $385.3 million this year to $413.6 million next year. Now remember, each Congress critter already gets a $136,673 annual salary and a very liberal (pun intended) expense account. The "representational allowances" fund provides yet another $600,000 to $1,100,000 per House member, depending on how they milk it.

Staff director James Dyer of the House Appropriations Committee, which produced the bill, told AP that he has detected little support for cutting it. "If members want to go out on the floor and say, 'Cut me, cut me,' OK, we have provisions to allow that to happen." Dyer admitted the extra money would help legislators' "desperate scramble here to keep people with a corporate memory" by allowing for pay raises. Dyer included his raise in there, too, of course.

And herein lies another major problem. Certain "staff" on Capitol Hill have made a career of working government via creating, and adding to, oppressive laws. In the court system, new lawyers "clerk" one year for a judge as part of their legal internship. Not so in the legislative section. There, people who have never, ever had a real job -- or a real life outside of Washington -- make a career of interfering in the lives of the American people through affecting legislation.

This point cannot be stressed enough. It is the staff who write the bills. Few of the Lords and Ladies of the Hill even bother to read them -- they are much too busy for that mundane stuff. Staff writes the bills. Staff reads the bills. And staff provides a short executive summary to the busy Lords and Ladies of the Hill -- telling them only what staff wants them to know. So, it is not at all uncommon for staff to hide all kinds of stupid things in a bill, or even to slip a little something extra into a bill after it is passed. In fact, many staff work quite closely with the fat-cat lobbyists.

Many of these "career staff" make well over $100,000 a year. Most are very liberal. And, as stated above, few have ever had a real world job. The few who do leave the Hill seldom leave Washington. Instead, they become lobbyists.

So, when staff director James Dyer mentions "corporate memory," he is talking about the very people (staff) who should be forced out in favor of a "clerking" arrangement for only one or two years.

Furthermore, all Congressional offices should be paired down to a staff of five, with one other person added for each committee assignment. Permanent committee staffing should be abolished, and the workload handled by the committee members' staff people. Local offices need two people, and some districts are very large and may require more than one office. That is acceptable. But, half of the staff on Capitol Hill should go.

Only the Elected Ones should write bills. And each and every Lord and Lady on Capitol Hill should be required to certify, under pain of arrest and imprisonment, that they have read and understand each and every bill completely, before casting a vote. Because, when they vote on a bill they do not completely understand, as every one of them does with nearly every large budget and omnibus bill, that is malpractice, negligence and dereliction of duty -- actions which, in any other profession, are likely to trigger serious legal repercussions.

When the Lords and Ladies of the Hill start doing their own work, they will quickly find that they no longer need two-thirds of that staff. And, we will find there are many less stupid laws passed.

Meanwhile, they only want extra money to help insure their reelection. We should tell them they cannot have it.

Over the years, a lot of people have said I should be a Libertarian, rather than a Republican. In many ways they are correct. I believe in the freedom we should have and not the overactive leviathan the federal government has become. It is also true that, over the years, the Republican Party has grown farther and farther away from those ideals set down by the Founding Fathers and hence, from what I believe the federal government should be.

This last decade has seen a resurgence in freedom oriented rhetoric coming from Republicans, but zero in the way of action. They promised a smaller government, less taxes, fewer regulations, and more devolution of power. Instead, we got more of all of the above, plus a series of very atrocious and oppressive crime bills. Liberty is violated with general search warrants. Public officials freely steal the property of citizens without proven cause. We now have taxation without representation via the regulatory agencies. And Congress has decided it will again violate the Constitution by further restricting the teeth of liberty, our personal arms.

Republicans did all that. Wayward Republicans! Obviously, they are no supporter of the Constitution. If they were, they would not violate the Constitution with nearly every piece of legislation proposed.

Am I ready to leave the Republican Party? Well folks, I hate to be wishy-washy, but the answer is both yes and no. Or, perhaps it is just that I have found a group with which to work with in the interim, while I decide if I really want to sever all ties with the main Republican Party completely.

That group is called the Republican Liberty Caucus. In their words: "The Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC) is a grassroots, nationwide organization affiliated with the Republican Party (GOP). The goal of the RLC is to elect libertarian and libertarian-minded individuals to office."

Generally speaking, this has been my goal for many years, and my primary reason for volunteering in political campaigns. I always worked for the candidate who leaned the most towards support of personal freedom -- that candidate who most supported personal liberty. Therefore, I might fit right with the RLC.

"The Republican Liberty Caucus represents the G.O.P.'s libertarian tradition. Founded in 1988, the RLC has expanded nationwide and now has affiliates in 30 states. It is the fastest growing libertarian political organization. The primary objective of the RLC is to help elect libertarian-leaning Republicans to public office at all levels. The Caucus provides volunteer and technical support to endorsed candidates, and publishes a detailed vote rating index of the members of congress from a libertarian perspective. The RLC's affiliated PAC, the Republican Liberty Federal Campaign Fund, assists in fundraising activities and campaign management."

Their literature also states that that Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) is a former chairman of the RLC. That is certainly a great selling point.

Their goals fit right in with mine, too. For Instance, they call for lower and fewer taxes and abolishing the IRS, a right to privacy, the right to keep and bear arms, balanced budgets through spending cuts, educational choice, the protection of property rights, alternatives to the drug war, term limits, sound monetary policies, deregulation, phasing out foreign aid, ending federal welfare, private options to Social Security, and the privatization of government functions. All I saw that I could argue with was the concept of "free trade" rather than "fair" trade.

In their "principles" section, we find statements like this on personal freedom: "No less than economic liberty is the right of every American to personal liberty. As a matter of principle, as well as accomplishing the defueling of the engines of social conflict and discontent, we believe it is vital to repeal all laws limiting the right of an individual to act as he/she so chooses -- so long as he/she does not use force or fraud."

That'll work. In fact, it is very close to the ideals of the Founding Fathers; their definition of Liberty. And coupled with "deregulation" -- the abolishment of the unconstitutional federal regulatory bureaucracy -- the American people could again live, work and raise a family without the federal government butting into every human function from womb to tomb. Then, if we fired the IRS, protected all property rights and returned to a Constitutional monetary standard, who knows, this may again become a free country.

Check out The Republican Liberty Caucus at: <http://www.rlc.org>. Then, get an idea of some of their member publications at: <http://www.afn.org/~afn04641/opinions.html >.

It's time for some alternatives to the status quo in today's political arena. The RLC may be one answer. But, regardless, the status quo has got to go. Let's give people like Rep. Ron Paul some support by thinning out the socialists and sending people to Capitol Hill Ron Paul & friends can work with. We can even think of him as "Speaker of the House" Ron Paul, if we all do our part.

There is a lot of gun news out there lately and, truthfully, most of it is bad. No, it's not people shooting up things, either. One in one-hundred-million gun owners may do that once in a while, just as some may cause havoc with automobiles. There are evil and crazy people around, and that is a fact of life.

The bad news is much more widespread and ominous than that. This is not localized news, it is nationwide. And, all of it has to do with the intentional misdeeds of the federal government.

Most notably were the anti-Constitutionalists in the Senate voting to restrict the right to keep and bear arms of all American citizens, no matter how honest, honorable and worthy they are. Other anti-Constitutionalists in the House are expected to follow along with the Senate and approve the Constitutionally errant restrictions. And, of course, that is exactly what the Clinton, Clinton & Gore socialists in the White House want: Stronger controls over the people.

The American people, however, do not agree with those in government. In fact, a great many people feel just the opposite and are quietly working to protect their right to keep and bear arms. For instance, many of the twenty-some states that do not have liberal concealed carry weapons laws are considering them, as well they should. The facts are in. An armed citizenry keeps the violent crime rate down to a manageable level.

Last week (June 8), Paul M. Barrett, reported (Industry Under Siege, Threats of Regulation -- and a Surge in Sales) in The Wall Street Journal that the gun market booms every time consumers perceive a threat that regulations will make it harder to obtain firearms. This year is no exception. Industry insiders report that weapons are flying off the shelves.

Barrett also reports two other contributing factors: The rash of lawsuits cities are filing against the industry could also dry up supplies, so people are buying now. And, the approach of the year 2000 is causing worries that widespread malfunctions of computers will occur and lead to social chaos. So, people want weapons for personal protection.

Not reported are the growing worries of armed foreign military personnel stationed throughout our country. Many of these foreigners are actually participating in the U.S. military's training to attack our cities. There are also rumblings of the possibility of a third world war brought on by the obvious ineptness of the current administration.

Add all these things together and it is no surprise that gun, ammunition, magazine and clip manufacturers are predicting a great jump in sales this year. They should. And, we hope this becomes the fastest growing industry in the nation.

On this end, we're not into maintaining an armory in the house. We think of a gun as little more than another tool and we do not have a lot of work for many of that type of tools; no more than we do for a dozen different sized hammers or saws.

Yet, there are reasons for keeping a certain variety of these tools around. And for that, we choose three good ones of the "multipurpose" variety.

For instance, the trusty 12 gauge shotgun is famous for being handy against all types of varmints. And, in truth, there is probably not a burglar in the country who would not instantly recognize the very distinctive sound of a pump shotgun racking in a shell, even from two rooms away. The correspondingly instinctive reaction, then, would be for the intruder to get the hell out of there. Quickly!

Sometimes it's necessary to "reach out and touch" something. The most economical bang for the buck to do that is the trusty 30.06 rifle with a good scope. Some people like a .308 and others a 30.30. That's personal preference. But, ammunition for the 30.06 is plentiful and there are many makes and models of the rifle from which to choose.

Other times, one might be up close and personal with a varmint -- the thing might even be in the house. In that case, a shotgun or a 30.06 might be somewhat excessive and, if discharged repeatedly indoors, could even create a need for structural repair of the dwelling. In such cases, a good handgun is in order. Again, personal preference takes precedence, but the serious user should consider a 9mm or larger.

So, here are but three handy tools easily obtainable in that tool store called a gun shop. All require practice to use properly. But then, so does your automobile.

Nevertheless, like the extra family automobile, in an emergency, when you need it right away, you need it right away. Therefore, you also have to know how to use it properly -- and, in this case, effectively.

There was no fife and drums, no fanfare, not even a publicized press release or a few column inches by the vast Washington media corps. Nor was there even a peep from Congress. Nevertheless, yet another clause of our Constitution bit the dust last week.

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power of spending and outlines a list of activities on which the taxpayer's money may be spent. Clearly, Congress had the power of the purse, we were taught years ago in American government class. If Congress does not appropriate the money, it is not supposed to be spent.

Well, that was then and this is now. Things have changed.

On June 3, the first elected president ever impeached signed yet another of his famous executive orders. This one may well authorize many billions of dollars in federal spending -- without any action by Congress.

The title of the new law is, "Greening the Government Through Efficient Energy Management." In opening, the Order states that the Federal Government is the Nation's largest energy consumer and should significantly improve its energy management in order to save taxpayer dollars and reduce emissions that contribute to air pollution and global climate change.

As a major consumer that spends $200 billion annually on products and services, the Federal Government can promote energy efficiency, water conservation, and the use of renewable energy products, and help foster markets for emerging technologies. http://www.uhuh.com/laws/eo-energy.htm

So, "through life-cycle cost-effective energy measures, each agency shall reduce its greenhouse gas emissions attributed to facility energy use by 30 percent by 2010 compared to such emissions levels in 1990." And, "each agency shall reduce energy consumption per gross square foot of its facilities, excluding facilities covered in section 203 of this order, by 30 percent by 2005 and 35 percent by 2010 relative to 1985."

Each federal agency

shall strive to expand the use of renewable energy within its facilities and in its activities by implementing renewable energy projects and by purchasing electricity from renewable energy sources. In support of the Million Solar Roofs initiative, the Federal Government shall strive to install 2,000 solar energy systems at Federal facilities by the end of 2000, and 20,000 solar energy systems at Federal facilities by 2010.

Later, the Executive Order gets a bit more specific: "Agencies shall use off-grid generation systems, including solar hot water, solar electric, solar outdoor lighting, small wind turbines, fuel cells, and other off- grid alternatives, where such systems are life-cycle cost- effective and offer benefits including energy efficiency, pollution prevention, source energy reductions, avoided infrastructure costs, or expedited service."

The problem is, most of this technology is not yet ripe for the picking. That is, it is not developed well enough to power large facilities. Therefore, this "development" is going to be great fun to watch for the next couple years. Unfortunately, it will also be an enormous waste of money.

On the other hand, there may be some immediately interesting investment opportunities here; and we cannot help but wonder who in government has already put their bucks into this technology stock. More than one at the White House, we betcha!

Check out the "Million Solar Roofs initiative" at: http://www.eren.doe.gov/millionroofs

Then, in another matter on June 4, the First Liar signed an Executive Order titled, "Amending the Civil Service Rules Relating to Federal Employees With Psychiatric Disabilities." And, yeah, the executive order does exactly what is implied by the title. The Order gives "individuals with psychiatric disabilities the same hiring opportunities as persons with severe physical disabilities or mental retardation under the Civil Service Rules."

In truth, there are many already working in the federal government who appear compulsive to the extreme. IRS collectors, some at the BATF, the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team, and the leadership at the EPA quickly come to mind. So, a few psychiatric patients, more or less, might blend in well in some circumstances. However, some of them do often make it a bit difficult for others to get any meaningful work done.

On the other hand, the Clinton following liberals have over 6 million American kids on strong psychotropic drugs nowadays. And, since they drug these kids into submission now, rather than help them through the old tried and tested carrot and stick method, most of them will not act much better as adults. So, they'll be needing a place to work.

Whatever.

http://www.uhuh.com/laws/eo-psy.htm

We cannot help but comment that this government has mutated into something very strange, indeed.

Check over your long distance bill this month before you pay it. My AT&T bill has an item entitled, "National Access Contribution" in the amount of $1.78. When I called AT&T customer service to inquire about this charge, I lucked out. The lady I talked to could be a Freeper. When I asked if this was in fact the "Gore Tax," she explained that she was not permitted to explain what the item was, but since I asked, the answer was "yes."

I told her that since Congress, not the FCC, is empowered to levy taxes and since a "contribution" is by definition, voluntary, I will decline to contribute the $1.78. On the other hand, if AT&T will state in plain language on their bills that this charge is at the insistence of Vice President Gore and the FCC, then I will be happy to make my contribution.

Then my AT&T lady went one better. She gave me the toll-free telephone number of the FCC to call and complain about the "contribution." (1-888-225-5322)

She also gave me the FCC mailing address:

Federal Communications Commission

Enforcement Division [and now "taxing" section -- ed.]

Common Carrier Bureau

Washington, D.C. 20554

(This is Jeff in central Michigan) 

  ** uhuh **

The President said he is reducing taxes.

uhuh.

Congress says they are balancing the budget.

uhuh. Sez who?

Web Home Page: www.uhuh.com

---

This web page can NOT be altered or sold, but may be copied intact for reasonable distribution in keeping with the philosophy of uhuh and GR Force, who can assume no liabilities. Please make you own decisions.

The term U-Mail, uhuh and this web page are Copyright 1996 by Forest Glen Durland.

hu139.htm. Revised 6-12-99. uhuh and GR Force are non-profit.