Tag Archives: Roy Blunt

Your US House Member And The Farm Bill Vote

As expected, the Farm Bill was re-married with the Welfare/Food Stamp Bill and was an assault on the taxpayers, freedom, and the free market in general.

Sadly, the conservative position as well un-represented by the Missouri Republican Coalition with all Republicans voting for the bill:

It’s disappointing, as I look at the current scorecard for Missouri (a bit differently than most), I see that:

  • Billy Long votes against conservative positions 18% of the time
  • Jason Smith 24% of the time
  • Ann Wagner 31% of the time
  • Vicky Hartzler 32% of the time
  • Sam Graves 33% of the time
  • Blaine Luetkemeyer 37% of the time
  • Senator Blunt votes against conservative positions 43% (almost half) of the time

Notice how often the Missouri Democrats vote with the other side of the aisle – lock – stock – barrel:

  • William Lacy Clay votes against liberal positions 16% of the time
  • Emanuel Cleaver 10% of the time
  • Clair McCaskill 6% of the time

Some middle-of-the-roader Clair is… …but the point to note is that when our “conservative” representatives go across the aisle… …this country continues to move to the left… …toward tyranny.



Posted by on January 30, 2014 in Congress, Conservative, Free Market, Republican


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Blunt Supports…

…everything the Healthcare Mandate was going to pay for, but not the Healthcare Mandate?!?

Michelle Malkin called out Senator Blunt:

(h/t TPM) GOP Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, vice chair of the Senate GOP Conference, told a St. Louis radio station two weeks ago that he supports keeping at least three ObamaCare regulatory pillars:

  • Federally imposed coverage of “children” up to age 26 on their parents’ health insurance policies (the infamous, unfunded “slacker mandate”)
  • Federally mandated coverage regardless of pre-existing conditions (“guaranteed issue,” which turns the very concept of insurance on its head and leads to an adverse-selection death spiral)
  • Closure of the coverage gap in the massive Bush-backed Medicare drug entitlement (the “donut hole fix” that will obliterate the program’s cost-controls)

So, how are we going to pay for this Senator Blunt?  Sunshine and fairy farts?

Read more on Talking Points Memo.

If enacting the 3 main pillars of ObamaCare is the Republican’s main solution should the Supreme Court strike down the mandate, why are they even joining the fight?

Clearly, nothing has been learned from the 2006 / 2008 shellacking and the 2010 salvaging of the Republican Party compliments of the Tea Party Movement.  It’s still a party of milquetoast moderate solutions that will continue to bankrupt our country, create bigger government (albeit at a slower pace than Liberals), and destroy the fabric of what made America great… …the expectation that you go out and work for what you need and want.

NOBODY is talking about the real solution… …getting the Employer out of the Health Care business.  Yes, cross-state-line purchases, HSAs, and removal of 1st-dollar payments will help.  But, a huge portion of the problem is that the Employer is so involved in the Health Care business.

Under the current system, really only one person has to be satisfied with the Health Care Plan being offered to the company’s employees: the VP of Human Resources.  If he or she is happy (after getting laid, tickets to the finest suites of every professional sports venue, golf outings, boat outings, and gala dinners — trust me, I’ve seen it), then the Employer chooses their plan.  Maybe it’s the best of the three plans that the VP of HR had time to take a look at, but is it the best for 100% of the employees?  Of course not.

The government got the Employer into the Health Care business with wage and price controls during World War II and on occasion beyond.  They’ve got to get them out of the picture, so Health Care Companies work to keep their actual customer (the employee) happy — not Senior Management.

Then a market-based health-care exchange would make sense.  Ever heard of Kayak?  Priceline?  Oribtz?  Apparently, the free market can build a system where you can compare rates for travel cheaply and efficiently.  There’s no reason a free-market Health Insurance Exchange couldn’t do the same.

Then, the Employer can offer funding of a Health Care Plan… …and stay out of the CHOICE of a Health Care Plan.  The Employee is then responsible for choosing the best plan from a menu of options.  He or she can decide if they want to have the Appendectomy insured, or know that it costs $1500.00 (or whatever) and be prepared to pay for it.

If they choose not to have insurance, the Employer keeps the money… …and probably looks to hire someone more responsible.  But, the Employee now has the best option to find the most suitable Health Care solution for his or her personal situation.

That, my liberal Republican friend, Mr. Blunt, is a good starting point for Health Care reform.


Tags: , , ,

Blunt’s Turn

It’s an apropos blog title today because every other representative of Cape County’s Tea Party members has been the topic of this week’s blogging AND it describes a serious turn towards liberalism and big government by Missouri’s freshman Senator.

ht/ aolcdn.comI couldn’t believe when an article came across my Internet Wires reporting that Roy Blunt was the Co-Sponsor of a new bill to enforce sales tax collection on Internet Purchases.

From Brian R. Hook…

The Marketplace Fairness Act would close what the Republican from southwest Missouri describes as a tax loophole, leveling the playing field between local and online retailers.

The Marketplace Fairness Act:  I don’t think anything could sound more Obama-esque!

At 7:00am on Friday 11/11/11, Jamie Allman of St. Louis’ KFTK 97.1 was scheduled to interview Blunt.  I fired off an e-mail to Jamie requesting that the Marketplace Fairness Act be a topic of discussion.

Here are a couple of statements from Mr. Blunt before the tax fairness discussion:

Are we going to be the United States of Europe; or are we going to be who we want to be…

The president’s view of this is clearly different than mine…

…We have to make a different decision; get our spending under control; get our programs under control.

What have we learned from [list of countries]…and other European countries? If your government gets bigger than you economy can support, it creates a huge, and maybe even unsolvable, problem.

Are we going to be the United States of America – where opportunity is the goal – rather than just sort of an equal division of everything that’s out there to divide.

Well, apparently, Mr. Blunt thinks that, here in America, we’re not collecting enough taxes… …and that’s just unfair. Here is the pertinent part of the discussion

Jamie: ~~Sales Tax. Is it Controversial?

Blunt: It is a little controversial; I’m for it; I’ve always been for it. What that would do would be to create a pattern where states could participate; they’d have to make the choice to opt in where the merchant who does $500 million of business over the internet would have to collect the sales tax when they do that business.

Wrong Mr. Blunt; your bill taxes SMALL business that sell $500,000 worth of goods – not $500 million

Blunt: It’s a fairness thing; it’s a fair tax equity thing. The local merchant who’s trying to be there on the Main street on the corner not even far from here or across the street from here… their products all have that – whatever it is where they live – that 5 or 6 or 7%.

Jamie: Yeah they’ve got to pay it.

Blunt: And if you get that mailed to you, you’re not paying that tax right now; though actually technically, under most state laws, including ours, you’re supposed to then voluntarily send the sales tax to the state. And, of course, we know what happens with that.

Jamie: Right

Blunt: So this is not “Taxing the Internet”. This is saying that if you buy things on the internet, you pay a tax, the same tax you’d pay if you bought it from the grocery store across the street.

Jamie: And here’s the issue, I think, for some people if they’re against this. Let’s put it this way. Let’s have no sales tax at all. But if you’re going to have a sales tax; everybody ought to be sharing that burden in terms… there’s no reason an internet company from California ought to be at a competitive advantage over a company right here in MO.

Blunt: That’s right. If you don’t pay that – your share of the tax – who takes care of the sidewalk in front of your house? Who takes care of the police department or whoever else is dependent on that tax? And so, this is a tax fairness…. I think for years, it’s been confused with the government trying to manage or tax use of the internet – which I’m not for. Now this is just saying, if you buy on the internet – and this is much less complicated all the time too ya know – if your GPS can hone in on a picture of every address in America, they can pretty closely figure out exactly what the sales tax would be for that address with a not-very-complicated program. You apply that program; send the money to the states; the states figure out how to distribute it in the fairest possible way.

Mr. Blunt, which side are you on?  The keep the government as small as possible side?  Or, the let’s make a giant sales tax collection bureaucracy side?  In your discussion with Jamie this morning, you came down on both sides.

Full Disclosure: I am a proponent of abolishing the 16th Amendment in lieu of all taxation via Consumption Taxes, I don’t disagree that we need to be able to apply taxation to the final (first) purchase of an item or service.

However, as Mr. Blunt surely knows, we don’t have a taxing problem in the U.S. right now, WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM.  He is clearly not paying attention to his constituents or holding to his word when he co-sponsors a bill that provides an increase in revenue to the Government.  No matter what kind of spin he tries  to put on it, if I’m paying $10 of taxes to the government, and he puts through a bill that makes it become $11 worth of taxes… …IT’S A TAX INCREASE!!

And Mr. Blunt, it seems you are tone deaf to the regulations already stifling America’s small businesses AND to the millions of Americans that are unemployed or underemployed.  A new regulation to require such businesses to track this level of detail taxation will require new, costly and unproductive accounting activity within their firms.  And the customers will suddenly be paying 7% more (let’s call it 7% inflation) for the goods and services they spend time and effort locating for the best possible price.

Yes, Mr. Blunt, it’s your turn… …your turn to be the topic of this blog; your turn towards bigger government; your turn towards ignoring your word on taxation; your turn towards ignoring that unemployed / underemployed don’t need a 7% increase in their purchase cost; your turn to sound like Obama and his doctrine of Fairness.

Now is NOT the time for big government and more taxes.  IT’S THE SPENDING, STUPID!!


Posted by on November 12, 2011 in Congress, Taxes


Tags: , , ,

Rip Off The Band-Aid

Irony of Ironies.  In Puerto Rico, where the President hopes to garner favoritism with Latinos, they soundly reject his big government policies.  John Stossel, my emerging hero, interviewed the the governor of Puerto Rico, Luis Fortuno.

Fortuno, faced with debt of 70% of GDP and one in three workers employed by the government, did what Tea Partiers know that America must do: Rip Off The Band-Aid.


After firing 17,000 government workers, lowering taxes, and privatizing government agencies, and massive spending cuts (including the governor’s salary), thousands of union members demonstrated against Fortuno for days, clashed with police, and called Fortuno a fascist.

The result?

“…Fortuno had already cut approximately 17,000 government employees off the payroll, which did make the initial unemployment numbers increase somewhat, but long-term Puerto Rico will be able to balance it’s budget while cutting taxes at the same time.”

“Today, Puerto Rico is well on their way to increasing business and tourism, which then translates into more tax revenue for the government to operate with.”

In America?

Self proclaimed Conservative Senators still haven’t got the message — even after signing the Tea Party Treaty.  It’s time to rip off the Band-Aid in America — starting with the Department of Educations continuing with the Department of Energy and including Ethanol Subsidies.  Did Roy Blunt forget where he laid his signature?  Maybe.

Senator Coburn’s amendment to stop ethanol subsidies failed in the Senate this week and both Missouri Senators voted to kill the amendment.  Mr. Blunt, a good rule of thumb: Voting with Claire McCaskill is a vote against what’s best for America.

Rip off the Band-Aid Mr. Blunt.  That’s why you were hired.  We may not like the pain, but America needs it!



Tags: , , ,

Mitch McConnell Wants Your Grandchildren’s Freedom!


Update:  Obviously, Mr. McConnell read my post (wink) for at this point, he has changed his position on earmarks.  However, it seems Mr-I-Support-The-Tea-Party-Blunt has not yet signed on to the program.  Like I said, the Republican entrenched politicians do not get it.


I took a week away from the blogosphere to enjoy the victory of the Tea Party and Conservatives in returning a majority of Republicans to the House, increasing the number of Republicans in the Senate,

The choice was made by Tea Party leaders all over the U.S. in 2009 to forgo the advent of a 3rd Party of truly fiscally responsible Conservatives and Libertarians, and the Republican Party is currently the recipient of the benefits of that decision.  The House flipped, and the Republicans gained 7 seats in the Senate.

And, then they proved they don’t get it…

But for the decision by the Tea Partiers to give the Republicans another chance, the Republican Party would have gone the way of the Whigs.  To support the Tea Partiers, at a very minimum, the Republican Party MUST stop the use of Earmarks until the Federal Debt is reduced.  Period.


There’s no wiggle room.  The three Republican Senators that continued to use Earmarks have no choice.  I’d rather see a larger Democratic majority than this milquetoast Republican ‘yeah we want to control spending’.  Well, if you’re not willing to start with Earmarks, then ‘get off the stage’.

We’re done; and the Tea Party will come after you!

We KNOW that the Earmarks are but 1% of the Federal Budget.  But if you’re not willing to start there, then you aren’t willing to make the tough decision that need to be made in other parts of the budget.

No bill should go through the House with one single Earmark while the Republicans have the leadership.

If you’re not willing to stop taking money (freedom, labor, time) from our children and grandchildren, step down so we can elect someone who is!  Mitch McConnell, stop taking my grandchildren’s freedom!

On Facebook?!?  Like this page to tell your Congressman that Earmarks are DONE until the Debt is Reduced!

1 Comment

Posted by on November 12, 2010 in Balanced Budget, Economy, Reform, Tea Party


Tags: , ,

Is Carnahan Up For The Job?

The Washington Times reports that Missouri is one of 5 states that have not implemented the electronic-delivery requirement under the MOVE Act.  The MOVE Act was enacted in 2009 to ensure that our Military brothers and sisters abroad were not denied their right to vote (as was rampant in 2008)

The Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE Act) requires states to mail absentee ballots at least 45 days before an election and requires states to use electronic delivery mechanisms to expedite the delivery of absentee ballots to military members.

As I read the article, I prayed that Missouri would not be on this list… …knowing, personally, friends and coworkers who have family members in harms way.  But to my disappointment, there was Missouri on the list.

Robin Carnahan, the Secretary of State of Missouri, would be your employee responsible for enacting the measures described under the MOVE Act.  Much will be made of her Senatorial opponent’s voting record in the run-up to the November 2010 election.  So, if we’re going to look at Robin’s record, on this one, we see… …job NOT done.

But, we’re to believe she’s up for the next job she wants.

I know I’ll hear about “legislature this” and “governor that” and “Matt Blunt email thus” and “It’s Bush’s Fault”, but the bottom line is that the job should have got done.

Here’s some more from Big Government on Carnahan’s shenanigans with the voter roles

Leave a comment

Posted by on August 13, 2010 in Election, Reform


Tags: , , , ,

Chewing Tea Bags

The opposition to common sense (and the Tea Party) are jumping on the latest disagreement among several Conservative Groups (who happen to be Tea Party supporters).  The State Run Media will tell of a great divide in the Tea Party — that the leadership is splintered, flailing and dysfunctional.

The story here is that some of the St. Louis area and other Missouri Conservative groups have strongly endorsed, supported and campaigned for Chuck Purgason.  Chuck Purgason is a very good man and an stalwart Conservative in the Missouri’s legislature.  He righteously fought his own party and for Conservative principles when he filibustered the bailout of the Ford Claycomo Plant.  Purgason is running for U.S. Senator from Missouri against Roy Blunt.

Late last week Michele Bachmann, Minnesota Representative and staunch Cosnervative, endorsed Roy Blunt.  Blunt has 14 years in the House and has been tied to bad votes on the Bailouts, Cash For Clunkers, and Medicare Prescription Plan.  Blunt touts his own Conservative record and one cannot deny the fact that he successfully passed a Balanced Budget Amendment in the U.S. House of Representatives as the top Republican there.  Haven’t seen Pelosi tackling that bailiwick.

So, the rift is that the Purgason supporters wanted Bachmann’s endorsement, and they didn’t get it.

On July 31st, Bachmann was to be in St. Louis to campaign for Blunt.  She was to meet with several Tea Party leaders… …surprisingly including me.  The Purgason Camp called out for protesters to meet at the GOP headquarters and protest, nicely, Bachmann’s Blunt endorsement.  Purgason canceled other campaign events to be at the protest.  Several members of the groups have sent out angered e-mails, texts and Facebook posts decrying Bachmann and her endorsement.

I pray that the Purgason camp will see the error in their folly.  True Conservatives respect informed decision.  Period.  Whether they like the decision or not, Michele Bachmann has every right to endorse Roy Blunt and he IS a good man.  Let’s show Michele Bachmann the respect she deserves as one who would not just follow the establishment GOP candidate.  For cryin’-out-loud, she started the Tea Party Caucus which now has 40+ members in the House!

Tea Party members can chew each other up and give the Lame Stream Media fodder to make jest at their efforts, or they can be disappointed in Bachmann’s decision, say so, and move on.


Posted by on August 1, 2010 in Conservative, Election


Tags: , , ,