In Defense of the Federal Government's 100% Failure Rate

Over the years I have chronicled the 100% failure rate of the federal government while asking the question, "why the hell should we give them more and more money and control of our lives when they have such a horrible record?" 

Back in 2009 I referenced the Postal Service, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the War on Poverty, Medicare, Medicaid, Amtrak, Cash for Clunkers, and the Obama Stimulus bill. In 2010, I referenced Social Security. In 2014, I listed a long list of more recent failures including Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Veteran's Affairs, the IRS scandal, the national debt, and ISIS. In 2015, I circled back to Amtrak, pointing out its colossal waste of tax-payers dollars.  

I recently came across a graphic that explains why the federal government has a 100% failure rate . . . .

IT SPENDS OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY FOR SOMEONE ELSE!

http://i.imgur.com/jKxtWxN.jpg

Democratic Party Resume Enhancement

If you are a national Democrat looking to enhance your resume, apparently the best avenue is to get caught lying to the American people.

Consider:

• President Clinton
• President Obama
• Hillary Clinton
• Ted Kennedy
• Donna Brazile
• Debbie Wasserman Schultz
• Senator Richard Blumenthal
• Charlie Rangel
• Senator Elizabeth Warren
• Senator Bob Menendez
• Attorney General Eric Holder
• Attorney General Loretta Lynch
• Al Sharpton
• Harry Reid
• Nancy Pelosi
• Susan Rice
• Elijah Cummings

The list goes on and on and on and on!!!!!

It's Time to Get the Government Out of the Environmental Protection Business

If you want to protect the environment, you should be a strong advocate for getting the government out of the environmental protection business.

Recently I have found myself in Facebook conversations defending my belief that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should be abolished. My argument is simple -- environmental protection is not one of the powers granted to the federal government in the Constitution. I tell my friends, if you want a federal agency to perform this function, pass and ratify an constitutional amendment.

Those who challenge my logic always come back to the same irrelevant argument -- the states cannot be trusted to protect the environment.

Advocates for broader, unconstitutional federal powers, such as the EPA, almost always have three fatal flaws in their arguments:

#1 - They ignore the Constitution

#2 - They never look at the evidence

#3 - They refuse to consider alternative solutions as viable

Regarding the Constitution - The Founding Fathers limited the federal government's power for a reason. If we were to revert back to the powers articulated in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, most of the monetary, fiscal and social problems that we spend so much time arguing about would disappear.

Regarding the evidence: For those who are advocates for the EPA (and other governmental regulatory agencies), I have a simple question: What happens to government officials and their agencies when they royally screw up? 

Consider Flint Michigan's water contamination incident where a "former Michigan health official was recently sentenced to a year of probation and forced to apologize to Flint residents for failing to tell the public about an outbreak of Legionnaires' disease during the city's water crisis." Keep in mind, twelve deaths have been attributed to this incident!

A private company in the same situation would have been sued for damages!

Or consider the EPA's Colorado River toxic spill.

A private company in the same situation would have been sued for damages!

Or consider the failed levees in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. They were managed by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.

A private company in the same situation would have been sued for damages!

Or consider the thousands of sick Americans who die each year because the EPA has not approved a drug that might help them. Private pharmaceutical companies already have burdensome governmentally imposed standards to meet and often get dragged into court for the damage their drugs do to patients!

The point is the government is very rarely held accountable for its incompetence while the private sector is rightfully held accountable and pays damages to injured parties. 

If you want to protect the environment and make sure people pay for any damage done to it, you should be a strong advocate for getting the government out of the environmental protection business.