Skip to comments.Schlafly's GOP Agenda (contents: 100% pure, unadulterated, kicka$$, conservatism))
Posted on 12/04/2002 11:50:11 AM PST by Dutchgirl
Congressional Agenda for 2003
Dec. 4, 2002
The clouds of election contests are behind us and a new Republican majority in both Houses of Congress will gather in January. It's time to reaffirm some basic Republican principles and move ahead with legislative implementation.
Principle #1. The American people, especially middle-class families, are overtaxed. Congress should accelerate and make permanent the tax cuts voted in 2001.
In particular, Congress should remedy the ridiculous and deceitful current law that eliminates the death tax in 2010 but reinstates it at high levels in 2011 and imposes a brand new tax on the heirs of the deceased called carryover basis. We don't want an epidemic of euthanasia in 2010.
Congress should abolish the Alternative Minimum Tax. And Congress should fulfill the Republican Platform promise to pass "legislation requiring a super-majority in both houses of Congress to raise taxes."
Principle #2. The chief problem with our health care system and its rising costs is the pervasive practice of "third party payment": i.e., the person receiving medical care has little or no control over how much is spent and for what purposes. Congress should pass genuine, workable Medical Savings Accounts, which were the alternative Republicans promised when they defeated Clinton's attempt to inflict us with universal government health care in 1994.
The time is ripe for individuals to retake control of their own health care spending. Even Dan Rather's CBS Evening News has been featuring the new breed of doctors who provide prompt and efficient medical care for cash while refusing payments by any government or private insurance.
Principle #3. Our government has the duty to protect the independence and sovereignty of the United States of America. The Senate should reject all United Nations treaties because they create committees of busybody foreigners to monitor U.S. compliance.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) would force us to adopt the radical feminist agenda from abortion to textbook language revision. The Kyoto Protocol (Global Warming treaty) would force us to reduce our American standard of living by denying us the use of our own energy sources.
Neither is a Republican initiative: the former was signed by Jimmy Carter and the latter by Al Gore for Bill Clinton. We urge President Bush to unsign both treaties as he did to the Clinton-signed International Criminal Court Treaty.
Principle #4. Terrorism is primarily a problem of dangerous aliens coming into America because government policy allows them to violate and evade current laws, and because many laws and regulations encourage open-borders policies. America must make a choice: close our borders to people we suspect of intending to violate our laws OR put all law-abiding U.S. citizens under suspicion and allow government to curtail our civil liberties.
Congress should refuse to fund all plans to develop a national database that would integrate existing public and private databases containing personal information on American citizens. We don't want government monitoring our daily activities.
Congress should deny amnesty to illegal aliens and reject any revival of Section 245(i) amnesty because (as Senator Robert Byrd said) it is "sheer lunacy," and Congress should repeal Ted Kennedy's Diversity Visa Lottery immigrant program. Congress should deny visas to aliens from countries that sponsor terrorism, and order the State Department to terminate its ridiculous policy that mere advocacy of terrorism is not sufficient to deny a visa.
Congress should put a moratorium on the numbers of immigrants admitted until the Immigration and Naturalization Service puts into effect a system to find and track the thousands of aliens the Justice Department wants to question about terrorism. Congress should deport illegal aliens when caught; we don't want another John Lee Malvo.
Principle #5. It's time to put a stop to the era of federal judges legislating from the bench on social policy. The President should nominate and the Senate should confirm only judges who respect the U.S. Constitution as the source of their authority rather than their own political and social prejudices (e.g., against the Ten Commandments and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag).
Principle #6. Republicans should remedy Majority Leader Tom Daschle's obstructionism in the Senate just adjourned. Both Houses should pass the legislation passed by the House in the last Congress but which Daschle refused to allow to come to a vote in the Senate, including a ban on partial-birth abortion, a ban on human cloning, the Child Custody Protection Act, and the proper definition of abstinence education for eligibility for federal funding.
Principle #7. The continuation of self-government depends on honest elections and an informed electorate. Congress should repeal the 1975 law that requires states to provide foreign-language ballots, amend the Motor Voter Law to permit states more latitude in cleaning up registration lists, and abolish provisional voting which amounts to same-day registration and makes post-election manipulation too easy.
This list is only a start. Stay tuned.
There is another Senate election this Saturday in Lousyana. More potential pain for Dim-0-RATS.
But don't worry. The drunken, wife-beating T-shirt wearing GOP will come back to their conservative spouses again in 2004 and beg for forgiveness.
Principle 6: politics as usual but let's get federal involvement out the schools and bring it back to the local level where it belongs, mkay?
Principle 3: blanket statements like this are just dumb and arrogant. I'm going to say something that's probably going to get me hammered here but: "The United Nations is a good thing. We need a world-wide dialogue and global resolutions to our problems." Does that sound crazy?
I read Ann Coulter's book Slander and she revealed how smart Phyllis Schlafly really is, which is seldom if ever made known in the press. She usaully is maligned in as an extreme right winger.
She has degrees from Havard, graduating very high in her class, as well as accomplishing many other academic and professional achievements while raising a family.
There is no comparsion be Phyllis Schlafly and the left's Gloria Steiman as far as brains, achievements, etc.
Why is it a good thing? What specific good has it done the U.S.? How are we prevented from having dialogue without it?
Principle 3 reads as follows: Our government has the duty to protect the independence and sovereignty of the United States of America. The Senate should reject all United Nations treaties because they create committees of busybody foreigners to monitor U.S. compliance. Which of those sentences do you believe is incorrect?
Yes it does, but not for the reasons you apparently think.
The debating society you laud isn't what the UN is all about nor is it the danger Ms. Schlafley cites (although if Saddam completes a WOD and smuggles it out of the country while Kofi sweetheart dithers, you will start to realize how dangerous an organization it is). Her concern is multilateral treaties that become supreme law of the land and then have managing secretariats of paid activists that define their terms and applications AFTER ratification. If you want to know where many of the property rights abuses pursuant to the Endangered Species Act or Clean Water Act originated (that have harmed both humans and nature), you need look no further than the UN. UN bureaucrats are now publishing documents specifying land use in the US, the manner of our children's education, gay rights, abortion rights, rights of "migratory peoples"...
You clearly have a lot to learn about the UN. Its true purpose is racketeering and organized crime at the expense of your rights and liberties. Best you had get started with your education.
But at first blush, I'll say that "soveriegnty" doesn't mean the unbridled right of the might to run roughshod over the wishes and best interests of the other people on this planet. But maybe I'm too idealistic.
What problems in particular are we not truly able to handle on our own or with "dialog" with like minded(ie) "democratic and freedom loving" nations?
The UN is the worst form of democracy, when countries like the Sudan, which uses the euphemism "abduction" for the sale of christian women and children into slavery- actually sits on the UN Human Rights Council! Why the UN? why not dialog with NATO, the WTO, G8 or other loose affiliation that does not presume to chastise the US for its sovereignty?
If your son or daughter were in the military, would you EVER, under any circumstances, trust the UN to deploy OUR troops? If so, please state the circumstances and describe the actions that the UN has taken- in the last decade, to have won your esteem?
What you have to look at is the results. The UN has become a group of brutal dictators who prop up other brutal dictators and who constantly seek ways to drain the riches of our successful free society.
If competive bidding is open to religious organizations, then we don't need an office of faith based initiatives. (The Salvation Army pretty much serves as the probation arm of the State of Florida, and we are mighty pleased with the arrangement.)
If vouchers become the wave of the future, we will see the end of the power of teachers unions, and a huge shrinkage of Federal funding for education.
Of course it depends on people holding their elected officials to account...which is another reason I like Eagle Forum. I suspect that somewhere on next weeks list will be tort reform. Beautiful words, I think I'll type them again.
I agree there are egregious flaws, but its the only global court we've got, and it's really not that old. The "global community" in itself is just a baby. Obviously, we need generations to continually work on these problems and rectify injustices.
I just get tired hearing "abandon the UN" and other woefully myopic isolationist hoo-ha.
And, yes, I would trust the UN to deploy my son or daughter. Bosnia, for instance. And I would expect our troops to adhere to the same standard of conduct set for other countries' troops.
That would be an improvement considering it's currently a lunatic asylum.
Do you advocate expelling the US out of the UN and vice versa? If so, why? Evidence, por favor.
I do not and have "backed up my platitudes" with principled belief.
On 9/11, Harry Belafonte was on "Today", expressing his displeasure with the US for not sending a representative to the UN conference on "racism." Racism, according to the UN, is what America practices by not engaging in dialogue regarding "reparations" to descendants of slaves in the US. "Racism" according to the UN, has nothing to do with the modern day enslavement of christians, or the murder of millions in Rwanda, because these are/were crimes perpetrated by black people on black people.
The UN is morally bankrupt. They have turned a blind eye to genocide to avoid antagonizing petty dictators.
America is no longer committed to a "World Court", thank God for Bush, having the back bone to refuse to sign on to a litigious nightmare.
It is interesting that you believe that the UN, which has proven to be a cesspool of mismanagement and fraud, is the organization best equipped to deal with these problems.
The political response to "over-population" is the one child policy of China. The political response to hunger has been to appease the war lords who feed their armies with UN supplies (Taliban). The problems of industrialization and pollution are actually the same. Emerging nations sacrifice the environment for quick profit and jobs. Being green is a luxury that most third world countries cannot yet afford. The solution, as we are beginning to see in South America, is more industry, to create more wealth so that once the most urgent priority, survival, is taken care of, resources can be conserved. But that is an economic solution, not a political one, and therefore it cannot be embraced by the UN marxists.
as for Bosnia. USA Today, not a conservative publication, described our involvement this way:
NATO in Bosnia: NATO is responsible for patrolling the no-fly zone over Bosnia, designed to stop an air war. NATO airstrikes have been called when U.N. commanders on the ground, their civilian chief and NATO commanders agree on them. On Wednesday, U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali delegated his authority to the U.N. commander in former Yugoslavia, meaning military men will now decide whether to engage in more vigorous air strikes. (mine) US troops are under Nato, not UN command.)
Originally, U.N. peacekeepers were to go to former Yugoslavia to patrol the truce in Croatia. By summer of 1992, their role had broadened to include ensuring humanitarian aid deliveries to millions of needy, especially in Bosnia. Since then, the Security Council has passed about 70 vague and often conflicting resolutions governing the peacekeepers' mission across former Yugoslavia. The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees has been the principle deliverer of aid on which millions depend in Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia.
I work with severla Bosnian refugees. They described the corruption of the UN seen first hand. They were assisted out by Catholic Charities.
Glad to hear it.
The UN is built on corruption. The UN is incompatible with anything other than corruption and could not survive without it. The UN is the guilty conscience of the modern western world that has always been ashamed of its successes to the point of self destruction..
The only thing crazy is WE don't need it THEY need it for THEIR problems..
Whatever happens, the WI GOP better back their nominee to the hilt- I still feel either Neumann or Bob Welch could have beat Feingold if they'd had more support from their party. Instead, the RINOS in WI allowed them to be demonized as "extremists."
Feingold's finance reform Bill has just been discredited by the courts in Hawaii. We should make a big deal of his move against Freedom of Speech.
Those RINOs out there, who realize that we've got nowhere else to go, will continue the cycle of pretending to like us conservatives every election, knowing that without us, they can't win; then when we give the keys to government to them, they'll take every opportunity to pass the major parts of the DemonRAT platform.