Catholibertarian: Thank the Catholic Founding Fathers For the First Amendment

Kevin and I have been working on our new blog Catholibertarian  and while we're still in the midst of adding links to our blogroll, political and Catholic lists we decided this would be the right time to spread the word about our blog.  If you have any suggestions for our blog please do let us know as we are new to the WordPress format.  Kevin has written a post called Thank the Catholic Founding Fathers For the First Amendment.  I hope you enjoy reading it, as it is very informative, interesting and a great piece of work IMO.

The First Amendment  has a quasi-sacred status in the minds of most Americans because that is the amendment that guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press.  On that note, it guarantees the protected status of what I am doing right now in this blog.  This tendency to imagine that the First Amendment is the product of divine inspiration in nearly the same sense if not degree as the Bible is even more prevalent in those who lean toward Libertarianism.  The latter are sometimes tempted to see the U.S. Constitution, and even more so its Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments), especially the First and Second, as akin to holy writ.  For some of us, the First Amendment is the more revered of the two, but not because of the liberty it upholds in the sphere of political speech, but because the first freedom it supports is not that of speech or the press, but the free exercise of religion.

What most people do not know is that we owe the freedom of religion we enjoy here in this constitutional republic in no small part to the efforts of Catholic, most especially Charles Carroll of Carrolton, the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence.   He was a delegate from Maryland, which, of the thirteen original colonies, was the only nominally Catholic one – indeed, the other delegates from Maryland were all Episcopalians. CONTINUED 

Herman Cain Is On Fire For America!

H/T SecularStupidest 

What's Next For Egypt?

The crowd in Cairo is jubilant!!  But, as much as they are wishing for democracy and freedom is this a be careful what you wish for moment?  The Egyptians have ousted Mubarak so what exactly lies in their future?  Does Egypt have the structure in place to be able to start a democracy?  Or is a Khumeini-like individual going to emerge to the forefront and misrepresent himself as being for the people like Khumeini did in Iran?   While I do see some signs of hope for the Egyptians' future I find it eerily similar due to the fact that this revolution and ousting of Mubarak the dictator happened on exactly the 32nd anniversary of the Shah falling in Iran.  Plus, we had a pro-Big Government president in 1979, named Jimmy Carter who royally screwed up our relations with the Middle East and now we have Obama who is an Ultra pro-Big Government president who is royally screwing up our Middle East relations again.  In addition, the way that both Carter interacted with the Middle East's leaders in the past and how Obama is interacting with Middle East leaders today, in screwing our allies while appeasing our enemies I wonder whose interests he's really looking out for?  It certainly doesn't look like Obama is looking out for America's best interests today.

I think that this is a momentous occasion which gives the people of Egypt the possibility of following the model of freedom and democracy, following in Iraq's footsteps.  As I was watching the news coverage of people shouting in the streets cheering in the streets shouting the word freedom in celebration of Mubarak having stepped down I saw in particular one person who said that he wanted democracy, that he wanted to follow the model of deomcracy in Iraq and I couldn't help but wonder whether Geroge W. Bush had a hand in today's events.  Without George Bush having the courage to stand up for freedom, not merely spouting words like other politicians,  would Iraq have become a beacon of democracy of freedom in the Middle East?  He was willing to walk the walk instead of just talking the talk and he toppled a ruthless dictator. Without Bush having initiated a democracy in Iraq would any of these uprisings in the Middle East and Africa have occurred?  Would they have had any hope to topple their leader who was oppressing them?  Hopefully, terrorist organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorist sympathizers won't take advantage of this chaotic situation and fill the vacuum.  Now the military holds the keys and the future of Egypt is in the palm of the military's hand.

I thought it would be a good idea to look up Egypt's background on history, government makeup, demographics, and resources so here is a brief summary from the CIA World Factbook:

Background:

The regularity and richness of the annual Nile River flood, coupled with semi-isolation provided by deserts to the east and west, allowed for the development of one of the world's great civilizations. A unified kingdom arose circa 3200 B.C., and a series of dynasties ruled in Egypt for the next three millennia. The last native dynasty fell to the Persians in 341 B.C., who in turn were replaced by the Greeks, Romans, and Byzantines. It was the Arabs who introduced Islam and the Arabic language in the 7th century and who ruled for the next six centuries. A local military caste, the Mamluks took control about 1250 and continued to govern after the conquest of Egypt by the Ottoman Turks in 1517. Following the completion of the Suez Canal in 1869, Egypt became an important world transportation hub, but also fell heavily into debt. Ostensibly to protect its investments, Britain seized control of Egypt's government in 1882, but nominal allegiance to the Ottoman Empire continued until 1914. Partially independent from the UK in 1922, Egypt acquired full sovereignty with the overthrow of the British-backed monarchy in 1952. The completion of the Aswan High Dam in 1971 and the resultant Lake Nasser have altered the time-honored place of the Nile River in the agriculture and ecology of Egypt. A rapidly growing population (the largest in the Arab world), limited arable land, and dependence on the Nile all continue to overtax resources and stress society. The government has struggled to meet the demands of Egypt's growing population through economic reform and massive investment in communications and physical infrastructure.

Natural Resources:

Petroleum, natural gas, iron ore, phosphates, manganese, limestone, gypsum, talc, asbestos, lead, rare earth elements, zinc

Population:

80,471,869 (July 2010 est.) 

Religions: 

Muslim (mostly Sunni) 90%, Coptic 9%, other Christian 1%

Independence:

28 February 1922 (from UK protectorate status; the revolution that began 23 July 1952 led to a republic being declared on 18 June 1953 and all British troops withdrawn 18 June 1956); note - it was in ca. 3200 B.C. that the Two Lands of Upper (southern) and Lower (northern) Egypt were first united politically

Constitution:

11 September 1971; amended 22 May 1980, 25 May 2005, and 26 March 2007

Legal system:

Based on Islamic and civil law (particularly Napoleonic codes); judicial review by Supreme Court and Council of State (oversees validity of administrative decisions); accepts compulsory ICJ jurisdiction with reservations

Executive branch:

Chief of state: President Mohamed Hosni MUBARAK (since 14 October 1981); Vice President Omar SOLIMAN (since 31 January 2011)  This has changed. 


Head of government: Prime Minister Ahmed SHAFIK (since 31 January 2011);Deputy Prime Minister Mohamed Hussein TANTAWI (since 1 February 2011) I believe he is the person in power now. 


Cabinet: Cabinet appointed by the president; note - a new cabinet was sworn in on 31 January 2011

Elections: president elected by popular vote for a six-year term (no term limits); note - a national referendum in May 2005 approved a constitutional amendment that changed the presidential election to a multicandidate popular vote; previously the president was nominated by the People's Assembly and the nomination was validated by a national, popular referendum; last referendum held on 26 September 1999; first election under terms of the constitutional amendment held on 7 September 2005 (next scheduled for 2011)
election results: Hosni MUBARAK reelected president; percent of vote - Hosni MUBARAK 88.6%, Ayman NOUR 7.6%, Noman GOMAA 2.9%

Legislative branch:

Bicameral system consists of the Advisory Council or Majlis al-Shura (Shura Council) that traditionally functions only in a consultative role (264 seats; 176 members elected by popular vote, 88 appointed by the president; members serve six-year terms; mid-term elections for half of the elected members) and the People's Assembly or Majlis al-Sha'b (518 seats; 508 members elected by popular vote, 64 seats reserved for women, 10 appointed by the president; members serve five-year terms)

elections: Advisory Council - last held in June 2007 (next to be held in 2013); People's Assembly - last held in November-December 2010 in one round of voting and one run-off election (next to be held in 2015)

election results: Advisory Council - percent of vote by party - NA; seats by party - NDP 80, Al-Geel 1, Nasserist 1, NWP 1, Tagammu 1, Tomorrow Party 1, independents 3; People's Assembly - percent of vote by party - NA; seats by party - NDP 419, NWP 6, Tagammu 5, Democratic Peace Party 1, Social Justice Party 1, Tomorrow Party 1, independents 71, seats undecided 4, seats appointed by president 10

Judicial branch:

Supreme Constitutional Court

Political parties and leaders:

Al-Geel; Democratic Peace Party; Nasserist Party [Ahmed HASSAN]; National Democratic Party or NDP (governing party) [Mohamed Hosni MUBARAK]; National Progressive Unionist Grouping or Tagammu [Rifaat EL-SAID]; New Wafd Party or NWP [Sayed EL-BEDAWY]; Social Justice Party [Mohamed Abdel Al HASAN]; Tomorrow Party [Ayman NOURI]
note: formation of political parties must be approved by the government; only parties with representation in elected bodies are listed

Political pressure groups and leaders:

Muslim Brotherhood (technically illegal)
note: despite a constitutional ban against religious-based parties and political activity, the technically illegal Muslim Brotherhood constitutes Egypt's most potentially significant political opposition; President MUBARAK has alternated between tolerating limited political activity by the Brotherhood and blocking its influence (its members compete as independents in elections but do not currently hold any seats in the legislature); civic society groups are sanctioned, but constrained in practical terms; only trade unions and professional associations affiliated with the government are officially sanctioned; Internet social networking groups and bloggers.

In my next post on Egypt I will focus on why the Muslim Brotherhood must not be allowed to have a place in Egypt's government and expose just how dangerous the organization really is.


This is a tumultuous situation which calls for our thoughts and prayers.

Thanks to the Obama Administration the United States is Economically Less Free

From Heritage.org:

 The United States’ economic freedom score is 77.8, making its economy the 9th freest in the 2011 Index. Its score is 0.2 point lower than last year, reflecting deteriorating business freedom, trade freedom, government spending, and monetary freedom. The U.S. is ranked 2nd out of three countries in the North America region, and its overall score is well above the world and regional averages.

The U.S. economy faces enormous challenges. The government’s recent spending spree has led to fragile business confidence and crushing public debt. Interventionist responses to the economic slowdown have eroded economic freedom and long-term competitiveness. Drastic legislative changes in health care and financial regulations have retarded job creation and injected substantial uncertainty into business investment planning.

Ongoing regulatory changes, coupled with fading confidence in the direction of government policies, discourage entrepreneurship and dynamic investment within the private sector. Leadership and credibility in trade has been also undercut by protectionist policy stances and inaction on previously agreed free trade agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia.

---

BACKGROUND

The U.S. economy is the world’s largest. While services account for more than 70 percent of economic activity, the U.S. remains the world’s largest producer of manufactured goods. A federal form of government that reserves significant powers to states and localities has encouraged diverse economic policies and strategies. However, the national government’s role in the economy has expanded sharply in the past two years, and the federal budget deficit is extremely large, with gross public debt approaching 100 percent of GDP. Passage in March 2010 of a massive health care bill significantly expanded the federal government’s control of the health care industry, but a proposed climate change bill that would have imposed federal constraints on energy use has been stalled. Elections in November resulted in a Republican Party takeover of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Here are explanations behind the grade given for each type of economic freedom within the United States: 

---

BUSINESS FREEDOM91.0-0.3

The overall freedom to create and run a private enterprise, regulated primarily at the state level, is strongly protected. However, new regulatory uncertainty hampers business expansion and employment creation.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

TRADE FREEDOM86.4-0.5

The weighted average U.S. tariff rate was 1.8 percent in 2009. Anti-dumping and countervailing duties laws, “buy American” procurement rules, high out-of-quota tariffs, services market access restrictions, import licensing, restrictive labeling and standards, and export-promotion programs and subsidies add to the cost of trade. Ten points were deducted from the U.S. trade freedom score to account for non-tariff barriers.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

FISCAL FREEDOM68.3+0.8

U.S. tax rates are burdensome. The top income and corporate tax rates are 35 percent. Other taxes include an estate tax and excise taxes. Additional income, sales, and property taxes are assessed at the state and local levels. In the most recent year, overall tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was 26.9 percent. Should authorities choose not to extend tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, the tax rate on the top individual income bracket will jump to 39.6 percent beginning in 2011, and the top capital gains tax rate will increase from 15 percent to 20 percent.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

GOVERNMENT SPENDING54.6-3.4

In the most recent year, total government expenditures, including consumption and transfer payments, equaled 38.9 percent of GDP. Spending increases totaled well over $1 trillion in 2009 alone, an increase of more than 20 percent over 2008. Stimulus spending has hurt the fiscal balance and placed federal debt on an unsustainable trajectory. Gross government debt exceeded 90 percent of GDP in 2010.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

MONETARY FREEDOM77.4-0.7

Inflation has been low, averaging 1.4 percent between 2007 and 2009. Price controls apply to some regulated monopolies and the health insurance sector; certain states and localities control residential rents; and the government influences prices through subsidies, particularly for the agricultural sector, dairy products, and some forms of transportation. Government interventions in housing, automotive, health, and financial markets have substantially increased price distortions. Fifteen points were deducted from the U.S. monetary freedom score to account for measures that distort domestic prices.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

INVESTMENT FREEDOM75.0No Change

Foreign and domestic enterprises are legally equal. Foreign investments face screening only if perceived as a potential threat to national security. Foreign investment in banking, mining, defense contracting, certain energy-related industries, fishing, shipping, communications, and aviation is restricted. Regulations are generally transparent; individual states may impose additional restrictions. There are few controls on currency transfers, access to foreign exchange, or repatriation of profits. Foreign investors may own land.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

FINANCIAL FREEDOM70.0No Change

The U.S. financial sector has undergone far-reaching changes since the sub-prime mortgage crisis in 2008. A number of prominent financial firms or banks failed or were bailed out, and the government has intruded on firms’ management in unprecedented ways. The damage caused by mortgage guarantors Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac remains largely unabated. Concerns continue over the intrusive nature and cost of the 2002 Sarbanes–Oxley Act, which increased disclosure and internal control requirements to the detriment of smaller firms. The impact of a sweeping overhaul of financial regulations passed in July 2010 is yet to be measured, though it appears to do little to reduce the chances of future government bailouts.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

PROPERTY RIGHTS85.0No Change

Property rights are guaranteed. Contracts are secure, and the judiciary is independent. A well-developed licensing system protects patents, trademarks, and copyrights. Government interventions in financial markets and the automotive sector have raised concerns about expropriation and violation of the contractual rights of shareholders and bondholders. The individual health insurance mandate passed by Congress in 2010 raised serious constitutional questions regarding whether government could require the spending of private funds.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

FREEDOM FROM CORRUPTION75.0+2.0

Corruption is perceived as minimal. The U.S. ranks 19th out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index for 2009. The U.S. government has become part owner or effective operator of several “too-big-to-fail” companies, and the impartiality of subsequent regulatory efforts is seen by some as corrupted.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

LABOR FREEDOM95.7+0.9

U.S. labor regulations are highly flexible. The non-salary cost of employing a worker is low, and the severance payment system is not burdensome. With private-sector union membership steadily shrinking, more union members currently work for the government than for private businesses.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

Both the Obama administration and the democratic majority congress's policies expanded the size of government, promoted more government intrusion into our lives, anti-business policies, along with excessive spending and debt has led to this nation being economically less free.  We, the American people, must keep vigilant and make sure that the new congress lowers the debt,  reverses past government intrusion, and fights against present and future government intrusion attempted by the Obama administration. 

Dangers that Executive Powers Pose on Liberty & Freedom

Ever since it has to come to light that the President is sneakily adding end of life counseling under the guise of regulation after that amendment in that piece of legislation was previously rejected by both the American people and Congress I have been thinking and am asking the question, what specifically gives the president the authority to add something without the consent of the governed or Congress?  I have been pondering over how much President Obama has overreached and usurped powers which are reserved elsewhere.  Progressives want to control every aspect of our lives and have advanced their vision rapidly over the past two years. They are trying to decide which ways are easiest to control the masses - the “sheep” - and how those items on their agenda can be implemented  without citizens catching onto their scheme.  Progressives want to use back-door policies to control our lives. The President in coordination with other progressives have issued a great many regulations and laws under the guise of security, safety, education, internet fairness, and health care and this has ultimately led to our liberty and freedom being diminished greatly.  Much of Obama’s usurpations of powers were done under the guise of instituting regulations, without congressional oversight and those so-called regulations were used as a cover to institute new policies.  Obama has viewed his powers as president very broadly and has abused his power as president on a number of occasions.

John Carey over at Sentry Journal has written a thought-provoking article which touched upon the possibility for the need of an Article V Constitutional Convention which would focus on the clarification of the commerce clause, or the need to repeal one out of a few choice amendments, or the possibility of adding an amendment which would grant States the right to repeal any law or regulation of the United States so States can take back their rights which are guaranteed by the constitution.  I am not quite sure whether a Constitutional Convention would work since there are so many liberal activist judges who ignore the Constitution.  I think it is an option worthy of thought and discussion which may work if the details are worked out.  There is no doubt the Federal government needs to be reined in some capacity. The Federal government has metamorphosed into a leviathan which has squeezed and sucked the life out of States’ rights. The Ordinance Power grants the president the authority to issue regulations, proclamations, and executive orders. I believe that the Ordinance Power needs to be clarified so progressive presidents like Obama (I hope not another one like him is ever elected again but we had Carter and look who we got later on) cannot have any wiggle room to act like kings, usurp power, and  institute new policies instead of enforcing existing ones.  In article 2 Section 3 the Constitution states that the president “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” but this does not mean that presidents have been given the authority to add anything extra which wasn’t already passed by congress.  The End of Life Counseling or “Death Panels” in Obamacare were taken out after their was outcry by the public and now Obama is going to be adding the End of Life Counseling via regulations.  This is not merely enforcing the rule of law or making sure that laws are faithfully executed but rather is making an addition which was not in the final version of the health care bill which was passed by Congress and signed into law by the president.

As much as I agree with John that the Federal government needs to be reined in I am not sure I agree with his assessment that the commerce clause is one the biggest threats to the American people. It is a big threat but I believe that the powers of the president -Ordinance Power-  are the powers which have the most capacity to endanger and encroach on our liberty and freedom.  I believe these powers need to be clarified and limited.  I think that Congress should be a check on the president by giving their authorization to any regulations and executive orders that either the President or those in government agencies such as the EPA want to implement.  IMO, recess appointments need to stop also.  If it is impossible for Congress to give a certain appointee their approval then they must not be fit to represent the American people in whatever position they have been nominated for.  Although, there is the problem of the opposite Party blocking appointees approval regardless of how qualified the appointee is. 

President Obama most recently has added (or plans to) end of life counseling under the guise of Medicare and Medicaid regulations, three Democrats on the FCC voted to enact the equivalent of the fairness doctrine but for the internet instead of radio, instituted green gas regulations through the EPA since he couldn’t get Congress to pass Cap & Trade, named recess appointments such as U.S. ambassadors and the head of Medicare and Medicaid, Donald Berwick.  And, these are just the power grabs committed by the president since July of 2010.  In addition you have progressives like John Podesta advising the president to ignore the will of the American people and institute policies via federal agencies. 


Congress needs to do its job and use the Congressional Review Act to engage in oversight to reign in and stop the president’s power grabs. The Republicans in Congress intend to give Obama a fight over the new EPA regulations.


The Federal government, federal agencies and most importantly the president needs to be reined in with both congressional Oversight and either an amendment clarifying and limiting the powers of the president and federal agencies or through a Constitutional Convention such as John suggests.