National GOP

By RICH LOWRY

President Ronald Reagan in 1982 (National Archives)

‘A Time for Choosing’ is a brilliant libertarian speech. But Reagan couldn’t have foreseen the toxic individualism that challenges us today.The greatest documents in American history never lose their ability to astonish. They deserve, and repay, careful study, and inevitably have contemporary resonances no matter how long ago they were written or uttered.

There’s no doubt that Ronald Reagan’s “A Time for Choosing” belongs in the top ranks of American speeches. It is among the most significant political speeches ever given by a non- officeholder and non-presidential candidate. It heralded the beginning of the political career of a man who would go on to be a successful two-term president, and it remains an extraordinarily powerful and cogent expression of a deeply held worldview.

The speech is a defining statement of modern conservatism. Reagan’s core arguments in the speech about the deleterious effects of taxes, deficit spending, and debt defined the Republican agenda for two generations.

He gave us phrases still quoted fondly by conservatives, including “the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so,” and “a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.”

To read the rest of this article, please click (HERE):

Author: Mike Rosen

With their majority in both houses of the state legislature and the office of governor, Democrats exploited their monopoly on state government to ram through a measure that commits Colorado to a nationwide plot to subvert presidential elections. It’s called the National Popular Vote (NPV) Compact.

It’s a devious scheme to circumvent the Electoral College which was brilliantly crafted by our founders to conform with the constitutional republic they created, as codified in Article IV, Section 4 guaranteeing to every state a “republican form of government.” And decidedly not a direct democracy. The word “democracy” appears nowhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. The notion that we have a national popular vote for president is a fiction. What we have are 51 separate elections, one in each of the states and the District of Columbia. It’s only as a matter of curiosity that we tally the votes of those 51 popular elections to produce a national total. But it has no force of law.

The democratic principle of “one person one vote” applies more appropriately to the US House where seats are apportioned strictly by population; but not in the Senate where each state gets two votes regardless of population. Electoral votes for president are also assigned among the states to disproportionally favor states with low populations, and they’re cast winner-take-all (except in Nebraska and Maine) rather than proportionately based on a state’s popular vote. James Madison explained that, “The immediate election of the president is to be made by the states in their political characters.” That is, as individual entities not as members of any collective “compact.”

To read the rest of this story, click (HERE):

The Left’s Lucrative Nonprofits

‘Powerful interests’ and ‘dark money’ are mostly on the Democratic side.

By Kimberley A. Strassel

Sept. 5, 2019 6:49 pm ET

The Planned Parenthood Reproductive Health Services Center in St. Louis, Mo., May 30.PHOTO: SAUL LOEB/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

This year’s Democratic presidential candidates have a favorite whipping boy: “powerful interests.” Get ready to hear again in coming weeks how the National Rifle Association rules Washington, how the Koch empire dominates politics, how the right is pouring “dark money” into its agenda. And then remember that these are among the biggest whoppers of the 2020 election. One side will do battle with the aid of a huge and savvy nonprofit political empire—and it isn’t the right. Though the sooner Republicans understand that, the better.

A helpful tutorial arrived this week, “Power Grab,” a new book by Republican former Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah. Mr. Chaffetz has been digging into nonprofits since his time as House Oversight Committee chairman, and the book details how powerful the liberal nonprofit sector has grown. It may surprise many Americans—those who read daily stories about conservative “influence”—that the likes of the NRA, Judicial Watch and the National Organization for Marriage barely rank by comparison to the assets and revenue of Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union or the Nature Conservancy.

These aren’t only big political players; they’re the biggest political players. In 2018 the nonprofit watchdog Capital Research Center analyzed grants handed out in the 2014 election year by six big foundations on the right (including the Bradley and Charles Koch foundations) versus six on the left (including the Open Society and Tides foundations). Liberal public-policy charities, organized under chapter 501(c)(3) of the tax code, bagged $7.4 billion of this foundation money in 2014. For conservative charities, the figure was a mere $2.2 billion. That $7.4 billion also dwarfed total 2013-14 campaign receipts to federal, state and local campaigns ($4.1 billion) and spending that cycle by independent groups ($830 million).

Mr. Chaffetz’s contribution is to refocus attention on the way liberal charities channel their huge funds into political work that benefits the Democratic Party. We’ve long known that some of them engage in nominally nonpartisan voter registration, conveniently only in places likely to yield Democratic votes. The Chaffetz book adds new data highlighting contracts between liberal charities and overt political organizations.

To read the rest of this story, click (HERE):

 

Why the “National Public Vote” scheme is unconstitutional

Why the “National Public Vote” scheme is unconstitutional

This article first appeared in the Daily Caller.

The U.S. Supreme Court says each state legislature has “plenary” (complete) power to decide how its state’s presidential electors are chosen.

But suppose a state legislature decided to raise cash by selling its electors to the highest bidder. Do you think the Supreme Court would uphold such a measure?

If your answer is “no,” then you intuitively grasp a basic principle of constitutional law—one overlooked by those proposing the “National Popular Vote Compact” (NPV).

NPV is a plan to change how we elect our president. Under the plan, each state signs a compact to award all its electoral votes to the presidential candidate who wins the national popular vote. The compact comes into effect when states with a majority of presidential electors sign on.

In assessing the constitutionality of NPV, you have to consider some of its central features. First, NPV abandons the idea that presidential electors represent the people of their own states. Second, it discards an election system balanced among interests and values in favor of one recognizing only national popularity. That popularity need not be high: A state joining the NPV compact agrees to assign its electors to even the winner of a tiny plurality in a multi-candidate election.

Third, because NPV states would have a majority of votes in the Electoral College, NPV would effectively repeal the Constitution’s provision for run-off elections in the House of Representatives.

Continue reading

Constitutional Topic: The Electoral College

The Constitutional Topics pages at the USConstitution.nett site are presented to delve deeper into topics than can be provided on the Glossary Page or in the FAQ pages. This Topic Page concerns the Electoral College. The Electoral College is embodied in the Constitution in Article 2, Section 1, and in the 12th Amendment.


The Framers were wary of giving the people the power to directly elect the President — some felt the citizenry too beholden to local interests, too easily duped by promises or shenanigans, or simply because a national election, in the time of oil lamps and quill pens, was just impractical. Some proposals gave the power to the Congress, but this did not sit well with those who wanted to see true separation of the branches of the new government. Still others felt the state legislatures should decide, but this was thought to make the President too beholden to state interests. The Electoral College, proposed by James Wilson, was the compromise that the Constitutional Convention reached.

Though the term is never used in the Constitution itself, the electors that choose the President at each election are traditionally called a College. In the context of the Constitution, the meaning of college is not that of a school, but of a group of people organized toward a common goal.

The Electoral College insulates the election of the President from the people by having the people elect not the person of the President, but the person of an Elector who is pledged to vote for a specific person for President. Though the ballot may read “John McCain” or “Barack Obama,” you’re really voting for “John Smith” who is a McCain supporter or “Jack Jones” who is an Obama supporter. Continue reading

The Reagan Club meets on the second Thursday of every month at CB & Potts, 1257 W 120th Avenue, Westminster, CO, 80234 from 6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m. with doors open at 6:00 p.m. Enter via CB & Potts main entrance and head to the back meeting room. Food and beverages are available from CB & Potts. We feature different programs and speakers as we honor the 40th President. The Reagan Club of Colorado seeks to promote the Constitution, smaller government, lower taxes, personal freedom, helping candidates, and educating the public about one of our greatest presidents, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Recent Comments