I Voted No

With the vote late yesterday on the Continuing Resolution to end the government shutdown and avert a default on the U.S. debt, the deal essentially enables our federal government to borrow money in order to pay interest on loans for money that they have already spent.   Along with 143 other congressmen, Ron DeSantis, FL, voted no yesterday and gave an excellent explanation on Facebook.  Here is an excerpt that shows how this legislation flies in the face of self-governance:

“Make no mistake about it: this “deal” ratifies a state of affairs in which the government can impose burdens on society as a whole while relieving those burdens for politically-connected entities such as businesses, unions and members of Congress. At the same time, it fails to promote economic growth, does not prevent America’s blue collar workers from being shifted to part-time work, and does nothing to facilitate the viability of our nation’s small businesses. As usual, the taxpayers get left holding the bag.”

Congressman DiSantis also cited two constitutional issues with this “deal:”

“First, the bill changes the procedure for extending the nation’s debt limit. Whereas Congress has traditionally voted whether or not to extend it, this bill essentially allows the President to unilaterally increase the debt ceiling unless Congress disapproves by a veto-proof supermajority. The Constitution vests the power to “borrow money on the credit of the United States” in Congress. This bill sets a new precedent that may be used in the future to water down Congress’ power over the purse.

Second, the income verification provision (which is a sad joke, as it does nothing to protect the taxpayer from the issuance of fraudulent subsidies, but merely requires a written report) actually undermines the rule of law. This is because, while the health care law already requires recipients of ObamaCare subsidies to provide proof of eligibility, the Obama administration is not enforcing the letter of the law. This part of the bill was considered a “concession” by the President. The Constitution, though, requires the President to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” so by including this provision the bill implicitly concedes that the faithful enforcement of the law is not an ironclad constitutional requirement, but something for which the people’s representatives must bargain.”

Read more from Congressman DiSantis on his Facebook page.