Category Better Life

Mar 2 2015

The Right to Keep and Bear Ammo

Lost in the hubbub of all the maneuverings of last weeks legislative schedule in Washington was the news that Bruce Poliquin had signed on to a letter denouncing the President’s move to ban AR-15 ammo.  After signing on to the letter, Poliquin released a statement emphasizing,“It’s unconstitutional and overreaching for the President to use his federal agency to restrict our right to keep and bear arms. I will always fight to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and will make sure our hard-working and law-abiding Mainers are able to exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

The full text of the letter was also provided in the presser, entitled Right to Keep and Bear Ammo.  So far, the Congressman from Maine seems to be keeping his promise to defend the 2nd Amendment.

Mar 1 2015

Constitutional Carry Bill Shows Promise

A Constitutional Carry bill in the Maine State Senate shows great promise as it begins its march through the legislature. Originally sponsored by Senator Eric Brakey (R-Auburn), the bill enjoys nearly 100 co-sponsors. If passed it most assuredly will be signed by the Governor and Maine will join Alaska, Arizona, Montana, Wyoming, and, surprise, Vermont in legalizing both concealed and open carry without permit.  Maine enjoys strong support for the 2nd Amendment by voters across party lines.

TMCV has previously posted its support for this bill but cautioned that there was a need to make sure there was language in the bill to protect and preserve the present Concealed Carry permitting process so as to not nullify reciprocity with other States, who may not honor Constitutional Carry but still reciprocate, honor, Maine’s Concealed Carry permit.  Sources close to the bill have assured TMCV that there is language in the bill that protects reciprocity for Concealed Carry permit holders and keeps the permitting process for those who need to have Concealed Carry permits honored in other States.  This is important as several individuals have contacted TMCV concerned that the Constitutional Carry, if passed, would invalidate their permits making them vulnerable to arrest in States that they do business.

Before the start of this legislative session, TMCV contacted our local State Senator, Paul Davis (R-Sangerville), and passed the several concerns that had been expressed to us.  Senator Davis sponsored a bill that would have worked to protect Concealed Carry reciprocity.  This past weekend I spoke with Paul Davis to get an update of the different issues facing our State and, as it pertains to Constitutional Carry, he felt that, as long as reciprocity was protected, Brakey’s Constitutional Carry bill was the better bill and he was lending his full support to it, with the caveat that reciprocity must be protected.

With cautious optimism, TMCV believes that there is a good chance this bill will be passed.  This sends a strong message to the rest of the Nation that the 2nd Amendment and the citizens right to self-defense resonates across party lines amongst voters even as some in the political realm persist in making it a partisan issue. Let’s Set Maine Free!

 

Feb 28 2015

Questions for Education

The U.S. House of Representatives moved yesterday to postpone debate and the vote on HR 5, due to the volume of amendments and length of time debate on those amendments  would consume.  Questions from all quarters are still being raised and the final wording of the bill is still in flux to be sure.  With all the accusations being hurled about concerning the Student Access Act, its difficult at times to decipher what is accurate.

Heritage Action has come out against HR 5 listing claims of misleading facts within the bill.  While I empathize and certainly agree with Heritage in their ardent disapproval of Federally controlled education, it may be, in their zeal to discredit the bill, Heritage is guilty of some misleading information of their own. Let’s take a peek.

Heritage claims that HR 5 maintains the same high levels of governmental interference that were imposed by the NO Child Left Behind Act, when in truth, the No Child Left Behind expired in the fiscal year 2008. With no Congressional action, the present Administration has been free to establish educational policy through Executive fiat. Similarly, the Secretary of Education has had no check or balance from Congress as their office has continued to extend waivers and impose national policy. Language in HR 5 actually allows for funds to follow low-income families to charter schools and gives States sovereignty in establishing their own accountability measures. It also prevents the Secretary of Education from dictating teacher standards.

Heritage also claims that because of the bill’s size, over 600 pages, The Student Access Act does not reduce spending  but merely reorganizes the way the department spends $25 million annually, still, the facts tell a different story. HR 5 flat-lines funding for K through 12 for 5 years at a rate lower than the Title 1 authorization for the last year it was authorized under law. The bill ensures that funds are targeted towards students and not bureaucrats. It requires the Secretary of Education to identify the number of employees identified with the consolidated 65 programs and reduce the workforce by an equal number.

It certainly cuts against my grain to criticize another conservative organization like Heritage Action, but it does concern me when misleading facts are used.  Do I trust Congress on this? Absolutely not!  I don’t trust Congress on anything, but I would prefer these conservative organizations would be engaged in the process rather than lobbing fireballs from the outside. Heritage has also given Representatives such as Steve Pearce (R-NM), Walter Jones (R-NC), Steve King (R-IA), Randy Weber (R-TX) and Trey Gowdy (R-SC) less than perfect ratings on their conservative scorecards. Perhaps Heritage has some skewed parameters in their measurements of these well-known conservative Congressmen.

I have two children that are home schooled and one in Christian school.  I would much rather have an organizations, such as the Homeschool Legal Defense Association and the Family Research Council, involved in maintaining wording that protects my liberties in HR 5.  The ideal of an educational system free of government control is a worthy and admirable goal we all hope to attain, but its shadow is not even on the horizon. No Conservative in a perfect scenario wants Federal control of education, but if we disengage from the legislative process out of protest to adhere to a pure standard, we will be left out of the language and must assuredly targeted.

Feb 26 2015

Caveats for HR 5

Much of the attention this week has centered around the Net Neutrality issue.  While Americans are struggling to understand how capitalism in our Country can be circumvented by three dictators in closed meeting without any accountability to the citizens of this Country, there have been some other bills debated this week.  One is HR 5, the Student Success Act.

First let me preface my comments by saying it is the position of TMCV that the Federal involvement in the educational system is the primary reason for the deplorable failing in the educational standards for  the youth of our Country.  That acknowledged, the pragmatist must assess the landscape he faces in the modern educational debate.  The Federal Government controls the majority of our education.  The challenge before us is to keep government out of the forms of education that are still free from Federal control.

The initial reports I had on HR 5 painted a negative picture.  I posted some of those reports here on TMCV.  Further review of the bill and the support of some organizations I respect, has caused me to cautiously reconsider.  I do so with the caveats so aptly stated by many of the bills supporters.

The HomeSchool Legal Defense Association sent a letter of support for HR 5 but with numerous caveats. The majority of these emphasized the necessity that the language which protects home and Christian schools from government interference remain in the bill.  The Family Research Counsel has a similar letter in which their support is predicated upon language protecting children from sex education and wording that protects and upholds religious liberty.  Still, the implication is that this support could be withdrawn if certain language in the bill is withdrawn.

The Student Success Act has yet to be voted on.  Sources in Washington tell me there is at least 40 amendments still to be debated on HR 5.  For the home schooler or administrator of a Christian school, it is important to understand the language of independence in this bill hinges on not taking Federal funds.  As with anything, the temptation to take monies from the Federal or State governments will most assuredly result in government oversight.  This will destroy any free forms of education.  If we want to be independent, we must truly be independent.