Friday, 27 February 2009
Should the District of Columbia enjoy the full benefits of congressional membership? The Constitution says no.
By the Editors
Congress is on the verge of granting the District of Columbia statehood on the cheap: This week, lawmakers in both chambers are debating a scheme to give the District a permanent seat in the House of Representatives. The bill in question violates the plain meaning of the Constitution and should go no further. For years, Democrats have dreamed of conferring statehood on the District of Columbia, if only because they know it will increase their partisan clout in the Capitol. As with so many large cities, Washington, D.C., is a one-party jurisdiction. Neither its mayor nor a single person on its 13-member city council is currently a Republican. If “New Columbia” were to become the 51st state, it would surely send a delegation of Democrats to the Hill. They would probably live on the left-wing fringes of their party, too. When the District created the position of “shadow senator” in 1990, voters responded by electing Jesse Jackson to this honorary office.
Because efforts to make D.C. a full-fledged state have failed, the city’s political backers have resorted to incremental steps. Much like Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam, the District currently sends a delegate to Congress. The rules governing these posts have changed over the years, but in general delegates have been allowed to vote in committee but not on the floor of the House.
That’s because the Constitution forbids non-states from enjoying this privilege. The senators and congressmen who think otherwise should take a refresher course on Article I, Section 2 and the Fourteenth Amendment: “No Person shall be a Representative who shall not ... be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.” Moreover: “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States.”
There was a time when D.C.’s political backers appreciated this prohibition. In 1977, Congress passed a constitutional amendment that would have granted representation to the District — the most direct way of lifting an obvious constitutional ban — but the states failed to ratify it. Years earlier it took the passage of the 23rd Amendment to give District residents the right to vote for president.
Read more here
Posted on 02/27/2009 6:23 AM by Bobbie Patray
Saturday, 21 February 2009
The Movie that Saves Lives
If you have not seen this movie, rent or buy it TODAY! Click above to order.
Official Bella website HERE
See the Trailer HERE [Don't be put off by the PG-13 rating,I think it was given that rating because of the subject of abortion.]
'Bella' is hope, life
BY REBECCA GRACE - AFA Journal, January 2009
Only a couple of days before her 19th birthday, Jana (name changed) had an abortion. She’s regretted it ever since.
Nineteen years later, she found herself in the waiting room of what she thought was an abortion clinic. Jana, single and without a steady job, was pregnant again and contemplating another abortion.
While waiting to see a counselor, Jana picked up a book and read about a lady who had been in her exact situation. The stories were so similar Jana felt like she was reading about herself.
If that wasn’t strange enough, she was welcomed to the clinic with open arms and genuine love. It didn’t take her long to realize that she was at a pregnancy help center rather than an abortion clinic, which was odd considering Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, referred her to the center.
Jana didn’t recognize it at the time, but God was at work in her life and the life of her unborn child.
She left the center that day firm in her decision of choosing life for her child. She also left with a copy of the movie Bella.
Read more here
Posted on 02/21/2009 5:30 AM by Bobbie Patray
Friday, 13 February 2009
Democrats Have Mixed Opinions on Borrowing Money From China to Pay for Stimulus
The number-two Democrat in the House said that over the short term, massive spending was necessary to aid the economy, despite any concerns about who we borrow from.
“In the short term, there is no alternative in my opinion, to borrowing money to infuse it in the economy to get out economy going,” Hoyer said.
As of November 2008, the People’s Republic of China was the largest single holder of U.S. debt at $681.9 billion, according to figures released by the U.S. Treasury Department. China, in fact, holds 10.8 percent of all publicly held federal debt.
The communist nation has increased its share of U.S. federal debt by $223 billion since November 2007 and by $95 billion since September of 2008.
If China loaned the U.S. 10 percent of the money for the stimulus bill, the U.S. debt it held would climb another $80 billion to $90 billion, depending on the size of the final bill.
Read more here
Posted on 02/13/2009 4:58 AM by Bobbie Patray