Over the years there has been criticism of these payments, but Republicans are unlikely to want to distance farmers.

It seems that there is no limit of the number of electric cars you can buy and get a tax credit of $5,500 from the Federal Government. Unfortunately, this tax credit applies to golf carts as well. See, they are electric and as long as they are equipped with three point harness belts and rear view mirrors, they qualify for the program. According to the Wall Street Journal, there are some golf cart companies who are offering to have you buy the cart, lease it back to the company for $100 a month for 27 months, then have the company buy it from you for $2,000. You will have profited $2,000 from the transaction.

Some entrepreneurs are buying several carts, taking the credit and them hoping to sell at a later date and make a profit on the deal.

I am so glad that our tax dollars are put to good use!

Unfortunately, some lawsuits got way out of hand. While compensation should be given to victims of defective products or medicines, there are always the few that are willing to take advantage of the system. Instead of fighting for just compensation and changes in a system that would make sure such things don’t happen again, some people just see dollar signs.

That is why you have phony lawsuits such as the woman who found a finger in her restaurant food. She actually brought in a severed finger in order to sue the restaurant. Shame on those who trivialize the real victims.

Before the 1950s, Supreme Court Justice nominees didn’t even appear before the Senate Committee, the committee would just deliberate and make a decision. Now it is much more like a three ring circus. Senators make long-winded remarks instead of asking questions, and the questions that are asked are sometimes focused on the mundane. Instead, the committee should be focusing on two things: the past and the present.

The Past. Did Judge Sotomayor make decisions based on fact and not on emotion? Did she faithfully uphold the law and the constitution? Or did she try to make policy from the bench?

The Future. Does Sotomayor believe that Supreme Court judges can discard laws to make their own policy? What is her view of the Court and their responsibilities and how would she fit it?

Unfortunately, I think we will see a lot of pandering from the left and right and lots of long-winded speeches.

Additional cabinet positions were added over the years, including Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Secretary of Energy, Secretary of Education, Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Secretary of Homeland Security.

There are other government agencies, that are not cabinet positions, but are managed by cabinet positions. For example, The US Food and Drug Administration is an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services. This agency is in charge of making sure that certain drugs and foods (such as alli, celebrex and vioxx) are safe for human consumption. The US Environmental Protection Agency is not a cabinet position, but is often given cabinet rank.

There are so many different agencies in the Federal Government today, I am curious if George Washington would approve.

If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the so called General Welfare they may take the care of religion into their own hands. They may appoint teachers in every state, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury. They may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like-manner, schools throughout the union. They may assume the provision of the poor. Were the power of congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations and transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.

How telling these words our. How far from the original ideas of the founding fathers we have come.

Madison also noted:

The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.

According to Madison, the federal government should not be involved in charity (and I believe that includes welfare, social security and medicare/medicaid), but these “powers” should be left to each individual state.

Congress has become so involved in redistributing tax money, that it has lost sight of what its real function is.

In 1945, Harry Truman asked congress to fund a national health insurance program. However, too many were afraid of “socialized medicine” and Truman eventually backed off the idea. Instead, officials in the Social Security administrations determined that adding a health insurance program for Social Security beneficiaries would be a good idea.

It is not until 1965 that Medicare and Medicaid (for indigent people) are signed into law by President Johnson and over 19 million enroll. Truman is the first to enroll in the Medicare and the premium is $3 per month. In 1972 the program is expanded to cover disabled persons under 65 and those with kidney failure.

Federal employees become covered under Medicare in 1983 – 1984. This includes the President and members of Congress. Other coverages (such as for mammography) are added over the years.

Medicare spending may reach $500 billion by 2012 and yet it still does not cover all the necessary procedures for some seniors. Many participants relay on a medicare supplement to help defray medical costs.

When Medicare was first enacted, there were few who believed that retirees over the age of 65 would live much more than 5 to 10 years. However, since people as living much longer today, the strain on Medicare has become enormous. Some predict that eventually the federal government will not be able to afford this benefit.

Stop the Drug War (DRCNet) calls for an end to drug prohibition (e.g. some form of legalization), and its replacement with some sensible framework in which drugs can be regulated and controlled instead.

They seem to believe that legalizing drugs will end the violence, stop the spread of diseases and get treatment to those who need it. Would this really be the case? Sweden legalized some drug use in 1965 and saw intravenous speed addicts rise 88.5% in one year and there was a high correlation between drug use and crimes committed. Switzerland open an area in Zurich and provided clean needles, drugs and medical care. Unfortunately, the number of addicts and violence surged. The program had to be abandoned. More myths can be read here.

It the number of addicts increases under such a program, the need for drug rehab will increase as well, increasing the amount of your tax money spent on drugs.

Thank goodness for justice. Sharpe James was convicted this week on ALL charges. I know that $58,000 doesn’t sound like much, but it is the principle of the thing. Why do politicians treat their offices like it is a personal spending spree. They shouldn’t be looking through a furniture catalog to try and redecorate their offices on the taxpayers money. They shouldn’t be taking lavish trips to the Dominican Republic just to see if their gardens would look good in Newark train stations.

I really hope that Sharpe James gets the full penalty. Of course, he probably won’t.