Just saw the news story that Rep. Jack Murtha has died.

A spokesman says Democratic Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, a retired Marine Corps officer who became an outspoken critic of the Iraq war, has died. He was 77.

He had been suffering complications from gallbladder surgery.

In addition to his opposition to the Iraq war, Murtha is known for his involvement in Abscam and the volume of pork brought to his little corner of PA.

I can’t think of any political area where I would agree with him. Still, I pray for comfort for his family and friends.

One big issue with the Health Power Grab bill is the individual mandate which requires, with penalties for non-compliance, American citizens to purchase health insurance. There’s just one problem — there is no power granted by the Constitution that allows this.

Quin Hillyer posts a memo put out by a group of major leaders of the conservative movement.

ISSUE: Mandating that individuals must obtain health insurance, and imposing any penalty-civil or criminal-on any private citizen for not purchasing health insurance is not authorized by any provision of the U.S. Constitution. As such, it is unconstitutional, and should not survive a court challenge on that issue. Supporters of the legislation have incorrectly contended that the legal justification for the mandate is authorized by the Commerce Clause, the General Welfare Clause, or the Taxing and Spending Clause. Given that this mandate provision is essential to Obamacare; its unconstitutionality renders the entire program untenable.

The memo lays out the legal arguments that explain the bill’s unconstitutionality. The writers call for the following:

ACTION: We urge you to make this point to members of the U.S. Senate-and if a bill passes the Senate to impress upon members of both chambers of Congress-that the key provision in the healthcare legislation violates the U.S. Constitution.

Let your legislators know that you oppose this bill. It is not too late.

It’s the race the political blogoshpere, cable and network news, and print sources are all talking about — New York’s special election in House district 23. If you tuned out Friday afternoon, you may have missed a few things.

On Friday, the day after the only three way debate, Hoffman continued to pick up endorsements from George Pataki and others. On Saturday Dede Scozaafava decided to suspend her campaign, and on Sunday she showed how much being a “Life-long Republican” meant to her — by supporting Democrat Bill Owens.

Scozzafava dropped out after Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman experienced a late-in-the-game surge. The move was expected to consolidate GOP voters behind Hoffman on Tuesday.

But on Sunday, Scozzafava issued a written statement in which she backed Democrat Bill Owens.

As Ed Morrissey and many others pointed out,

Doesn’t this prove the point conservatives had been making about Dede Scozzafava all along?

Why, yes. Yes it does.

As you can imagine, all of these various pieces have shook up the polling. The only one I’ve seen – post Dede – is one from PPP.

In a three way contest with Democrat Bill Owens and Republican Dede Scozzafava Hoffman leads with 51% to 34% for Owens and 13% for Scozzafava. In a head to head contest with Owens Hoffman holds a 54-38 advantage.

In other words, it’s a toss-up. What? That’s what Mike Allen suggested on Morning Joe.

The claim by Allen, Politico’s chief political correspondent, was so absurd that, on the spot, host Joe Scarborough offered 3:1 odds to Allen and anyone else wanting to place a few kopeks on Dem Bill Owens.

The real poll is tomorrow. Along with the governorships in NJ and VA it should be an interesting 48 hours.

Here are my thoughts and observations about last nights town hall meeting with Fl-12 rep Adam Putnam. Driving up I was greeted by Public Option Now signs lining the entrance and parking lot. There were around a dozen public option supporters handing out material just outside the doors.

I would estimate between 150-200 people in attendance. The dress ranged from I-just-came-from-work to I’m-retired-and-this-is-what-I-wear. A good percentage appeared to be retirement age.

Adam started his remarks by saying that there are four major issues facing Congress, but I missed the fourth, and he didn’t really elaborate on the last one. Those three — Cap and Trade, Card Check, and of course, Health Care Reform. He called them “game changers,” a major shift from the way we do things as a nation.

Before taking questions he listed some of the things that he thinks should direct the debate on health care:

• Greater access
• Afforadability
• The individual, along with their health care professionals, should be the ones to make medical decisions
• Government should not limit choices
• Private insurance should remain the foundation

He had one very interesting statistical note on the expatriation rates of doctors by country. Canada has a rate above 10% and the UK is above 5% (sorry, I didn’t get the exact number). The US rate is 0.6% and most of those are doctors which have decided to go on the mission field. The numbers for nurses are similar. There is a reason that medical professionals trained here practice here.

He spent several minutes talking about how much the US spends on equipment, research, and innovation. One stat – MRI Machines: In the US there are 25 MRI machines per million people. In Canada and the UK that number is 5 per million.

One big issue is how difficult it is to project future health costs. He cited the huge difference between original CBO projections for Medicare and Medicaid and the quickly realized realities.

One point he made that I thought was particularly important, and often under discussed, is the effect federally implemented plans will have on state budgets. The impact could be a budget buster for many, if not most, states.

His suggestions for the discussion:

• Association Health Plans – where groups of people, bound by some association, could purchase insurance at group rates typically reserved for companies. Perhaps we could have the “Bloggers Health Plan”
• Malpractice Reform
• The ability to sell plans across state lines
• Electronic Medical Records. He called this the area where there is the least partisan disagreement.
• Incentivize wellness and fitness
• Small business tax incentives

He remarked that mandatory coverage of pre-existing conditions without mandated participation for all can not co-exist.

He also touched on the timing of things in Congress. The House leadership has expressed a goal of bringing HC to a vote before Thanksgiving, although he believes that it may extend through the end of the year, or into early 2010. In any case, he said the issue is on a short time line. Because of the focus on HCR, he thinks that Cap and Trade and Card Check will be pushed off until early next year.

I wasn’t able to stay for all of the Q&A portion, but I did stay for the first few.

The first question got quite a bit of positive reaction from those in attendance.

Q. Is it constitutional/legal/possible for Congress to pass a bill that is not in it’s final legislative form?

A. He said that the bill, in it’s present form, is in many ways conceptual. There are at least three separate versions that are being melded in the House. The version that is eventually voted on, however, will have to be specific and final. He took the opportunity of this question to say that it is critical for the final bill to be available for people to see prior to Congress voting.

Q. This questioner likened what the government is doing as equivalent to being forced to support a particular charity.

A. His answer addressed the issue of cost in the bill, which currently range from $873 Billion to $1.3 Trillion. Cuts to Medicare could be $500 Billion. One method of revenue generation under discussion is a VAT on medical devices and a surcharge of 2.5% on people making $250,000 or more. One option is to change the surcharge to 5% on those making a $500,000 or more. He pointed out the fact that many of those in either scenario are small business owners. He made the point that these options would have the effect of costing small businesses more than Fortune 100 companies. He repeated the point that state governments will have to come up with more money as well. A lot more money.

The final question I was able to stay for:

Q. What about fraud in existing government programs?

A. Fraud, along with waste and abuse, are unbelievably high in existing programs. Florida is particularly bad. While eliminating or reducing fraud, waste, and abuse won’t solve all of the cost problems, they are important and costly factors.

It was interesting to attend, and I wish I could have stayed longer. While there was a significant presence of those supporting a public option, most questioners (of those I had the chance to hear) appeared to want government to leave us alone.

If anyone else was there and had a different view, or was able to stay longer, please let me know.

My Rep., Adam Putnam (FL-12), is holding a Town Hall meeting about an hour from now. I’ll be there. What question should I ask, if I get the chance? Send it (quick) to lakelandjim at gmail dot com.

The meeting is at the Bartow Civic Center, 2250 S. Floral Avenue, Bartow, Fl.

See you there?

Is the House race in NY district 23 a bellwether of conservative opportunities around the country, or is it merely a local race that will have little meaning at the end of the day? Here’s the story as it was on October 1st:

Republican Dede Scozzafava leads Democrat Bill Owens in the race to fill a vacant House seat in upstate New York, even though the Conservative Party’s Doug Hoffman skims off a chunk of GOP voters.

Scozzafava, a longtime assemblywoman, was backed by 35 percent of likely voters in a Siena College poll conducted Sept. 27-29 — the first independent survey in the hotly contested race to fill the seat of former Rep. John McHugh.

Owens, a Plattsburgh attorney, was favored by 28 percent of those polled, while Hoffman, an accountant and entrepreneur, was the choice of 16 percent.

But that was not, and is not the end of the story.

Club for Growth and Gary Bauer both endorsed Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman.

And it doesn’t end there.

RCP Reported these poll results on October 15th:

Owens 33 (+5 vs. last poll, Oct. 1)
Scozzafava 29 (-6)
Hoffman 23 (+7)

As the polling reflects, Scozzafava’s chances were fading while Democrat Owens took the lead and Hoffman made a serious leap upward. Dana Loesch, writing at BigGovernment.com, looked at the race:

A special election to replace departing Congressman John McHugh features a GOP candidate, Dede Scozzafave, backed by national GOP ‘leaders’, DailyKos and the state teachers’ union, a Democrat, Bill Owens and a Conservative Party Candidate, Doug Hoffman.

National GOP figures claim Dede Scozzafava is the best candidate hold the seat for the GOP. If that is true it begs a question, is it worth holding? Dede Scozzafava has regularly sought the support of ACORN’s Working Families Party, supported higher taxes, increased government spending, the stimulus bill, bailouts, Card Check…oh, lets just stop there.

Loesch created the website www.DumpDede.com

I have the feeling that Scozzafava thought this campaign was going to be a cake walk. John McHugh had won the district by comfortable margins in the past.

As her poll numbers shrank so did good ideas for her campaign. Example 1 — calling the cops on a reporter.

Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack caught up with Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava at a campaign event in Lowville, New York, yesterday. McCormack scared the hell out of Scozzafava by asking her questions on card check, taxes and abortion coverage.

McCormack scared Scozzafava so badly that she called the cops on him. “[Scozzafava] got startled, that’s all,” the officer explained to McCormack. “It’s not like you’re in any trouble.”

McCormack was relieved, but he wonders “if it’s the Scozzafava campaign that’s in trouble–with a candidate who supports card check, who is unwilling to say she’d oppose a health care bill that raises taxes or includes abortion coverage, and who is so reluctant to answer questions that she has someone with her campaign call the cops when she’s questioned by a reporter who is (if I may say so) polite–if a bit persistent.”

What could be worse than that? Yes, that was a rhetorical question. The answer is holding a press conference in front of your opponents campaign headquarters. It was not a good photo-op.

While Scozzafava enjoys the support of Republicans like Newt Gingrich and the NRCC, in the past few days Hoffman has picked up some serious conservative support. Ken Blackwell said,

Hoffman is a genuine Reagan conservative in a district that generally votes in that direction. Now, some smart people argue that in some districts, only a moderate Republican can get elected. That’s what coalitions are all about. We cannot get all we want all the time. Even the Gipper would campaign for some Republicans I was less than thrilled about. He understood the importance of building a majority in Congress.

That’s not the situation that faces us in New York 23, however. There, the GOP establishment’s nominee for Congress, Dede Scozzafava, is pro-choice and anti-marriage; she supported the failing Obama stimulus, and she has waffled on whether she would back Big Labor’s demand for “card check.”

[...]

Hoffman is a true Reagan conservative. He accepted the Conservative Party’s nomination because he was denied the chance to make his case to the party’s grass-roots voters. If elected, he would caucus with the Republicans. He’d provide unquestionably stronger support for genuine GOP principles than Scozzafava — based on her own liberal record — would provide.

And Rep. Michelle Bachmann:

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) became the first Republican member of Congress to publicly support Conservative Doug Hoffman over the GOP nominee Dede Scozzafava in the upcoming New York special election.

Want more? How about Sarah Palin.

The votes of every member of Congress affect every American, so it’s important for all of us to pay attention to this important Congressional campaign in upstate New York. I am very pleased to announce my support for Doug Hoffman in his fight to be the next Representative from New York’s 23rd Congressional district. It’s my honor to endorse Doug and to do what I can to help him win, including having my political action committee, SarahPAC, donate to his campaign the maximum contribution allowed by law.

Our nation is at a crossroads, and this is once again a “time for choosing.”

The support has also come in financially.

Over the past week, New York House special election candidate Doug Hoffman has doubled the amount of donations he has received for his unusually strong third-party campaign.

Hoffman, the Conservative Party nominee in the Nov. 3 contest for the 23rd District seat, disclosed just more than $300,000 in total receipts in his pre-general election fundraising report, which covers the beginning of the race through Oct. 14. That included a $102,000 loan that Hoffman, an accountant and first-time candidate, made to his campaign from his own funds.

But Hoffman’s campaign also said that since Oct. 14, the candidate — who is in a tight three-way race to fill the seat Republican Rep. John M. McHugh vacated to become secretary of the Army — raised more than $200,000 online.

While this race is coming down to the November 3rd wire, it is far from over.

Hoffman’s campaign website and on Twitter — @dougforcongress

I received this letter from my representative, Adam Putnam, on ACORN and HR 3571

Yesterday, I became an original cosponsor of H.R. 3571, the Defund ACORN Act. This legislation would stop all funding to the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN). In addition, the Senate also voted to deny any funding to ACORN provided under the Fiscal Year 2010 Department of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Appropriations Act. ACORN would have been eligible for millions of dollars in additional taxpayer funds had the amendment not passed.

As you are well aware, ACORN has a long history of allegations surrounding their abuse of taxpayer funds through inappropriate and illegal political activities. Most recently, disturbing videos emerged showing ACORN employees providing individuals with guidance on how to best hide illegal activities from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and law enforcement.

There is simply no place in our federal budget for funding of political activists and organizations that provide illegal services. ACORN — and any other organization providing these “services” — should be denied all federal funding.

While in July 31, 2008, I called on House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) to hold immediate hearings to investigate evidence that ACORN may be using public funds inappropriately, and again in October 2008, requesting that Chairman Frank hold hearings on alleged abuses of taxpayer dollars by ACORN due to the significant funding ACORN and it’s affiliates receive from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and HUD, he has yet to hold such a hearing.

Taxpayer funds should only be used for programs that provide important services to beneficiaries, transparency to taxpayers, and the appropriate oversight mechanisms to the public and Congress. We should have no tolerance for spending hard earned taxpayer money on groups and entities like ACORN that promote and carry out illegal activities, while politicizing government programs.

This group should have been defunded long ago and I am hopeful that any access to federal funds will stop immediately through either the passage of H.R. 3571 or direct action by the Administration.

I will continue to keep you updated on the progress of this important issue.

Where does your Rep. stand on HR 3571? Report what you find out here in the comments.

Joe Wilson is the Representative from South Carolina’s 2nd Congressional district. He has been in that seat since the death of Floyd Spence. Working to elect Floyd Spence was my first active involvement in politics. Later, as a County Party Chairman and State Committeeman, I met and got to know Joe, if only a little.

My impression is that Joe Wilson is a passionate conservative politician, and typically very measured and aware of what he says. On occasion, the passionate side overcomes the measured. I believe that is what happened last night.

“I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the president’s remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health-care bill,” Wilson said in a statement. “While I disagree with the president’s statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable.”

Wilson shouted “you lie” at a point in the speech when Obama said his plan to extend insurance coverage “would not apply to those who are here illegally.”

Last night on Twitter, this was getting more attention than the President’s speech. My question, in the poll over on the right, is, “What do you think about Rep. Joe Wilson’s Outburst?”

Vote, and leave any additional thoughts here in the comments.

Living in government housing used to be limited to military personnel (I still remember visiting my uncle and his family at Ft. Dix) and, what we used to call, “the projects”. Not anymore.

I bet you thought that if you bought a house, you actually own it and can, with reasonable exceptions, do with it what you want. You probably think that if you want to live in a log cabin, with wood stoves that belch smoke into the air for heat, and an old washer and dryer that don’t have those little EnergyStar stickers on them you can because it’s your life and your property. You paid for it with money you earned with the sweat of your brow and what the heck is America anyhow if a body can’t live in the home they want furnished with the appliances they want?

Ah, silly you. You didn’t reckon on the Democratic Party’s desire to control every minuscule aspect of your life.

Jimmie Bise’s post is a sobering and disturbing look at just one section of passed-without-reading Waxman-Markey mess. It’s section 304, and it says, in part:

(A) preparation, and public disclosure of the label through filing with tax and title records at the time of–

(i) a building audit conducted with support from Federal or State funds;

(ii) a building energy-efficiency retrofit conducted in response to such an audit;

(iii) a final inspection of major renovations or additions made to a building in accordance with a building permit issued by a local government entity;

(iv) a sale that is recorded for title and tax purposes consistent with paragraph (8);

(v) a new lien recorded on the property for more than a set percentage of the assessed value of the property, if that lien reflects public financial assistance for energy-related improvements to that building; or

(vi) a change in ownership or operation of the building for purposes of utility billing; or

(B) other appropriate means.

As Bise notes, “Pay close attention to (iii), (iv), and (vi) because those hit you right where you live.” You need to read his whole post. If your head doesn’t explode (I make no guarantees) head over to this post by Stephen Spruiell & Kevin Williamson and read about 49 other little tidbits of nanny state delight, including:

43. Waxman-Markey also enables Obama to indulge his persistent desire to use the tax code to transfer wealth from people who pay taxes to people who don’t — i.e., from likely Republican voters to likely Obama voters. The bill “amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow certain low income taxpayers a refundable energy tax credit to compensate such taxpayers for reductions in their purchasing power, as identified and calculated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), resulting from regulation of GHGs (greenhouse gases).”

44. Not only will Waxman-Markey slip more redistribution into the tax code, it will establish a new monthly welfare check. It will create an “Energy Refund Program” that will “give low-income households a monthly cash energy refund equal to the estimated loss in purchasing power resulting from this Act.”

45. Another new class of government dependents will be created by Waxman-Markey: Americans put out of work by Waxman-Markey. The bill establishes a program to distribute “climate change adjustment assistance to adversely affected workers.”

The bottom line is you are going to have less (much less) on your bottom line. Beyond that you are going to have less (much less) personal freedom and rights.

It’s passed in the House. We can not allow it to move forward in the Senate. The amount of damage this bill can do between now and 2010/2012 is mind-boggling. Make no mistake, this bill will do nothing to stop “climate change” (how can you fix a hoax?), but will do plenty to stop prosperity and replace capitalism with government redistribution of wealth.

If this doesn’t scare you, you’re just not paying attention.

It was supposed to be a bill to address the “problem” of “climate change(?)”. That wasn’t flying, so they labeled it a jobs bill. Right. What it really is, is an economy killer.

This bill, named for Democrats Henry A. Waxman of California and Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, would have adverse and lingering consequences for every American. It would raise the cost of electricity for our homes, fuel for our cars and the energy that produces our manufacturing jobs, with little or no environmental benefit. Further, independent experts estimate it would cost Americans more than $2 trillion in a little more than eight years.

Just think about the ways this will impact the economy. Energy is used at every step of every thing we make, buy, and consume. Not only will we be impacted directly by higher gas and utility prices, but indirectly on every single thing we do or purchase.

Let’s go to the grocery store. Want to buy a loaf of bread? The farmer growing the wheat will be paying more to plant, grow, and harvest that wheat. It’s going to cost more to ship and process it into flour. Add a few more cents when the flour is made into bread, packaged, shipped to the stores, and don’t forget the additional costs to the grocery store just to keep the lights on and the doors open.

You can do that exercise with every single product in your shopping cart.

Read this editorial as well.

This bill, if allowed to pass in the Senate, will cost all of us. A lot. Don’t wait, contact your senator and tell them to vote no!

(h/t pomalom via twitter)

I know that there is still a fight that can be won in the Senate. Let’s pray it happens, because if Crap & Tax is signed into law we are all seriously screwed. Here are my thoughts now. I may have more when I calm down some.

• The church of Global Warming has convinced 219 U.S. Representatives that they can legislate temperature. News Flash – you can’t.
• They are trying to sell this as a jobs bill. That’s true. The jobs are in India and China.
• If you believe this bill is a good idea you probably believe the Reps who voted for it read it. Evelyn Wood couldn’t have read this bill/amendment in the time they had.
• There are eight Republicans who voted for this farce. They need to go. Not a dime for their campaigns, not a vote for their reelection, not a good word for any of them. Let them know what you think of their legislative proctological exam. They are:
  • Mary Bono Mack (California’s 45th district)
  • Michael Castle (Delaware’s at-large)
  • Mark Kirk (Illinois’ 10th district)
  • Leonard Lance (New Jersey’s 7th district)
  • Frank LoBiondo (New Jersey’s 2nd district)
  • John McHugh (New York’s 23rd district)
  • Dave Reichert (Washington’s 8th district)
  • Chris Smith (New Jersey’s 4th district)
  • (h/t to Steveegg for the names and links.)
• Oh yeah, RNC? No money for you either.

I’m about to fall asleep at the keyboard. More later.

Via Michelle Malkin, AFP has a list of undecided and leaning representatives along with their contact information.

Here are the Republicans you should call:

Lean Yes
Castle, Michael – Delaware
Ehlers, Vernon – Michigan
Lance, Leonard – New Jersey
McHugh, John – New York
Reichert, Dave – Washington

Undecided
Buchanan, Vern – Florida
Kirk, Mark – Illinois
Lobiondo, Frank – New Jersey
Petri, Thomas – Wisconsin
Smith, Chris – New Jersey

Lean No
Fortenberry, Jeffrey – Nebraska
Frelinghuysen, Rod – New Jersey
Gerlach, Jim – Pennsylvania
Johnson, Timothy – Illinois

My rep is Adam Putnam. I am sure he is a no, but I’ll be calling his offices at 9:00 urging him to try to persuade others.