Article V – The Remedy or Catastrophe?

Flag with listing the 50 states within the red and white stripesJoin us next Thursday, March 26 at 7:00pm at Lorain Community College (College Center near Starbucks and the cafeteria) for a discussion on the proposed Article V Convention, also known as the Convention of States. This idea was fleshed out in Mark Levin’s “The Liberty Amendments” and dozens of states have since moved forward with proposals for an Article V Convention.

Everyone knows the U.S. Constitution allows for amendments; there are twenty-seven amendments already.  But we are witnessing one of the most egregious power-grabs in our 237 year history.

One of the more controversial ways to reign in this federal usurpation of state’s rights is the most practical and, to some, the most logical.  More importantly the framers of the U.S. Constitution provided us with just the thing, the remedy, in the main body of the Constitution:
“ARTICLE V: The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

The Framers knew that there probably would come a time during the American “experiment” that the federal government would try to stretch itself beyond the limits they set for it and encroach more and more into the province of the States.  Article V was their best remedy for that future probability.   Continue reading

Putting Growth First

line graph showing real income for top 10% and bottom 90% are together before 1970, but separate afterwards.

Real Income Growth from 1948-2012

(This post was edited to correct the 10% income level and to make more clear that the Federal Reserve looks at rising wages as a bad thing.)

On Thursday March 12, Rich Lowrie and Jack Boyle presented negative economic trends and possible solutions through their new advocacy group Put Growth First. More important than federal spending, tax rates, and even government benefits, Lowrie argues that monetary policies created in the 1970’s has led to flat real income growth over the last forty years.

Before making the argument, Lowrie would like conservatives to correctly frame the argument. Economic stagnation in this country is not due to “the 47%” that collect benefits, he claims. The leaked Romney video in 2012 unfortunately alluded to this argument and it subsequently damaged his campaign. The correct division between the prosperous and unprosperous is at the top 10% income level, or those making above $254,000. As conservatives, we should be arguing for the “Striving Majority” that make up the bottom 90% of income earners.

When I think about the bottom 90%, I think… “That’s everybody I know!” It joins the middle class with those in poverty as all of us have seen our incomes and buying power stagnate.When you look at the graph that Put Growth First provides on their website showing real income growth for the top 10% and the bottom 90% since 1910, you can see exactly what Lowrie is talking about. (And here is the YouTube video detailing this graph and his arguments.) Continue reading

Public forum on high stakes testing, March 4

From the Wednesday, February 25, 2015, North Ridgeville Press:

“A public forum on standardized testing is slated for March 4 at the North Ridgeville Branch of the Lorain Public Library, 35700 Bainbridge Road.

According to an event posted on Facebook, “Join a growing group of concerned parents, teachers and administrators for an informational forum to discuss the issues facing our schools and our children with the current standardized testing curriculum. Please consider joining us to learn about the high stakes PARCC testing, the 3rd Grade Guarantee and your rights regarding these tests. Speakers will be available to answer your questions.”


“The Cancer of Multiculturalism”

by Walt Williams

President Obama’s vision is that of a man brainwashed through an academic vision of multiculturalism, in which American exceptionalism has no place. It’s a vision that has been shaped by a longtime association with people who hate our country, people such as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Weather Underground leader and Pentagon bomber William Ayers and Ayers’ onetime fugitive wife, Bernardine Dohrn. A vision that sees a moral equivalency between what Christians did centuries ago and today’s Islamic savagery is quite prevalent in academia. It’s part of what’s worshipped on most college campuses as diversity and multiculturalism.
Read full article here:

HCC is a State-Based Alternative to Obamacare in Ohio

HCC LogoBelow is a great article explaining the Health Care Compact – HCC – (HB 34) introduced in Ohio by State Rep. Wes Retherford & State Rep. Terry Boose.
Please call or email your State Rep (Click Here) and ask them to support true healthcare freedom in Ohio by supporting HB 34 – the Health Care Compact.

From The Sidney Post –

If Ohio likes its Obamacare, it can keep its Obamacare – but it won’t have to if a group of state lawmakers have their way.

State Rep. Wes Retherford, Hamilton – House District 51, and Rep. Terry Boose, Norwalk – House District 57, have introduced legislation that would give Ohio greater control over federal health care programs. It’s called the Health Care Compact, and it would allow Columbus to regulate health care and provide an alternative to Obamacare.

“We’ve begun to see with Obamacare and the Veterans Administration debacles that a centralized health care system run out of Washington is destined to fail. States should be free to come up with the approach that best reflects the needs and wants of its citizens,” Retherford said. “By transferring decision-making authority, responsibility and control of federal health care funding from Washington, D.C. to Columbus, the Health Care Compact gives Ohio the option to choose a different health insurance system than Obamacare, one that actually works to meet our families’ needs.

“The Health Care Compact will shield Ohio citizens and businesses from the burdensome regulations of Obamacare, and protect our seniors from the $700 billion dollars that Obamacare cuts from Medicare to pay for Medicaid expansion and insurance subsidies,” he said.

The move to give states more say-so over health care policy is gaining momentum. The Health Care Compact has been approved by nine states — Indiana, Continue reading

Ohio House Unanimous AGAINST Common Core

On February 11, the Ohio House of Representatives voted unanimously for HB7, a bill that makes a student’s PARCC score independent from his or her pass/fail consideration. PARCC is a college readiness test that is utilizing Common Core standards, and is being implemented in this month of February to Ohio students. Parents and students have the choice to “opt-out” of the testing, and more have been making this choice as people have become increasingly frustrated with the over-testing of our students. recently posted an article on the increasing number of opt-outs, and more information on the “opt-out” procedure can be found on the Ohioans Against Common Core website.

In case you missed it, Elyria High School teacher Stacie Starr won a Top Teacher Award and then promptly announced her resignation due to Common Core.  Continue reading

What Net Neutrality Will Mean

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai has been sounding the alarm regarding the expected decision in favor of Net Neutrality. (From Breitbart, and from The Verge) The plan is for the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) to treat broadband service as a public utility like network television and radio, thereby requiring these internet companies to prove they are allowing equal and fair access to all websites. There has been no accusation or proof that internet companies are changing service speeds depending on the content, only a supposition that they will do so unless supervised by an impartial external entity… like the FCC.

Continue reading