Design: Copyright © 2013 Jason Stomps; CompareMyCandidates.com

Equal Rights. It’s what we all deserve. Why should the government control any part of our personal lives?

Enjoy some of the highlights from each of the candidates below as they responded to real questions from real people at the debate surrounding real issues like jobs and the economy, equality, civil liberties, the drug war, foreign policy, and the two-party system. Also, don’t forget to vote in our poll on who won the debate after the highlights!

Gary Johnson (L) – @GovGaryJohnson

The country is in really deep trouble. We should not bomb Iran.

Marriage equality is a constitutionally guaranteed right on par with civil rights.

Let’s repeal the Patriot Act.

I would have never signed the NDAA.

I promise to submit a balanced budget to Congress in the year 2012. That’s a 1.4 trillion dollar reduction in federal spending.

I’m the only candidate who wants to eliminate the income tax, the corporate tax, abolish the IRS, and replace them with a Fair Tax.

In no category is marijuana more dangerous than alcohol and yet we are arresting 1.8 million people a year on drug related crime.

The operative word here is ‘defense’ and not ‘offense’ and nation building.

We have to stop with the drone strikes!

Did we not learn anything from Afghanistan where we funded Osama Bin Laden?

We should have gotten out of Afghanistan 11 years ago.

If we bomb Iran, we’re going to end up with 100 million more enemies that this country wouldn’t have otherwise had.

(Regarding an ACLU Liberty rating scale) Mitt Romney has 0 Liberty Torches out of 24 and Gary Johnson had 21 Liberty Torches out of 24.

The root of all evil are politicians that beat their chest to get elected or reelected.

Let’s make it as easy as possible for someone that wants to come into this country to work to get a Visa… so applicable taxes get paid.

Wasting your vote is for voting for someone you don’t believe in. That’s wasting your vote! I’m asking everyone here to waste their vote on me!

Jill Stein (G) – @jillstein2012

Marijuana is a substance that is dangerous because it is illegal; it’s not illegal because it is dangerous.

We need to cut the budget, bring the troops home, and end the use of drones and not bring them home.

It’s time to make higher public education free, as it should be.

[The NDAA] is unallowable and a basic defense against American liberty and it should be repealed. And while we’re at it, we should also repeal the president’s interpretation of the Military Use Act that said assassinations are a power of the President.

We need to repeal the Patrio Act and we need to stop the persecution of whistle blowers who blow the whistle on crimes committed by our government.

Money is not speech and corporations are not people.

There is a choice in this election – to take back democracy.

Virgil Goode (C) – @VirgilGoode

I am an advocate of a balanced budget within the next 10 years.

This won’t sit well with many of you here but I am not for the legalization of marijuana.

I am not familiarizing drugs. If you want that, don’t vote for me, vote for one of them.

We can’t afford more federally subsidized student loans and we can’t afford more Pell Grants. We’ve got to balance the budget and cut the debt.

One sentence answer: If I was President I would have vetoed NDAA.

If we don’t adopt term limits, we are going to always have a congress that is worried about the next election, not what’s best for the people.

Four major things: Balanced budget now, jobs for American citizens first, political action committees eliminated and individual donations only, and term limits.

Rocky Anderson (J) – @RockyAnderson

Hemp? Really? Why is that illegal, except for those with a money interest? We need to legalize industrial hemp now!

First, no wars of aggression.

We cannot afford to NOT provide a quality education for the young people in this country.

We are on the road to totalitarianism and that is not an exaggeration.

It’s time that we have federal protection for members of our LGBT community.

We know that both of these candidates are bought and paid for.

View video highlights from Ora.tv

Compare Gary Johnson’s Issue Stances to those of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney

Sadly, the Michigan GOP has pulled out every dirty trick in the book to keep Governor Johnson off the ballot in Michigan. Despite this, we are not going to be shut out and you will be able to vote for Gary Johnson as as write-in candidate.

There is usually little room on the ballots to write-in a candidate’s name, so while “Gary Johnson” and “James P. Gray” have both turned in the neccessary paperwork, your vote should be counted by writing in “Gary Johnson, James P. Gray” as well as checking off on your ballot that you are voting for a write-in candidate.

Depending on how your ballot looks, this may be a circle that needs to be filled in, a line that should be connected, or something else. It will be consistant with the rest of your ballot.

Will writing in Gary Johnson spoil my ballot?

Absolutely not, we have gotten no indication that doing so would spoil your ballot. There were issues raised with this during the 2008 presidential primaries, however the Secretary of State has said that their office will count write-in votes for president as long as the person is a registered write-in candidate.

What do I have to do to make sure my ballot is counted?

Indicate on the ballot that you are voting for a write-in candiate for president and write “Gary Johnson”

Why do I have to write-in Gary Johnson? Why isn’t he on the ballot?

After the Secretary of State refused to remove Governor Johnson and Herman Cain from the 2012 Republican primary ballot, she informed us that the state’s “sore loser” law applied, and that governor Johnson would be ineligeable for the general election ballot. Despite a series of lawsuits in US federal court, we have been unable to change this.

If I have to write-in Gary Johnson, why wouldn’t I just write in Ron Paul?

The only write-in votes that will be counted are those that are for candidtes who filed the affidavits with the state of Michigan, basically if your candidate didn’t do the paperwork your vote for them will not count. We also have to remember that we don’t have a single election in this country, we have thousands of small local, precinct level elections happening at the same time. Those ballots are checked at the precinct level, so if you are thinking that maybe you can make a statement by writing in Ron Paul, the only person who is going to see it is a poll worker in your city or township, who will not count or record the vote. The total number of write-in votes for any candidate, including Ron Paul, who are not declared candidates, will not be counted. Votes for Gary Johnson however, will be counted and we will have a state-wide total once all the ballots are overlooked.

Will the campaign have stickers that voters can place on their ballots?

No, in Michigan you are not allowed anything with the candidates name on it once you are inside the polling location and write-in stickers are not legal and will not be accepted. To vote for Gary Johnson, you must write-in “Gary Johnson, James P. Gray”. Other states allow stickers, Michigan is not one of them.

If I vote straight ticket libertarian, will I still have to write-in Gary Johnson?

Yes! Even if you vote straight ticket Libertarian party, since there is no slot for the Libertarian Party under the presidential candidates, no vote for president will be counted unless you write in “Gary Johnson, James P. Gray”

Do I need to write in Governor Johnson and Judge Gray?

While we have been told that votes for “Gary Johnson” will count, we officially recommend writing in “Gary Johnson and James P. Gray”. See this example from the Michigan Libertarian Party:

Example of how to write-in Gary Johnson and James P. Gray

How to Register to Vote in Michigan

To register to vote, applicants must be at least 18 years old by Election Day and be U.S. citizens. Applicants must also be residents of Michigan and of the city or township in which they wish to register.

Voters may register by mail, at their county, city or township clerk’s office, or by visiting any Secretary of State office. The mail-in form is available atwww.Michigan.gov/elections. First-time voters who register by mail must vote in person in their first election, unless they hand-deliver the application to their local clerk, are 60 years old or older, are disabled or are eligible to vote under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.

To check their registration status, residents may visit the Michigan Voter Information Center at www.Michigan.gov/vote. On the website, residents can view a sample ballot, find their polling location, learn about absentee voting, get information on Michigan’s voter ID laws and view contact information for their local clerk.

The polls will be open on Election Day from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Voters who qualify may choose to cast an absentee ballot. As a registered voter, you may obtain an absentee ballot if you are:

• age 60 or older.
• physically unable to attend the polls without the assistance of another.
• expecting to be absent from the community in which you are registered for the entire time the polls will be open on Election Day.
• in jail awaiting arraignment or trial.
• unable to attend the polls due to religious reasons.
• appointed to work as an election inspector in a precinct outside of your precinct of residence.

Those who wish to receive their absentee ballot by mail must submit their application by 2 p.m. Saturday, Nov. 3. Absentee ballots can be obtained in person anytime through 4 p.m. Monday, Nov. 5. Voters who request an absentee ballot in person on Monday, Nov. 5 must fill out the ballot in the clerk’s office. Emergency absentee ballots are available under certain conditions through 4 p.m. on Election Day.

As a reminder, voters will be asked to provide identification when at the polls on Election Day. They will be asked to present valid photo ID, such as a Michigan driver’s license or identification card. Anyone who does not have an acceptable form of photo ID or failed to bring it with them to the polls can still vote. They will be required to sign a brief affidavit stating that they’re not in possession of photo ID. Their ballots will be included with all others and counted on Election Day.

Voters who don’t have a Michigan driver’s license or identification card can show the following forms of photo ID, as long as they are current:

• Driver’s license or personal identification card issued by another state.
• Federal or state government-issued photo identification.
• U.S. passport.
• Military identification card with photo.
• Student identification with photo from a high school or an accredited institution of higher education, such as a college or university.
• Tribal identification card with photo.

Additional election information can be found at www.Michigan.gov/elections.

See you at the polls!

U Didn’t Build That by MC ‘Bama

“Mitt Romney” — A Bad Lip Reading Soundbite

The Heritage Foundation, a pro-conservative think tank that whose policies are “based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, and individual freedom,” published an article Monday morning declaring “Assange should face justice in Sweden,” adding he is “dodging sex crime charges against him in Sweden.” However, Assange has yet to be charged with any sexual assault related crimes. In fact, many are speculating these “charges” are merely a politically-motivated move to ship Assanage to the U.S. where he could face execution.

According to a 2010 House floor speech by pro-liberty congressman Ron Paul, Julian Assange should not be prosecuted for publishing classified documents that he did not steal,” adding “why shouldn’t the Washington Post and New York Times and others who have also published these documents be prosecuted?”

Dr. Larry Arnn, who sits on the board of directors of The Heritage Foundation and is the president of Hillsdale College, stated, “Hillsdale College was founded 164 years ago on the idea that learning is the surest support of liberty.” As a supporter of liberty and a graduate of Hillsdale College, I agree. However, is there some superficial cap on “learning” in which it becomes “Anti-Americanism?”

While The Heritage Foundation claims “Wikileaks placed American lives in jeopardy and that’s just NOT okay,” it seems that the only life in danger is that of Mr. Assange himself.

In a free society we’re supposed to know the truth. In a society where truth becomes treason, then we’re in big trouble. And now, people who are revealing the truth are getting into trouble for it.

- Ron Paul

Do you support whistle blowers like Julian Assange or should they face the death penalty for exposing the truth?

If approved, Proposal 2 would “decriminalize the possession, control, use, or gift of marijuana” (see full text below the poll). Instead of being thrown in jail, one would only pay a maximum fine of $100.00, if charged. City Attorney Catherine Mish explained that “since the fines were so small… the change could lead to little or no enforcement at all.”

A Pro-Cannabis group called Decriminalize GR managed to obtain over 10,000 signatures to get the proposal past, much more than the ~6,500 required (more specifically, 5% of the population). The group included such wording in the proposal that would prohibit local law enforcement from reporting infractions to State and Federal law enforcement. The language also “[provides] an affirmative defense to prosecution for defendants intending to use marijuana to relieve pain, disability, or discomfort,” effectively acknowledging the use of cannabis for medical purposes.

The measure is estimated to save taxpayers $2.5 million per year, reduce the rate of arrests among youths, and will free up local police to focus on crime prevention and law enforcement.

PROPOSAL 2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO TITLE XVIII (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, CONCERNING THE DECRIMINALIZATION OF MARIJUANA

A proposal to decriminalize possession, control, use, or gift of marijuana, through a Charter amendment prohibiting police from reporting same to law enforcement authorities other than the City Attorney; prohibiting the City Attorney from referring same to other law enforcement authorities for prosecution; prohibiting City prosecution except as civil infractions enforced by appearance tickets with a maximum fine of $100.00 and no incarceration; waiving fines if a physician, practitioner or other qualified health professional recommends the defendant use marijuana; and providing an affirmative defense to prosecution for defendants intending to use marijuana to relieve pain, disability, or discomfort.

The stakes in November could not be higher. On Debbie Stabenow’s watch, we’ve seen the United States Senate go three years without passing a budget. Senator Stabenow has served as a rubber stamp for President Obama’s disastrous agenda. She has driven up record deficits, while passing on a legacy of debt to our children and grandchildren.

Today, our party stands united behind our nominee, Pete Hoekstra. Clark Durant, Randy Hekman and Gary Glenn ran admirable campaigns, and we applaud their efforts, and the efforts of their volunteers. Thank you for your hard work to advance the cause. Together, we will do what needs to be done: We will defeat Debbie Stabenow, and elect Pete Hoekstra as Michigan’s next U.S. Senator.

Hoekstra goes up against Debbie Stabenow in the general elections this Novemeber. Compare the candidates in our web app now: https://vote.comparemycandidates.com

While Durant amassed a large number of supporters in the final weeks of the campaign, his backing by candidate Gary Glenn wasn’t quite enough to win him the race. View the full results of the primary below:

Republican Party – Michigan August Primary Results – U.S. Senate

Compare the Candidates in our new Web App! Compare Pete Hoekstra

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Gary Glenn late Thursday night announced that he is withdrawing from the August 7th Republican primary contest and endorsing Detroit charter school executive Clark Durant.

Glenn’s name will remain on the primary ballot, but he says he will spend the remaining weeks of the campaign urging his TEA Party-based grassroots organization to mobilize for Durant instead.

“To help save our country from the brink of bankruptcy, our highest priority must be defeating big-spending liberals like Debbie Stabenow,” Glenn said. “I’ve grown more convinced over the course of this campaign that because of the obvious vulnerability of his own big-bailout, big-debt, big-spending record, nine-term Congressman Pete Hoekstra can’t beat Stabenow.”

“Since Pete Hoekstra can’t beat Debbie Stabenow,” Glenn said, “my sense of duty requires me to step aside and assist the conservative candidate whose broad and growing range of support from all corners, financially and otherwise, makes him clearly more likely to defeat Congressman Hoekstra in August so we have a chance to defeat Sen. Stabenow in November. That’s clearly Clark Durant,” Glenn said.

Compare the U.S. Senate Candidates in our New Web App!

“Clark Durant has a lifelong history of advancing the conservative, Constitutional, limited government principles on which our nation was founded, from Hillsdale College to the Reagan White House to helping empower and equip inner-city students at Cornerstone Schools in Detroit to chase their own piece of the American dream,” Glenn said.

Because of the relationships he has developed with Detroit pastors and parents over 20 years of administering Cornerstone Schools, Durant will win substantially more support in Detroit than would Hoekstra or any other typical GOP establishment candidate, Glenn said.

Durant’s ability to take voters out of Stabenow’s own base will be a key factor in his ability to win the November general election, Glenn said.

Hoekstra, on the other hand, is vulnerable — because of his voting record — to losing support to Stabenow even among otherwise traditionally Republican and even conservative voters, he said.

“Unthinkable as it is, one of the most liberal senators in America could actually outflank Pete Hoekstra on the right, threatening to win votes out of our own base on both high-profile spending and cultural issues,” Glenn said.

Glenn cited Hoekstra’s vote for the $850 billion Wall Street bailout, which Stabenow voted against.

Compare the Candidates in our new Web App! Compare Pete Hoekstra

“On the best known big-spending bailout vote of the last decade, one of the most liberal senators in America could legitimately run TV ads portraying herself as more conservative, more responsible with our tax dollars, than the Republican nominee, if that nominee is Pete Hoekstra,” Glenn said.

“If a liberal Democrat can take votes out of and prevent the Republican candidate from securing his own base, he cannot win,” Glenn said.

Glenn cited other elements of Hoekstra’s voting record he said will suppress essential support for Hoekstra’s candidacy among grassroots conservatives who do the work of persuading and turning out the vote on election day, specifically Hoekstra’s votes:

* For the $192 billion supplemental stimulus bill.

* For earmarks like the $223 million Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska.

* Five times to raise the federal debt ceiling, the last time to $11 trillion.

* For the Medicare prescription drug benefit, projected to leave a $15 trillion unfunded liability on future generations of American taxpayers.

Glenn also cited Hoekstra’s past campaign endorsements and funding by Jimmy Hoffa, Jr., and the Teamsters, Hoekstra’s past and current opposition to state and national Right to Work laws, depending on which office he was pursuing at the time.

He also cited Hoekstra’s joining Stabenow and then-Sen. Barack Obama in sponsoring a federal mandate that, had it passed, would have forced every state and local government in America to unionize its police, fire fighters, and paramedics.

Compare the Candidates in our new Web App! Compare Debbie Stabenow

That bill would have given government employee union officials even more political power and money, he said, “funneling tens if not hundreds of millions more dues dollars into the pockets of AFSCME, SEIU, and Teamster union officials.”

Michigan Truth Squad, a group of current and former journalists, vetted Glenn’s news release criticizing Hoekstra’s support for that bill and found it “entirely accurate.” http://michigantruthsquad.com/gary-glenn-for-u-s-senate-campaign-press-release/

“That’s why Congressman Hoekstra is dodging debates, because he doesn’t want his big-bailout, big-debt, big-spending record further exposed,” Glenn said.  “I’m confident Clark and those supporting him have the resources necessary to make sure voters are informed even fi Hoekstra continues to refuse to debate.”

Glenn said major national conservative organizations and political leaders who have remained neutral in the race as long as he and Durant were both actively contesting for the GOP nomination will — now that they’ve joined forces — enter the race on Durant’s behalf.  He said those announcements will start next week.

In February, Glenn won the endorsement of Michigan 4 Conservative Senate, a statewide coalition of over 40 local TEA Party organizations that helped him gather more signatures than any other candidate on the nominating petitions required to appear on the August 7th ballot.

But Durant was the coalition’s second choice and won the support of several local TEA Party groups not affiliated with the statewide group, a fact Glenn said will make it easier to unify TEA Party activists statewide behind Durant’s candidacy.

Learn more about Clark Durant in our New Web App!

(Originally from the Gary Glenn for U.S. Senate campaign team)

Symbolic votes like this are not uncommon in any Congress and in fact there is a long tradition of such votes on both sides of the aisle to position a particular party either for or against an issue and to make the opposing side go on record. These votes are very common during an election year when member votes can be used against them in a campaign by their opponents.

The GOP’s latest vote came in response to the Supreme Court’s June 28 ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act. Party leaders have been on record opposing the Act since before it was signed into law and they wanted to show their supporters who deeply oppose the law that they were still doing what they could to repeal it.

The Affordable Care Act, like many policies in our current political environment, is loved by just about half the country and hated by the other half. This partisan take on the law allows the opponents of the law to continue to attack it and try to repeal it without much consequence. Those who support the law tend to be Democrats and will not vote for the GOP and those who oppose the law want it repealed. For the GOP, the repeal votes are a way to keep their base energized and to raise campaign funds. It matters not what the pundits or press say about the futility of taking these votes, and in fact it doesn’t matter that the law will not be repealed. The vote is a statement of encouragement to the base that is needed to turn out to vote when the polls open in November and to open their checkbooks before then. This works the other way as well. Many Democrats vilify the GOP for taking these votes and challenge them to move on, but the votes allow these same Democrats to energize their base and raise money by pointing out that the GOP is trying to get rid of the President’s signature achievement.

The repeal votes are also a way to put vulnerable Democrats who represent swing or conservative districts on record. For these Democrats, who desperately want to move past Obamacare, making them choose sides is a no-win proposition. Should they vote to repeal, their party and their base of voters will be angry and turned off. Should they vote against repeal, the GOP will accuse them of putting party over their constituents and many will not survive.

When the latest repeal vote was taken on July 11, 2012, 5 Democrats joined the GOP in their effort to repeal the law.

Finally, there is the argument that many in the GOP honestly believe the law is bad for the country and feel it is their duty to repeal it. Whatever the reason, the battle over Obamacare will most likely continue.

In order to promote innovation and the economic interests of the United States, Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX) proposed the Intellectual Property Attaché Act (IPAA). IPAA, in its current form, would remove the Attaché Program from within the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and place it directly within the Commerce Department. It would also create an Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property who would be appointed by the President and would oversee the implementation of the Attaché Program.

First, it is important to understand the structure of the Commerce Department in order to properly understand what IPAA seeks to accomplish. The Commerce Department, headed by the Secretary of Commerce, is a Cabinet-level department which seeks to promote job creation, economic growth, and improved standards of living. As part of this goal, the Commerce Department regulates intellectual property rights through the USPTO. In order to promote intellectual property protection and enforcement around the world, the USPTO established the Overseas Intellectual Property Rights Attaché Program.

What IPAA would do is remove the layer of the USPTO. Instead of the USPTO coordinating and implementing the Attaché Program, the Secretary of Commerce would establish the program and appoint the attachés. IPAA would also require the creation of an Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property. The Assistant Secretary would be appointed by the President and be responsible for overseeing the Attaché Program. Other responsibilities would include “the management of coordination, advocacy, training, and capacity building in other countries.” Finally, the Assistant Secretary would report directly to the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property.

This is not the first time that Congress attempted to place the Attaché Program directly within the Commerce Department. In 2011, H.R. 3261 was introduced by the same Congressman, Lamar Smith. Known as the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), it included a wide range of policy changes in order to combat piracy on the internet. The last change that SOPA included was Section 205: Defending Intellectual Property Rights Abroad. The language in Section 205 is very similar to the language contained in IPAA. For example, Section 205 required the Secretary of Commerce to ensure that intellectual property rights were vigorously enforced around the world. To accomplish this goal, the Secretary was granted the power to appoint multiple attachés and assign them to geographic regions determined by the Secretary of State. Similar to IPPA, the objective of the attachés was to work with other countries to develop, protect, and enforce United States intellectual property rights.

This version of the Attaché Program was not enacted, however, because SOPA never moved forward in the House – largely because of strong public opposition to the Act. The opposition to SOPA was mainly directed at other parts of the Act and not necessarily Section 205. Generally speaking, critics of SOPA argued that it would give too much power to the government in enforcing intellectual property rights. A main criticism was that internet service providers (ISPs) would be required to shut-down websites if there was any allegation of infringement. If they failed to do so, stiff penalties would be levied against the ISP. Moreover, the ISPs would be granted immunity if they erroneously blocked a website because of a reasonable belief that it contained infringing material. Critics argued that this immunity, coupled with large penalties for allowing infringing work, would result in ISPs over-zealously patrolling content. They argued that ISPs would end up blocking legitimate websites in order to steer clear of any conflicts with the law, and thus acting to censor the internet.

IPAA, however, would not necessarily give the government powers similar to those contained in SOPA. There is no language in IPAA that would allow the government to obtain court orders to block websites, or to force ISPs to shut websites down. Moreover, there is no mention of immunity for ISPs if they shut a website down because they reasonably believed that it contained infringing material. Alternatively, IPAA attempts to re-organize an intellectual property enforcement arm of the Commerce Department that has already been in existence since 2006.

On the other hand, an argument could be made that this is more than a mere re-organization. Language in the Act could indicate that this would expand the power of the government. There are no specific guidelines for what the attachés are required to advocate for, nor are there limits upon their role. IPAA also does not limit the number of attachés that the Secretary of Commerce can appoint, if certain conditions are met.[1] Allowing the Secretary of Commerce to appoint an army attachés to vigorously enforce United States intellectual property laws around the world could create over-enforcement problems similar to concerns raised regarding SOPA.

Even without IPAA, there is already an Attaché Program in place. As a result, IPAA could be seen as making the Program more efficient, or it could be seen as an attempt to increase the power that the government has to enforce intellectual property laws. As it stands, IPAA is currently awaiting a full committee markup before the House Judiciary Committee. It was scheduled for July 10, 2012, but it has yet to occur.

What Does Obamacare Cost?

Here’s a quick summation of the sources of funding associated with the Affordable Care Act:

• $210.2 billion: Broaden Medicare tax base for high-income taxpayers
• $60 billion: Annual fee on health insurance providers
• $32 billion: 40% excise tax on health coverage in excess of $10,200/$27,500
• $27 billion: Impose annual fee on manufacturers and importers of branded drugs
• $20 billion: Impose 2.3% excise tax on manufacturers and importers of certain medical devices
• $15.2 billion: Raise 7.5% Adjusted Gross Income floor on medical expenses deduction to 10%
• $13 billion: Limit contributions to flexible spending arrangements in cafeteria plans to $2,500
• $14.9 billion: All other revenue sources

That amounts to $392.3 billion. However, while the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) originally estimated Obamacare will cost $940 billion (March 18, 2010). Two years later, on March 14, 2012, the CBO increased its estimate nearly two-fold to $1.76 trillion. So where does the other $1.37 trillion come from? Former CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin released his own analysis, finding that the law will cost $1.072 trillion in subsidies during the first ten years and another $2.85 trillion in the decade after that, a total of nearly $4 trillion in new spending over the next 20 years. What ever happened to Obamacare reducing our deficit? In the video below, President Obama says, “It’s going to be deficit neutral; it’s not going to add a dime to the deficit, now or in the future.” Problem one.

Is the Individual Mandate Really a Tax?

In a 2009 ABC interview with President Obama, George Stephanopoulos suggested that the individual mandate was a tax. Obama whole-heartedly disagreed:

STEPHANOPOULOS:  …during the campaign.  Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t. How is that not a tax?

OBAMA:  Well, hold on a second, George. Here — here’s what’s happening.  You and I are both paying $900, on average — our families — in higher premiums because of uncompensated care.  Now what I’ve said is that if you can’t afford health insurance, you certainly shouldn’t be punished for that.  That’s just piling on. If, on the other hand, we’re giving tax credits, we’ve set up an exchange, you are now part of a big pool, we’ve driven down the costs, we’ve done everything we can and you actually can afford health insurance, but you’ve just decided, you know what, I want to take my chances.  And then you get hit by a bus and you and I have to pay for the emergency room care, that’s…

STEPHANOPOULOS:  That may be, but it’s still a tax increase.

OBAMA:  No.  That’s not true, George.  The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.  What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase. People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that if you hit my car, that I’m not covering all the costs.

…

STEPHANOPOULOS:  I wanted to check for myself.  But your critics say it is a tax increase.

OBAMA:  My critics say everything is a tax increase.  My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy.  You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but…

STEPHANOPOULOS:  But you reject that it’s a tax increase?

OBAMA:  I absolutely reject that notion.

However, according to Chief Justice John Roberts in his majority opinion ruling on the case, “the individual mandate must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance, if such a construction is reasonable.” Problem two.

Watch the full interview:

The Individual Mandate: A $4.2 Billion Tax Increase

Unfortunately it looks like the individual mandate, roughly estimated to raise $4.2 billion in 2016 alone, won’t quite reach the $1.37 trillion we need to make up for its costs. In fact, it would take over 326 years at that rate. Seems feasible. But let’s look at some more numbers (I just love numbers).

The CBO estimates that Obamacare will reduce the number of uninsured people by about 30 million, yet will still leave 25 million uninsured residents by 2019, after all of the provisions of the bill will have taken effect. Interestingly enough, about a third of these uninsured individuals are illegal immigrants who are in fact exempt from the individual mandate, but will still receive emergency services under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (1986).

Additionally, the CBO estimates that 14 million Americans will refuse to purchase health insurance if they deem it is too expensive. However, they never released any information related to their methodology of finding this claim so it could be significantly higher, or lower. Within the 2016 calendar year, they estimate that a total of 3.9 million Americans will be required to pay the mandate after subsidies, resulting in a tax of $4.2 billion, rising each year thereafter. Problem three.

One Last Tidbit

To enforce the individual mandate, Congress is adding 16,000 agents to the IRS to step up enforcement. That will surely piss off the Libertarians. Problem four (minus those 16,000 people who were hired, of course).

What do you think?

According to a Reuters poll, 61% of Americans opposed the individual mandate, including 59% of Democrats, 81% of Republicans, and 73% of Independents. Furthermore, 72% of Americans believed the individual mandate to be unconstitutional in February 2012. What do you think? Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision? Do you agree with Obamacare in general?

Chief Justice John Roberts, the swing vote, wrote that the individual mandate does not apply to the commerce clause, but stands under the taxing clause:

Chief Justice Roberts concluded …that the individual mandate must be construed as imposing a tax on those who do not have health insurance, if such a construction is reasonable.

The most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is that it commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power. It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.”

Click here to download the opinion from the SCOTUS website (PDF)

In summation, the majority opinion declared that the federal government does not have the constitutional power to force individuals to become active in commerce… [so] the individual mandate cannot be sustained.” However, the government does have the power to tax its people. Ironically, democrats originally denied that the mandate was a tax while rushing for its approval in 2010.

While the health care law is posed to support thousands of people across the nation that do not currently have insurance, it can now be declared as a new tax on the American people, set to start in 2014.

Apparently not everyone got the news, correct:

So how much is this going to cost us?

Photo Credit: RedAlertPolitics.com

The Freedom of Assembly is guaranteed under our First Amendment rights: “Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to peaceably assemble.” Additionally, it is recognized as a human right, civil liberty, and political freedom. Unfortunately for this group of protestors, they were deemed the dangerous ones and were removed from the festival.

While the video is nearly 23 minutes in length, it gives you a great look from the protestor’s point of view, how they were attacked (and by how many people), and what the police had to say. According to The Blaze, “protesters were depicted as being battered by a constant hail of thrown debris, including water bottles and possibly even stones.” Watch it all unfold in the video (skip ahead to ~9:00 to see the “stoning”):

Unfortunately it’s not clear who “started it all,” but in the end no one really wins. The police could very well face another free speech lawsuit, the Christian group was battered with bottles, crates, water, urine, etc., and the attackers could spend some time in jail. It seems like our rights are deteriorating right before our very eyes, as if we’re going back in time.

Below is an infographic that has been blowing up on Facebook this week comparing not only Republicans and Democrats, but Libertarians, too. While it only breaks it down to their respective simplest form, it may make you re-think who you pledge your allegiance to. Check it out and share your thoughts:

HT: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151578572764240&set=a.363032684239.157611.32785124239

Now, before you watch it, we must say that it’s quite obvious Fox News is a right-leaning organization, just as MSNBC is an extreme-left organization. However, the feedback from internet users on websites like Reddit and YouTube are quite telling:

I don’t want to spend too much time on comments such as these so let’s watch the video:

Now, as mentioned previously, Fox News isn’t always as “Fair and Balanced” as they claim to be. While they are attacked aggressively by the left-wing media, the best thing to do is research it for yourself and compile some quality fact checking. Since the overwhelming response from the internet community has been (something along the lines of) “Fox is disgusting and is flat out lying,” I’ve decided I’ll do some research for you. Please note that this isn’t being done in defense of Fox News, it is being done in defense of truth. “Brutally Honest Politics” is what we stand for here at CompareMyCandidates.com and whether your right-wing, left-wing, or somewhere in the middle, we believe that you deserve the facts. Let’s look at some of the claims:

An Increase in the National Debt from $10 Trillion – $15.7 Trillion

Fact: At the time of this publication, the US Debt stood at about $15,749,275,000 (http://www.usdebtclock.org/). When Obama was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2009, according to the Treasury Department, the total national debt stood at $10,626,877,048,913.08. A little high in comparison to the “$10 T” the Fox News segment claims, but if you are actually looking at Obama’s Hope and Change campaign from 2008, it’s spot on. The US Debt toppled the $10 Trillion mark on the last day of September in 2008, at the height of the Obama campaign.

An Increase in the Jobless Rate from 7.8% to 8.3%

Fact: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ most recent report (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf), the unemployment rate through April 2012 was 8.1% (about 12.5 million people), not including 2.4 million “marginally attached,” or those who want and are able to work a job but have quit looking (another 1.55%). Also according to the BLS (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_11072008.pdf), and to keep the date range consisdent, the unemployment rate in September of 2008 was 6.1%, much lower than Fox News’ estimate of 7.8%. However, there were about 1.6 million people marginally attached to the labor force at this time resulting in a jobless rate of about 7.2%.

An Increase in Food Stamp Dependency from 28.2 Million People to 46.2 Million

Fact: There was actually a spike in food stamp recipients in September 2008 to about 31.4 million people. The last time it was at 28.2 million recipients was in May of 2008. The most recent data, according to the USDA who release its data on a two-month delay, states that 46.3 million people received food stamp assistance in February 2012 (http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/34SNAPmonthly.htm).

An Increase in Gas Prices from $2.50/gallon to $3.68/gallon

Fact: From September 2008 to May 2012 there was virtually no change in gas prices whatsoever. However, gas prices dipped to a four-year low in December 2008 to $1.61/gallon. The last time it was at $2.50/gallon was in October 2009 (http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx).

An Increase in Ground Beef Food Prices from $2.35/lb to $3.01/lb

Fact: According to the Consumer Price Index released by the BLS, the price for ground beef was $2.42/lb in September 2008. As of April 2012, the most recent statistics, the price was $3.00 (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/APU0000703112?data_tool=XGtable). Both averages were about the same as what the Fox and Friends video portrayed.

An Increase in Families with No Savings from 18.5% to 23.4%

Fact: This one is a little bit harder to define but the University of Michigan came out with a report a couple weeks ago that covers “Financial liquidity” (“The definition of liquid assets is money in checking or savings accounts, money market funds, CD’s, treasury bills, or government savings bonds.”). The report stated that as of 2009, 18.5% of families had no liquid assets while in 2011, this number grew to 23.4% of families. Obviously this is where Fox News pulled their data but please note that these dates are not consistent with our previous range of September 2008 – May 2012.

Bottom line: Facts are facts and simply stating they aren’t truth because “so-and-so” said so isn’t enough. Educate yourself, people! Approach everything with an open mind and make your own conclusions.

About 500 people attended the event

While the format wasn’t quite a debate, the moderator introduced each candidate individually and asked them a few questions while the spotlight was on each of them. From there, the floor was open to questions from the audience of about 500. Each candidate was given an adequate time to answer the questions before moving on to a final “lightning round.” Some of the responses were quite intriguing!

Scotty Boman

Scotty Boman (L)

Energy prices aren’t too high, the dollar is too cheap! 

No one should be forced to do business with anyone nor should they be forced not to. 

Clark Durant

Clark Durant (R)

If I’m good enough for Ronald Reagan, I hope I’m good enough for the people of Michigan!

Washington is broken. We need to fix it and restore constitutional government.

If we continue to raise our debt ceiling, it’s going to be worse than Greece in this country.

Gary Glenn

Gary Glenn (R)

I’m confident I can take votes out of Debbie Stabenow’s backyard.

We need to get out of and defund the United Nations!

‘Right to Work’ should be a universal, fundamental right… you should be able to get a job without being forced to join a union.

Special breaks in our tax code is the issue. (Glenn supports the “fair tax”)

No sharia or foreign law should ever be in the United States.

Randy Hekman

Randy Hekman (R)

We need leaders who are true leaders… we need to change the hearts of people – government can’t do that. That’s the role of family and churches.

I have a focus on social and fiscal issues… I’m a social, fiscal conservative and I’m a gutsy guy.

Strength of a nation is people, not government.

I am not taking corporate or association PAC money.

Peter Konetchy

Peter Konetchy (R)

We need to get the government out of every aspect of our lives.

Rush Limbaugh is to the far left of me!

I don’t want a ‘right to work’ amendment like Gary Glenn; I don’t want the government involved in labor at all.

The only solution is to get government out of our lives and that’s what every fiber of my body is fighting for.

One other highlight from the evening was an analogy Hekman gave while talking about PACs and lobbying. Being a judge for several years, Hekman pointed out that if the defendant in a case walked in and handed him $5,000 and then the plaintiff walked in and did the same exact thing, all he would have to do is decide who he liked better. While he acknowledged this is, of course, illegal, he compared it to what is going on with the lobbyists and lawmakers in Washington. Something to think about!

Vote in the poll!

Stemming from a case brought by the ACLU of Maryland in defense of citizens’ right to record, the DOJ sent a letter to the Baltimore Police Department stating people are allowed to record the actions of police so long as they are in a public place. In reference to the First Amendment, the DOJ letters states, “Recording governmental officers engaged in public duties is a form of speech through which private individuals may gather and disseminate information of public concern, including the conduct of law enforcement officers.” Furthermore, the letter states this isn’t restricted to public places, “Courts have also extended First Amendment protection to recordings taken on private property, including an individual filming police activity from his or her home or other private property where an individual has a right to be present.” The letter even references the 1991 videotaped assault of Rodney King, stating how this provided key evidence in the case against the offending officers.

In an announcement by the ACLU, they noted the “NATO 3” summit that took place in Chicago this past weekend and how “At all of these events, protesters, the press, and bystanders alike will be carrying sophisticated smartphones that permit high-quality video and audio recordings of police activities. Not only will this monitoring heighten trust in the authorities, it will discourage police abuse and provide a record of any such abuse (which protects both law enforcement and protesters alike).” Interestingly enough, reports have been flooding the internet today of police illegally seizing and destroying photographer equipment belong to journalists and protesters alike. Apparently the rules (see “H.R. 347”) don’t apply to everyone.

Click here to download the official DOJ letter (PDF)

The pizza party is just one of many political dealings with the President Obama. Denise, a democrat, has supported Obama since his 2008 campaign even providing Barack, Michele, and Joe Biden with custom Red Wings Jerseys. She also looked into running for Governor in 2010, gaining support from Obama, but decided the timing was not right for her. “I want to present Obama with a Detroit Tigers’ World Championship jersey after he wins re-election,” she said of the Tigers’ and Obama’s chances of winning their upcoming.

The announcement comes from this week’s Michigan Matters episode in which host Carol Cain talks with Roy Roberts, the Emergency Manager of the troubled Detroit Public Schools, about his first year on the job. Roberts joined a roundtable of Denise Ilitch and Municipal Planner Charlie Beckham to continue the discussion on Detroit, education, and Obama’s upcoming visit to Detroit …and of course a dinner invitation at the Ilitch house.

You can watch the full Michigan Matters episode on the CBS website. Photo Credit: Denise Ilitch Designs

UPDATE: