We Need Your Financial Support Now to Continue Our Efforts! Please use the DONATE link to learn how you can help!
Our Mission
U.S. Freedom Foundation is dedicated to restoring and expanding the economic and political vitality of the American middle class, the only economic group without special interest representation in Washington.
We feel the success of our historic “American Experiment” in self-government that began 400 years ago in Jamestown, Virginia is due to the creation by our ancestors of a God-fearing democratic republic under which the bulk of our wealth was distributed to the majority of our population through natural means – the free market.
A prosperous and broad-based middle class set America apart from other nations and cultures, where both national rights and national wealth were monopolized by the few at the expense of the many, leaving most of the world’s population mired in inescapable poverty, second-class citizenship, and oppression.
The past century has unfortunately witnessed political, judicial and economic assaults against our system that if not addressed, threaten to push our middle class families back into the same poverty as that suffered by the rest of the world, while an elite few gain the aristocratic status our founders fought to eliminate.
We have witnessed Congress hand over our good-paying manufacturing jobs through passage of outrageously bad trade deals like Most Favored Nation Status for China, NAFTA and CAFTA, and stood by while our high tech and administrative jobs are outsourced to India and Pakistan. We have also witnessed both Democratic and Republican Administrations stand by while tens of millions of low-income illegal immigrants have successfully driven down low and middle-income wages.
The result? The current crushing recession, fed by the housing/foreclosure crisis, as American families can no longer afford decent housing without resorting to mortgage rates and financing schemes that spell economic disaster for the nation.
Regardless of which party one votes for, this globalist agenda to destroy the American middle class and U.S. sovereignty continues unabated. There is virtually no distinguishable difference in policy on these key issues between the leadership of our two parties.
We have to start standing up for ourselves, and demanding that our elected government once again look to the welfare and desires of the majority instead of the special interests of the left and right. It is time to fight. We hope you will join our ranks in whatever capacity you feel led.
Down But Not Out - Saving our Healthcare Freedom
November 5, 2009: An estimated 25,000 Americans turn out at the U.S. Capitol to protest
the pending health care reform proposal. (USFF Photo)
November 13, 2009 USFF Editorial Board
Yes, PelosiCare squeaked by the House with a hair margin, 220-215. Supporters are celebrating their big win of overruling the majority of the citizens of the United States of America. Conservatives and opponents of the bill are suffering all the symptoms that come along with a hard fought loss: outrage, disappointment and deflation. Hundreds of thousands of Americans participated in the fight to defeat the bill and narrowly missed their goal by a mere thread: three more votes would have secured a victory.
Though an amendment was passed blocking federal funds from being used for abortion, the government option is still open for all intents and purposes to illegal immigrants, still costs over $1 trillion dollars to taxpayers (as a preliminary estimate) and still gives the government and particularly the President absolute control over the health insurance industry and 18% of the national GDP. It does all this remarkably without actually lowering the cost of healthcare in America, which is the alleged goal of any health reform.
That’s the bad news: the good news is that this was just the first battle and this issue is far from closed. Thanks to the overwhelming show of opposition from red and blue state Americans alike we secured 39 of the 41 Democratic votes needed to block the bill in the House. It wasn’t enough, but until the bill is signed into law the fight is far from over.
The bill still needs to pass the Senate before it can be signed into law. The latest reports say that the Senate will address it early next year, where it will only need a majority, or 51 votes, to pass. Republicans have banded strongly against the bill. There are 57 Democrats in the Senate who will have to choose between their constituents and their party line. If the same Americans who so vehemently opposed it during the House vote can secure just 7 Senate votes, they can still defeat the bill. The time to start fighting for those votes is now.
The real issue is this: money equals choice, in everything in life, not just healthcare. It’s an unfair and unfortunate fact about the way the world works, but history and social science bear out the fact. A little extra money in your pocket gives you the choice to go out to dinner, support a political candidate, give to charities, choose where to live, choose where to send your children to school and choose what kind of healthcare you need from insurance providers and doctors. When the government takes money out of your pocket to mandate health insurance and penalize those who can’t afford it, to provide American healthcare to those who would access it illegally and to establish over 100 new bureaucracies each of which require salaries from American taxpayers they are removing not just money but choices.
This is the danger of a socialist approach to anything: it takes choices away from citizens and gives them to an inefficient and undeserving government, who despite its own malady and internal strife knows better than you what your needs and ability to pay are.
Fortunately, the United States Constitution gives us weapons with which to fight our government. The first is our free speech. We’ve been using it, and we’ll keep using it to let our representatives know how we feel and what we expect them to do about it. The second is our ability to vote: this is the one that scares the daylights out of all politicians. We need to hold our representatives accountable for the decisions they make on this issue in 2010. Next, we have the U.S. Supreme Court to interpret the law. The measure against which all laws are judged is the Constitution itself, which heavily restricts the federal government from intervening in private business. If all that fails there’s more.
American citizens have won far bigger battles than the one we face now. As long as we hold fast in our beliefs, our government cannot legally oppose our judgment: it isn’t designed to.
So chin up America, because this Thanksgiving goose isn’t cooked yet. Actually, it’s just warming up. Dust off, patch up and get back out there.
###
Do you support a public option in health care reform?
Duck and Cover: The Taxpayer's Are Back and They Brought Questions
November 7, 2009
Protestors in front of the Capitol Building - Photo by USFF
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Thursday’s rally against the health reform bill in WashingtonD.C. exceeded expectations when tens of thousands descended on the nation’s capitol. They came from all over the United States on a work day with less than a week’s notice: the US Freedom Foundation spoke to people from Washington State, Tennessee, New York, New Jersey, Georgia and Florida.
“Can you hear us now?”
This was the chant ringing through the mall in Washington, D.C. as American citizens made their presence known again to protest the government takeover of health care. House Representatives opposed to the proposed legislation joined concerned citizens on the lawn; notably among these were GOP leader John Boehner GOP Whip Eric Cantor and republican alternative sponsor Rep. Tom Price.
“This bill is the greatest threat to freedom that I have seen in the 19 years I’ve been here in Washington, taking away your freedom to choose your doctor and the freedom to buy health insurance on your own. Its going to lead to a government take over of our health care system with tens of thousands of new bureaucrats right down the street making these decisions for you,” said Boehner.
Congressional supporters of the bill including House Speaker Pelosi who have brazenly pushed the bill in spite of overwhelming public disapproval couldn’t find the brass to appear at the rally. Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly voiced disdain toward the protest event, telling Politico that Democrats were busy trying to pass a bill while Republicans played the role of obstructionists.
Jon Voight signs autographs and mingles with rallier - Photo by USFF
Actor Jon Voight, author Mark Levin and actor/voice talent John Ratzenberger added their voices to the ground swell of opposition before the House.After speaking they went through the crowd talking to protestors, signing autographs and praising the efforts of the ralliers.
“Having ruined the banking system, the auto industry, the housing market, energy production and the education system, having robbed the social security trust fund, the Medicare trust fund and highway trust fund: now they tell us to trust them,” said Mark Levin.
After the rally, protestors were encouraged to visit the offices of their individual representatives in the Cannon, Longworth and Rayburn buildings. They were given pages from the nearly 2000-page bill to confront their Congresspersons and ask for explanation.Hundreds waited in line to get into the buildings only to find once inside that many Representatives supporting the bill had locked their doors. Speaker Pelosi was most notable among these: in spite of campaign promises to listen to the people and provide transparency, not only were her doors locked but guarded by capitol police.
Protestors wave flags in D.C. - Photo by USFF
“It’s one thing for Congress to ignore a protest group: we expect that. Its another matter entirely when they lock out the constituents who pay their salary,” said USFF executive director Deborah Stone, “Many of these people came across country on their own dime, and the people who ‘represent’ them couldn’t even make it to the door.”
Thursday’s rally was a follow up to the taxpayer march on September 12th, when Americans gathered to protest government spending, bailouts, the health care reform plan and what they feel is a lack of constitutional adherence among Congress and the current administration.
“Can you hear us now?”
Now, on shorter notice still, concerned Americans have been called to meet on the Mall in DC today at 1:00pm for a third time.
The intended message is clear: as long as you refuse to acknowledge us, we will continue to come.We will continue to care about our personal liberty and the role of the federal government.We will continue to fight for our freedom.
“Can you hear us NOW?”
###
October 22, 2009 Wasted Votes David W. Kirkpatrick - Senior Education Fellow
It's that time of year when Americans can exercise their constitutional right to abstain from voting. Which they do. Even in the presidential election of 1964, when President Lyndon B. Johnson received more than 60% of total votes, that was still a smaller number than the votes not cast.
And presidential years are regularly the ones with the highest voter turnouts.
A classic example of what can happen in an "on" year occurred in Pennsylvania in 1990 when a popular incumbent governor won reelection by a roughly 2-1 margin, often cited as a tremendous victory. It was a great win almost any way you look at it. Almost but not quite.
In 1990 Pennsylvania had a total population of about twelve million. Of course this included children and other ineligible voters. There were about nine million eligible voters. Of these six million were registered. Of these, about three million voted, of which the governor received two million and his opponent one million.
In brief, his "overwhelming" victory totaled two million of a potential nine million, about 22%.
Which, of course, is no reflection on the governor, or his opponent. They did the best they could. But it is a necessary assumption that those who voted were representative of the entire electorate.
Assumed but not necessarily so.
By contrast, this year is a so-called "off-year" when neither the presidency, members of the Congressional House and Senate, nor even most state governors and members of the state legislatures have to face the voters. Turnouts for the local elections in these years may be as low as 10%.
One argument of many nonvoters is that all politicians holding or seeking the 700,000 or so elective offices in the nation are not good enough to earn their support. It apparently can be quite satisfying to feel so superior to what over the years amounts to millions of your fellow citizens.
Another is the statement that the voter is going to cast a protest vote by not voting. Where else is something going to be done by not doing it. In fact, a nonvoter is agreeing to accept the decision of the electorate whatever it may be. Better to be former Vice President Alben Barkley of Kentucky who, according to Dean Acheson, when asked which of two candidates would get his vote said, "I haven't made up my mind yet; but when I do, I'll be bitter as hell."
Then there are the circumstances where third party, or atypical major party, candidates present themselves, and voters are urged to not "waste" their votes.
When that happens there is no way to know what might have happened if they had voted their true preference. Voting for a perceived winner is a true wasted vote because it indicates support and authority that is not there. Not only does it not affect the ultimate outcome but it distorts the truth and permits a winner to claim an unwarranted mandate and may scuttle the opportunity for real change.
There are only two true "wasted" votes - the one that is not cast and the one cast falsely.
And, the reason for this commentary which normally concerns education, perhaps nowhere is this more likely, and unfortunate, than in local school board elections where the turnout is often so low a few miscast votes may determine the outcome.
A few examples, good and bad, of the difference one vote has made:
In 1645 it gave Cromwell control of England. In 1649 it led to Charles I being executed. In 1845, if brought Texas into the Union; in 1868 one vote saved President Andrew Johnson from impeachment; In 1875, one vote changed France from a monarchy to a republic; in 1876 one vote made Rutherford B. Hayes president; in 1923 one vote made Adolph Hitler leader of the Nazi Party; in 1941, just weeks before Pearl Harbor, one vote saved Selective Service. On a larger scale, in 1796 a change of less than 100 popular votes in Pennsylvania would have cost Jefferson the presidency, and in 1800 a shift of 214 votes in New York City would have cost him reelection. Imagine no President Thomas Jefferson.
Such examples are endless, even if unknown.
####
The Fed's Final Trick: Making $1.5 Trillion Disappear
October 1, 2009
Washington, D.C. - In this time of economic hardship, when unemployment is hovering around 10% and housing foreclosure is rampant, there’s one business that has no shortage of funds: the Federal Reserve.
Under President Bush’s TARP (Troubled Asset’s Relief Program) bailout, the Fed received $700 billion and under President Obama’s Economic Stimulus (read: more bailouts) another $787 billion.Altogether, the Fed has come into nearly $1.5 trillion thanks to the spirited support of both Democrats and Republicans in Washington.
Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced an interesting notion 26 years ago: the Fed should be audited. In lieu of the glut of funds they’ve received in the past few years, over 200 other Representatives have jumped on board.
The bill is HR 1207, and ultimately it would revise the United States Code regarding the auditing process of the Federal Reserve. As it stands currently, the Fed is alone in the right to refuse an audit. Despite the fact that it audits other US banks on a daily basis, United States Code title 31 section 714 states that the US Comptroller General can only audit the Fed with written consent.
Wouldn’t it be nice for the individual taxpayer if the IRS approached with this same attitude of “may I?”
Perhaps it would be valuable to give a brief explanation of the Federal Reserve, since many Americans either don’t know or don’t understand what it is, what it does, and who it is accountable to.
The Federal Reserve is essentially a central, national bank with four basic roles defined according to their website as:
conducting the nation's monetary policy by influencing money and credit conditions in the economy in pursuit of full employment and stable prices
supervising and regulating banking institutions to ensure the safety and soundness of the nation's banking and financial system and to protect the credit rights of consumers
maintaining the stability of the financial system and containing systemic risk that may arise in financial markets
providing certain financial services to the U.S. government, to the public, to financial institutions, and to foreign official institutions, including playing a major role in operating the nation's payments systems
Particularly interesting here is the vague concept of “certain financial services”. Moreover, the credibility of the Federal Reserve suffers under the reality of our nation’s condition. If it is the Fed’s job to pursue full employment and stable prices, produce sound credit policies among banking institutions, and maintain stability of the financial system, then they are failing catastrophically across the board.
This leads to the next question, “to whom is the Federal Reserve accountable?”
In theory, the Fed is responsible to Congress through amendment of the Federal Reserve Act.Until such amendment, the Fed operates in an open market independently of government interference.
Ultimately, $1.5 trillion in taxpayer dollars was given to the care of a mysterious organization that has failed at every task set before it, has no immediate system of accountability, and cannot be audited by the government (which employs it) without their written consent.
U.S. Freedom Foundation supports Mr. Paul in the idea that the American people have a right to know what happened to the money that used to be in their pockets. We want to know where the $1.5 trillion went and why it went there: it is a simple, commonsense question. We hope that the Fed would be willing to answer our question as quickly as they accepted our money.
