I hope my mere presence in the politics forum isn't a sign of the apocalypse, but I wanted to share this video of Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL, from the district next to mine) questioning a business owner who claims a service-related disability to get government contracts.

---

David
Sitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

I was going to bring this subject up David, but it would fall on deaf ears.

When I was responsible for spending a very small part of the federal budget, whenever I needed to purchase something to support my mission, it wasn't just VA disability status I was looking for. As a vendor, there are about a dozen other things that put you in front of the line when trying to sell something to a federal agency.

Lying/cheating/stealing is perfectly fine in the eyes of a liberal as long as it's a liberal doing it.

This liberal can say he's following the letter of the law and claim superiority over others who follow the intent of the law.

This liberal can claim he did nothing wrong, because the VA allowed it.

If this becomes a news worthy item and gets national attention, the liberals will say if anybody is to blame, it's some conservative who works for the VA who granted the disability claim. But depending on the network reporting it, they may or may not add the fact that the VA *had* to grant him disability based on some convoluted section of the regulations they are charged with following.

Only a couple of federal departments have been in the news lately, but I would venture to say *ALL* federal departments need to be cleaned up. And I've come to the conclusion there is no *smart* way to do it that would be effective. And I've come to the conclusion about the only thing left to do that would have a very negative effect in the short-term, but a very positive effect in the long-term is to cut federal spending by 50 to 70% OVERNIGHT, go through a period of tumult and chaos for a short period of time, and tell the states they're responsible for everything (except national defense) until Washington DC settles down into a new, better, more limited roll as stated in the U.S. Constitution.

Washington DC is full of it and needs to be cleaned out.

73

I would like to see what the savings would be if the states only had to give the US gov only what they needed money wise for national defemse.

How would one go about finding that out. Are there stats that say how much each state pays to the government and what the breakdown is for each catagory.

As I live In New York Id like to see how much my state would save if only had to pay for national defense.

---

[/quote]

Old James

I would like to see what the savings would be if the states only had to give the US gov only what they needed money wise for national defemse.

Who would run the air traffic control system?

---

David
Sitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

I would like to see what the savings would be if the states only had to give the US gov only what they needed money wise for national defemse.

Who would run the air traffic control system?

VFR

---

I would like to see what the savings would be if the states only had to give the US gov only what they needed money wise for national defemse.

Who would run the air traffic control system?

VFR

Each state would pay for the manpower in there state. And you can bet they would have a surcharge on every flight coming instate.

---

[/quote]

Old James

I can see it now, Philadelphia finally gets decent priority for their airport -- currently it is handled out of NYC and as a result USAirways ends up with a fair number of delayed for 'ground hold' -- so that the NYC airports don't have a flight stack up.



[/quote]
Each state would pay for the manpower in there state. And you can bet they would have a surcharge on every flight coming instate.[/quote]

And to get back on topic the VA would be funded by the Military budget paid by the states for defense. If you need an Armed service the medical and rehab and retirement must come out of it.

I wont expect to see any of this happening. But it does make one wonder how the states would take over and run things the fed have been doing.

Would the states have to fund the National guard by themselves until the feds activate them for federal service?

---

[/quote]

Old James

Maybe we should let Texas secede and see how they handle it on their own.

And to get back on topic the VA would be funded by the Military budget paid by the states for defense. If you need an Armed service the medical and rehab and retirement must come out of it.

I wont expect to see any of this happening. But it does make one wonder how the states would take over and run things the fed have been doing.

Would the states have to fund the National guard by themselves until the feds activate them for federal service?

Im betting Texas would do Ok. Now NY and California are two states that would collaspe. Even though we get less tax dollars back the what we give in, NY needs the feds.

---

[/quote]

Old James

Well there are plenty of folks in Texas betting that they would do fine. Then again, I wonder if the US would present Texas with the bill for the loans they covered as a result of the compromise of 1850 -- with interest..... <smile>.

---

Well there are plenty of folks in Texas betting that they would do fine. Then again, I wonder if the US would present Texas with the bill for the loans they covered as a result of the compromise of 1850 -- with interest..... <smile>.

I suspect that as well as Texas is doing these days, they could pay back most everything with interest.

And say Ta Ta now.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

Well there are plenty of folks in Texas betting that they would do fine. Then again, I wonder if the US would present Texas with the bill for the loans they covered as a result of the compromise of 1850 -- with interest..... <smile>.

Or war reparations 1861-65?

---

[/quote]

Old James