Archive for Monday, March 22, 2010

Brownback urges Kansas Legislature to advance amendment seeking to block federal health care reform

March 22, 2010, 8:30 a.m. Updated March 22, 2010, 9:13 a.m.


— U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., who is running for governor, announced that he wants the Kansas Legislature to pass a measure seeking to block federal health care reform.

“It is important the state of Kansas protects its citizens from the federal government's abuse of its constitutional authority,” Brownback said.

On Sunday, Congress approved sweeping health care reform that is opposed by Republicans.

Today, the Kansas House is scheduled to debate House Concurrent Resolution 5032. It is a proposed state constitutional amendment that would prohibit the federal government from requiring that Kansans purchase health insurance.

Critics say the amendment is meaningless because any legal challenge to the federal law will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court which will consider the U.S. Constitution, regardless of any state constitutional provisions.

But Brownback said the state constitutional amendment is necessary. “If approved by Kansas voters, a constitutional amendment establishes a foundation for legal challenges to any health care mandate passed by Congress and signed into law by the President,” he said.

In a news release, Brownback said he added his name to a list of Kansans calling on the Kansas Legislature to approve the proposed constitutional amendment for a statewide vote in November.

Groups supporting the amendment include the Kansas Chamber, Americans for Prosperity, the Kansas Sovereignty Coalition and Political Chips, which describes itself as “Your Kansas Tea Party Connection.”


skinny 7 years ago

It should have been done yesterday!

Bob_Keeshan 7 years ago

Kansas Chamber, Americans for Prosperity, the Kansas Sovereignty Coalition ...

Anybody else think it is bizarre to see an organization that claims to be the voice of Kansas business aligned with the Kansas Sovereignty Coalition?

Think about that the next time you go shopping at Dillons or Hy-Vee, two of the Chamber's biggest contributors. Apparently they not only want you to buy their milk, they also want the State of Kansas to reject all federal funding.

sbell10 7 years ago

stop it sam! i want health care!

christy kennedy 7 years ago

Skinny, You may not care if you can't get health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, and you may not care if your insurer dumps you when you become ill, and you may not have college-aged kids (or up to 26) who don't have health insurance but a lot of the rest of us do care and are thrilled with these changes. It's not a perfect bill but it will help a lot of people. Wait and see, give it a chance for god's sake. The GOP has a few complaints and so do progressives but forward movement and insurance reform are decades overdue.

Mary Sucha 7 years ago

Coming from a man that gets his health insurance from the federal government, what a total tool.

Seth Peterson 7 years ago

Goldwater - you beat me to it. :)

Grundoon Luna 7 years ago

Utless, you just don't get it do you? sbell may very likely be someone who would love to do just as you say but is consistently denied or coverage priced completely out of this world. Ayn Rand is rolling over in her grave . . . . but go ahead cling to Faux news lies and misinformation for all the good it won't do you or anyone else. Care about someone but yourself for once.

AtlasShrugging (anonymous) says… sbell10

“stop it sam! i want health care!”

Then work and pay for health insurance with the fruits of your labor.

meggers 7 years ago

Pure political posturing, none of which will hold up in court. Quit embarrassing yourself and our fine state, Sam.

rboyer 7 years ago

Ah yes... if this works, then why aren't there ammendments allowing states to segregate? Show me the ammendment that bans abortions in states. It's simply ridiculous...

This is going to turn out exactly what happened in Texas with the stimulus... they will gripe and complain about it and say they won't accept it, and then in the final hour be there with their hands out.

woodscolt 7 years ago

The republicans continue to be the anti-people, anti-society party and the skinny's of the world can't figure out they are coming up on the short end of the party's stick. Democracy can't survive without debate and compromise. Karl rove and bush governed on the "your either with us or your agin us" policy and the republicans have continued this ever since. Obama, foolishly, tried to establish so called town hall meetings to allow for open debate on health care reform and the republicans sabotaged the meetings with out and out blatant lies and threatening behavior. The blatant lie about death panels that republicans bought into was a complete lie, not to mention that the portion of bill they refered to as "death panels" was introduced by a republican congressman from Georgia. The public option was a much better option but the pub's lyingly labeled it as "socialism" so whenever it was discussed, they falsely inserted "socialism" instead of debating the truth. The mandate requiring everyone to have to buy insurance was first introduced by republicans in the Bush 1 adm. and picked up again in the republican alternative to the Clinton healthcare proposals. When the dem's proposed the republican idea mandating everyone must buy health insurance as an alternative to the "public option" the pubs declared their own idea as "socialism" again. Anything to sabotage health care reform. And what did it accomplish? We now have a very broke down version of health care reform instead of what we could have had if the republicans had been willing to engage in genuine debate and compromise . We needed to reform the health insurance industry and that didn't happen. Everyone can buy health insurance, the problem is receiving what they paid for.

tolawdjk 7 years ago

So a state law is going to ban the collection of federal income tax?

Good luck with that.

whatupdown 7 years ago

Enough of the greedy self serving Repubs, as for me and my house we are voting Dem. I'd rather have wolfs than sheep in wolfs clothing. I've read in the past about the massive ins industry funding to Brownback, looks like he's coming through for them as paid to do. (I'm a church goer who sees the light.)

Kirk Larson 7 years ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

sizzleplate 7 years ago

We'll see how good this bill turns out when our nation is completely bankrupt and living in a total police state. 16,000 new IRS agents are being hired as we speak... Oh and btw, I'm not republican nor am I a democrat. This right-left false paradigm has really blinded some people from seeing the real problem, and your big government isn't going to fix it.

Steve Bunch 7 years ago

Morons, and evil morons at that.

Shardwurm 7 years ago

I hope we do it. 39 other states are already begun a process to block it. There are ways to make healthcare affordable without putting the burden on the middle class to finance the weak (e.g. paying the salaries of college professors with skyrocketing tuition.)...starting with Tort reform.

Jimo 7 years ago

Brownback is a graduate of the law school at the University of Kansas. As such, I believe it is unlikely to near impossible that he actually believes this to be more than a publicity stunt, that he is totally aware that there is no basis whatsoever for challenging this federal statute.

Why would Kansans wish to vote for a documented demagogue determined to waste their tax money down a sinkhole? Even people dead-set against this law should be questioning Brownback's lunacy.

Paul R Getto 7 years ago

This will get interesting now. Senator Sam is a piece of work, I tell ya. I hope his governorship is successful. Look for him to run for president as soon as he gets sworn in here in Topeka. Apparently, not getting any votes last time around didn't phase him much. PS: The health care bill is neither panacea nor armageddon, somewhere in between. At least we moved the ball out of the end zone where it has been since Teddy Roosevelt's time.

MyName 7 years ago

Great, how about we waste more valuable time in the legislative schedule on useless crap instead of finding a way to fix the hole in the state budget, or figuring out a way for our schools, roads, and health care to be better.

While you're at it, why don't you get them to pass an amendment forcing God to keep the sky from falling! It's just as useful as this proposal.

georgiahawk 7 years ago

It is done! Republicans, tea-baggers and you to libertyone, need to stop with the doom and gloom for a while. Go home prepare your "I told you so" signs and wait for socialism to destroy America just like it has the rest of the world. Oh wait, it hasn't destroyed the rest of the world and this is not socialism! Well, prepare your signs anyway, just shut up for a bit!

feeble 7 years ago

" sizzleplate (anonymous) says…

We'll see how good this bill turns out when our nation is completely bankrupt and living in a total police state."

Were this true, who would pay the police?

Let's play this out, what happens if/when SCOTUS strikes down the new law?

The house just passes the thing again and ties it to Medicare/Medicaid/Federal Highway construction funding to the states, same as alcohol and tobacco age limits.

or, the Court just strikes down the individual mandate, but leaves the other portions of the bill in place. This works out in the Dems favor as well, as they get to keep their consumer protections and then really put the screws to the insurance industry over caps.

The other thing to remember is that the second the ink dries on this, there are immediate benefits accorded to children, young adults and senior citizens (no pre-existing conditions for minors, staying on parents health plan until 26, no lifetime caps). Clawing these entitlements back will prove to be politically very difficult, as it will be "putting your hands on my healthcare".

Really, I think Brownback is just trying to deflect attention away from his vote yesterday to KEEP the Cornhusker Kickback. Seems like he was against the Kickback before he was for it.

Ralph Reed 7 years ago

@dulcinea47. Excellent cartoon. Thanks!

@Made_in_China. I agree, Brownback's campaign for KS Governor is simply to get his leadership tab so he can run for President (again).

I'm glad Health Insurance Reform passed. It's not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction, despite the best efforts G-NO-P to stop it. What are they going to whine about when they see the system works?

On a side note: 1. The article reads like Brownback is already the KS Governor. Did I miss an election or something? 2. Now we get to see if Limbaugh is true to his word. I remember his saying he was going to go to Costa Rica for medical care if Health Care Reform passed. Bet he weasels out and says, "That's not what I meant. I was not speaking literally."

Bob_Keeshan 7 years ago

Shardwurm (anonymous) says…

I hope we do it. 39 other states are already begun a process to block it. There are ways to make healthcare affordable without putting the burden on the middle class to finance the weak (e.g. paying the salaries of college professors with skyrocketing tuition.)...starting with Tort reform.

Tort reform in Kansas? Already happened. What else you got to control costs in Kansas, assuming you get your wish and federal reform is "blocked"?

Richard Payton 7 years ago

Already, the attorney general of Virginia plans to sue the federal government on grounds that this is unconstitional. Virginia already has a state law stating people from the State of Virginia are not required to have health insurance. I'm sure insurance company's disliked this law but will now use it to try to block the current bill just passed.

Kirk Larson 7 years ago

Finally. For months, on just about any Brownback story I happened upon, I have been making a comment to the effect that the policies of Sam Brownback are far too similar to those of former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum and that support for Brownback would bring about the level of right-wing-nuttery and religious zealotry represented by said Santorum. Someone finally got it and my comment was removed. I wondered how long it would take. I shall now desist.

Kirk Larson 7 years ago

Shardwurm says... "blah, blah, blah Tort reform".

Yeah, tort reform was supposed to fix everything in Texas. Now they have some of the highest premiums and rate of uninsured in the country. Dosen't work.

Kirk Larson 7 years ago

Yeah, and you think undocumented workers are filing lots of malpractice suits, eh Hatless?

openyourmind 7 years ago

some states require people to have car insurance. why can't the federal government not require everyone to have health insurance? I have a master's degree and have worked in a professional job for five years. each two-week paycheck of mine is reduced by $250 = $500 month for health insurance. we now have $20,000 of medical debt b/c Blue Cross Blue Shield will not cover my wife's diagnosis and treatment b/c of pre-existing conditions, which was pregnancy and child birth related...five years later. She cannot obtain private insurance unless we pay over $1000 month, and then who knows when she would not be covered or be dropped. We have degrees from KU, have worked professionally, and pay our taxes, but now are entertaining the idea of filing bankruptcy b/c of the medical debt. How is this fair? How is health reform not needed immediately? You may not have health issues now, but what about tomorrow, next month, ten years from now? How will you pay for diabetes, cancer, or other treatments when your health insurance drops you because of a pre-existing high heart rate, or high cholesterol, or family history of cancer?

meggers 7 years ago


The state of Virginia pulled the same thing with desegregation and it didn't work for them then. Like civil rights laws, the passage of Medicare, and the enactment of Social Security, those who oppose the right of all Americans to have affordable access to health care will eventually be seen as being on the wrong side of history.

Grundoon Luna 7 years ago

I don't think LIberty One would know reality if it checked him in the kisser. His fabulous party brought about the 2008 crash and he tries to act like the GOP is still credible. LOL!!

zzgoeb 7 years ago

It's not about "working and paying for healthcare...", it's about a non-competitive and unregulated market. I don't mind paying for my own insurance, but I mind that mega-corp can charge how ever much they want, dump whoever they want, ad nauseum. As for our distinguished Senator, he needs to sponsor a bill to IMMEDIATELY end Medicare, as that is exactly what his opposition to healthcare reform is equal to.

jayhawklawrence 7 years ago

A Kansas Republican leader launches another idiot bomb.

What else is new?

jayhawklawrence 7 years ago

Looks to me like the national Republican Party has some kind of contract they are asking potential candidates to follow before they get campaign funding.

Brownback is simply going down the list to make sure he falls in line.

The last one is probably to get on his knees and squeal like a pig.


Grundoon Luna 7 years ago

Sorry to have pegged you differently, LO, but you seem to walk and talk like a duck, etc.

So if the GAO says the Health Care Reform plan is going to be deficit neutral - albeit not for a long time but it will eventually nearly 10 years down the road but I can live with that - and nobody on the right seems to believe that, but the same GAO also warned everyone of the high cost of the "War on Terror" and the GOP didn't questions and didn't bat an eye and still doesn't when it comes to war. Since the war costs in a year what Health Care Reform start up is going to costs, and will eventually be deficit neutral, I simply cannot take the GOP seriously when they start screaming about what things costs. Clearly they will spend like druken sailors when it's somthing they want costs be damned. Fiscallly conservative is not something the GOP currenlty maintains and has not done so for quite some time.

Otherside of the same coin? I think not, but you are certaily entitled to disagree.

headdoctor 7 years ago

I am still trying to get my brain wrapped around this one. "federal government's abuse of its constitutional authority,” Brownback said."

I am thinking that trading Constitutional authority for Kansas Republican authority is a real piss poor trade. Why should I trust anyone group of people that their play book involves declaring their ultimate authority over the State and refuse to abide by the checks and balances of the Government structure. Proving their point by ignoring and thumbing their nose at the Kansas Supreme Court. The National Republicans tried to pull this off a few years back with Rush Limbaugh leading the charge. It didn't work to well at the national level but I guess at the State level there isn't enough people to challenge them. I think the only hope for Kansas is that if the Legislature makes enough Parents angry State wide they might start voting out these Bible thumping zealots.

ferrislives 7 years ago

Why is it when states want to pass medical marijuana laws in their home states, conservatives say that the federal laws should overwrite those state laws, but when a health care reform bill is passed federally, it's suddenly all about state's rights?

Mary Sucha 7 years ago

Sen. Sam - What in your Roman Catholic teachings make you want to repeal this bill? Remember Rep. Stupak voted for the bill.

Are the following provisions what you want to protect Kansas citizen's from???

-Parents would be able to keep older kids on their coverage up to age 26.

-Insurers would be prohibited from denying coverage to people with medical problems or charging them more.

-Insurers could not charge women more.

-insurers would be forbidden from placing lifetime dollar limits on policies

-denying coverage to children because of pre-existing conditions

-from canceling policies because someone gets sick

Or are these the provisions that have your * in a wad?

-the bill applies an increased Medicare payroll tax to the investment income and to the wages of individuals making more than $200,000, or married couples above $250,000.

-tax on investment income would be 3.8 percent. If the Senate follows through, it would impose a 40 percent tax on high-cost insurance plans above the threshold of $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families. The tax would go into effect in 2018.

meggers 7 years ago

Bingo, ferris. They don't mind far-reaching legislation that supports their own narrow world-view, but God forbid the federal government pass laws that actually improve the lives of all citizens, regardaless of social status or so-called moral standing.

GeorgeBurnWasRight 7 years ago

Beyond the immediate issue, there's the stupidity that increasingly you can't just pass a law about some current hot-button social issue, you have to amend the constitution. All this does is clutter up a document while accomplishing nothing. An amendment can be changed or revoked by a future legislature just like anything else they pass. On the federal level, we learned that when we first amended the US constitution to create Prohibition, and a few years later, amended it again to reverse the first amendment.

Mary Sucha 7 years ago

"Social security was supposed to pay for itself. How did that work out? "

According to CBO, social security has had a surplus since 1984, look for yourself -

deskboy04 7 years ago

I think that we needed some kind of change. Health insurance costs have been skyrocketing. Something needed to be done. If the change works out poorly, there will be plenty of right wingers to say I told you so.

headdoctor 7 years ago

goldwater (anonymous) says… "Social security was supposed to pay for itself. How did that work out? " According to CBO, social security has had a surplus since 1984, look for yourself -

It worked out fine until the Government robbed the trust funds and replaced the money with IOU Bonds that were allowed to run without limit and well below market interest rates if not interest free. And both parties took their turn at steeling the money. That money has been gone since the mid 1970s. To bad they blew it, otherwise they wouldn't be scrambling to figure out how to make it last longer than 2037.

Mary Sucha 7 years ago

"goldwater, how many times has the social security tax gone up since its inception? Hardly paying for itself, don't you think? Same thing will happen with this travesty."

21 times since 1935.

The social security tax has not increased since 1990, when daddy bush was president. Look at the numbers, surpluses since 1984, so it does pay for itself. In 2009 the surplus was $137 billion, in 2008 the surplus was $186 billion.

"It worked out fine until the Government robbed the trust funds and replaced the money with IOU Bonds that were allowed to run without limit and well below market interest rates if not interest free. And both parties took their turn at steeling the money. That money has been gone since the mid 1970s. To bad they blew it, otherwise they wouldn't be scrambling to figure out how to make it last longer than 2037. "

They are called Treasury Bills. Reagan (8 years), Bush1(4 years), Clinton(5 years), Bush 2(8years), Obama(1 year), all borrowed surplus Social security taxes, Clintons last 3 years were surpluses and no Social Security suplus taxes were borrowed.

pace 7 years ago

Brownback stands tall for corporations, doesn't care about families except he would like to control them. Keep them down and Brownback has more power. He is a sick man but with excellent insurance. Must make him feel special to deny others what he has.

Fred Whitehead Jr. 7 years ago

When are the right wing wingnuts (republicans) ever learn that the black man in the White House was lawfully elected, and however much they choose to show their disdain and bigotry for this fact, they will continue to pursue a policy of attempting to destroy the lawful government of the United States of America. The republican party is already on a course for extinction, and this outrageous and childish behavior will only serve to further the destruction of the two party system and the elevation of the Klan and the Idaho Nazi Militia.

headdoctor 7 years ago

goldwater (anonymous) says… They are called Treasury Bills. Reagan (8 years), Bush1(4 years), Clinton(5 years), Bush 2(8years), Obama(1 year), all borrowed surplus Social security taxes, Clintons last 3 years were surpluses and no Social Security suplus taxes were borrowed.

Really, T-bills. I don't know where you are getting your info but T-Bills are marketable. The bulk of the IOUs are in non-marketable obligation bonds and non-marketable Treasury Securities.

What Reagan, the two Bushes, and Clinton borrowed was from surplus payments. Money taken prior to 1976 was not only surplus payments but the existing principal as well. Because of the treasury bookkeeping and mixing of funds prior to 1960, we don't even know if the money paid in for Social Security is all accounted for even though there was a trust fund created decades before that to help keep it separated from the general treasury fund.

tomatogrower 7 years ago

So, Brownback wants insurance companies to have the ability to dump people when they get sick and not insure people with pre existing conditions? What does he suggest these people do? How is he going to help these people? I wonder how much he is getting from insurance companies? Is he afraid that people with preexisting conditions or with family members who have preexisting conditions will now be free to look for other jobs, because they won't have to give up their insurance? I see no solutions coming from Brownback or from other Republicans. Therefore I conclude that they care about the unborn, but once you're born, you'd better be able to take care of yourself or just go away and die. And isn't it interesting that he was all gungho for the wars that are bankrupting us, but against spending money on American citizens. How can they call themselves patriotic when they care more about other countries?

whatupdown 7 years ago

I smell the shock of the Republican party at the mass of losses in the next elections.

Mary Sucha 7 years ago

T-Bills is how the federal government finances it operations. It currently owes the social securtiy trust fund in excess of $4 trillion. When the time comes to pay the social security trust fund back, the fed will issue more t-bills. Debt currently held by the public is about $7.6 trillion.

Jimo 7 years ago

Liberty: "The states can refuse to enforce any federal statute that they find unconstitutional."

Lib, I thought you were a law student. Obviously not. Not the most fourth-rate, moral majority law school would push such a stupid, untruthful claim.

Upon graduation and admission to the bar (an "if" I admit), please, please, please -- give the quoted legal advice to a client. The ensuing claims for malpractice and bar expulsion will be beautiful to watch.

There is a difference between issue advocacy and a neutral statement of law (something John Yoo might have benefited from as well).

jayhawklawrence 7 years ago

One of the hidden truths of the Republican Party leadership is that they wanted to get rid of Social Security. Privatization would have dumped a massive avalanche of cash into the stock market and financial markets which they could then loot to their hearts delight.

The surplus that Bush had when he was elected should have been used to shore up the system, only the Republicans did not have that on the agenda. He had to spend it on a ludicrous and idiotic attack on Iraq.

Whenever I see Karl Rove or Dick Cheney on Fox news promoting torture as good US policy I wonder how my generation could have created such trash. When they smile on national television without any remorse I just feel insulted and sorry for all the Americans who sacrificed to give honor to our nation only to have these guys soiling it.

jayhawklawrence 7 years ago

Errata: The Clinton Budget Surplus

Well, I have to correct my statement so I will just post this link to

meggers 7 years ago


Please note that Jefferson also encouraged secession following the Kentucky act that you cite.

Even Jefferson thought states would need to secede, in order to break their contract with the feds. It didn't work then and unless you are promoting secession, it has no relevance now.

cowboy 7 years ago

Do you like health care and ham I do not like them Sam I am I do not like health care and ham

Would you like them here or there? I would not like them anywhere

Do you like Medicare and ham? I do not like them Sam I am I do not like medicare and ham

Would you like them here or there ? I would not like them anywhere

Do you like farm subsidies and ham I do not , oh well yeah I kinda like farm subsidies and ham Yes I do like them Sam I am

Would you like them here or there I would like them only for my family and inlaws Sam I am

Do you like gov't paid health care and Ham I do not like gov't paid health care and ham Well , except when there paying for mine Cuz otherwise it would be socialism and ham

Do you like the Family and Ham Oh yes I like them Sam I am Would you like them here or there. Oh crap I'd like them everywhere Christ , they paid my rent in Washington and I got to hang around with all those pillars of monogamy , or crap , that's a lie.

Richard Heckler 7 years ago

Repubs offered up nothing to improve the quality of life for citizens. They like the high dollar status quo concept. Repubs also took our economy down the drain and put 11 million out of jobs according to radio news.

Repubs got plenty of bribe money let's not kid ourselves. There are far more substantial reasons than repubs as to why the mandate to purchase likely will not stand.

I think mandating medical insurance purchase across the board will disappear for any number of reasons:

  1. IMPROVED Medicare For All Insurance does not support the mandate
  2. It is my belief that neither Ralph Nader nor Dennis Kucinich support the mandate
  3. There are many many wealthy citizens/families that will not want to purchase the insurance for they have the capability to pay no matter what.
  4. Setting up health care profit making accounts to finance one's medical needs should always be an option.

It is the wealthy insurance industry that pulled off the mandate for they will be drowning in money. Eliminating the med insurance industry wipes out some huge corruption tactics. $1.4 million dollars a day to kill reform is obscene and should be against the law.

Yes shareholders and other profiteers due to others misfortune love government forced dividends aka socialism!

Tom McCune 7 years ago

Brownback is the antichrist. Jesus healed the sick. Sam heals only the insurance companies.

Jimo 7 years ago

Thanks, Lib - many of us are well acquainted with the Kentucky Resolution and its companion the Virginia Resolution - acquainted enough to know they had no impact on the course of American law. Indeed, Madison, the other author, went on to appoint as Chief Justice the man who would extinguish forever this 'not enumerated' theory of Congressional power.

The last time this flurry of silliness came about was in the 1830s. As Andrew Jackson, President at the time, said: "I consider the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one State, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed." Congress at the time authorized the use of the military to move in and arrest the coup-plotters if necessary, no doubt inspired by Washington's similar military action to put down the earlier Whiskey Rebellion and hang the traitors. Members of the GOP could profit by studying these earlier examples.

The first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, also directly rejected the Kentucky Resolutions' claim as flatly wrong. That modern Repubs would turn on Lincoln isn't that much of a shock seeing they've substantially abandoned their modern secular saint Ronald Reagan as well.

Of course, you have completely fled (like a timid mouse) defending the legal basis for your outlandish claims.

Jimo 7 years ago

I am reminded by a good reader and student of law that during the Whiskey Rebellion I referenced earlier G. Washington invoked the Second Militia Act, which in part REQUIRED the PURCHASE by ALL citizens (male by necessity, white by tradition) of a variety of military items ranging from guns to bullets to knapsacks. If only Washington had been challenged on this by the Tea Potty movement and shown up for his arrogant disregard for liberty! (Indeed, Congressmen were expressly exempted from this mandated purchase.)

Commenting has been disabled for this item.