Today, December 16, is the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. On this date in 1773, colonists destroyed a cargo of tea as a protest against “taxation without representation”. The Tea Party was a key event on the path to the American Revolution.

Two hundred plus years later, the Tea Party Movement continued the tradition of protest against an overreaching government. But there is a key difference between then and now. Those early patriots had to establish their independence and to start anew. But, our task is different. “It is not about fixed bayonets but fixed principles; not about bullets but ballots. Our task is not to overthrow; it is not revolution; it is renewal and restoration of those self-evident truths of constitutional government at the heart of America.” (via Heritage Foundation)

“Do you prefer a more active government with more services and higher taxes or a smaller government with fewer services and lower taxes?”

That is a question that pollster Rasmussen Reports has been asking since 2006. Americans have consistently answered: smaller government. In a recent poll, voters answered 65% in favor of smaller government to only 25% favoring larger government.

This election is a turning point. Will we turn left or right? Will we turn to bigger government controlling more of our lives, or to limited government where we have more freedom to control our own lives? Will we turn to higher and higher spending and insane borrowing or will we turn to fiscal sanity?

The Democrat party leadership favors bigger and bigger government, more and more spending, and more and more power for themselves. (Among Democrat voters just over half want big government, while almost one-third want smaller government.)

The Republican party favors smaller more-limited government, lower spending, and more power in the hands of individuals, not government. (86% of Republican voters prefer small government. Sadly, Republican leaders have too often been guilty of endorsing big government, big spending and big borrowing. During this year’s primaries many of these leaders were voted out of office by the grassroots.)

So the choice is easy: if you want big government, big spending, and higher taxes vote Democrat. If you want smaller government, less spending, and lower taxes vote Republican.

It’s too bad that some people (Sara Smith letter, July 27) just spout their party’s talking points rather than looking up the actual facts. The Bush tax cuts went fully into effect on May 28, 2003 when Bush signed the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. For FY2003 total revenues were $1.782 trillion (Source: White House Office of Management and Budget, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/hist.pdf) Four years later, FY2007 revenues were $2.568 trillion, an increase of $768 billion, or 44%.

Let me repeat that: The result of the Bush tax cuts was a huge increase of revenues, not a decrease. The problem was not lack of revenue, the problem was an increase of spending from $2.159 trillion in 2003 to $2.758 trillion in 2007. Next, let us look at the deficit. In 2003, it was $377 billion. In 2004 it worsened slightly to $412 billion, but for the next three years the deficit steadily improved to $318, $248, and finally $160 billion in 2007.

The deficit, bad as it was, improved steadily from 2004 until 2007 when Democrats took control of Congress. If Ms. Smith remembers her civics lessons, she knows that it is Congress that controls the purse strings. The president cannot spend a dime without authorization of Congress. For the last two years of the Bush Presidency, Democrats controlled the purse strings.

In their first budget, Democrats increased the deficit to $458 billion and then to an astonishing $1.412 trillion. Now that one party controls both Congress and the White House, the deficit continues at previously unimaginable levels. The latest White House estimate is $1.47 trillion this year and $1.4 trillion next year. (Source: Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/23/AR2010072304101.html).

The Democrats’ economic theories have not worked; they have made the economy even worse. We cannot spend and borrow our way to prosperity. These gigantic deficits cannot continue indefinitely. Sooner or later, lenders (including the Chinese government) are going to stop funding this government’s wild spending spree. We are heading to a train wreck and must change course.

The 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

James Madison, father of the Constitution, stated “”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”

Many of us who still believe in limited government and individual freedom are signing the pledge at http://pledge.tenthamendmentcenter.com/the-state-pledge/

In just a couple of weeks we will celebrate July 4th. Sadly many youngsters and even some adults do not know why July 4th is a holiday. Over the years I have asked many kids and some young adults why it is a holiday and about half do not know the answer.

In all of history, there are few events as important and consequential as the Declaration of Independence and the founding of the United States of America. Every citizen should know that we celebrate July 4th as our nation’s birthday and that July 4, 1776, was the day when the Continental Congress approved the wording of the Declaration of Independence.

I hope that all parents will teach their children the meaning of July 4th. It wouldn’t hurt for all of us to reread the preamble, which declares that all men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” It continues by stating that the purpose of governments is to protect our natural rights and that when government “becomes destructive” of these rights, that the people have the right to “alter or to abolish” the government.

These words have become an inspiration to people around the world. Abraham Lincoln later borrowed the phrase “all men are created equal” for his Gettysburg Address. I wonder how many of today’s young people know that Thomas Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration, that he became our third President, and that he is honored with his face on the $5 bill?

Mr. Karr (March 9) presents a utopian vision of health insurance reform and wonders why anyone would oppose it. Well, I have a few questions for Mr. Karr: If your plan is so good, then why does it have to force people to join it? If it solves all the world’s problems as you seem to think, then wouldn’t people voluntarily flock to it? Why do you want to impose fines and possible jail terms on people who choose not to participate in your plan? I think that my current plan is better for me. Why do you want to force me to switch to your plan? You might respond that “if you like your plan, you can keep it.” It’s very generous of you to allow me to keep my plan, but that’s just not true. Some 10 million people have chosen HSA plans instead of traditional insurance because they get better care at a lower price. But both the House and Senate bills make HSA plans illegal (non-qualified). So, millions of people who prefer HSA plans will be forced to switch to the plan that you prefer. What gives Congress the right to interfere in my choice of health care?

Now, I know that the politicians in Washington are much smarter than I, they surely know what’s better for me than I do, and I should be grateful that they are deigning to look after my health, but you know what: I prefer to take care of myself. I pay all the costs of my health care and I get care that is entirely satisfactory to me. Under your plan, I would qualify for subsidized health care. Why do you want to pay for some of my health care? How will that lower anybody else’s health care costs? And do you seriously think that your plan will keep costs down overall? Government programs always cost much more than forecast.

Instead of a one-size-fits-all plan let’s have freedom of choice. Get rid of all the fines, taxes, mandates, and restrictions. For those who want the government in charge of their health care, let them have such a plan, but make it voluntary. The majority (according to all polls) who are against the proposed reform should be free to choose whatever plan we think is better for us. Let those who participate in the government plan pay all of its costs; don’t ask the rest of us to pay for their costs. In turn, we won’t ask those in the government plan to pay any of our costs. Give individuals the same tax break for health care that businesses get. Then we can buy insurance that is not tied to our jobs. Give us the freedom to choose to buy across state lines from whatever company we prefer. Let each of us decide whether we want coverage for maternity or for alcoholism or substance abuse. I’m not going to become pregnant; I don’t drink; I don’t do drugs. Why should I be forced to buy coverage I will never use? Let each of us decide whether we want high deductible low cost plans or low deductible high cost plans. I’ll let you have your choice of health insurance plans. Why won’t you let me have my choice of plans?