Proof Positive - Another Answer We Already Knew

As we all know, things tend to expand until they reach a limiter.  Populations and human waistlines both know this to be true - they expand until something keeps them from expanding further (food is a great example of a limiter for both of these).

Budgets are no different.

In the case of our government budget the unfortunate truth is that the limits to growth that could and should be in place are all controlled by people who have a vested interest (power) in the budget being as large as humanly imaginable (and they seem to be able to imagine bigger every year...).  Even more problematic is the fact that they control the means of financing these larger budgets (printing money, raising debt ceilings, and potential to tax us all to Siberia).

The good news is that there is one, definitive limiter to budget growth that the Beltway Bozos don't control - US!

If we proceed in the knowledge that We the People are in control.  That we are responsible for hiring and firing our employees sitting in the seats in DC, then all is not lost.  November was a great start.  It showed an electorate that was awake, aware and alert (i.e. the Career Politician's worst nightmare!).  The big question now is: Can we all stay awake?

This is simply and only a question of management.  We sent these people to Washington to work for us.  Whenever you hire someone the worst, most damaging, absolutely guaranteed way for them and you to fail is to fail to supervise.

So as a test, through election day 2012 I resolve to try and be a good manager of the people I have hired and sent off to Washington.  I want to know if they are working well for me, and I will provide feedback to them (good and bad) to let them know how they are doing and where they need to improve.  I will use the information that I learn about them to make a better hiring decision the next time.  And if it works - meaning that I have held my employees accountable, and that the next time I know specifically who I am voting for and why - I will do it again.  And again.

What kind of country would we have if we all did that?

Let's find out!

Get another job!

So I read today that ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) issued a statement saying that they may refuse to process suspected illegals aliens picked up in Arizona.  Evidently this is some sort of protest against the Arizona Immigration Law.  I am uncertain how they came to their respective conclusions, as from all I have read or heard it appears nearly no one within the Federal Government has actually read the text of the law.  I read it.  It's pretty simple and straightforward - you can read it here.

Whether this is driven by the Administration or simply bureaucrats looking to score political points with the Administration is irrelevant at this point, as the effect is the same: An agency of the Executive Branch that is charged with enforcing Federal law is saying that it may refuse to enforce Federal law that is specific to its domain, and for which it has specific responsibility.

Seriously?!?  That has to be one of the most asinine things I have ever heard from the government - and sadly, that is really saying something...  Doesn't it seem like the Federal Government is moving farther and farther away from the things that it is constitutionally supposed to do?  Shouldn't the government simply and only have a constitutional agenda, founded on its constitutional responsibilities, instead of a solely political one?

So here's the real question: I know that it is really hard to sue the Federal Government.  AND, if the head of a Federal agency refuses to enforce a law for which they have specific responsibility, and they are then given a chance to resign as a form of moral/political protest and they refuse, could they not be held personally liable, in the same way that corporate CEO's and CFO's are held to account for their statements and actions?

So that's the question.  Not saying that the implications of the question would be easily manageable.  I just think it is a valid question.