Civil asset forfeiture is just theft by the government

Discussion in 'Political Action Forum' started by The Other David, Sep 13, 2017.

  1. KENNEDY63

    KENNEDY63 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,354
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Location:
    MINNESOTA
    :l:l Right. Libertarians and Freedom Caucus folks have accomplished nada. See below.

    Man Up, Mr. Meadows
    The Congressman has a lean and hungry look. So run for Speaker.

    By
    The Editorial Board
    Sept. 8, 2017 6:45 p.m. ET

    The Washington Post reports that defrocked White House aide Steve Bannon and Members of the House Freedom Caucus are plotting a coup to depose Paul Ryan as Speaker later this fall. Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows denied this on Friday on MSNBC, but you can bet something is afoot. And come to think of it, why wait?

    If the Freedom Caucus is upset enough to contemplate a mid-session leadership coup, let’s get it on now. Congress is entering a critical few months that will determine whether Republicans will have anything significant to show for their majority. If the fate of this Congress hangs in the balance, then it’s unconscionable to wait and let the House fail. The manly—the patriotic—thing to do is force a debate and vote while there’s still time to save the day.

    This has the added advantage of being a stab in the front for a change. The Freedom Caucus specialty is the stab in the back. Claim to be cooperative, to be working constructively toward some legislative compromise, but then at a critical moment raise its demands, vote no and blame the leadership. Soak up the cable-TV appearances and then sit back as someone else cleans up the political mess.

    This is how Mr. Meadows played the ObamaCare repeal debate earlier this year. As House leaders and HHS Secretary Tom Price prepared the draft bill, Mr. Meadows was regularly consulted. According to numerous sources, Mr. Meadows’ priority in private discussions was killing any reduction, even a small one, in the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance.

    For conservative health economists, this is a crucial policy reform. It would reduce a subsidy that drives up health-care costs, and it would begin to equalize the tax treatment for individual and employer insurance. But Mr. Meadows opposed it as a “tax increase,” a definition which would mean that Congress could never reduce any tax subsidy.

    Mr. Meadows worked frantically behind the scenes to make sure there was no change in the tax exclusion, without objecting to other provisions. GOP leaders gave him what he wanted and killed the tax change. But within days Mr. Meadows began trashing the draft bill anyway—this time because it supposedly didn’t reduce insurance costs enough. His assault defeated the first attempt at a House vote, and delay its passage for weeks, helping Democrats build public opposition and making it a much harder lift in the Senate, where it failed.

    With this record of accomplishment, clearly it’s time for Mr. Meadows to step into the spotlight and take some leadership responsibility. The honorable act now would be to announce an immediate challenge to Mr. Ryan surrounded by his Freedom Caucus supporters and Mr. Bannon’s Breitbart staff.

    Lay out his strategy for passing tax reform, for raising the debt limit, and for passing the Freedom Caucus budget through the House and the Senate this fall. Then the Members of the House GOP conference can hold a debate and vote, and Mr. Meadows and the country can see how much support he has for his political strategy compared to Mr. Ryan.

    If Mr. Meadows is too modest, or thinks he can’t win, then perhaps his Freedom Caucus running mate, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, would want to run. And if Mr. Jordan declines the honor, then perhaps Texas Rep. Louis Gohmert will want to exploit the high regard with which he is held by his colleagues.

    This is the way a congressional majority is supposed to work. Individuals run for leadership, the Members vote, and then everyone accepts the results and moves on together. That’s what Democrat Steny Hoyer did after he lost to Nancy Pelosi in 2002, and Democrats proceeded to govern in unified fashion after they won the House in 2006.

    If Mr. Meadows wants to stage a coup, he should do it publicly by putting his agenda and strategy front and center for everyone to see. Take the dagger out from under the toga, Mark, and show your colleagues that lean and hungry look. Then let’s hold a vote.

    Appeared in the September 9, 2017, print edition.
     
  2. KENNEDY63

    KENNEDY63 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,354
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Location:
    MINNESOTA
    I think that I will stick with "progressive" taxation, as that is direct thievery.

    How anyone can snipe about this while remaining silent on the elephant in the room is beyond me - or are Libertarians now on board with moving incrementally to the right?
     
  3. The_Duck_Master

    The_Duck_Master Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    3,850
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Salem, Oregon
    Boy, this sure seems like deja-vu all over again.

    Did you read the article? They didn't charge him and have kept his truck PLUS a $4,000 fee he sent them to retain the right to get it back. FOR 2 STINKING YEARS.

    What the article describes is more along the lines of what you'd expect from 3rd world despot level government abuse. WTH is the constitution for?

    Put simply...

    Forfeiture without charges and eventual conviction is WRONG.
     
  4. ALMODUX

    ALMODUX Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    16,854
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Location:
    Alabama
    I'd agree. I'd also point out (as Kennedy does) that it's just one thing. Estate taxes, progressive taxes, etc.....are all just governmental excuses for theft, also. Each dollar gets taxed so many times, it IS a license to print $, and yet they still over spend.
     
    API likes this.
  5. eel river

    eel river Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,085
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2005
    Location:
    indiana
    Asset forfeit without conviction doesn't go well with the word freedom.
     
  6. stevena198301

    stevena198301 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,968
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2015
    Location:
    HSV, Alabama
    Told y'all a while back I don't trust a guy with the name Beauregard...
     
  7. 3inch3's

    3inch3's Illinois Forum Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    7,615
    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2000
    Location:
    In a slough off the Wabash
    Why do they have to complicate things so much.... Seems pretty simple to me. You have to be charged and convicted or they give you your stuff back and better yet with interest just to keep the power hungry from over reaching on a whim. Seems it would make them be sure they have a strong case BEFORE seizing the assets.
     
    The_Duck_Master likes this.
  8. hartfish

    hartfish Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    3,366
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Location:
    virginia
    Passing a bill that prevents govt overreach and Constitutional violations looks like a victory to me. Why do you hate due process and freedom? Who do you suppose hates the Constitution more, Conservatives or liberals?
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2017
    The Other David likes this.
  9. KENNEDY63

    KENNEDY63 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,354
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Location:
    MINNESOTA
    Yep. This truck thing is a bad deal. But then again - the left always seems to find starving children when the discussion of entitlement reform comes up.

    So it appears that you are in the throw the baby out with the bathwater camp i.e. civil forfeiture has no place in the government crime fighting toolbox. I disagree. There is probably a place for it - especially if assets can be dissipated prior to conviction.
     
  10. KENNEDY63

    KENNEDY63 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,354
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Location:
    MINNESOTA
    K. So is the Freedom Caucus going to man up or not?
     

Share This Page