All registered voters may request to vote absentee-by-mail in Indiana by completing an absentee ballot application.

For the Republican primary election, voters do not need to indicate a reason for voting absentee-by-mail. And if you already submitted an ABS-MAIL form for the original primary date (May 5, 2020), you do not need to resubmit your application for June 2.
Counties will start mailing absentee ballots to those who requested them on April 18, 2020.

On April 22, the Indiana Election Commission will decide if the primary will be a MAIL ONLY primary (in an attempt to keep people at home and contain the spread of coronavirus).

Here are three things to consider before voting in the Republican primary.

It’s easy to make sure your vote counts. Simply download the absentee ballot form, print and fill it out, and mail it to your county’s election board office. (See page 2 of the form for the address you need.) 

To fill out your absentee-by-mail ballot for the Republican primary:

• Print your county above the bold line for section 1.
• Print your name, date of birth, and registration address in box 1.
• Mark Republican Party in box 3.
• Sign and date box 4.

District 3 voters should send their ABS-MAIL forms to one of the following counties (wherever you reside):

• Adams
• Allen
• Blackford
• DeKalb
• Huntington
• Jay
• Kosciusko
• LaGrange
• Noble
• Steuben
• Wells
• Whitley

The deadline to return the form is May 21, 2020 (12 days before Election Day) by 11:59 p.m. local time.

Download and submit your ABS-MAIL form today.

Additional Absentee Ballot Forms:

• ABS-IN PERSON Application for In-Person Absentee Ballot | En Español
• ABS-TRAVELING BOARD
• ABS-MAIL: Application for Absentee Ballot by Mail Only | En Español
• 2020 Military and Overseas Voter Guide
• Absentee Voter’s Bill of Rights

For more information on absentee voting, visit https://www.in.gov/sos/elections/2402.htm.

To learn more about Dr. Chris, visit his website at drchrismagiera.com and his Facebook page at facebook.com/drchrismagieraforcongress. You can also donate to Dr. Chris’s campaign at drchrismagiera.com/contribute-dr-chris-magiera.

The post How to Vote Absentee-by-Mail for the Indiana Republican Primary appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

As I have traveled the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana during this campaign, the most frequently voiced concern by the people involves the subject of immigration in general, and specifically the crisis of uninvited migrants at our southern border. This invasion threatens our lives, our liberties, our properties, our national sovereignty, and our American exceptionalism.

Yes, these United States are a Union of immigrants, but our sovereignty and our constitutional, representative Republic can only be maintained with a sound immigration policy. A policy based on the Constitution. 

Hello. I am Dr. Chris Magiera from Warsaw, Indiana, and I am running for the United States House of Representatives in the May 5 June 2 Republican Party primary election for the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. Recently, a person contacted me with concerns about my position on the subject of immigration and naturalization. Their comment was that, while I presented much constitutional theory on the definition of the role of the federal government in immigration and naturalization, they wanted more details on specific policies and issues. OK, that is fair enough. They then arranged to send me a list of specific questions involving immigration and naturalization. 

I have read these questions and formulated answers, which I shall share with you at this time. Again, for the sake of this presentation, let’s leave behind the academic discussions. But I would continue to recommend a reference that was well known to the Founders, the 1758 book “The Law of Nations” by Emer de Vattel. 

Okay, are you ready? Here we go. 

Do you oppose “chain migration”? Yes. 

Do you oppose the visa “lottery”? Yes. 

Do you support the mandatory use of E-Verify? Yes. 

Do you oppose amnesty? Yes. 

Do you oppose “Birthright Citizenship”? Yes. It is there in the 14th Amendment. You just have to read it carefully. Also, according to “The Law of Nations,” a reference used by the Framers of the Constitution, citizenship follows the parents, not the “soil.” 

Do you oppose unnecessary worker importation, if their presence would threaten the jobs or depress the wages of American workers? Yes. Here I must add that the situation would not be so “desperate” had 63 million potential American workers not been aborted! Also, if there is a job-skill shortage, reaching for the immigration solution is the last thing that we should be doing, not the first. 

Do you support a reduction in total immigration? Yes. Before 1990, the average yearly immigration number was 325,000. Since that time it is averaging 1 million per year. Assimilation takes time, and the vast numbers complicate the situation. Take for instance my own situation. I am a 4th generation Polish-American born in South Bend, Indiana. And I am the first generation not fluent in the Polish language. I am fully assimilated. I have never been to Poland, and I do not harbor memories of all the thousands of years of European conflicts. 

Do you support border security? Yes, wall and all. 

Do you support completion of “US-VISIT,” a biometric database system for tracking the entry and exit of every non-citizen? Yes. This was approved in 1996, but never implemented. 

Do you oppose rewards for illegal immigration? Yes, absolutely no benefits for undocumented immigrants. We must turn off the “magnet.” 

Do you support local law enforcement of immigration? This question opens up the constitutional discussion again. It is complex. Care must be taken to not violate the “anti-commandeering doctrine”(see Prigg v Pennsylvania and several other cases). Immigration and naturalization authority and enforcement are federal powers, and, according to the 10th Amendment and the above SCOTUS cases, the State and local officials are not required to act as Federal enforcers, should they choose not to. The Constitution Solution would be to appropriate more Federal enforcement assets. 

Do you oppose “sanctuary policies”? Should funding be reduced to state and local entities that adopt such policies? Again, the short answer is “yes,” but the constitutional theory is detailed. Allow me to comment. I am a supporter of the original intent of the Founders’ Constitution. Aside from the few, enumerated powers of Congress in Article 1, Section 8, there is no constitutional justification for the central government to be funding state and local law enforcement. 

You can’t reduce something that is unconstitutional in the first place. Congress must be careful to follow Article 1, Section 8 and the 10th Amendment. Immigration is a function of the central government (because it is the first step in naturalization, a primary power of a sovereign), and its enforcement must be constitutional. There is a Constitution Solution, and I shall work toward that end. 

Well, I was asked to provide details, and you now have them. Compare and contrast with other candidates. But remember, in order to keep America great, we must keep America constitutional — never wavering from our mission.

This is why I’m asking you to stand with me on May 5 June 2 and vote for Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress. Visit DrChrisMagiera.com to learn more. 

I’m Dr. Chris Magiera, and I approve this message. Paid for by Friends of Chris Magiera, Inc. Thank you.

The post Immigration Specifics appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

Do you feel that the federal government is unconstitutionally infringing upon your right to keep and bear arms? Of course they are! And unless something is done soon about this blatant usurpation of powers not granted, we will be reduced to living in a state of abject tyranny, under the domination of the progressive and socialist administrative state and the career politicians who support it. 

Hello. I am Dr. Chris Magiera, and I am running for the United States House of Representatives in the May 5 June 2 Republican Party primary election for the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. What do I offer that other candidates lack? That’s simple. I offer the Constitution Solution. 

Allow me to explain. First, we must go back to the time of the Founders. In 1772, Samuel Adams said, “Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First, a right to life. Secondly, to liberty. Thirdly, to property — together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.” And since God created nature, these are God-given natural rights. 

The Founders instituted our representative Republic and its Constitution in order to secure these God-given natural rights. Men do not grant these rights, governments do not grant these rights, documents do not grant these rights, and Amendments do not grant these rights. Through nature, God has granted these rights. To quote the 2nd Amendment, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Let me repeat that: “Shall not be infringed.” It simply cannot be made any clearer. 

So, in practical terms, what does this mean, and why is my opinion so different than other candidates? I can summarize it in one short sentence: There are no constitutional federal firearms acts. None. Beginning with the 1934 Act, they should all be repealed, and if elected to Congress, I shall work to that goal.

So, there you have it. The Constitution Solution, plain and simple. No pragmatism, no malice towards liberty, and no ignorance of the Constitution. All original intent, all the time. 

This is why I’m asking you to stand with me on May 5 June 2 and vote for Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress. Visit DrChrisMagiera.com to learn more. 

I’m Dr. Chris Magiera, and I approve this message. Paid for by Friends of Chris Magiera, Inc. Thank you.

The post To Keep & Bear Arms appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

Hello. I am Dr. Chris Magiera, from Warsaw, Indiana, and I am running for the United States House of Representatives in the May 5 June 2 Republican Party primary election for the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. 

The first thing that I would like to do is to ask if there are any military veterans in the audience? To you all, I say a heartfelt “Thank you.” And especially to those not here, because they gave the ultimate sacrifice. For the last 230-plus years, the members of our military have been fighting to support and defend one thing: our representative, constitutional Republic. Thank you again. 

So, what exactly is so unique about this simple document, the U.S. Constitution? Well, you have to go back a while in history. In fact, you have to go back to Creation. We are all endowed by our Creator, with certain unalienable natural rights, which include the rights to life, liberty, property, and the right to defend and support these rights to the best of our abilities. The Founders developed our representative republic and Constitution in order to secure our God-given natural rights. 

We are a federal system, where the sovereign states came together to form a compact for the common defense and representation to the world. It is a highly detailed and well-balanced system, with very specific, enumerated rules. However, for the last 125 or so years, our Union has been under assault by the progressive and socialist agendas. Because of the unconstitutional delegation of congressional powers, there now exists a massive and oppressive Administrative State. 

Quite frankly, I’m worried. There are times when the whole world seems to be upside down. We are not protecting the unborn. We are allowing our right to keep and bear arms to be infringed, and we are allowing an invasion of uninvited migrants that threatens our American exceptionalism. 

But do not despair. There is a solution, the Constitution Solution. By returning strictly to the original intent of the Framers, we can and will prevail. 

If elected to Congress, that shall be my goal. When considering a piece of legislation, it must be the primary duty of every member of Congress to ask the following questions, in this order: 1) Is it Constitutional, 2) Can we afford it? 3) Do we need it? 

I intend to use the wisdom and virtue of my 37-year medical career to guide legislation made in pursuance of our Constitution. Always. No compromise. If elected to Congress, I pledge to constitutionally legislate, not delegate, so you won’t have to litigate, to reclaim your God-given natural rights and liberties. 

On May 5 June 2, vote for the Constitution solution, Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress. Thank you for listening. May God bless you all. May God bless Indiana, and may God bless these United States of America. Thank you.

The post The Constitution Solution Speech appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

What do high school students and members of Congress have in common? A lot more than you would think. And that is sad and concerning. 

Hello. I’m Dr. Chris Magiera of Warsaw, Indiana, and I am running for the United States House of Representatives from the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. On May 5 June 2, there will be a Republican Party primary election, and I would appreciate your vote. 

Back to the headline: Congress and High School. What is the link here? I shall answer. Because humans are social creatures, we tend to bond into units. Some of these collectives can function for the good, but others can be very destructive. A case in point is high school cliques: ruthless, authoritarian mobs fueled by raging hormones and immature neural connections. 

Is advancing age an escape from this tyranny? Perhaps not. A case in point is the phenomenon of the congressional caucus. Not infrequently, I am asked, “If you are elected to the House, which caucus will you join?” And people wait for an answer, as though this will provide some amazing revelation. I standardly answer that, according to the Rules of the House, I will caucus with the Republicans. But people will press, “How about the Freedom Caucus or the Republican Study Committee?” And on and on and on.

Curious, I looked into this. Did you know that in addition to the Republican and Democrat caucuses, that there are 357 officially recognized and financed caucuses — or, technically, Congressional Member Organizations (CMOs) — in the United States House of Representatives? I’m not kidding. Here is the list. I have read through it, and a few of the Cliques caught my attention. There’s the Bourbon Caucus and the Wrestling Caucus. What will come next, the Poker and Cigar Caucuses? 

We can joke about this for hours, but these cliques are serious business, and voters need to be educated as to the effect of group-think on legislation. Just like in high school and junior high school, the clique phenomenon exacts a high price on its members. Are the memories coming back now? In order to be popular in a clique, there is enormous peer pressure to conform to the prevailing views. It is natural human group psychology. We change behavior in order to seek pleasure and approval and to avoid the emotional pain of non-conformity. And of course, there is always the desire to be “leader of the pack.” 

Cliques and caucuses act to subvert independence. The Founders knew this well. In fact, George Washington often said that “faction” would be one of two things that would undo our constitutional, representative Republic. The other item [he mentioned was] foreign entanglements. 

So, back to this election. I would put forth that my 37 years of medical practice makes me uniquely qualified for the House and insulated against the effects of factions, caucuses, and cliques. In addition to healing the sick, I have always had another goal in my medical practice, and that has been maintaining the sanctity of the patient-doctor relationship. I have developed a determined independence of keeping all other interlopers out of the exam room. Government, insurance companies, bureaucrats, and bean counters: out! I am used to making decisions that are not easy, convenient, or popular. 

Governments are instituted among men in order to secure our God-given natural rights to life, liberty, property and the means to support and defend them to the best of our abilities (to paraphrase Samuel Adams). The clique that I will belong to is the Constitution caucus. And you know what? It’s not even on the list. How sad. 

If elected, I “shall be bound,” according to Article 6, Section 3, “by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.” Period. 100 percent of the time. Unlike ambitious career politicians, I will be unafraid to confront the cliques and leadership in order to pursue the Constitution Solution.

In order to keep America great, we must keep America constitutional — never wavering from our mission. 

On May 5 June 2, vote for the Constitution Solution, Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress. Visit DrChrisMagiera.com to learn more. 

I’m Dr. Chris Magiera, and I approve this message. Paid for by Friends of Chris Magiera, Inc. Thank you.

The post Cliques, Congress, & High School appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

Do you feel that our country is being turned upside down? What was once right is now wrong, and what was condemned is now celebrated? This is because most Congressional conservatives aren’t voting in alignment with the Constitution. They’re not fully upholding the sanctity of all human life. 

The very first of our God-given, inalienable, natural rights is the right to life. Governments are formed in order to secure these natural rights. Not only is abortion immoral; it is unconstitutional. Abortion is murder and should be treated as such. Attempts to regulate abortion by legislation are counterproductive, because such attempts inadvertently confer legitimacy on the practice. Life begins at conception and continues until natural death. Abortion is never to be allowed. 

Abortion has, as its primary goal, the killing of a baby. However, in contrast, a fetal-maternal separation procedure has the primary goal of preserving the lives of both baby and mother. There is a difference between the two procedures. A fetal-maternal separation is both moral and constitutional. Sadly, given our present technology, not all babies in such circumstances will survive. However, there will come a time when medical science will make fetal-maternal separations highly successful. 

Without life, you can’t have liberty or the pursuit of happiness. The proper role of government is to secure the God-given, inalienable, natural right to life. The Constitution IS the solution.

I’m Dr. Chris Magiera, a Republican candidate for Congress from the 3rd District of Indiana, and I will always vote to secure the right to life. Unlike many career politicians, I can’t be bought, influenced, or fooled into supporting Planned Parenthood and the other purveyors of the culture of death. 

In order to keep America great, we must keep America constitutional — never wavering from our mission. 

On May 5 June 2, vote for the Constitution Solution, Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress. Visit DrChrisMagiera.com to learn more. 

I’m Dr. Chris Magiera, and I approve this message. Paid for by Friends of Chris Magiera, Inc. Thank you.

The post Inalienable Right to Life appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

Do you pause and take a deep breath each time you tune in to the news? Does it seem that each day brings a new crisis? It’s no wonder that the young people of today are paralyzed by fear. They are fed a steady diet of immediate apocalypse. 

Who is to blame? What can we do about it? Well, if you can spare a few minutes, I shall explain. 

Hello. I’m Dr. Chris Magiera. I am running for the United States House of Representatives in the May 5 June 2 Republican Party Primary election for the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. 

Whether it is a terrorist attack or the virus of the day, we must maintain a healthy skepticism of the government-sponsored solutions. Remember what one of President Obama’s advisors said:  “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Yes, I am sorry to say, that the progressive administrative state, and the career politicians who support it, are always looking for ways to infringe your God-given natural rights and liberties. 

And this is nothing new. In 1776, Founder John Adams said, “Fear is the foundation of most governments. But it is so sordid and brutal a passion, and it renders men in whose breasts it predominates so stupid and miserable…” Later, in 1798, James Madison — the “Father of the Constitution” — said, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, “Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against danger real or pretended from abroad.” Let me repeat that: “Real or pretended from abroad.” 

So, you see, we have been down this road before. Don’t be tricked into relinquishing your liberty in response to the cries of “we must do something!” But what, you ask, are we to do? Well, the answer is more simple than you might think. 

To secure our God-given natural rights and liberties, the Founders developed a constitutional, representative Republic. The Constitution Solution is the answer. When considering the solution for any crisis of the day, both citizens and members of Congress need to ask the following questions, in this order: 1) Is it constitutional? 2) Can we afford it? 3) Do we need it?

To keep America great, we must keep America constitutional — never wavering from our mission. This is why I’m asking you to stand with me on May 5 June 2 and vote for Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress. Visit DrChrisMagiea.com to learn more. 

I’m Dr. Chris Magiera, and I approve this message. Paid for by Friends of Chris Magiera, Inc. Thank you.

The post Fear & Government appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

When Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (in front of the entire nation) tore up President Trump’s State of the Union speech, she exhibited the emotional and intellectual characteristics befitting a truculent toddler. But it gets worse. She might have just as well made a public spectacle of ripping to shreds the Constitution of the United States. And that action would be inexcusable from a person of such high public office. Does this concern you? It certainly concerns me. 

Hello. I am Dr. Chris Magiera, from Warsaw, Indiana, and I am running for the United States House of Representatives from the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. On May 5 June 2, the Republican Party will hold a primary election to see who represents the Party in the November general election. I will be challenging the career-politician incumbent, Representative Jim Banks, for that office. 

After viewing the State of the Union speech and the vote of the Senate to acquit (rightfully, I might add) President Donald Trump of the charges of impeachment, several things became readily apparent. The people of these United States are now polarized to an extent rarely seen in our history. The Democratic Party, and its leadership, have now virtually eliminated from the realm of possibility any attempts at bipartisan legislation. This is unfortunate because, with their anti-Constitutional beliefs and behavior, the only option with respect to the Democratic Party appears to be, as radio commentator Rush Limbaugh has stated many times: “Defeat and Domination.” 

If the House Democrats attempt any further harassment of the President, they should be charged with “Malicious Prosecution.” Some have argued that this impeachment sham should rekindle efforts to repeal the 17th Amendment, so that Senators may be recalled at any time if they fail to represent the interests of their respective states, as determined by the state legislatures. But I digress. The purpose of this discussion is to clarify my feelings about President Trump.

His State of the Union speech was a masterful and moving presentation. That man can communicate. One of his accomplishments has been a vigorous slashing of obtrusive federal regulations. This is not given much attention because it is not glamorous. However, easing burdensome regulations is key to increasing prosperity and reigning in the unaccountable Administrative State. He laid out his vision for many subjects, including war, trade, spending, immigration, and medical care. 

Optimizing peace, frugality, international trade, sovereignty, and health are visions that I share with the President. However, there are a number of possible paths to these goals, and this is the place where I must respectfully disagree with the President. 

It appears that he is motivated partially by pragmatism, and this is understandable, considering his business background. That is, he is driven to “get the job done, whatever it takes.” In addition, I sincerely believe that he has around him, from time to time, suboptimal advisors. If you look at the membership of the Globalist-dominated Council on Foreign Relations, you will find a number of Cabinet Officers and Advisors. 

So, how can I sum this up? Some time ago, there was a popular public service announcement that had the tag-line “Friends don’t let friends drive drunk.” Well, I would amend this to read “Friends don’t let friends govern unconstitutionally.” 

The Founders were very wise men and designed a plan for a central government that contained, importantly, a separation of powers between the branches, and strictly enumerated and limited powers. This is the Constitution Solution, which is the central pillar of my campaign. Over the last 100 or so years, Congress has unconstitutionally delegated powers to the executive branch, with predictable results. In a 1788 speech, Founder Patrick Henry voiced his misgivings about the design of the proposed new government. He remarked, “Your President may easily become King.” He went on to state, “Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty?” 

President Trump is very much fulfilling his constitutional duty under Article 2, Section 3: “He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” After that, it is strictly up to the Congress to legislate. The principle of the separation of powers mandates that it is the job of the Congress, and especially the House of Representatives, to represent the people. Constitutional ideas are universally welcome, but there is no justification for members succumbing to celebrity adoration of any one person over the Constitution. 

I like President Donald Trump and could easily call him “friend.” However, my primary duty as a member of the House “shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution” (Article 6, Section 3). 

If elected to the United States House of Representatives from the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana, I pledge to constitutionally legislate, not delegate, so you don’t have to litigate to reclaim your God-given natural rights and liberties. 

So, on May 5 June 2, I urge you to stand beside me. Let’s Make America Great Again by Making America Constitutional Again. Vote for Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress. Thank you.

The post President Trump & The Constitution appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

News Flash: Career-politician and incumbent 3rd District Congressman, Jim Banks, is already lashing out at his opponent in the May 5 June 2, 2020 Republican Party primary election. And you know what? The “spin” will surely devolve out of control, as career-politician Banks becomes more desperate to stay in office. 

Hello. I am Dr. Chris Magiera, of Warsaw, Indiana, and I am running for the United States House of Representatives from the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. As the campaign progresses, I will need, from time to time, to infuse the process with some reality checks. 

Let’s look at the most recent “Pinocchio Points”: My opponent claims, about me, that “He opposes President Trump and me on the key issue of repealing ObamaCare.” Nothing could be further from the truth. I am assuming that Banks is referring to his support for HR 1628: American Health Care Act of 2017. First, a bit of background. In case any of you have forgotten, “ObamaCare” (also known as the “ACA”) is the situation created by the passage of two bills in the 111th Congress: HR 3590: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and HR 4872: Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. 

My issues with HR-1628 were numerous. In fact, my feeling about that bill was summed up by the acronym “REC.” Yes, like a train wreck.

• R: It was not a repeal of ObamaCare. You can’t find the language “HR 3590 and HR 4872 are hereby repealed” anywhere in the Bill. Analogous to cancer treatment, Obamacare must be completely excised. 

• E: Contrary to constitutional conservative principles, HR 1628 simply created new entitlements. 

• C: HR 1628 did not address the root causes of the high cost of medical care. No, I could not support such a flawed bill.

My advice at that time was that the new mantra of medical care needed to be “Cash, Catastrophic Insurance, and Charity.” I preached the sanctity of the patient-doctor relationship and the need to preserve “natural price discovery,” exclude “rent-seekers” (like the government) from that relationship, and, to minimize “regulatory capture” by the medical-industrial complex. (See the short book Common Sense Medicine by Jeff Danby.)  

And lest we forget the gross unconstitutionality of federal government involvement in national-scope medical care, I refer you to Article 1, Section 8 and the 10th Amendment. To move on, the entire thrust of Banks’ campaign against me is going to be an attempt to portray me as a radical and irrational critic of President Trump. You know the drill: Anyone who has the slightest disagreement with President Trump must not be a “True Patriot.” 

Well, let me set this record straight. President Donald Trump just went through an impeachment process that was not in any way justified by the criteria set forth in the Founders’ Constitution. He has been rightfully acquitted. I liked candidate Trump from his first trip down the escalator. And you know why? He is a political outsider who can affect change, and he is a person of incredible vision when it comes to promoting the safety, prosperity, and health of the American people. 

I share those principles, but he and I travel on two seemingly different paths to the goals. Whereas President Trump and Congressman Banks follow a course of pragmatism and populism, I adhere to the Constitution pathway, or, if you will, the Constitution Solution. 

Patriotism isn’t doing what is easy, convenient, or popular. Patriotism is working to secure our God-given natural rights and liberties, no matter the consequences. As Founder Patrick Henry said, “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” 

So, I ask you, the voters of Indiana’s 3rd Congressional District, to tune out the malicious noise and stand beside me. Let’s Make America Great Again by Making America Constitutional Again. On May 5 June 2, vote for Constitutional Republican Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress. Thank you.

The post Spinmeister Banks appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.

The national debt of the United States is currently over $23 trillion! That is $68,400 per citizen or $183,000 per taxpayer. And it gets worse: We currently have over 125 trillion in unfunded liabilities. (Mitchell Nemeth, FEE: 9/17/19: “18 Facts on the U.S. National Debt That Are Almost Too Hard to Believe.”) And it gets worse: The current annual interest on the debt is over $378 billion. 

We are spending like a strung-out crack addict with a wallet full of credit cards. At some point, the bubble will burst, and the repo-man will come calling. What language will he be speaking? What will be left to eat? The Great Depression will look luxurious in comparison to our future. But don’t worry — there is a solution. A Constitution Solution. 

Hello. I am Dr. Chris Magiera from Warsaw, Indiana, and I am running for the United States House of Representatives from the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. On May 5 June 2, 2020, there will be a Republican Party primary election. In that election, I will be challenging the career-politician incumbent for the Republican nomination. 

Each day, the massive Administrative State infringes on your God-given natural rights and liberties. Our Founders created this constitutional, representative republic to secure these rights. It will be my pledge to always follow the original intent, understanding, and meaning of the Founders’ Constitution. 

If you are like most Americans, the mere thought of all those zeros in billions and trillions just causes your brain to go numb. “It won’t happen in my time” or “They are always saying this” is the usual comment I hear. However, it is real, and the repo-man is coming. 

If the U.S. cannot pay its debts, the cost of borrowing will go up for the government, then for consumers. Life quality and productivity will plummet. The only way out will be drastic cuts to government benefits and/or mammoth increases in taxes — to the middle class. 

Do I have your attention now? Whether you are a “maker” or a “taker,” life quality is going to suffer, big time. 

So, what can we do about it? Can’t we just kick the can down the road, like we always do? You could, but the cost of the interest on the debt will continue to rise and rise and rise. 

Almost every year, the government spends more than it takes in. That is the yearly budget deficit. The accumulated deficits, and the interest due, become the long-term debt. For instance, in fiscal years 2018 and 2019, the deficit was about $1.2 trillion each year. 

“But the economy is booming,” you retort. It may be, but this current economic “high” is financed by consumer and government borrowing. Whose fault is it? Well, last time I checked the Constitution, it is the Congress, and only the Congress, that has the power to raise revenues and appropriate monies. The President is empowered to either approve or veto bills and to execute the spending provisions. 

The national debt is multifactorial and bipartisan. But it is the House of Representatives, of which I am seeking to be a member, that starts the process: Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1: “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” 

Over time, I have read many proposals for dealing with the debt and deficits, but none have left me with a sense of satisfaction. Until now. While I do not endorse the following plan as stand-alone legislation, it contains one of the best explanations of the problem and possible solutions that I have ever read. 

The paper is from the Manhattan Institute. It is the September 2018 report by Brian Riedl: “A Comprehensive Federal Budget Plan to Avert a Debt Crisis.” It was very, very heavy reading, but one of the features that I found illuminating was his “compare and contrast” of how the various conservative and liberal debt “pipe dreams” simply will not work. 

Unlike my Constitution Solution, under which the government must be structured according to Article 1, Section 8, he (Riedl) begins with the assumption that our current mandatory and discretionary spending parameters will remain the same. In other words, his goal is to create a bipartisan plan to stave off economic disaster by the year 2048. 

Here is where the dull part begins, but I implore you to bear with me. The national debt is now above the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) and, by 2048 will be almost 300 percent of GDP. That is not sustainable. He states, “The entire increase in long-term debt will come from surging Social Security, Medicare, and other government healthcare spending.” Mandatory entitlement spending is about 70 percent of our budget, and the remaining 30 percent is split almost evenly between discretionary military and non-military spending. Over the next 30 years, Medicare and Social Security, and the interest, will create an unfunded liability of $100 trillion. 

Stay with me now. Because the mandatory spending and debt will be growing much faster than discretionary spending and debt, his contention is that the system can only be stabilized by action on the mandatory entitlements. He states “Moving to a fully balanced budget is probably not possible. However, stabilizing the national debt around 95 percent of GDP…would likely stabilize the cost of interest on the national debt and the debt’s effect on the economy.” 

Why the emphasis on mandatory entitlement spending? Mr. Riedl gives three reasons. “First, it’s the only solution that addresses the underlying problem.” “The second reason” he continues, “is generational equity. Drowning younger workers in ever-rising taxes is no more moral than drowning them is debt…” “The third reason is economic. The level of tax increases that would be necessary to keep pace with the escalating entitlement spending — including a 33 percent payroll tax rate or a 34 percent VAT (value-added tax) — would retard economic growth.” 

And one other thing: He goes on to state that “long-term sustainability means that showy reforms, such as across-the-board discretionary spending cuts, are less important than subtle entitlement reforms that produce larger savings over time.” I mention that last point because that is precisely the flawed budgetary philosophy promoted by my opponent. 

I am speaking of Representative Banks’ June 13, 2019 proposed amendment to HR 2740: Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Defense, State, Foreign Operations, and Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2020. According to the Congressional Record, the Amendment read, “Each amount made available in division D, except those amounts made available to the Department of Defense, is hereby reduced by 14 percent.” 

The Congressional Record continues, with Representative Banks saying “Mr. Chair, I am going to be back. I am going to come back time and time again, proposing this same amendment for across-the-board cuts of 14 percent…” 

So, what’s my point? Well, so, given the debt facts as presented by Mr. Riedl, it appears that Representative Banks is on a fool’s errand. He is proposing mere budgetary bandaids when what is needed is a more comprehensive cure. So, before everyone falls into a coma, allow me to present a brief summary of Brian Riedl’s solution. “Stabilizing the national debt at 95 percent of GDP would require tax-and-spending reforms producing net savings against the baseline that gradually rise to 6 percent of the GDP annually by 2048.” 

How will this be accomplished? 

• Social Security: “Raise full-benefit retirement age to 69 by 2030. Trim the benefit growth only for the top 60 percent (by income) of retirees.” 

• Medicare: “Premium support (model) plus other efficiency reforms…Raise Medicare Part B and D premiums for retirees above the 40th income percentile…” 

• Medicaid: “Phase out the inflated federal reimbursement rate preferentially applied to the ACA’s newly eligible population of nondisabled, working-age adults…federal per-capita spending caps… that grow at 3.5 percent per annum…” 

• Other Mandatory Spending: “…limit most spending growth to 3.2 percent annually…” 

• Discretionary Spending: “Cap annual growth at 2.5 percent through 2030, and 3.5 percent thereafter. Parity between defense and nondefense discretionary spending…” 

• Tax Increases:  “Halve the tax exclusion for employer-provided health insurance gradually over 25 years…Raise the Social Security and Medicare payroll tax 1% each and add a 1% income tax above the maximum earnings subject to the Social Security payroll tax…” 

Well, there you have it. This discussion was like prepping for a colonoscopy — no fun, but necessary for a good outcome!

But before I sign off, remember that I said I did not support this plan. Well, as logical and as well thought out as it is, I cannot support it as a stand-alone solution. The deficit and debt can only be effectively addressed, not by budget bandaids as my opponent proposes, but by a serious Constitution Solution. 

The only way to eliminate the tyranny of the massive and autonomous Administrative State is to restore the federal government spending to those limited and enumerated powers, mostly found in Article 1, Section 8. Remember, the other powers are largely reserved, as outlined in the 10th Amendment, to the States or to the People. It has taken over 80 years to create the largely unconstitutional Administrative State, so it is probably going to take, perhaps, 40 or 50 years to sunset the offending agencies and transfer jurisdiction to the States. 

Did you hear what I said? It will be for the States to decide what and how to implement programs and spending vested to them by the Constitution. 

I could support the budget and debt reforms as proposed in the Riedl report only if they were part of an iron-clad, locked down, air-tight transition plan to restore spending according to the original intent of the Founders’ Constitution. Remember, when considering legislation, it is the duty of every member of Congress to ask the following questions, in this order:  Is it Constitutional? Can we afford it? Do we need it? 

So, on May 5 June 2, 2020, I ask you to vote for a Republican candidate who has a serious vision for a comprehensive Constitution Solution, not just some showy budgetary bandaids. Vote to secure your God-given natural rights and liberties. Vote for Dr. Chris Magiera for Congress from the 3rd Congressional District of Indiana. Thank you.

The post National Debt & The Constitution appeared first on Dr. Chris Magiera.