10th Amendment Center

Course: Tenther 101

Do you want to understand the constitution - AND - what to do about it when it’s violated? Then you’ve come to the right place! Our all-new Tenther 101 Course is really 3 courses in one! It’s a 3 hour live online course that will give you everything you need to know to get started.

Go to: http://store.tenthamendmentcenter.com/product-p/ct101.htm to purchase.

LMFA Fair & Consistent

I must strongly disagree with Tom Kocal’s commentary in the Dec. 14, 2011 Prairie Advocate (Heart of the Matter, Sec. One, pg.5) regarding the regulations to build new livestock facilities in the State of Illinois.

The IL Dept. of Agriculture is responsible for implementing the “Livestock Management Facilities Act” (LMFA). This state law was written to make the rules and regulations for animal production consistent and fair throughout the state. It includes strict “set-backs” for locations of new facilities and requires detailed “nutrient management plans”. Basically that plan regulates when, where, and how a farmer can store and spread manure on his fields.

You argue that local governing bodies should be responsible for the regulatory task of determining if a livestock farmer has satisfied the rules of the LMFA? The LMFA was created for an independent agency to make these decisions on livestock farms based on scientific rules and fact, not the emotions of a handful of local people. If the IL Dept. of Ag is not qualified to do this, then who is? The IL EPA?

They have systematically eliminated many small, family type livestock farms from our area over the last 5 - 10 years through tight regulation. Many local county boards lack the resources to make informed decisions based on the technical nature of these issues; or they can be subject to personal bias (for or against) that may be unrelated to the merits of an individual project.

I trust the future of the livestock industry, our rural economy, and our environment more with informed professionals following strict guidelines, rather than with “anti-everything” activists that want to protect us from problems that may not even exist.

Brad Smith
Carroll Co. Farm Bureau Board
Milledgeville, IL

Hoping for Change - in DC

Christmas and New Year’s celebrations are behind us. It was such a good time to be with the family and (try) to forget about the dismal future of our country. I keep thinking about Hope and Change.

In order to save this once great nation, I hope we get a different president as well as change to a conservative senate. That’s what Newt Gingrich did in 1994 with his Contract with America (not that Newt is my #1 choice, though any of the challengers would be a vast improvement over Obama). However, it was the first time in 40 years that the Republicans held both houses.

I remember how our U.S. Congress held Clinton’s feet to the fire. He vetoed welfare reform three times before signing the congressional bill. I will give President Clinton credit. Unlike Obama, he was smart enough to move to the center and work with the Republican Congress.

In 1998 they passed the first balanced budget since 1969. Under Newt they had four consecutive years of balanced budgets.

Projected through 2012, Obama and company will have driven up the debt more than all of the previous presidents combined (Politifact). At this point now, no matter who gets in office with a debt of $15 trillion, can this country be saved? At our next Tea Party meeting we will get some answers to this topic.

We are pleased to have 18-year-old, home-schooled economist and author (now), Savannah Liston back with us. Savannah is an economics graduate from Mises Institute. She works part time, implementing improvement projects at a local aerospace company. Some of her ideas are thought-provoking, and you will certainly find this an educational experience.

Let us meet at 111 E. Mason St., Lena, IL on January 12th at 6:30 P.M. Contact Stephenson County Tea Party at , or phone .

Bill Dietz
Lena, IL

Progress and Abortion

Leftist thinking captures many ideas, but a common denominator of them all is progressivism. That is to say, leftist ideas are progressive, leading to progress, helping “advance.” A progressive society is a society which advances, its members get more and more rights every time, they are increasingly better protected against contingencies: housing, illness, unemployment, ageing. On the other hand, a non-progressive society is conservative and does not “advance,” there are more and more unequal rights among its members, and there are many members who are excluded for different reasons and are forced to live on the margins of that society —the unemployed, low classes, gays, etc.

This classification is given by leftism to its own ideology and is indisputable, as long as there is no evidence to the contrary —there hardly ever is. The thinking we might define as not leftist has a lower starting value because it is not “progressive.” These clichés are widely accepted today by the entire political class we might call leftist (of course), and by a large part of the rightist political class —something which is outrageous.

Having thus admitted that leftist thinking is “progressive,” I find it very difficult to understand this eagerness for imposing the abortion law awaiting us. Is it progressive to kill? Can an advancing society keep on advancing with 100,000 abortions each year? And what about aborting mothers? How can one oppose the death penalty for convicts (I do myself) while defending the death penalty for someone who has not been born yet because he or she is an embryo, or a less than 14 weeks old fetus, or has an alleged malformation and is still less than 22 weeks old? Where is progress here? Where are we advancing to, other than to an abyss? Is not the case rather as follows?

First we offer Heaven to our youths through an insane sexual conduct (the earlier you start your sexual life and the more promiscuous you are, the better for you); if this results in unwanted pregnancies, don’t worry because you can have an abortion and nothing has happened here; and when after so much craziness there are consequences in the form of psychological damage for the woman (the main victim in this entire tragedy, along with the unborn child), we will have a new subject who will joyfully accept any new instruction she is given.

It is paradoxical to learn that the two most harmful regimes known to humankind, i.e. Nazism and Stalinist Communism, used to encourage the most irresponsible sexuality ever, open only to instinct, and the easiness for having abortions was even greater than what this law seeks. The bigwigs in these regimes were well aware of this: the more dehumanized the individual became, the easier his/her control by the powerful state apparatus over which they ruled. Basically, all inhuman laws —and this abortion law is— ultimately seek to turn people into subjects under a powerful state.

Be careful.
Alejandro Perez
Foro Independiente

Gringrich’s Short Comings

I want to thank Lisa Bloom (Prairie Advocate, Dec.14) for reminding us of the long list of Newt Gingrich’s moral and ethical short comings. For those who don’t remember, Gingrich lost the support of his own party as Speaker of the House in 1998, and his entire campaign staff resigned earlier this year. This man may be articulate and bright, but there are certainly questions regarding his character.

On a recent PBS News Hour show syndicated columnist Mark Shields said that Gingrich was not emotionally mature enough to be the Republican candidate or the President of the United States. I’ve never heard Shields so bluntly critical. Shields also points out that Gingrich is claiming to have been a close associate and supporter of Ronald Reagan when, in fact, he was a harsh critic of Reagan. Such “memory slips” are common to Gingrich.

As to the support of the Religious Right for Gingrich, I am not at all surprised. This group reminds me of the young maiden who believes anything you whisper in her ear. They have continually supported the conservative wing of the Republican Party despite Christ’s teachings exhorting us to give to the poor. One among many such references tells the story of the rich young ruler who asked how he could enter the kingdom of heaven. Christ’s reply was, “Sell all you have and give it (the proceeds) to the poor.”

Since the late 70s, the conservative Republican push toward unregulated free-market capitalism with lower taxes for the wealthy has produced none of the trickle-down to the lower classes that was promised. Instead there has been a 239% growth in income share for the top 1%, loss of income for the middle class, and a continual increase in the number of citizens who fall below the poverty line. The US now has the least income equality we’ve had since 1929. Among approximately 30 of the richest nations (OECD members) we rank very near the bottom in income equality * That doesn’t sound like Christian charity to me.

*World Bank and CIA figures using the GINI measure of inequality.

Delmar Lohr
Forreston, Illinois

Your Vote vs. Their Money

Career politicians in the U.S. Congress are quick to reach out to voters around election time. This is natural since it is the voters who will determine who gets elected. However, these politicians are continuously reaching out to special interests who supply the large amounts of money needed to run a successful campaign. So, the voters supply the votes and the special interests supply the money.

The problem here is that the voters and the special interests are different groups with different expectations. Voters expect politicians to represent the country and their local district. Special interests expect favors for themselves and their companies. Voters never have enough money to get the attention of members of Congress after the election.

If you would like to support candidates who will refuse to accept special interest money, are independent of a political party, and will serve a limited term, go to www.goooh.com to learn more.

Billy D. Clifford

Austin, TX

Capitol Report

By Jim Sacia, State Representative, 89th District

What is more important to an elected person than the public trust? More than a few of you have sent me angry emails about the abuses of the Illinois Public Pensions System.

Several years ago an Illinois state senator retired, was hired by then Governor Blagojevich for about a month as a deputy governor resulting in her pension nearly doubling. There was a huge outcry. It went away. Several weeks ago two union officials substitute taught for a half day each leading to their pensions growing to obscene amounts. This time we fixed the problem with legislation so it could never happen again.

Not so fast! As we returned to Springfield two weeks ago to fix the CME and Sears debacle, we learned of a last minute Sunday afternoon committee meeting that just may have had an ulterior motive of some highly placed members of the house of representatives attempting to create special funding for a couple of union officials. The media called them out on it and it was stopped in its tracks.

Here are the cold hard facts! There will always be those who attempt to abuse the system. I, like you, find it repulsive. It really hits home when you find out you’ve been duped.

The Chicago Tribune and several area newspapers carried an article about now retired State Representative Bob Molaro working for powerful Chicago Alderman Ed Burke for one month following his retirement. He was hired solely to research the abuses of public pension systems, specifically Chicago’s. That one month translates to Bob’s pension going from $64 thousand per year to $120 thousand per year. If we believe the mortality tables, with normal life expectancy, he’ll collect about $3 million in retirement. Remember, his job was to research pension abuses.

I worked with Bob for five years. I thought a lot of him as he chaired the Judiciary II Criminal Law Committee of which I am proud to be a member. We didn’t always agree but I admired his legal mind. He effectively ran a committee that is very time consuming and mentally intensive. When he retired I wished him well and he is now at the capital lobbying for the Chicago Pension System.

Here is a solemn promise. He will never lobby me again. No big loss to him I’m sure but I’m sickened by it. Yes, I was duped.

I’ve seen too many come to Springfield and become impressed with their importance.

Bilking you, the taxpayer, is absolutely unacceptable but, as you know, it’s not something new. We owe you a debt of gratitude for allowing us to serve. I for one, cherish the privilege.

My staff and I would like to wish each of you a Blessed New Year.

I will be in the district until mid January if any of your groups would like to meet with me please call.

As always, you can reach me, Sally or Barb at or e-mail us at You can also visit my website at www.jimsacia.com. It’s always a pleasure to hear from you.