Amid the launch of a new campaign to encourage greater scrutiny of the right-wing “American Crossroads” groups known to many as the “shadow RNC,” an activist organization declared that it would give $100,000 to any person who comes forward with “information leading to the arrest and conviction of Karl Rove.”

The campaign is being conducted by American Crossroads Watch, an offshoot of Velvet Revolution, which promotes issues key to many progressives activists and represents the political will of dozens of organizations and unions nation-wide.

Their newly launched Web site declares:

Karl Rove created American Crossroads to continue his 40-year history of unfairly manipulating elections on behalf of oligarchs. He joined with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a cabal of corporate barons, and other CEOs that want Big Business to control our elections and our government.

Rove’s group plans to amass more than $50 million from companies making secret donations, and spend that money to influence elections and buy candidates who will act on behalf of those companies and their deregulatory policies. These same polices brought us Enron, the collapse of Wall Street banks, Bernie Madoff, Jack Abramoff, the Gulf oil spill, the recent coal mining disasters, and the corporate controlled Supreme Court.
We are fighting back on behalf of the 87 percent of Americans who do not want corporations to buy politicians and control our government.

Crossroads Watch specifically refers to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which allowed 527 groups to accept unlimited donations from any source. They and many progressives charge that removing the caps on how much money the wealthy can dump into election advertising has the potential to undermine America’s democracy.

In a request for an advisory opinion [PDF link] filed with the Federal Election Commission, an attorney for Protect Our Elections cites reporting by RAW STORY, Rolling Stone and The Huffington Post to build a case alleging that Rove and his groups have effectively replaced the official RNC, hence they should be subject to the same rules and not be allowed unlimited donations. A second request [PDF link], filed with the Department of Justice, urges the protection of the 2010 elections from wealthy individuals and groups who seek to win “by hook or crook.”

They further insist that the DOJ “[launch] a specific criminal investigation into American Crossroads/American Crossroads GPS for its coup d’etat of the RNC for the purpose of controlling the United States Government.”

Naturally, the offer of a reward for Rove’s arrest and conviction was issued by way of an online wanted poster.

karlrovewantedposter Group offers $100,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Karl Rove

In trying to warn candidates away from accepting the support of Rove’s group, American Crossroads Watch also launched an Internet ad targeting former executive Carly Fiorina, now a California Republican Party nominee to the U.S. Senate. A list of “targets” was posted on the Crossroads Watch Web site and supporters were urged to contact the candidates and emphasize their opposition to Rove’s “laundered” money and “dirty tricks”.

A sister organization, U.S. Chamber Watch, last week filed an I.R.S. complaint against the Chamber of Commerce, alleging the conservative, big-business lobby laundered millions of dollars from a group closely tied to embattled insurer A.I.G.

HARRISBURG — Taxpayer-funded bulletins listed meetings of Tea Partiers, Quakers and Pittsburgh anti-war activists as potential security threats.

A year’s worth of bulletins released Friday by the governor’s office shows the Institute of Terrorism Research and Response warned state Homeland Security officials about events as far away as the Sinai and as easy to predict as looking at a calendar.

The reports ignited controversy earlier this week when opponents of Marcellus gas drilling learned that gas companies had received the “Pennsylvania Intelligence Bulletin” listing their planned participation in public hearings as part of a warning about potential terrorist threats to public infrastructure.

Gov. Ed Rendell denounced the reports on Tuesday and said he won’t renew the institute’s $103,000 contract when it expires in October. State senators plan a hearing to investigate. At least one activist plans to file a civil rights lawsuit.

A November report said two Tea Party rallies against illegal immigration might attract “white nationalists.”

“I think it is one of the more bizarre things I’ve ever heard,” said Karen Kiefer, a Tea Party activist from Scottdale. “A lot of people say they never feel safer than at a Tea Party rally. They got $103,000 in taxpayers’ money to compile these bogus lists? That is absolutely shocking.”

The co-director of the institute yesterday defended the bulletins and took issue with Rendell’s criticism of its work, saying the governor is “regrettably, misinformed. … We provide information on potential issues that may require enhanced security responses in the protection of clients’ obligations to public safety and protection of their assets.”

The co-director, Michael Perelman, a former York city police officer, said in a brief telephone interview: “The indications that the Institute of Terrorism Research and Response tracked gay groups is inaccurate and offensive.”

Rendell had no response to Perelman’s comments, press secretary Gary Tuma said.

Rendell on Tuesday said the information the institute gave the state “has no value. … It may have some value to other people, but it had no value to us.”

The reports were supposed to help state Homeland Security officials protect critical public infrastructure, a post-9/11 federal mandate. Most reports, however, are dedicated to possible terrorist action in places such as Ireland, Afghanistan, Turkey and Chile. It notes Pennsylvania colleges that have study-abroad programs in those countries.

One report, in August, listed “newly identified corporate targets of pro-life boycotts.” The institute said the boycott list, which included the YMCA and Johnson & Johnson, represented a “low-to-moderate” threat because it could be used by “more militant anti-abortion elements and lone wolves.”

The most recent report, issued Monday, listed the dates of upcoming Jewish holidays and noted they would result in “very high attendance at Jewish houses of worship and public gatherings in Pennsylvania.”

A November bulletin noted an approaching anti-war protest in Philadelphia by the Brandywine Peace Community and the American Friends Service Community, a Quaker organization. The protesters planned to wear placards saying, “Dear President: Do Not Send More Troops to Afghanistan. War is Not the Answer,” the terror institute wrote.

Another report alleged links between G-20 protesters and an anti-war rally in Pittsburgh. Protests of the September 2009 G-20 world summit resulted in 193 arrests.

Several reports issued this month warn that opponents of Arizona’s immigration law planned to protest at the Pirates game against the Arizona Diamondbacks and that an animal rights group will protest the Lulu Shrine Rodeo in Plymouth Meeting. It quotes “activist material” that calls the rodeo “the worst of the worst.”

“We’re an open organization,” said Kenneth Miller, an organizer with the Industrial Workers of the World, which had planned the Diamondbacks protest. “It’s terrible that our government officials view our protest as a security threat. That’s sick.”

The institute’s monitoring of drilling opponents led to the following headline in one bulletin: “Would-be protesters to become ‘Citizen Journalists.’ ” The report attributed the information to a website run by the natural gas company Chesapeake Energy.

Luzerne County Republican Sen. Lisa Baker announced a Senate committee she chairs will conduct a hearing, saying citizens are “angry about what appears to be a serious abuse of government power.”

The Senate Veterans Affairs and Emergency Preparedness Committee’s hearing is set for Sept. 27, Baker said.

“People were targeted for no reason, other than they were exercising their fundamental rights of free speech and assembly,” Baker said.

In his statement, Perelman said the institute identified “threats to critical infrastructure and to people.”

The institute “operates within the scope of the law in fulfilling the contractual obligations of its clients,” he said.

Ever go to the beach and not think of slapping together a sand castle? And who doesn’t enjoy the feeling of wet, warm sand between her toes?

According to federal authorities who recently intercepted an oil-hunting reporter on a Florida beach, those activities have been deemed “illegal.”

The officers’ legal revelation (which is not actually true) came as something of a surprise to Dan Thomas, reporter for WEAR ABC 3 in Pensacola, Florida, who was visiting the Gulf Islands National Seashore for a special report.

Shovel men at the ready, it did not take Thomas long to uncover splotches of oily crude less than a foot below the surface. Within seconds, his report had shown that BP’s cleanup efforts, which have been limited to just the top six inches of sand in most cases, are not entirely effective.

That’s when a representative of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service showed up, demanding he produce a permit to use shovels on a public beach.

There has been a sharp rise in the number of Americans who believe the US role as a world leader is on the decline, a survey suggests.

The proportion of those saying the US is playing a less pow­erful global role than 10 years ago has risen from 17% in 2002 to 37%, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs said.

A third of 2,717 respondants said the US would be the top world power 2060.

The gloom is put down to economic woes at home and weariness of foreign wars.

“After nine years of difficult wars and the greatest financial crisis since the 1930s, Americans want to focus on the home front and be more selective in the application of US influence and resources abroad,” Chicago Council President Marshall M Bouton said in a statement.

Other survey findings include:

The Federal Reserve has been a nightmare for the American people. It inflates the money supply, thereby devaluing already-existing money and placing a massive hidden tax on the people via rising prices. It also uses its monopoly power to cause interest rates to go up or down, usurping the rightful place of the market and causing massive malinvestment and generally an improper and unproductive allocation of resources.

The Fed also causes the boom-and-bust cycle through its manipulations of the currency and credit supply. It serves as the government’s partner in perpetually expanding the “welfare-warfare state,” allowing the state to spend far more than it could ever hope to reasonably raise through direct taxation. And of course, the fact that all Federal Reserve notes enter the economy as debt with interest attached (but never created) has led to a situation where it is literally mathematically impossible to pay off the debt. In sum, the consequences of such a system have been disastrous for average Americans — hence the growing calls to audit and even end the Fed.

But now, imagine such a system at the global level. And it isn’t just a mental exercise; the global central bank is already emerging. As bad as the Fed has been for America — and indeed the world — a similar system at the international level would be far worse. Disaster might even be an understatement.

International Liquidity and Inflation
One of the most serious threats posed by a global central bank and world fiat currency is the fact that it would allow the emerging planetary regime to print its own money and finance its activities independently. That means wealth could be secretly siphoned away from all of humanity to pay for armies, tax collectors, courts, bureaucracies, law enforcement, wealth redistribution, propaganda, and much more. With no limits. But to advocates of such a system, that is one of its primary benefits.

“A super-sovereign reserve currency not only eliminates the inherent risks of credit-based sovereign currency, but also makes it possible to manage global liquidity. A super-sovereign reserve currency managed by a global institution could be used to both create and control the global liquidity,” wrote Chinese central-bank boss Zhou Xiaochuan in his public paper calling for a world currency. “The centralized management of its member countries’ reserves by the Fund will be an effective measure to promote a greater role of the SDR [Special Drawing Rights, the International Monetary Fund’s first effort at a world currency] as a reserve currency.” Of course, communists have always supported control of “liquidity” (Karl Marx was a strong advocate of central banks with a monopoly on currency and credit). But to people who care about freedom and prosperity, the communists’ support should be a huge red flag.

The United Nations has also backed global currency proposals for the same reason. In a report earlier this year calling for the end of the dollar’s status as a reserve currency and a new monetary regime controlled by the International Monetary Fund, the UN’s World Economic and Social Survey for 2010 points out that, “Such emissions of international liquidity could also underpin the financing of investment in long-term sustainable development.” The term “sustainable development” — especially when used by the UN — is often used to refer to stronger central planning, population reduction, more land in government hands, and other ideas repugnant to average Americans and the U.S. Constitution. Other schemes for “international liquidity” could be even worse.

Hiding behind the passive voice, a separate report by the UN Conference on Trade and Development adds in the concept of wealth redistribution: “It has been suggested that in order for the SDR to become the main form of international liquidity and means of reserve holding, new SDR allocations should be made according to the needs of countries.” It then promotes worldwide central planning to “stabilize global output growth” by issuing more SDRs or retiring them as the emerging global government deems necessary. As it stands, wealth redistribution around the world is bad enough. Surrendering that power to a global institution would be a nightmare.

In its report published earlier this year, the IMF also recently came out in favor of allowing it to print its own money to provide “international liquidity.” “A global currency, bancor, issued by a global central bank would be designed as a stable store of value that is not tied exclusively to the conditions of any particular economy,” the paper says. “The global central bank could serve as a lender of last resort, providing needed systemic liquidity in the event of adverse shocks and more automatically than at present.” In laymen’s terms, the IMF, with its power to “emit liquidity” out of thin air, would be empowered to “bail out” companies, governments, and whomever it wished. If you thought the Fed handing out trillions of dollars to the big banks and other insiders was bad, just wait until a global central bank exercises that power.

Allowing the emerging global government to supply its own money would free it from the constraints of having to raise money through national contributions or direct international taxation. But of course, printing all of this new “liquidity” and financing all of its ambitious projects would be inflationary by definition. And this inevitably would represent a massive problem.

Even John Maynard Keynes, the original proponent of the world currency called “bancor,” understood the concept well. In 1919, he wrote in his book The Economic Consequences of the Peace, “By a continuous process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens.”

To understand the effects, one can look to history and examine examples such as what occurred in the Weimar Republic of Germany, where the money supply was inflated to such an extent, to finance government spending and war debt, that Germans actually found their money more valuable to burn as fuel than to use to purchase items. Or, in more recent years, the tragedy of hyperinflation in Zimbabwe, where inflation exceeded millions of percent per year and it could cost a person billions of dollars for a loaf of bread, provides a more current warning. Even in America — with a comparably stable currency up until now — inflation has wreaked havoc on the economy and the lives of citizens, as we have become a country where husbands and wives must both work to make ends meet. And these all happened in a world where there was still a check on unlimited inflation of fiat money — the fact that citizens could quit using it and purchase other currencies that were not losing their value as quickly. But under a global fiat monetary regime, there would be no such option.

Economists who have been proven correct over the decades about the economic consequences of creating money out of thin air are already sounding the alarm. “A world paper currency and world central bank would heighten the moral hazard and lead to a global inflationary regime such as we’ve never seen,” noted Lew Rockwell, the chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. That is, the “easy” money and credit would cause people to borrow and spend way beyond their means, creating an unprecedented global bubble that would at some point inevitably burst. “There would be no escape from political control at that point.”

And the consequences would be dire. “Inflation tears apart the whole fabric of stable economic relationships,” explained the legendary free-market economist Henry Hazlitt. “It leads men to demand totalitarian controls. It ends invariably in bitter disillusion and collapse.”

Closer Integration and Total Control
Existing monetary unions are often seen as the model for a global currency by advocates of such a system. But surrendering control over money to supranational institutions has consequences, as the people of the Eurozone are discovering. For one, according to data compiled by the European Central Bank, economic growth has slowed dramatically in countries using the euro since the introduction of that single currency — a phenomenon not observed in other areas of the world.

But more importantly, the goal of keeping the monetary union intact is leading to ever greater fiscal and political integration as rules are harmonized and authority continues shifting from nations toward European institutions. During the height of the crisis in Greece, other European governments were forced to bail out the Greek regime over fears that it could bring down the euro. But on top of that, Eurozone heads of state and government got together and used the crisis as an excuse for pushing deeper integration and the imposition of “economic governance” at the European level.

“We commit to promote a strong coordination of economic policies in Europe. We consider that the European Council must improve the economic governance of the European Union and we propose to increase its role in economic coordination and the definition of the European Union growth strategy,” announced the euro-area heads of state and government in a statement. “The current situation demonstrates the need to strengthen and complement the existing framework to ensure fiscal sustainability in the euro zone and enhance its capacity to act in times of crises.”

Around the same time, IMF boss Dominique Strauss-Kahn joined the calls for deeper integration in Europe, offering IMF funds with strings attached. “The launching of the euro was only a first step,” he explained. “You can’t have a single currency without having a more coordinated economic policy.” And indeed, such economic control will also lead to more political control — just as we have seen with the transformation of the European Common Market into the European Union.

Obviously, if the euro is the model for a world currency, the same phenomenon would occur at the world level. That would mean closer integration among the nations of the world, the vast majority of which are ruled by totalitarian regimes of various varieties. A world fiat currency, then, would be the surest way to accelerate the development of a true global government and the accompanying destruction of national sovereignty. But to planetary currency enthusiasts, that is a non-issue.

Noting that there would be critics of the development of a world central bank, especially in America, Council on Foreign Relations insider and global fiat currency promoter Jeffrey Garten points out in an article for Newsweek, “Among their many charges, critics will protest the establishment of ‘world government.’ But we have a World Trade Organization with legally binding powers over trade disputes. We have a World Health Organization for communicable disease with the ability to quarantine entire countries. And a World Court functions today that has considerable legal and moral clout.” Dismissing critics protesting the establishment of a world government by pointing out that it already exists in rudimentary form is hardly likely to pacify those critics.

But what would a global currency really mean aside from the destruction of the dollar and the U.S. economy? “A global central bank would be a disaster,” financial guru Bob Chapman, editor of the International Forecaster, told The New American. “It means the acceptance of world slavery.” Chapman also pointed out that the present international monetary system was being deliberately destroyed precisely to bring about a global currency like the bancor. “It’s just not fiscal and monetary policy. It is every facet of your life that these elitists want to control.” And they’re moving rapidly toward that goal.

In addition to printing money, the emerging global central bank and its affiliates are already usurping other powers traditionally exercised at the national level. In his Newsweek article, Garten calls for the new planetary central bank to be the “lead regulator” of all sorts of financial institutions, monitor risks, push national authorities to “modify their policies,” coordinate national “stimulus programs,” orchestrate a “global-stimulus plan,” force taxpayers around the world to bail out companies, and even act as a bankruptcy court. The IMF, in its own report, called for global “imbalance” taxes, capital controls, and a true world financial regulatory regime. A lot of that is already coming into being, but as the new monetary order develops, the agenda will only accelerate.

And as if all that wasn’t bad enough, there is no accountability for this newly empowered IMF. Jim Rickards, the director of market intelligence for Omnis, explained that, while the IMF has articles of association and some governance rules, the true power structure behind it is the G20, which is “completely unaccountable.”

Options, Solutions
As the international monetary crisis unfolds with a collapsing dollar, there will need to be some sort of reforms. The question is which ones. Instead of “currency reform” coming “from the marble palaces of the monetary elites,” economist Lew Rockwell of the Mises Institute points out, “private currencies traders the world over could, on their own, give rise to a new currency rooted in gold and traded by means of digital media.” This would be far superior for numerous reasons, he argues. “Under a gold standard, the physical metal is the limit and the market is the master. Under a global paper system, the paper provides no limit whatsoever and the politicians are the masters.”

And indeed, while the elites push their fiat world currency, entrepreneurs have already been working on making gold a sort of currency without the need for government dictates. “Money was invented in pre-history by people interacting peacefully with one another to help improve their situation by trading. Money is not an invention of government,” explained James Turk, founder of GoldMoney, a company holding over a billion dollars in assets that allows customers to purchase, store, and trade precious metals. “There is a better solution. It was the one created by Sir Isaac Newton and given to King William III. We now call it the classical gold standard, which lasted from circa 1700 to 1914. If governments are to issue currency, it must be tied to gold. It is this link that provides essential discipline needed to rein in the aspirations of politicians to spend money, even money the government doesn’t have,” he told The New American, adding that the bankers pushing for a world fiat currency “will do everything they can to continue this special privilege that they have assumed for themselves.”

Omnis’ Rickards also has some ideas about how America can put a freeze on the emergence of the global paper currency: cuts in taxes and spending; higher interest rates to strengthen the dollar; and, eventually, getting back on the gold standard. “The U.S. is in the best position to go back to the gold standard,” he explained, pointing out that, with an estimated 8,000 tons, America has more gold than any other country. “The first country that goes to the gold standard will — in effect — dominate the world of finance because they will have the currency that everybody wants. … Would you rather have a gold-backed dollar or a paper SDR?” What’s missing right now, he said, is just the political will to do it.

“What you’re going to see over the next few years is a global struggle between the forces who want to create new forms of paper and just give it a different name and a different issuer and continue to flood the world with paper liquidity and keep the game going on the one hand, versus people who will recognize that the only true form of money is gold and will start bidding up the price of gold against the dollar,” Rickards predicted.

John McManus, president of The John Birch Society, has a similar view of how to rectify the current situation without moving toward an international central bank to manage a global fiat currency. “If the currency is a commodity like gold or silver, it does not have to be managed. The free market place will manage it,” he explains in Dollars and Sense, a short video presentation on the monetary system. “Money should be a commodity valuable to all people; and there’s no management needed.”

It is ironic that the likely imminent collapse of the world’s current fiat “reserve currency” is being used as an excuse to implement a global fiat currency. But it is extremely serious. Escaping the elites’ clutches would become almost impossible as wealth is steadily transferred from humanity to the banking oligarchy and its ever-expanding global government. And so the scheme must be prevented.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Thursday renewed her pledge to pass an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the middle class, but now she’s leaving the door open to extending the tax cuts for upper-income Americans.

The California Democrat, speaking in the same room House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) appeared in earlier in the day, said that the “only thing I can tell you is the tax cuts for the middle class will be extended this Congress,” leaving open the possibility that cuts for people making more than $250,000 could be extended at some point, too.

“What I believe the American people deserve is a tax cut for the middle class,” Pelosi said. “And without getting into procedure and timing and process, what we’re going to do is to say at the end of the day the extension of the Obama middle-income tax cuts will take place, and that’s what I have to say on the subject.”

Kurt Nimmo
September 20, 2010

The establishment is pulling out all the stops to shoot down Delaware Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell.

First it was former Nixon dirty trickster and Bush’s brain, Karl Rove, who characterized her as “nutty” and a reprobate for taking two decades to pay off her student loans.

Now a decade old video clip as surfaced where O’Donnell admits to dabbling in witchcraft.

It looks like Ms. O’Donnell will face a withering barrage of negative publicity as she heads into the mid-term elections. Both Democrats and Republicans are determined to trash the real Tea Party and any candidate who appears to be an outsider. O’Donnell, who obviously has a few issues, will be the poster child for that effort. Her idiosyncrasies will be superimposed upon the entire movement.

It is ironic that the establishment would claim O’Donnell is connected to occultism when the practice is at the core of their ideology. From Bohemian Grove to Skull and Bones, the elite are obsessed with the occult.

Skull and Bones, dismissed by the corporate media as a harmless college fraternity, is an offshoot of the German Brotherhood of Death Society. Its roster reads like a Who’s Who of the global elite — Bush, Harriman, Phelps, Rockefeller, Taft, and Whitney.

Bohemian Grove, centered around the occult Cremation of Care ceremony, is an offshoot of Skull and Bones. Its elite membership includes the likes of Bush and his son, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Helmut Schmidt, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Henry Kissinger and other high-powered luminaries, including members of the corporate media that is now demonizing Christine O’Donnell.

Arnold Schwarzenegger likes to wear the SS Totenkopf, or Death’s Head — the German word for “skull of a dead man” — as a belt buckle. The Nazis, who slaughtered around 30 million people, were fond of the symbol. Hitler was obsessed with the occult. Schwarzenegger has said Hilter was a great leader.

In 2005, we learned that former British PM Tony Blair and his wife Cherie practice occult ceremonies. In 2004, the London Times revealed that Blair made political decisions based on New Age readings of a hidden force called “The Light,” often referred to as Lucifer by occultists.

The global elite know the vast majority of people are turned off by witchcraft and other occult practices and that is why they are using O’Donnell’s decade-plus old comment to take her down.

Christine O’Donnell’s youthful meandering into witchcraft is certainly worrisome. However, it is nowhere as worrisome as the occultist and satanist obsessions of the people who now rule the planet and are determined at all cost to destroy the Tea Party and any grassroots political movement outside of their control.

Keith Johnson
Revolt of the Plebs
September 20, 2010

So many warnings, so many solutions, and so many people who couldn’t care less.


“If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.” –Thomas Jefferson

LONG AGO: A man named Noah (the conspiracy theorist of his time) warns his people that a great flood is fast approaching. His preparations for the event are largely dismissed as crazy, and he is constantly the subject of ridicule and mockery. Even as the heavy rains turn torrential; the people continue to laugh, eat, drink and dance…right up until the water level rises high enough to sweep them all away.

1912: As the RMS Titanic takes on water; word spreads among the passengers that they must prepare to abandon ship. Many refuse to board lifeboats because they are convinced that the vessel cannot sink. Some stay in the lounges to socialize while others return to their cabins and fall fast asleep. The lifeboats aboard the Titanic have the capacity to accommodate 2/3 of the passengers, but many of them are sent away nearly empty because some people refuse to take the crisis seriously.

1913: While treasonous politicians conspire to relinquish control of the U.S. economy over to European central banks; Congressman Charles Lindbergh, Sr. warns:

“This Act [the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Woodrow Wilson] signs the Bill; the invisible government of the Monetary Power will be legalized. The people may not know it immediately, but the day of reckoning is only a few years removed. The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill. The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation. From now on, depressions will be scientifically created.”

His warning is ignored, and by 1929, America falls victim to its first “scientifically created” depression.

PRESENT DAY: The United States has entered into yet another “scientifically created” depression—brought about by the same unsound money policies—controlled by the same corrupt banking cartels.

Somewhere in America; a young man wearing an “End the Fed” T-shirt stands alone—across the street from a Federal Reserve Bank—shouting the prophetic words of Thomas Jefferson through an amplified bullhorn:

“If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.”

Many passersby snicker while others stop to stare. A marked police cruiser pulls to the curb and demands that the young man leave the public sidewalk. He reminds the officer of his first amendment right of free speech and peaceful assembly. The officer reminds him that he couldn’t care less. He pulls a Taser from his utility belt and fires two probes into the boy’s chest—sending him to the ground—where is subdued, and then loaded into the backseat of the cruiser before being hauled away.

Among the gathering crowd, few gasp in disbelief but are afraid to say a word. Others point and laugh while the rest join in a morbid cacophony of cheers and applause.

It is a scene that is becoming far too common. Across America, peaceful dissent and protest is being met with brute force, while ordinary citizens stand on the sidelines watching in amusement as the face of their fellow countrymen meet the stamping boot of the police state.

The Constitution has become a relic, and those who live by it are becoming a nuisance to those who would like to see it torn to shreds. Word has come down from on high that these protests must end. A new strategy to quell dissent is being deployed through mainstream media personalities, who have been given orders to reign in their flocks by controlling and limiting their mode of expression.

In the days leading up to Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally, the self-described rodeo clown instructed attendees not to bring signs or posters. Most complied, some chose instead to bring flags or dress up in colorful “period piece” costumes.

Weeks later, in a two minute segment of his Fox television program, Beck addressed his obedient flock and pleaded for them to abandon their signs and costumes altogether. He referenced a new website by Think Progress, which Beck alleges was launched, “for the sole purpose of making you in to the crazy costume person, the racist or the conspiracy theorist. They are going to try to make you into anything that you are not.”

Instead of encouraging his viewers to be discriminating in the signs they hoist or the clothes they wear, he suggested that his viewers give in to the criticism. Beck told his people to, “Dress normally” and to, “Take the signs down.”

He then shared about a conversation he had with his daughter, who suggested that she really didn’t care what people said about her clothing. His fatherly response to her was, “well, other people do,” and then concluded by suggesting that the lesson for the day was: “Don’t give the media even a chance to typecast you.”

This is a clever psy-op using lots of double speak. Beck is actually conditioning his people to be shamed over the use of signs, loud speech and clothing with political statements. By instructing his people to avoid criticism, he is actually projecting that he concurs with the criticism itself.

Once these people accept that this behavior is a social faux pas, they too will join into the criticism and demonization of those who hold signs, use bullhorns or wear T-shirts with statements like “9/11 Was an Inside Job,” or “Don’t Tread on Me.”

Beck also suggested to his viewers that instead of bringing signs, they should bring their children. This is an even more sinister plan. The idea here is to use children as a tool to further demonize protesters. At certain events, Beck’s “quiet” minions will show up—with their sons or daughters in tow—and confront more passionate demonstrators and remind them to, “Keep it down– children are present.” I’m sure you can envision how that will look on the evening news.

But this strategy to quell dissent is not confined to the establishment right. The establishment left has its own plan, ripped straight from the pages of leftist icon Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.” Rule #5 of that book states:

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”

On October 30, 2010—the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart and Stephan Colbert of the Colbert Report will be staging duel rallies in Washington D.C. to spoof Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally and the Tea Party movement in general.

While we all enjoy good satire from time to time—even when the ribbing is done at our expense—these particular events should not be merely taken at face value.

The home page for Jon Stewart’s “Rally To Restore Sanity,” describes the event as,

“…a rally for the people who’ve been too busy to go to rallies, who actually have lives and families and jobs (or are looking for jobs)… Think of our event as Woodstock, but with the nudity and drugs replaced by respectful disagreement.”

Respectful disagreement? This is sure a stark contrast to the liberal left that pioneered the explosive, ‘in-your-face’ anti-war, anti-fascist movement of the 1960’s and 70’s. Today, the liberals seem to have no time for that. But apparently some will at least be able to find the time to attend a mock rally of tomfoolery that serves no other purpose than to further alienate the left from the right.

The page goes on to read, “We’re looking for the people who think shouting is annoying, counterproductive, and terrible for your throat…bring your indoor voice”

Yeah, God forbid that we annoy our oppressors with our grievances or scratch our throats while exercising our first amendment rights. The reason we’re in the mess we’re in is because too many people have been using their “indoor voice” for too many years. Silence and complacency are the only things that are counterproductive. I shutter to think what might have happened if Paul Revere had been stopped midway through his midnight ride and convinced that his “shouting” was “annoying” and “counterproductive.”

The liberals have lost their mojo when it comes to demonstrations. Their recent attempts to counter the Tea Party movement with a Coffee Party movement have thus far been an epic failure. During the Bush years, there was at least some semblance of an anti-war movement. But as soon as Obama took office, that all but disappeared.

The popularity and effectiveness of Town Hall confrontations and Tea Party demonstrations has overshadowed the liberal voice. Now, they are turning to more drastic measures by using ridicule to shame and silence their opposition.

Even some Tea Party groups, who many believe are free of establishment control, are starting to sound like they have been co-opted, and are preaching the same rhetoric as Glenn Beck.

Amy Kremer, chairman of the Tea Party Express, recently said, “The time has come for us to put down the protest signs and pick up the campaign signs and get engaged. We have stood on the sidelines for long enough protesting.”

So now we have both the establishment left and right working in concert to stifle the steadfast American tradition of dissent. The right will be cordial, the left will laugh and the criminals in our government will have nice quiet streets to travel down as they take this country straight to Hell.


There comes a time in the course of human events that those who love liberty and aspire to be free must rise up and put their liberty and their freedom on the line to secure these rights for those who are unable or unwilling to rise up for themselves.
The dollar is nearly worthless, the economy has faltered and those who we have elected have not just turned their backs on us but are actually working to our detriment. They have poisoned our water supply, contaminated the food chain with toxins and genetically modified seeds. They have destroyed our once great educational system and turned us against each other dividing us by race, social status, sports teams, political parties, religion and geographic location. They distract us with mass media while they build prison camps to detain those of us who will not follow them and their plan.
Thomas Jefferson foretold that this would happen and gave us this advice “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” The problem is that the current regime in power is not one we have elected but one we have allowed to usurp this nations halls of power and placed in it the persons who best support this nations demise.
They are prepared for an uprising and are doing all they can to see that it arrives. The goal is to give the government a reason to reduce the population both in the United States and the rest of the world.
Jefferson also stated “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent” and the government has distracted us and harassed us so that silence is kept. Those of us who break the silence are ridiculed and our characters assassinated to instill in others the desire to not protest what they see and know to be wrong.
Our government is corrupt, our founding principles no longer relevant, the Constitution is no longer the rule of the land but taught to our children in college to be an old, irrelevant and outdated remnant from a time long past. The Dollar is printed at will by a private group of bankers who have no oversight under the government or the people and it is time for the revolution to begin
Jefferson said “Force is the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism.” However we still have some recourse other than a violent assault on the government. In the book “Atlas Shrugged” one character brought the system down without firing a shot or taking a single life. He just informed the people of the mind, those who invent and create, that they have the power to bring the system to its knees by doing just one thing. Close down your shop, your factory or your research and leave the country.
John Galt brought the country to its collapse one person at a time. Don’t rise up to fight only to be killed and your family tortured and harassed. Pack up your wealth, your creativity and your loved ones and just get the hell out. If enough people of means and resourcefulness pack up and leave the system will have no one they can loot or manipulate. If you just leave they will not be able to use your wealth or creativity to harm others or you.
If you choose to stay and fight, I wish you luck. But understand, they are waiting and wanting you to do just that so they have justification to call for martial law and round up all who disagree. Get out now before they close the door and leave you and your family trapped in a war zone. Invest in Central and Southern America and we can help. WhosJohnGalt.Net will help you find your Galt’s Gulch and set you up with the contacts and investments you will need to keep your family and your family’s wealth safe from these looters and privateers looking to control the world’s resources.

HR 4646 IH


2d Session

H. R. 4646

To establish a fee on transactions which would eliminate the national debt and replace the income tax on individuals.


February 23, 2010

Mr. FATTAH introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on the Budget, Rules, and Appropriations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned


To establish a fee on transactions which would eliminate the national debt and replace the income tax on individuals.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This Act may be cited as the ‘Debt Free America Act’.


(a) Findings- The Congress finds the following:

(1) The current tax structure creates economic distortions that limit growth and job creation.

(2) The estimated cost of compliance to taxpayers is five billion hours and approximately $200 billion.

(3) Restructuring the tax code will promote economic prosperity.

(4) Replacing existing Federal taxes with a fee on transactions eliminates systemic inefficiency that plagues the current tax code.

(5) The United States, from its beginning in 1790 to the present, has been free of a national debt for only two years, 1834 and 1835.

(6) The national debt has grown from $75.5 million in 1790 to $5.8 trillion in 2008.

(7) Expressed as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), the national debt reached a high of 108.6 percent of GDP in 1946.

(8) After 1946, the national debt as a percentage of GDP declined, reaching a low of 32.5 percent in 1981.

(9) The large budget deficits of the 1980s and 1990s reversed this trend and pushed the percentage to another high of 49.5 percent in 1993.

(10) The Federal budget surpluses from fiscal year 1998 to fiscal year 2001 were used to retire a portion of the publicly held national debt.

(11) Between fiscal year 1997 and fiscal year 2001, the publicly held portion of the national debt declined by more than $400 billion.

(12) Since fiscal year 2002, a return to budget deficits has caused the debt to grow again.

(b) Purposes- The purpose of section 3 of this Act is to establish a fee on most transactions. Such fee–

(1) is different than a sales tax in that a sales tax is charged only on sales to the final consumer and the transaction fee would apply to intermediate users as well as end users,

(2) is different than a value added tax (VAT), commonly used in European and other countries, in that a VAT is imposed only on a portion of a transaction’s value (roughly the difference between an item’s selling price and it’s cost) and the transaction fee would apply to the entire amount of the transaction, and

(3) is intended to raise sufficient revenue to eliminate the national debt, which was $10.6 trillion in January 2009, during a period of 7 years and to phase out the income tax on individuals.


(a) In General- Subtitle D of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after chapter 36 the following new chapter:


‘Sec. 4501. Imposition of transaction fee.


‘(a) In General- There is hereby imposed on every specified transaction a fee in an amount equal to 1 percent of the amount of such transaction.

‘(b) Specified Transaction- For purposes of this chapter–

‘(1) IN GENERAL- The term ‘specified transaction’ means any transaction that uses a payment instrument, including any check, cash, credit card, transfer of stock, bonds, or other financial instrument.

‘(2) TRANSACTION- The term ‘transaction’ includes retail and wholesale sales, purchases of intermediate goods, and financial and intangible transactions.

‘(c) Liability for Fee- Persons become liable for the fee at the moment the person exercises control over a piece of property or service, regardless of the payment method.

‘(d) Collection- The fees will be collected by the seller or financial institution servicing the transaction and shall be paid over to the Secretary. In the case of a person who fails to collect and pay over the fee as required under this subsection, such person shall become liable for the fee not so collected and paid over.

‘(e) Potential Exclusions- Subsection (a) shall not apply to transactions involving stock (and any options or derivatives with respect to stock) until–

‘(1) such time as the United States enters into an international agreement that regulates domestic and international stock exchanges, or

‘(2) the Secretary issues recommendations regarding the application of the fee as it applies to stock.

‘(f) Regulations- The Secretary shall issue such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations or other guidance which require reporting of such information as the Secretary determines appropriate to prevent under reporting of the amounts on which a fee is imposed by this section.’.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of chapters for the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 36 the following new item:

‘Chapter 37. Transaction Fee.’.

(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to transactions in calendar years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.


(a) In General- Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after section 25D the following new section:


‘(a) In General- In the case of an individual, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to 1 percent of the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income.

‘(b) Phaseout Based on Adjusted Gross Income- The credit allowed under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall be reduced (but not below zero) by an amount which bears the same ratio to the amount of such credit (determined without regard to this subsection) as–

‘(1) the excess (if any) of the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income for such taxable year over $100,000 ($250,000 in the case of a joint return), bears to

‘(2) $10,000 ($20,000 in the case of a joint return).’.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 25D the following new item:

‘Sec. 25E. Credit during period of transaction fee and individual income tax.’.

(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning during calendar years beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.


(a) In General- Title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section:


‘Sec. 316. (a) Definitions- In this section:

‘(1) TASK FORCE- The term ‘Task Force’ means the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action established under subsection (b)(1).

‘(2) TASK FORCE BILL- The term ‘Task Force bill’ means a bill consisting of the proposed legislative language of the Task Force recommended under subsection (b)(3)(B) and introduced under subsection (e)(1).

‘(3) FISCAL IMBALANCE- The term ‘fiscal imbalance’ means the gap between the projected revenues and expenditures of the Federal Government.

‘(b) Establishment of Task Force-

‘(1) ESTABLISHMENT- There is established in the legislative branch a task force to be known as the ‘Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action’.


‘(A) REVIEW- The Task Force shall review the fiscal imbalance of the Federal Government, including–

‘(i) analyses of projected Federal expenditures;

‘(ii) analyses of projected Federal revenues; and

‘(iii) analyses of the current and long-term actuarial financial condition of the Federal Government.

‘(B) IDENTIFY FACTORS- The Task Force shall identify factors that affect the long-term fiscal imbalance of the Federal Government.

‘(C) ANALYZE POTENTIAL COURSES OF ACTION- The Task Force shall analyze potential courses of action to address factors that affect the long-term fiscal imbalance of the Federal Government.

‘(D) PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS AND LEGISLATIVE LANGUAGE- The Task Force shall provide recommendations and legislative language that will significantly improve the long-term fiscal imbalance of the Federal Government, including recommendations addressing–

‘(i) Federal expenditures;

‘(ii) Federal revenues; and

‘(iii) the current and long-term actuarial financial condition of the Federal Government.

‘(3) DUTIES-

‘(A) IN GENERAL- The Task Force shall address the Nation’s long-term fiscal imbalances, consistent with the purposes described in paragraph (2), and shall submit the report and recommendations required under subparagraph (B).


‘(i) IN GENERAL- Not earlier than November 3, 2010, and not later than November 9, 2010, the Task Force shall vote on a report that contains–

‘(I) a detailed statement of the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Task Force;

‘(II) the assumptions, scenarios, and alternatives considered in reaching such findings, conclusions, and recommendations; and

‘(III) proposed legislative language to carry out such recommendations as described in paragraph (2)(D).

‘(ii) APPROVAL OF REPORT- The report of the Task Force submitted under clause (i) shall require the approval of not fewer than 14 of the 18 members of the Task Force.

‘(iii) ADDITIONAL VIEWS- A member of the Task Force who gives notice of an intention to file supplemental, minority, or additional views at the time of final Task Force approval of the report under clause (ii), shall be entitled to not less than 3 calendar days in which to file such views in writing with the staff director of the Task Force. Such views shall then be included in the Task Force report and printed in the same volume, or part thereof, and their inclusion shall be noted on the cover of the report. In the absence of timely notice, the Task Force report may be printed and transmitted immediately without such views.

‘(iv) TRANSMISSION OF REPORT- No later than November 15, 2010, the Task Force shall submit the Task Force bill and final report to the President, the Vice President, the Speaker of the House, and the majority and minority leaders of both Houses.

‘(v) REPORT TO BE MADE PUBLIC- Upon the approval or disapproval of the Task Force report pursuant to clause (ii), the Task Force shall promptly make the full report, and a record of the vote, available to the public.


‘(A) IN GENERAL- The Task Force shall be composed of 18 members designated pursuant to subparagraph (B).

‘(B) DESIGNATION- Members of the Task Force shall be designated as follows:

‘(i) The President shall designate 2 members, one of whom shall be the Secretary of the Treasury, and the other of whom shall be an officer of the executive branch.

‘(ii) The majority leader of the Senate shall designate 4 members from among Members of the Senate.

‘(iii) The minority leader of the Senate shall designate 4 members from among Members of the Senate.

‘(iv) The Speaker of the House of Representatives shall designate 4 members from among Members of the House of Representatives.

‘(v) The minority leader of the House of Representatives shall designate 4 members from among Members of the House of Representatives.


‘(i) IN GENERAL- There shall be 2 Co-Chairs of the Task Force. The President, majority leader of the Senate, and Speaker of the House shall designate one Co-Chair among the members of the Task Force. The minority leader of the Senate and minority leader of the House shall designate the second Co-Chair among the members of the Task Force. The Co-Chairs shall be appointed not later than 14 days after the date of enactment of this section.

‘(ii) STAFF DIRECTOR- The Co-Chairs, acting jointly, shall hire the staff director of the Task Force.

‘(D) DATE- Members of the Task Force shall be designated by not later than 14 days after the date of enactment of this section.

‘(E) PERIOD OF DESIGNATION- Members shall be designated for the life of the Task Force. Any vacancy in the Task Force shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled not later than 14 days after the date on which the vacancy occurs in the same manner as the original designation.

‘(F) COMPENSATION- Members of the Task Force shall serve without any additional compensation for their work on the Task Force. However, members may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with sections 5702 and 5703 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in performance of services for the Task Force.


‘(A) AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH RULES AND REGULATIONS- The Co-Chairs, in consultation with the other members of the Task Force, may establish rules and regulations for the conduct of Task Force business, if such rules and regulations are not inconsistent with this section or other applicable law.

‘(B) QUORUM- Fourteen members of the Task Force shall constitute a quorum for purposes of voting, meeting, and holding hearings.


‘(i) PROXY VOTING- No proxy voting shall be allowed on behalf of the members of the Task Force.


‘(I) DATES- The Task Force may not vote on any version of the report, recommendations, or legislative language before the timing provided for in paragraph (3)(B)(i).

‘(II) CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE AND JOINT COMMITTEE ON TAXATION ESTIMATES- The Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation shall provide estimates of the Task Force report and recommendations (as described in subsection (b)(2)(D)) in accordance with section 308(a) and 201(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. The Task Force may not vote on any version of the report, recommendations, or legislative language unless a final estimate is available for consideration by all the members at least 72 hours prior to the vote.

‘(D) HEARINGS- The Task Force may, for the purpose of carrying out this section, hold such hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, receive such evidence, and administer such oaths the Task Force considers advisable.

‘(c) Expedited Consideration of Task Force Recommendations-



‘(i) IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES- Upon receipt of a report under subsection (b)(3)(B), the Speaker, if the House would otherwise be adjourned, shall notify the Members of the House that, pursuant to this section, the House shall convene not later than November 23, 2010.


‘(I) CONVENING- Upon receipt of a report under subsection (b)(3)(B), if the Senate has adjourned or recessed for more than 2 days, the majority leader of the Senate, after consultation with the minority leader of the Senate, shall notify the Members of the Senate that, pursuant to this section, the Senate shall convene not later than November 23, 2010.

‘(II) ADJOURNING- No concurrent resolution adjourning the Senate for more than 3 days shall be in order until the Senate votes on passage of the Task Force bill under paragraph (2)(B)(iv).

‘(B) INTRODUCTION OF TASK FORCE BILL- The proposed legislative language contained in the report submitted pursuant to subsection (b)(3)(B), upon receipt by the Congress, shall be introduced not later than November 23, 2010, in the Senate and in the House of Representatives by the majority leader of each House of Congress, for himself, the minority leader of each House of Congress, for himself, or any member of the House designated by the majority leader or minority leader. If the Task Force bill is not introduced in accordance with the preceding sentence in either House of Congress, then any Member of that House may introduce the Task Force bill on any day thereafter. Upon introduction, the Task Force bill shall be referred to the appropriate committees under subparagraph (C).

‘(C) COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION- A Task Force bill introduced in either House of Congress shall be jointly referred to the committee or committees of jurisdiction and the Committee on the Budget of that House, which committees shall report the bill without any revision and with a favorable recommendation, an unfavorable recommendation, or without recommendation, not later than 7 calendar days after the date of introduction of the bill in that House, or the first day thereafter on which that House is in session. If any committee fails to report the bill within that period, that committee shall be automatically discharged from consideration of the bill, and the bill shall be placed on the appropriate calendar.



‘(i) PROCEEDING TO CONSIDERATION- It shall be in order, not later than 2 days of session after the date on which a Task Force bill is reported or discharged from all committees to which it was referred, for the majority leader of the House of Representatives or the majority leader’s designee, to move to proceed to the consideration of the Task Force bill. It shall also be in order for any Member of the House of Representatives to move to proceed to the consideration of the Task Force bill at any time after the conclusion of such 2-day period. All points of order against the motion are waived. Such a motion shall not be in order after the House has disposed of a motion to proceed on the Task Force bill. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion. The motion shall not be debatable. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion is disposed of shall not be in order.

‘(ii) CONSIDERATION- The Task Force bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against the Task Force bill and against its consideration are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the Task Force bill to its passage without intervening motion except 100 hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and any motion to limit debate. A motion to reconsider the vote on passage of the Task Force bill shall not be in order.

‘(iii) APPEALS- Appeals from decisions of the chair relating to the application of the Rules of the House of Representatives to the procedure relating to a Task Force bill shall be decided without debate.

‘(iv) APPLICATION OF HOUSE RULES- Except to the extent specifically provided in paragraph (2)(A), consideration of a Task Force bill shall be governed by the Rules of the House of Representatives. It shall not be in order in the House of Representatives to consider any Task Force bill introduced pursuant to the provisions of this subsection under a suspension of the rules pursuant to Clause 1 of House Rule XV, or under a special rule reported by the House Committee on Rules.

‘(v) NO AMENDMENTS- No amendment to the Task Force bill shall be in order in the House of Representatives.

‘(vi) VOTE ON PASSAGE- Immediately following the conclusion of consideration of the Task Force bill, the vote on passage of the Task Force bill shall occur without any intervening action or motion, requiring an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. If the Task Force bill is passed, the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall cause the bill to be transmitted to the Senate before the close of the next day of session of the House. The vote on passage shall occur not later than December 23, 2010.

‘(vii) VOTE- The House Committee on Rules may not report a rule or order that would have the effect of causing the Task Force bill to be approved by a vote of less than three-fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn.


‘(i) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, it is in order, not later than 2 days of session after the date on which a Task Force bill is reported or discharged from all committees to which it was referred, for the majority leader of the Senate or the majority leader’s designee to move to proceed to the consideration of the Task Force bill. It shall also be in order for any Member of the Senate to move to proceed to the consideration of the Task Force bill at any time after the conclusion of such 2-day period. A motion to proceed is in order even though a previous motion to the same effect has been disagreed to. All points of order against the motion to proceed to the Task Force bill are waived. The motion to proceed is not debatable. The motion is not subject to a motion to postpone. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or disagreed to shall not be in order. If a motion to proceed to the consideration of the Task Force bill is agreed to, the Task Force bill shall remain the unfinished business until disposed of.

‘(ii) DEBATE- All points of order against the Task Force bill and against consideration of the Task Force bill are waived. Consideration of the Task Force bill and of all debatable motions and appeals in connection therewith shall not exceed a total of 100 hours. Debate shall be divided equally between the majority and minority leaders or their designees. A motion further to limit debate on the Task Force bill is in order, shall require an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members duly chosen and sworn, and is not debatable. Any debatable motion or appeal is debatable for not to exceed 1 hour, to be divided equally between those favoring and those opposing the motion or appeal. All time used for consideration of the Task Force bill, including time used for quorum calls and voting, shall be counted against the total 100 hours of consideration.

‘(iii) NO AMENDMENTS- An amendment to the Task Force bill, or a motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed to the consideration of other business, or a motion to recommit the Task Force bill, is not in order.

‘(iv) VOTE ON PASSAGE- The vote on passage shall occur immediately following the conclusion of the debate on a Task Force bill, and a single quorum call at the conclusion of the debate if requested. Passage shall require an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. The vote on passage shall occur not later than December 23, 2010.

‘(v) ADJOURNMENT- If, by December 23, 2010, either House has failed to adopt a motion to proceed to the Task Force bill, paragraph (1)(A)(ii)(II) shall not apply.

‘(vi) RULINGS OF THE CHAIR ON PROCEDURE- Appeals from the decisions of the Chair relating to the application of the rules of the Senate, as the case may be, to the procedure relating to a Task Force bill shall be decided without debate.


‘(i) REFERRAL- If, before the passage by 1 House of a Task Force bill of that House, that House receives from the other House a Task Force bill, then the Task Force bill of the other House shall not be referred to a committee and shall immediately be placed on the calendar.

‘(ii) PROCEDURE- If the Senate receives the Task Force bill passed by the House of Representatives before the Senate has voted on passage of the Task Force bill–

‘(I) the procedure in the Senate shall be the same as if no Task Force bill had been received from House of Representatives; and

‘(II) the vote on passage in the Senate shall be on the Task Force bill of the House of Representatives.

‘(iii) TREATMENT OF TASK FORCE BILL OF OTHER HOUSE- If 1 House fails to introduce or consider a Task Force bill under this section, the Task Force bill of the other House shall be entitled to expedited floor procedures under this section.

‘(iv) TREATMENT OF COMPANION MEASURES IN THE SENATE- If following passage of the Task Force bill in the Senate, the Senate then receives the Task Force bill from the House of Representatives, the House-passed Task Force bill shall not be debatable. The vote on passage of the Task Force bill in the Senate shall be considered to be the vote on passage of the Task Force bill received from the House of Representatives.

‘(v) VETOES- If the President vetoes the Task Force bill, debate on a veto message in the Senate under this section shall be 1 hour equally divided between the majority and minority leaders or their designees.

‘(3) SUSPENSION- No motion to suspend the application of this subsection shall be in order in the Senate or in the House of Representatives.’.

(b) Funding- From the amounts appropriated or made available and remaining unobligated under division A (other than under title X of division A) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), there is rescinded pro rata an aggregate amount equal to $9,000,000, which amount shall be made available without need for further appropriation to the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action to carry out the purposes of the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action, and which shall remain available through fiscal year 2011. Not later than 14 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall administer the rescission and make available such amount to the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action.


(a) In General- Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking the following provisions:

(1) Part I of subchapter A.

(2) Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A.

(3) Sections 31, 32, 35, 36, and 36A.

(b) Repeal of Alternative Minimum Tax for Individuals- Section 55 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

‘(f) Exemption for Noncorporate Taxpayers- The tentative minimum tax for any taxpayer other than a corporation shall be zero.’.

(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017.


To take into account the national security concerns of the United States, the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall prioritize the repayment of the national debt and shall take into account circumstances in which the Secretary of the Treasury determines the early repayment of outstanding debt is detrimental to the fiscal stability of the United States.


(a) Study- The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, shall–

(1) analyze methods to prevent and relieve any distortions among economic sectors created by the implementation of this Act,

(2) make recommendations regarding the application of the transaction fee established under this Act to barter transactions which do not involve a payment instrument,

(3) assess the transaction fee established under this Act as a tool of Federal fiscal policy, including an impact analysis on the elimination or retention of existing tax expenditures, incentives, penalties, and credits, including–

(A) the earned income credit,

(B) the alternative minimum tax,

(C) the child tax credit, and

(D) the deduction for mortgage interest,

(4) analyze the extent to which the transaction fee could offset the cost to the Federal Government of increasing discretionary and mandatory spending, particularly expenditures related to education, defense, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid,

(5) make recommendations with respect to the Internal Revenue Service, which–

(A) assume the transition and grandfathering of all existing personnel of the Internal Revenue Service,

(B) identify the elements of the current Internal Revenue Service needed to administer the transaction fee, and

(C) examine the feasibility of modifying the overall mission and jurisdiction of the Internal Revenue Service from one focused on tax law application to one focused on uncovering waste, fraud, and abuse throughout the Federal Government, and

(6) make determinations and recommendations for methods of phasing out the income tax on individuals before its repeal under section 4 in a manner which is consistent with the purposes described in section 2(b)(3).

(b) Report- The Secretary of the Treasury shall, not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, submit to Congress a written report containing the results, determinations, and recommendations of the Secretary under subsection (a).

Next Page »