Category: Fritz Pettyjohn

at-painter-og-image.png

America First with Alaskan Oil


On his recent visit to Alaska, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke began laying the groundwork to open the 3% of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge contained in Area 1002 to oil development.  He ordered a new assessment of the area’s potential oil reserves.

The most recent comprehensive study by the United States Geological Survey was completed in 1998, and its mean estimate of recoverable reserves in Area 1002 was 7.7 BBO (billion barrels of oil).  At $45 a barrel, that’s $346 billion.  Most of this oil lies in the western portion, near the terminus of the Trans Alaska Pipeline at Prudhoe Bay.

Development of Area 1002 alone would fill the Alaska pipeline, currently running at 25% of capacity,  for a minimum of 10-15 years.  Additional development of the National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska could add as much or more.  And recall that this USGS survey is 19 years old.  The new, revised numbers could be eye-popping.

The impact of this development on the state of Alaska would rival that of Prudhoe Bay itself.  Revenue to the state would soar.  Instead of raiding its Permanent Fund, Alaska could add billions to its principal.  Employment would rise, and property values would recover.  It would be a boon to Alaska and its people.

But isn’t the world awash in crude?   The shale revolution shows no sign of slowing down, and Russia and Saudi Arabia are cutting production in a bid to stabilize prices.  Who needs Alaska oil?

As Secretary Zinke said in Anchorage, the United States seeks not energy independence, but energy dominance.  This can be achieved by using American oil as a tool of foreign policy, as it has been for a hundred years.

Our most important ally in the Pacific is Japan, with a navy inferior only to our own.  We have a strategic interest in ensuring Japan a stable and secure energy supply.  This can be accomplished by selling it the oil from ANWR Area 1002 and NPR-A.

It’s 3,600 miles from the Alaska pipeline’s terminus at Valdez to Yokohama, a bit more than the trip to Los Angeles.  More important than distance is security of passage.  The seas between Alaska and Japan are under the total control of the United States Navy and its allies.  

There are no bottlenecks like the Strait of Hormuz, or the Strait of Malacca, through which most of Japan’s energy imports must currently navigate.  Because it needs security of supply above all else, Japan would leap at the chance to import more Alaskan oil.

The greatest geopolitical challenge for America in the 21st century will be China.  In containing China, Japan is the indispensable nation.  Tied to one another by Alaska oil, the bond between the United States and Japan will be unbreakable.  This is in the highest national security interest of the United States.

And it is why the time is right to open ANWR.  Legislation to accomplish this can be done in a budget reconciliation bill, as was done in 1996.  But President Clinton vetoed the bill, and no serious effort has been made to open ANWR since.

Unlike the giant State of Alaska-owned field at Prudhoe Bay, all of ANWR is federal land, and if oil is found there, it will prove a bonanza for the United States Treasury.  Revenues from oil development could put a significant dent in the federal deficit.  Thus, it clearly qualifies for inclusion in a budget reconciliation bill.  The votes of only 50 senators, plus Vice President Pence, are needed for passage.

Republican Senator John McCain, a previous opponent of opening ANWR, is a defense hawk, Navy veteran, and strong supporter of our alliance with Japan.  For national security reasons, he may now take a different position.

Two other “soft” Senate Republicans are Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine.  Murkowski is an ardent supporter of opening ANWR, as are the vast majority of the people of Alaska.  Perhaps Murkowski can use her close relationship with Collins to convince her on the merits.

Democrat Senator Joe Manchin is no environmentalist, and a friend of the working man.  The development of Area 1002 would create tens of thousands of jobs and make a dent in our trade deficit.  For these and national security reasons, there may be other Democrat votes available as well.

The arguments against opening Area 1002 are rubbish.  Environmentalists call it the Serengeti of the North.  But it is almost devoid of life, as it is the most difficult environment on the planet.

In 1984, as an Alaska state senator, I was given a tour of ANWR, and I was astonished that there was any controversy over its development.  It is the most godforsaken place on Earth.

The more oil the United States produces, the more powerful it becomes.  We used the oil weapon, to great effect, in both World Wars.  Now that we’re acting as though we believe in our own self-interest, we can again use our vast oil wealth in pursuit of our foreign policy interests.

This is why President Trump will open ANWR. 

Fritz Pettyjohn is a former Alaska state senator and House minority leader.  He blogs at ReaganProject.com.

On his recent visit to Alaska, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke began laying the groundwork to open the 3% of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge contained in Area 1002 to oil development.  He ordered a new assessment of the area’s potential oil reserves.

The most recent comprehensive study by the United States Geological Survey was completed in 1998, and its mean estimate of recoverable reserves in Area 1002 was 7.7 BBO (billion barrels of oil).  At $45 a barrel, that’s $346 billion.  Most of this oil lies in the western portion, near the terminus of the Trans Alaska Pipeline at Prudhoe Bay.

Development of Area 1002 alone would fill the Alaska pipeline, currently running at 25% of capacity,  for a minimum of 10-15 years.  Additional development of the National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska could add as much or more.  And recall that this USGS survey is 19 years old.  The new, revised numbers could be eye-popping.

The impact of this development on the state of Alaska would rival that of Prudhoe Bay itself.  Revenue to the state would soar.  Instead of raiding its Permanent Fund, Alaska could add billions to its principal.  Employment would rise, and property values would recover.  It would be a boon to Alaska and its people.

But isn’t the world awash in crude?   The shale revolution shows no sign of slowing down, and Russia and Saudi Arabia are cutting production in a bid to stabilize prices.  Who needs Alaska oil?

As Secretary Zinke said in Anchorage, the United States seeks not energy independence, but energy dominance.  This can be achieved by using American oil as a tool of foreign policy, as it has been for a hundred years.

Our most important ally in the Pacific is Japan, with a navy inferior only to our own.  We have a strategic interest in ensuring Japan a stable and secure energy supply.  This can be accomplished by selling it the oil from ANWR Area 1002 and NPR-A.

It’s 3,600 miles from the Alaska pipeline’s terminus at Valdez to Yokohama, a bit more than the trip to Los Angeles.  More important than distance is security of passage.  The seas between Alaska and Japan are under the total control of the United States Navy and its allies.  

There are no bottlenecks like the Strait of Hormuz, or the Strait of Malacca, through which most of Japan’s energy imports must currently navigate.  Because it needs security of supply above all else, Japan would leap at the chance to import more Alaskan oil.

The greatest geopolitical challenge for America in the 21st century will be China.  In containing China, Japan is the indispensable nation.  Tied to one another by Alaska oil, the bond between the United States and Japan will be unbreakable.  This is in the highest national security interest of the United States.

And it is why the time is right to open ANWR.  Legislation to accomplish this can be done in a budget reconciliation bill, as was done in 1996.  But President Clinton vetoed the bill, and no serious effort has been made to open ANWR since.

Unlike the giant State of Alaska-owned field at Prudhoe Bay, all of ANWR is federal land, and if oil is found there, it will prove a bonanza for the United States Treasury.  Revenues from oil development could put a significant dent in the federal deficit.  Thus, it clearly qualifies for inclusion in a budget reconciliation bill.  The votes of only 50 senators, plus Vice President Pence, are needed for passage.

Republican Senator John McCain, a previous opponent of opening ANWR, is a defense hawk, Navy veteran, and strong supporter of our alliance with Japan.  For national security reasons, he may now take a different position.

Two other “soft” Senate Republicans are Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine.  Murkowski is an ardent supporter of opening ANWR, as are the vast majority of the people of Alaska.  Perhaps Murkowski can use her close relationship with Collins to convince her on the merits.

Democrat Senator Joe Manchin is no environmentalist, and a friend of the working man.  The development of Area 1002 would create tens of thousands of jobs and make a dent in our trade deficit.  For these and national security reasons, there may be other Democrat votes available as well.

The arguments against opening Area 1002 are rubbish.  Environmentalists call it the Serengeti of the North.  But it is almost devoid of life, as it is the most difficult environment on the planet.

In 1984, as an Alaska state senator, I was given a tour of ANWR, and I was astonished that there was any controversy over its development.  It is the most godforsaken place on Earth.

The more oil the United States produces, the more powerful it becomes.  We used the oil weapon, to great effect, in both World Wars.  Now that we’re acting as though we believe in our own self-interest, we can again use our vast oil wealth in pursuit of our foreign policy interests.

This is why President Trump will open ANWR. 

Fritz Pettyjohn is a former Alaska state senator and House minority leader.  He blogs at ReaganProject.com.



Source link

Draining the Swamp with Article V


The publication of Rep. Ken Buck’s Drain the Swamp: How Washington Corruption is Worse than You Think could not be more timely.  The campaign for Buck’s recommended corrective – the use of Article V, by the states, to adopt a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) – is at a critical phase.

Thirty-four state resolutions are required in order for Congress to call an Article V Amendment Convention, where the proposed language of a BBA would be drafted before being sent back to the states for ratification by three quarters of them.  For seven years, the BBA Task Force has been working in state capitols to pass such resolutions and today has 28 in hand.  The remaining target Legislatures – all under complete Republican control – are Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Montana, and Idaho.  Vigorous campaigns to adopt BBA resolutions are underway in all of them, and there is a clear path to 34 in 2018.

It may well be 2018 or never for an Article V BBA.  Forces funded in large part by George Soros and his network of organizations are dead set in opposition.  Working with the traditional opponents of Article V – principally the John Birch Society – these groups were able to stop passage of the Article V BBA resolution in Montana in 2015.  They also convinced the Democrat leadership of the Delaware and Maryland Legislatures to rescind BBA resolutions passed in the 1970s.  Moreover, they were able to elect new Democratic majorities in the Nevada and New Mexico Legislatures in the 2016 election.  As a result, New Mexico rescinded its 1970s BBA resolution, and a similar rescinding resolution has passed the Nevada Senate and awaits action in the House.

Even if Nevada does rescind, the remaining Republican-controlled Legislatures in the seven states listed above will be able to reach the goal of 34 in 2018.  There are no other states where Democrats have the power to rescind.  However, Republican strength in state legislatures is at a historic high, with 33 of 50 under total Republican control.

As the 2016 losses in New Mexico and Nevada demonstrate, any state that reverts to Democratic control could quickly rescind its BBA resolution.  If the Colorado Senate turns Democratic in 2018, its resolution will likely be rescinded, putting the goal of 34 out of reach without Democrat help.  And George Soros has purchased enough clout in the Democratic Party to prevent that from happening.

Soros has selected Common Cause as his principal vehicle to oppose the BBA.  Their anti-BBA campaign is an exercise in hypocrisy.  They claim to oppose not the BBA itself, but the use of Article V to achieve it.  Their rescission campaigns in Maryland, New Mexico, and Nevada focus exclusively on the danger of a runaway Article V Convention.  Their rescinding resolutions make no reference to the BBA, instead seeking to repeal any and all pending Article V resolutions.

And yet, on their home web page, linked above, they ask their followers to “Take Action – Californians, Help Overturn Citizens United.”  But there’s only one way to get that done, and it’s by using Article V.  Left-wing Wolf-Pac seeks to do just that and has passed Article V resolutions in five states and is active in state capitols across the country.  As the link on their home page demonstrates, Common Cause has supported Wolf-Pac’s campaign in the past.  But that’s down the memory hole now that they have signed on with George Soros.

Two hundred leftist organizations have banded together with Common Cause to kill the BBA.  They will team up with the John Birch Society in 2018 in an all-out war on the entire Article V movement.  If we’re ever going to drain the swamp, it has to happen next year.

The most potent opponent of the BBA in the Republican target states will be not Common Cause, but the John Birch Society.  They are particularly strong in the Mountain West, and while victories have recently been won in Utah, Wyoming, and Arizona, the Birchers and their right-wing allies have stopped BBA resolutions in Montana and Idaho.  There are pockets of Bircher strength as well in Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Carolina, and Virginia.  The fear of a runaway convention is their only selling point.

In order to counteract such arguments, the Arizona Legislature, under the leadership of Speaker J.D. Mesnard and Senate president Steve Yarbrough, recently passed HCR 2022, which contains a call for the first national Convention of States since the Washington Peace Conference of 1861.  The purpose of the convention, to be held in Phoenix on September 12, 2017, is to propose the rules and procedures that would be used at a subsequent Article V Amendment Convention, which will convene once 34 BBA resolutions have been passed.

As in all such conventions in American history, voting will be one state, one vote.  In their deliberations, the commissioners to the Phoenix Convention will demonstrate to the right-wing skeptics that an Article V Convention will not run away – in fact, it is opposed to running away.  It is expected that the commissioners to Phoenix selected by the presiding officers of the 99 state legislative chambers will be, by and large, the same individuals who would be appointed to attend an actual Article V BBA Convention in 2018.  If this Convention of States succeeds, the path to 34 in 2018 will be cleared.

Representative Buck is to be congratulated on Draining the Swamp.  It could not have come at a better time.  With his help, the campaign to use Article V for the first time in American history will succeed next year.  We won’t just drain the swamp.  We’ll restore a bedrock principle of the Constitution: federalism, or the dispersal of political power.

Fritz Pettyjohn is a former Alaska House minority leader and state senator.  He blogs at ReaganProject.com.

The publication of Rep. Ken Buck’s Drain the Swamp: How Washington Corruption is Worse than You Think could not be more timely.  The campaign for Buck’s recommended corrective – the use of Article V, by the states, to adopt a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) – is at a critical phase.

Thirty-four state resolutions are required in order for Congress to call an Article V Amendment Convention, where the proposed language of a BBA would be drafted before being sent back to the states for ratification by three quarters of them.  For seven years, the BBA Task Force has been working in state capitols to pass such resolutions and today has 28 in hand.  The remaining target Legislatures – all under complete Republican control – are Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Montana, and Idaho.  Vigorous campaigns to adopt BBA resolutions are underway in all of them, and there is a clear path to 34 in 2018.

It may well be 2018 or never for an Article V BBA.  Forces funded in large part by George Soros and his network of organizations are dead set in opposition.  Working with the traditional opponents of Article V – principally the John Birch Society – these groups were able to stop passage of the Article V BBA resolution in Montana in 2015.  They also convinced the Democrat leadership of the Delaware and Maryland Legislatures to rescind BBA resolutions passed in the 1970s.  Moreover, they were able to elect new Democratic majorities in the Nevada and New Mexico Legislatures in the 2016 election.  As a result, New Mexico rescinded its 1970s BBA resolution, and a similar rescinding resolution has passed the Nevada Senate and awaits action in the House.

Even if Nevada does rescind, the remaining Republican-controlled Legislatures in the seven states listed above will be able to reach the goal of 34 in 2018.  There are no other states where Democrats have the power to rescind.  However, Republican strength in state legislatures is at a historic high, with 33 of 50 under total Republican control.

As the 2016 losses in New Mexico and Nevada demonstrate, any state that reverts to Democratic control could quickly rescind its BBA resolution.  If the Colorado Senate turns Democratic in 2018, its resolution will likely be rescinded, putting the goal of 34 out of reach without Democrat help.  And George Soros has purchased enough clout in the Democratic Party to prevent that from happening.

Soros has selected Common Cause as his principal vehicle to oppose the BBA.  Their anti-BBA campaign is an exercise in hypocrisy.  They claim to oppose not the BBA itself, but the use of Article V to achieve it.  Their rescission campaigns in Maryland, New Mexico, and Nevada focus exclusively on the danger of a runaway Article V Convention.  Their rescinding resolutions make no reference to the BBA, instead seeking to repeal any and all pending Article V resolutions.

And yet, on their home web page, linked above, they ask their followers to “Take Action – Californians, Help Overturn Citizens United.”  But there’s only one way to get that done, and it’s by using Article V.  Left-wing Wolf-Pac seeks to do just that and has passed Article V resolutions in five states and is active in state capitols across the country.  As the link on their home page demonstrates, Common Cause has supported Wolf-Pac’s campaign in the past.  But that’s down the memory hole now that they have signed on with George Soros.

Two hundred leftist organizations have banded together with Common Cause to kill the BBA.  They will team up with the John Birch Society in 2018 in an all-out war on the entire Article V movement.  If we’re ever going to drain the swamp, it has to happen next year.

The most potent opponent of the BBA in the Republican target states will be not Common Cause, but the John Birch Society.  They are particularly strong in the Mountain West, and while victories have recently been won in Utah, Wyoming, and Arizona, the Birchers and their right-wing allies have stopped BBA resolutions in Montana and Idaho.  There are pockets of Bircher strength as well in Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Carolina, and Virginia.  The fear of a runaway convention is their only selling point.

In order to counteract such arguments, the Arizona Legislature, under the leadership of Speaker J.D. Mesnard and Senate president Steve Yarbrough, recently passed HCR 2022, which contains a call for the first national Convention of States since the Washington Peace Conference of 1861.  The purpose of the convention, to be held in Phoenix on September 12, 2017, is to propose the rules and procedures that would be used at a subsequent Article V Amendment Convention, which will convene once 34 BBA resolutions have been passed.

As in all such conventions in American history, voting will be one state, one vote.  In their deliberations, the commissioners to the Phoenix Convention will demonstrate to the right-wing skeptics that an Article V Convention will not run away – in fact, it is opposed to running away.  It is expected that the commissioners to Phoenix selected by the presiding officers of the 99 state legislative chambers will be, by and large, the same individuals who would be appointed to attend an actual Article V BBA Convention in 2018.  If this Convention of States succeeds, the path to 34 in 2018 will be cleared.

Representative Buck is to be congratulated on Draining the Swamp.  It could not have come at a better time.  With his help, the campaign to use Article V for the first time in American history will succeed next year.  We won’t just drain the swamp.  We’ll restore a bedrock principle of the Constitution: federalism, or the dispersal of political power.

Fritz Pettyjohn is a former Alaska House minority leader and state senator.  He blogs at ReaganProject.com.



Source link

at-painter-og-image.png

Liberty is a Lady


We have in our midst people who take Bill Clinton seriously — his history of criminal sexual predation, perjury, and corruption notwithstanding. But he was twice elected President, so there he was last week at the Brookings Institution, lecturing us on globalism.

He’s been thinking deep thoughts, and here is the sum of his wisdom, and his idea of globalism: “The whole history of the world is basically the definition of who is us, and who is them, and the question of whether we should all live under the same set of rules.” Further, he says, resurgent nationalism, “…living in an us and them world, will take us to the edge of destruction.” He’s being serious.

Self-identification is actually quite simple, but apparently a mystery to those who drink deeply from the waters at Davos, and who worship at the temple of Soros. For Trump and his “deplorables” the distinction between us and them is clear cut. “We” are Americans, and “they” are not. Americans identify as such, live in a country with borders, and have their own rules. If anyone else in the world wants to adopt our rules and way of life, they’re free to do so. If other nations have their own preferences, such as sharia law, that’s their business. Peaceful coexistence is possible if we all leave each other alone. Attempts to unite the world under one set of rules always fail, and are steeped in blood.

The followers of the Prophet Muhammad hate us for our rules, and would rather die than live under them. They live in a rigid patriarchal society, and we celebrate the equality of women. This is why in their eyes we are the Great Satan. Because at the heart of Islam is the absolute, life or death, authority of the husband over his family, and of men over women. This is the basis of their culture, their entire way of looking at the world. The family is the basic unit of a society, and a nation’s family values are its values. Moslems cannot tolerate the liberation of women. It would destroy their family structure, and their culture would collapse. So orders the Prophet, and disobedience is blasphemy.

In stark contrast, the full equality of women is found in countries like ours that embrace the Absolute Nuclear Family. (ANF) Tacitus was the first to describe it in the German tribes 2,000 years ago. The center piece of the ANF is a woman’s right to choose. Her body is her own. She can choose to give herself to a husband, or not. Here are the seeds of romantic love and chivalry. And after a woman does marry she is still not subject to anyone’s control. Her husband’s family has no authority over her, and she and her husband will not control their children when they marry. And she and her family owned their property as individuals, not as part of any group, and are free to dispose if it as they choose. It’s a culture of liberty, private property, and women’s rights. The three go hand in hand.

These are The Origins of English Individualism, as described by British historian and sociologist Alan Macfarlane. Reluctantly, he agrees with this quote from Montesquieu, “In perusing the admirable treatise of Tacitus On the Manners of the Germans we find it is from that nation the English have borrowed their idea of political government. This beautiful system was invented in the woods.” Because the English had taken the ANF from their Anglo-Saxon ancestors, their women were free to choose. In most of the world close to 100% of women married, but English women could choose to marry for love, and as a result, 10-20% of them never married, and those that did married late. Marriage at 25 was the norm.

This is the family structure that came to Jamestown and Plymouth, and it is ours today. It is responsible for our success in populating this continent. Because, in an ANF, society, each married couple was expected to set up their own household, apart and independent from their parents. This is difficult in settled societies, but it was easy in early America. There was land everywhere, and these colonial families averaged nine or ten children, knowing that there would be new lands for them to settle. America and the Absolute Nuclear Family were made for each other.

But it’s not for everybody, it’s incompatible with Islam, and the world would be a lot better off if fools like Bill Clinton didn’t go around telling everyone we’ve all got to live by the same set of rules.

Fritz Pettyjohn is a former Alaska State Legislator who blogs daily at ReaganProject.com in support of Article V and a Balanced Budget Amendment

We have in our midst people who take Bill Clinton seriously — his history of criminal sexual predation, perjury, and corruption notwithstanding. But he was twice elected President, so there he was last week at the Brookings Institution, lecturing us on globalism.

He’s been thinking deep thoughts, and here is the sum of his wisdom, and his idea of globalism: “The whole history of the world is basically the definition of who is us, and who is them, and the question of whether we should all live under the same set of rules.” Further, he says, resurgent nationalism, “…living in an us and them world, will take us to the edge of destruction.” He’s being serious.

Self-identification is actually quite simple, but apparently a mystery to those who drink deeply from the waters at Davos, and who worship at the temple of Soros. For Trump and his “deplorables” the distinction between us and them is clear cut. “We” are Americans, and “they” are not. Americans identify as such, live in a country with borders, and have their own rules. If anyone else in the world wants to adopt our rules and way of life, they’re free to do so. If other nations have their own preferences, such as sharia law, that’s their business. Peaceful coexistence is possible if we all leave each other alone. Attempts to unite the world under one set of rules always fail, and are steeped in blood.

The followers of the Prophet Muhammad hate us for our rules, and would rather die than live under them. They live in a rigid patriarchal society, and we celebrate the equality of women. This is why in their eyes we are the Great Satan. Because at the heart of Islam is the absolute, life or death, authority of the husband over his family, and of men over women. This is the basis of their culture, their entire way of looking at the world. The family is the basic unit of a society, and a nation’s family values are its values. Moslems cannot tolerate the liberation of women. It would destroy their family structure, and their culture would collapse. So orders the Prophet, and disobedience is blasphemy.

In stark contrast, the full equality of women is found in countries like ours that embrace the Absolute Nuclear Family. (ANF) Tacitus was the first to describe it in the German tribes 2,000 years ago. The center piece of the ANF is a woman’s right to choose. Her body is her own. She can choose to give herself to a husband, or not. Here are the seeds of romantic love and chivalry. And after a woman does marry she is still not subject to anyone’s control. Her husband’s family has no authority over her, and she and her husband will not control their children when they marry. And she and her family owned their property as individuals, not as part of any group, and are free to dispose if it as they choose. It’s a culture of liberty, private property, and women’s rights. The three go hand in hand.

These are The Origins of English Individualism, as described by British historian and sociologist Alan Macfarlane. Reluctantly, he agrees with this quote from Montesquieu, “In perusing the admirable treatise of Tacitus On the Manners of the Germans we find it is from that nation the English have borrowed their idea of political government. This beautiful system was invented in the woods.” Because the English had taken the ANF from their Anglo-Saxon ancestors, their women were free to choose. In most of the world close to 100% of women married, but English women could choose to marry for love, and as a result, 10-20% of them never married, and those that did married late. Marriage at 25 was the norm.

This is the family structure that came to Jamestown and Plymouth, and it is ours today. It is responsible for our success in populating this continent. Because, in an ANF, society, each married couple was expected to set up their own household, apart and independent from their parents. This is difficult in settled societies, but it was easy in early America. There was land everywhere, and these colonial families averaged nine or ten children, knowing that there would be new lands for them to settle. America and the Absolute Nuclear Family were made for each other.

But it’s not for everybody, it’s incompatible with Islam, and the world would be a lot better off if fools like Bill Clinton didn’t go around telling everyone we’ve all got to live by the same set of rules.

Fritz Pettyjohn is a former Alaska State Legislator who blogs daily at ReaganProject.com in support of Article V and a Balanced Budget Amendment



Source link