Government

Sen. Mike Lee Invokes the Boston Tea Party in Push for Balanced Budget Amendment During FreePAC Speech

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) took the stage at FreePAC on Thursday night to tout his ongoing push for a balanced budget amendment. He opened the speech by expressing his excitement over addressing the conservative audience.

Sen. Mike Lee Invokes the Boston Tea Party in Push for Balanced Budget Amendment

Sen. Mike Lee (AP)

“There‘s no place I’d rather be on earth than right here, right now with you,” he proclaimed.

Rather than immediately launching into his appeal for balanced federal budgets each year, Lee began by critiquing President Barack Obama. In particular, he claimed that the president is ignoring the nation’s most pressing issues.

“He puts words that don’t make sense to a catchy tune and then he expects us not to think about it,” he said, continuing sarcastically, “Because a $16 trillion debt isn‘t that bad if you don’t think about it.”

The American people, he claimed, aren’t buying into the distraction. To connect the dots, Lee brought the audience back to 1773, when the Boston Tea Party unfolded. He recapped the reasoning behind the protesters’ actions at the time.

“In so doing, they signaled to their national government that they were thinking about [the issues of the day],” Lee proclaimed. “They protested against a kind of government they didn’t want.

“Had it stopped — what happened in Dec of 1773 would have just been a small footnote in history,” he continued, referring to their ongoing push for freedom.

Lee challenged the audience to ask, “What’s the proper role of the federal government?,” and claimed that this is something that Congress and other federal officials have failed to ask. His balanced budget amendment, he claimed, is an answer that will hold government accountable.

“We as American citizens were born to be free…blessed by almighty God,” he later said, inevitably telling the crowd to “strive for liberty.”

Comments (15)

  • Arshloch
    Posted on July 29, 2012 at 12:59pm

    The role of government is simple, provide a strong military to protect the country and GET OUT OF THE WAY, so productive citizens can produce and not have to spend their time and money to play ‘mother may I’ with the second raters in government.

    Report Post » Arshloch  
  • TheFederalist
    Posted on July 28, 2012 at 10:34am

    WE DO NOT NEED A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT!
    WE DO NOT NEED A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT!
    WE DO NOT NEED A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT!

    This is the only thing that bothered me that was spoken at FreePac. Congress does not have the authority to appropriate most of the funds they are spending on. We must take away the appropriations they have no authority to spend on, therefore we do not need an amendment.

    See this article for a good explanation.

    http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/category/balanced-budget-amendment/

    Report Post »  
  • Seriously-Why
    Posted on July 27, 2012 at 3:20pm

    A balanced budget? How about A budget? Haven’t seen one of those in awhile, even though that is a primary duty of the Senate – BY LAW. A balanced budget amendment won‘t help is there isn’t even a budget.

    Report Post »  
  • fastfacts
    Posted on July 27, 2012 at 1:37am

    Now I know why he is a Senator, he will stick to his guns, especially with us behind him. Watch his entire speech: http://www.thedailycandidate.com/video/2012/july/freepac_speech_lee.html

    Report Post »  
  • Kona HI
    Posted on July 27, 2012 at 12:52am

    We‘d need 67 Mike Lee’s in the U.S. Senate to get a balance budget amendment (with teeth) passed. The only way to get it done is to craft an amendment and send it to the states, which can then call for a Constitutional Convention if this amendment isn’t passed by the Senate. Prior to reaching the magic number of 38 states approving the convention the self serving politicans in the Senate will pass the amendment to forestall the convention. I’d like to see the amendment specifiy that all federal mandates on the states are paid for by the federal government and subject to the spending cap.

    Report Post »  
    • kaydeebeau
      Posted on July 27, 2012 at 8:58am

      I am not a big fan of the balanced budget amendment and here is why. We already have the mechanism for a balanced budget – Article 1 Section 8. The amendment idea reminds me of the leftist who screams for more gun laws to try to reign in criminals and their actions.

      Since we cannot trust the government to live within the laws and constraints already in place, how can we trust them to be constrained by another law?

      Why would we give them license to spend 18% of GDP (or some other #) when we know from past experience (think debt ceiling votes) a limit never means anything?

      Why would we give them license to spend x% of GDP when the better thinking would be to see how close to 0% of GDP we can get (At the federal level).

      If spending is constrained to those things in Article 1 Section 8, why do they need to spend 18% of GDP and why would we tell they could spend that much right off the bat?

      Just like the term limit argument. We have a method for term limits – it is called an election.

      The issue with either notion is that they both are ways for us not to have to do the hard work of keeping an eye on the government and will give many that same false sense of trusting the laws to keep them in line.

      The only restraint that will ever work is a tireless population intent on keeping the gov’t within the bounds of the Constitution – regardless of any new amendment.

      We would be better served to repeal the 16th and 17th – they mark the starting line for the rac

      Report Post » kaydeebeau  
  • azcowboy1
    Posted on July 27, 2012 at 12:29am

    I’am a dum F$#@inT cowboy, I do understand a four function calculator. If every american TAXPAYPAYER paid 37,000 dollars in new taxes we could balacnce our budget. Enough said.
    Cowboy…

    Report Post »  
    • BSdetector
      Posted on July 27, 2012 at 7:31am

      So if the 49% who don’t pay any income taxes, paid their fair share, we would be fine? Brilliant idea Comrade, though somehow I don’t think you had the presence of mind for that to be your actual suggestion.

      I’am a dum F$#@inT Bulls**t detector, I do understand a four function calculator
      If da gubmint just cut 37,000 dollars in spending for each American TAXPAYER we could balance our budget. Enough said.
      Detector…

      Report Post » BSdetector  
  • christos
    Posted on July 26, 2012 at 10:17pm

    Next they should have “Restoring the U.S. Economy” .

    Report Post » christos  
    • taxpro4u03
      Posted on July 27, 2012 at 10:21am

      A! Anybody remember watching The Wizard of Oz? — YOU already have the magic slippers on! — To use them means to do it yourself! Properly! -

      Report Post »  
    • christos
      Posted on July 28, 2012 at 2:15am

      To TAXPRO4U2003 – Wrong don’t no anything about “magic slippers” my comment about “restoring the economy” was specifically about 1.) deregulation 2.) 9% tax across the board no property tax,sales tax,registrations like car,building etc. in other words the tax man just like 2,000 years ago as today can “GO TO HELL” just exactly what +JESUS+GOD+ called the Tax man a Sinner 2,000 years later Caesar is still Oppressing People.Poof

      Report Post » christos  
  • soybomb315
    Posted on July 26, 2012 at 10:02pm

    in order to get a balanced budget ammendment to the constitution, we will first need another revolution in the hearts of americans. anything less will result in more of the same

    Report Post » soybomb315  
  • SCREW-WINDOWS
    Posted on July 26, 2012 at 9:55pm

    A balanced budget is a must. But after all it’s not their soul their selling.

    Report Post » SCREW-WINDOWS  
  • historyguy48
    Posted on July 26, 2012 at 9:54pm

    Comrade please don’t forget the Kings response to the Boston Tea Party, especially since a big chunk of the tea they threw into the harbor was his. He closed the Port of Boston and stationed troops in the city, which further enraged the colonists.
    Perhaps that is why Dear Leader and his cronies have been trying so hard to throw the Tea Party overboard, perhaps Dear Leader thinks he is the reincarnation of King George the III, instead of what I know he is, a devoted follower of Islam and Americas greatest enemy.

    Report Post » historyguy48  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love