Mike Doherty has seemingly done the impossible.

In 2002, he was elected to the New Jersey Assembly. He has never been a party man, but always has been a man of integrity and principle. A West Point graduate who served for eight years in the Army as an artillery officer, Doherty has three sons currently serving in the military.

He has consistently bucked the Republican Party leadership while standing up for his own convictions. For example, in last year’s presidential election he committed what amounted to apostasy in the eyes of both the state and national Republican establishments: Rep. Doherty supported Ron Paul for U.S. President. He even went so far as to give a speech at a rally on Philadelphia’s Independence Mall at which Paul directed a tirade in the direction of the Federal Reserve building nearby.

According to columnist Paul Mulshine, a reporter who frequently covers libertarianism and New Jersey politics, “I first became aware of [Doherty's principles] in 2001 when he was a freeholder. A judge threatened to throw [him] in jail if he wouldn’t change his vote and approve construction of a county college.” Says Mulshine, “Doherty stood up. The judicial system backed down.”

This year, Doherty began his campaign for an open State Senate seat, facing opposition from Republican Marcia Karrow. The RLC endorsed his candidacy. Doherty risked his safe Assembly seat to enter the primary against Karrow.

Ms. Karrow circulated a flyer accusing Doherty of advocating “surrender in Iraq” — most likely because he supported Ron Paul. Says Mulshine, “Karrow decided to make Doherty’s support for Paul a central theme of her campaign. And if Doherty supported Paul, then Doherty supported surrender in Iraq. Or so the logic went.”

Continues Paul Mulshine, “It didn’t go very far. Neither Paul, who is also a veteran, nor Doherty supports surrender in Iraq. They simply support the Constitution, which calls for wars to be declared by Congress and then fought to the quickest conclusion possible. That is a stance popular with many military men.”

Doherty defeated Karrow in the primary. Doherty now becomes perhaps the most prominent conservative in the New Jersey Republican Party. Keep your eye on him.

Mulshine says that “Doherty showed an ability to rouse a crowd that is almost entirely lacking among GOP politicians.” He continues, “The reason is not difficult to discern. He actually bases his positions on principles. Among Trenton Republicans, that’s a novel concept. But sooner or later they might be tempted to try it.”

The district Doherty is running in encompasses rural Warren and Hunterdon counties and is safely Republican, making it likely that Mike Doherty will be moving up to the Senate come 2010.

You can learn more about Mike Doherty or donate to his campaign at http://www.mikedohertynj.com/.

Alex Isenstadt has a piece in today’s Politico called “Town halls gone wild” in which he explains how Town Hall Meetings sponsored by select Members of Congress have turned into “houses of horrors” that include “… [s]creaming constituents, protesters, [and] congressmen fearful for their safety”.

This is a tremendous sign of progress for those of us who have been actively working to change policies in our country by ‘waking up’ our fellow Americans.

In the article, Congressman Bishop, a Democrat from New York representing the never-boring constituency of Long Island, quips that Town Hall Meetings serve no purpose because “an unruly mob prevents you from having an intelligent conversation”. So he canceled his Town Hall Meetings.

Voters on Long Island should punish Mr. Bishop by not re-electing him.  If he can’t answer to or be held accountable by his constituents, then he doesn’t deserve to be in Congress.

Rep. Bishop’s comments could not be further from the truth.

Constituents confronting their alleged ‘leaders’ on issues of concern is exactly the type of dialogue that can be very productive — dialogue that has been lacking from our ‘politics-as-usual’ for decades.

It’s only recently that people have shown their utter disgust at Town Hall Meetings and other public events — venting to their Member about the issues that confront our country. Among the recent Town Hall blues for Members of Congress:

* Close to 100 sign-carrying protesters greeted Rep. Allen Boyd (D-FL) at a late June community college small-business development forum in Panama City, Florida;

* Danville, Virgina “anti-tea party activists” claimed they were refused an opportunity to ask Rep. Thomas Perriello (D-VA) a question at a town hall event and instructed by a plainclothes police officer to leave the property after they attempted to hold up protest signs; and

* Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE) found himself in a confrontation earlier this month with a “birther” protester who insisted he address the issue of Obama’s birth certification.

These “controversial” confrontations are exactly the types of citizen disgust that have been lacking from our political system for decades, so I’m pleasantly surprised — yes, encouraged — to hear that We the People are confroting our ‘leaders’ when they fail to … um, lead.

by Dan Sheill

The do-gooders in Congress continue to be drunk with power. At this point there is basically no limit to what they think they can legislate.

Texting while driving is extremely reckless (although I myself admittedly talk on the cell phone behind the wheel frequently).

But, if this issue should be legislated at all, it should be handled by the states, which unlike the federal government, are vested with police powers.

What are police powers?

The ability to regulate the “health, safety, morals, and general welfare” of the people.

So as much as we libertarians may detest laws against sodomy laws, smoking in public places, or the requirement to wear your seat belt while driving, the Tenth Amendment clearly states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In other words, Congress only has those powers specifically enumerated in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. Even the socialists who taught me at the University of Michigan were willing to admit that.

But nonetheless Congress still appears hell bent on legislating everything, so how could this be?

There are two enumerated powers which Congress has abused beyond recognition since the 1930s: the commerce clause, and the spending clause, which is the one they are currently abusing to regulate “texting”.

The spending clause is a good example of why all of this state sovereignty talk is full of hot air. As much as the states want to assert their independence at times, they easily succumb to the seduction of federal dollars thrown their way. In exchange for the money, they change their laws to Congress’ liking, and, like a deal made with the devil, abdicate whatever autonomy they may have had left.

But this is the truly scary thing: Congress is filled with lawyers, but few of them understand the Constitution, particularly the fact that it is a document which grants limited powers to the federal government.

A good example of this occurred when Vice President Joe Biden was still a Senator. Then-Sen. Biden drafted the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. As much as he boasted about this on the campaign trial last fall, he failed to mention that part of the Act were held unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court in United States v. Morrison (2000) on federalism grounds. And to think that this guy taught constitutional law!

As Judge Andrew Napolitano pointed out in his masterpiece “Constitution in Exile”, there is a difference between natural law, and mere positive laws — which are concocted for any apparent reason, and whose legitimacy is only based on the fact that our government said so.

As exemplified by the texting legislation, the United States has moved so far into the realm of positive law that the Constitution may very well be no longer worth the paper that it was written on.

by Terri McCormick

Regardless of political party or ideological persuasion, there are limited resources and outcomes possible with H.R. 3200 – “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009″ — the bill currently pending in Congress. There is no doubt that the stakes are high for individuals and businesses. It is critical that citizens engage in the discussion and that ‘We the People’ read the bill and act accordingly.

“Politics as usual” bedtime stories, when combined with chicken cordon bleu in the home of large political contributors, does not for good health care policy make. What it makes is a rather redundant kettle of “Status Quo Soup” stirred with the spoon of insider politics.

As former Congressman Dick Armey (R-TX) recently commented, “President Obama made the mistake of not setting a more specific direction for the democrat dominated legislature in both houses to pursue health care reform.”

Who will pay for the Healthcare Reform Act?

The middle class – either those small business owners who gross $250,000 a year or wealthier Americans whose household incomes are over $1,000,000, according to Mr. Obama in a press conference on July 23, 2009. The gaping taxpayer hole for the “Reform Act” appears to be 1/3 of the total cost of $1.5 trillion dollars.

Who is the Health Care Act written for?

A July 21, 2009 headline in The Washington Post read “Industry Cash Flowed to Drafters of Reform”. As liberal protesters marched outside, Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) sat down inside a San Francisco mansion for a dinner of chicken cordon bleu and a discussion of landmark health care legislation under consideration by his Senate Finance Committee.

The July 21 story goes on to say: “Baucus’s fundraising prowess underscores the enduring political strength of the health care lobby, which led all other sectors in donations to federal candidates during the last election cycle and has shifted its giving to Democrats as the party has tightened its control of Congress.” In fact, “The [health care] sector gave nearly $170 million to federal lawmakers in 2007 and 2008, with 54 percent going to Democrats, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks money in politics. The shift in parties was even more pronounced during the first three months of this year, when Democrats collected 60 percent of the $5.4 million donated by health care companies and their employees, the data show.”

Pay for Play politics does not yield solutions for Americans, but instead yields ‘deals’ for politicians.

What does the Health Care Reform Act do?

On page 16 of the 1,017 page document it clearly states, “In 5 years all private insurance plans must look like public plans.”

It is a government takeover of the private health care insurance industry. The private sector industry responsible for negotiating price on behalf of the patient will then be eliminated and a government-run “system” will replace it.

Does the Health Care Reform Act lower skyrocketing costs?

It would appear that government rationing is the answer being pursued, with the following examples:

1. Consider Elder Care. Instead of a goal to “age with dignity and independence” — which seems to be a shared common goal — under the bill in Congress, we will each be assigned to consultants who will review our case every five years to determine how grave a risk we will be to the federal health insurance system. When we become too high of a risk, the government will pull the plug. Or we will pay for the costs out of our own pocket (as if we haven’t paid enough in to the system already, right?).

2. Limits will be set to control costs for End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) of kidney disease, which many diabetics must face. The operative phrase is palliative care. It means treating the symptoms but not the underlying root cause of the disease. Give ‘em pain pills and let ‘em go die.

3. Congress has the ability to opt out of H.R. 3200 and they will still maintain their AIG-guaranteed pension and health care benefits.

4. TARP was distributed along party lines … so shouldn’t Americans be wary of health care being dispensed along party lines as well?

The notion of politicians and bureaucrats making health care decisions for the American people should have all of us concerned. But many Americans have been lulled to sleep, fat, dumb and happy that “the system is taking care of us.”

No need to read the 1,017 page document. Just trust the lobbyists and long-term politicians holding fundraisers throughout the negotiation process of the bill to get it right for all Americans.

For Hospitals, Clinics and Doctors

Is there an increased medicare reimbursement rate and guaranteed payment by the feds to hospitals and doctors who practice in federally approved clinics and hospitals? If not, the question then becomes ‘What happens when government bureaucrats hold all the insurance options?’

According to former Marine Veteran Carmen Russo, “The bottom line is that government will decide who lives and who dies. That’s what happens.”

Wouldn’t it be better if the Health Care Reform Act actually controlled health care costs?

Some suggestions:

Recommendations made on a Committee I chaired in the Wisconsin Legislature in 2002:

1. Create pools for prescription drugs, cooperative insurance pools, association pools nationwide and other insurance pools so that the free market has the opportunity to work. (Savings in Wisconsin’s first year alone was $40 million.)

2. Hold government bureaucracies and government-funded hospitals accountable by enforcing lean management controls on monies distributed on behalf of taxpayers. (Ever wondered why vertical impact machines were so expensive? You should – they are hammers!)

3. Get government out of the business of private business and into the role of ensuring a safety net for those Americans who need catastrophic care and government-secured insurance.

4. Never forget for a moment that the largest increases in health care costs are our individual choices that come with individual responsibility such as; our weight, exercise, smoking habits, and lifestyle choices.

We cannot regulate personal choices. But we can regulate government stupidity caused by incremental policy based on campaign contributions. The problem is both political parties have lost the public’s trust.

It is time to get behind candidates who we trust to change the way things are. We cannot hope and pray for change without action.

It is time to act!

__________________________________________________________________________

Terri McCormick is a former Wisconsin State Representative. While in the legislature, she Chaired the Health Care Cost Partnerships Committee.  She is currently working to establish an active Republican Liberty Caucus affiliate in Wisconsin.

© 2009 Terri McCormick
Reposted with permission.

One of the most active RLC affiliates in the country is located in Northeast Florida. They recently hosted our National Convention.

Below are some photos from the affiliate:

RLC members on Constitution Day, 2009.

RLC members on Constitution Day, 2009.

RLC members on Constitution Day, 2009.

RLC members on Constitution Day, 2009.

RLC members at the June 2009 RLC NEFL meeting.

RLC members at the June 2009 RLC NEFL meeting.

RLC members at the June 2009 RLC NEFL meeting.

Northeast Florida RLC members operate a booth at the Jacksonville Tax Day Tea Party on April 15, 2009.

Sarah Lovett received an award from the National RLC for her tremendous efforts for our cause.

Will Pitts received an award from the Florida RLC for his tremendous efforts leading the Northeast Florida RLC.

RLC activist Kimberly Wells talked to delegates at the RLC’s 2009 National Convention about the creative tools she developed for the RLC Activism Guide.

Northeast Florida hosted the RLC National Convention in 2009.

Florida RLC Secretary Sarah Lovett with former Congressman Dick Armey (R-TX).

Northeast Florida RLC members at the GOP National Convention in Minneapolis.

The following article was published in The Atlanta Journal Constitution on Monday, July 20. It’s author is former Republican Congressman from Georgia Bob Barr. Mr. Barr is currently a member of the Libertarian Party.

Health care ‘Never Never Land’
by Bob Barr

In “Sicko,” iconoclastic filmmaker Michael Moore extols the virtue of health care in such liberal “paradises” as the United Kingdom and Cuba. Leaving his audience to wonder where he would choose to go for treatment if he were facing a life-threatening illness — the People’s Hospital in Havana or the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. — Moore exhibits the same Alice-in-Wonderland delusion that has settled over the Obama administration.

A majority of members of Congress, too, seem to believe that if only enough bureaucracy and taxpayer dollars are thrown at the health care “crisis,” then everyone in the country will have their every medical need met, when they want it, and at much reduced cost. Such a mind set turns Peter Pan’s Never Never Land into a reality show.

For starters, advocates of the House legislation might want to talk to governors of those states, like Massachusetts, that have already implemented “universal” coverage plans. Increasing program costs, coupled with decreased state revenues as a result of the economic downturn, are causing serious fiscal problems and are forcing those states to consider cutbacks in coverage.

However, witnessing the irrational, “gotta-do-this-now” push in our nation’s capitol to pass comprehensive health care “reform” within the next few weeks, it is obvious the proponents of Obama-care are not interested in anyone throwing the cold water of fiscal reality on their parade.

The House version of the legislation, unveiled by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) last week, includes substantial mandates on American businesses (including a severe, 8 percent payroll tax on any business that fails to offer health insurance coverage to its employees). Still, the Pollyannaish Pelosi claimed (with a straight face) it would “lower costs to businesses.” This is government logic at its finest — you lower the cost of doing business by raising taxes on those businesses.

Pelosi’s obvious inability to grasp even the most basic of economic concepts was further displayed when she claimed that the “costs to consumers,” too, would be lowered. Apparently, this would be accomplished by placing a new surtax on those American consumers whose income exceeded the levels deemed worthy by the legislators.

Analysts of the 1,000-plus page legislation calculate its 10-year cost to exceed $1 trillion. Other experts fear such a figure greatly underestimates its true cost. Even the Congressional Budget Office calculates that the government subsidy for health care coverage will amount to some $6,000 per person within the next decade, which figures to more than $1.8 trillion.

Pelosi’s bill would also create a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers. Such a scenario, of course, is never a fair “competition,” because the government “owner” can always print money, spend borrowed money indefinitely, operate without regard for cost-benefit analysis, and threaten legal sanctions for those who fail to comply. None of these remedies are available to businesses (except, of course, for the “new” General Motors).

The smoke-and-mirrors approach is evident also in the fact that high-income taxpayers, who would already be taxed in order to pay for the “universal” coverage for their less-well-off compatriots, would face escalating taxes if the government fails in the years ahead to achieve targeted “savings” in Medicaid and Medicare. In other words, the government will set “savings targets,” but if it fails to meet them, it is taxpayers who will pay the penalty, not those members of Congress or federal bureaucrats who decide how much to spend on the entitlement programs.

Other industries, including pharmaceuticals, will face increased taxes as well, in order to pay for this “reform.” The more successful drug makers will pay a higher percentage tax than their smaller, less successful colleagues. Once again, success in the business arena is punished in the government arena.

Truly, this bill is a monstrosity.

###

Bob Barr, an Atlanta attorney, is a former member of Congress and Libertarian presidential candidate.

The following article is from RLC Adviser Ron Paul’s weekly column, Texas Straight Talk.

Political philosopher Richard Weaver famously and correctly stated that ideas have consequences. Take for example ideas about rights versus goods. Natural law states that people have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A good is something you work for and earn. It might be a need, like food, but more “goods” seem to be becoming “rights” in our culture, and this has troubling consequences. It might seem harmless enough to decide that people have a right to things like education, employment, housing or healthcare. But if we look a little further into the consequences, we can see that the workings of the community and economy are thrown wildly off balance when people accept those ideas.

First of all, other people must pay for things like healthcare. Those people have bills to pay and families to support, just as you do. If there is a “right” to healthcare, you must force the providers of those goods, or others, to serve you.

Obviously, if healthcare providers were suddenly considered outright slaves to healthcare consumers, our medical schools would quickly empty. As the government continues to convince us that healthcare is a right instead of a good, it also very generously agrees to step in as middle man. Politicians can be very good at making it sound as if healthcare will be free for everybody. Nothing could be further from the truth. The administration doesn’t want you to think too much about how hospitals will be funded, or how you will somehow get something for nothing in the healthcare arena. We are asked to just trust the politicians. Somehow it will all work out.

Universal Healthcare never quite works out the way the people are led to believe before implementing it. Citizens in countries with nationalized healthcare never would have accepted this system had they known upfront about the rationing of care and the long lines.

As bureaucrats take over medicine, costs go up and quality goes down because doctors spend more and more of their time on paperwork and less time helping patients. As costs skyrocket, as they always do when inefficient bureaucrats take the reins, government will need to confiscate more and more money from an already foundering economy to somehow pay the bills. As we have seen many times, the more money and power that government has, the more power it will abuse. The frightening aspect of all this is that cutting costs, which they will inevitably do, could very well mean denying vital services. And since participation will be mandatory, no legal alternatives will be available.

The government will be paying the bills, forcing doctors and hospitals to dance more and more to the government’s tune. Having to subject our health to this bureaucratic insanity and mismanagement is possibly the biggest danger we face. The great irony is that in turning the good of healthcare into a right, your life and liberty are put in jeopardy.

Instead of further removing healthcare from the market, we should return to a true free market in healthcare, one that empowers individuals, not bureaucrats, with control of healthcare dollars. My bill HR 1495 the Comprehensive Healthcare Reform Act provides tax credits and medical savings accounts designed to do just that.

The folks at The American Constitution and Capitalism Defense Front (Active), have come up with an interesting idea.

They’re calling for a nationwide strike of citizens against the government, turning the international socialists’ tactics against them and possibly launching a movement which will have even more impact than the Tea Parties have had.

At a time when the extreme left has become the establishment, those who support traditional American values of liberty and free enterprise are by default the radicals, just as we were in 1776 when we opposed the tyranny of British rule. I don’t agree with all of the beliefs and methods which groups like ACTIVE and the Patriotic Resistance and Bureaucrash advocate, but this idea of adopting the methodology and rhetoric of the radicals of the 60s in the fight against the growing power of the leftist state in America is very appealing.

Back in the early days of the Libertarian Party this is very much the approach which we took. As editor and a columnist for Liberty magazine back in those days I was constantly writing articles which sought to capitalize on the enthusiasm of student radicalism and direct it against the terrible policies of the Carter administration. In the Students for a Libertarian Society (SLS) we were borrowing ideas from the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) (which had preceded us by about a decade) and we were drawing on the hardcore anarchism coming out of the anti-government riots and the punk music coming out of England in the late 70s. At the time there was only so far we could go with the idea, because Carter’s incompetence made his administration too soft a target and the entire dynamic changed when Reagan came into power and drew a lot of libertarians including myself more into the political mainstream.

The days of Reagan are long gone now and the champions of liberty are the underdogs again. This time we have a statist establishment to oppose that is much more powerful and much more dangerous than Jimmy Carter ever dreamed of being. The time really is ripe for a liberty revolution, and the tactics of the revolutionaries of the past are now ours to use. The liberty movement has made a lot of strides in the last couple of years and generated a huge diversity of organizations and issue groups, both inside the Republican party and among independent voters, but it’s clear that a lot of these groups are looking for opportunities to take action in more radical and dramatic ways.

The Tea Parties brought a lot of different groups together with a common goal, but their effectiveness is inherently limited and they have been successfully undermined by a media disinformation campaign to portray them as “astroturf” events because of the involvement of Republican party groups and big money advocacy groups like FreedomWorks. As an idea they have also lost momentum from being overused and have pretty much run their course as an effective protest campaign.

Whatever succeeds the Tea Parties needs to go even deeper into the grassroots and nothing could do this more effectively than a protest which is purely based on individual action. Instead of gathering together into a group and marching or rallying, every person can take action on his own, but coordinated on a nationwide basis. That’s what makes something like a general strike such an appealing idea. If enough people can be involved to really represent the high level of dissatisfaction in the country, the results could be impressive and impossible to ignore.

The only problem is the timing. I assume that those who have proposed a date of November 4th picked that date because it’s the one-year anniversary of the election and because it gives plenty of time to organize a nationwide protest. The problem is that by then it’s likely to be too late for even a wildly successful strike to have any impact on the most serious threats from the Obama regime. If we don’t stop Obama and Pelosi as quickly as possible we are going to be out of luck. Cap and Trade and ObamaCare will be done deals by November 4th and we’ll be well and truly screwed as a nation. These socialist programs will never be reversed once they are implemented, so we need grassroots protest on a huge scale before the end of the Summer.

I love the irony of using classic radical tactics against this government, because the truth is that they may have started out as radicals, but they are now the establishment and we are the radicals. So grab a copy of Rules for Radicals, Steal this Book or Stir it Up and learn the tactics that used to drive our enemies, because they’re ours now and it’s time to turn the tables on them.

This nation was founded by radicals and it will take a new generation of radicals to reclaim our stolen liberty. Founding radical Sam Adams said: “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” We are the new irate minority – sons and daughters of liberty like Sam Adams – and a general strike might be just the kind of brushfire we need.

Earlier in the month, RLC members from the Indiana and Missouri affiliate attended the Young Republicans Convention in Indianapolis to spread the message of individual liberty and limited government.

RLC members Rob and Karen Hillman and Charlie Kochenash hosted a Republican Liberty Caucus booth at the YR Convention. Two photos from the booth follow.

Dave Nalle recently posted a summary of the YR Convention results at this blog.

Charlie Kochenash, Indiana RLC Chair, also spoke at the July 4 Northwest Indiana Patriots Tea Party:

Article from Florida Today, dated July 12, 2009:

Matt Nye steps into spotlight, changes game
Tired of sideline, he mobilizes conservatives by the masses

Matt Nye wanted nothing to do with politics until just a couple of years ago.

His father told him early on that “voting only encourages them.” He complained a lot about government, but never tried to change anything.

So it’s a major change for the 37-year-old Internet-telephone salesman and former mortgage broker to now be immersed in politics. He’s the lead organizer of the Brevard County “tea parties,” the latest of which attracted some 3,000 people to Space Coast Stadium on July 4.

Nye serves on the Brevard Republican Executive Committee and is chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Central East Florida, which represents the Libertarian wing of the party. County commissioners recently appointed Nye to influential government boards, where he can shape government and business in Brevard from the inside out.

And then there’s his role as modern-day pamphleteer. Besides a tea party Web site, Nye maintains the Space Coast Politics blog, where he quotes Libertarian author Ayn Rand and rails against the “liberal media” and big government spending. Another Nye site is dedicated to attacking County Attorney Scott Knox.

“I am not your typical volunteer organizer,” Nye said in a recent interview, twisting a silver ring with a Superman “S” logo. “I don’t play well in groups.”

All of that points to a more ambitious effort, Nye said — one that could force some soul-searching among local Republicans.

He said he plans to run for the Brevard County Commission in 2010, the seat currently held by fellow Republican Mary Bolin.

He’s tired of being “on the outside yelling for change,” Nye said.
Overcoming failure

Within months, Nye has gone from outsider to insider partly because of the election of conservative commissioners in South Brevard. Commissioner Trudie Infantini appointed him to the Charter Review Commission, charged with proposing changes to the fundamental operations and ground rules of county government. And Commissioner Andy Anderson named Nye to the board of directors of the Economic Development Commission of Florida’s Space Coast, the agency entrusted to recruiting industry.

But the man who preaches fiscal responsibility as he rails against wasteful government spending has suffered his share of financial disasters, including bankruptcy, foreclosure and a federal tax lien.

Read more.