Proposed Legislative Remarks ..

This speech, previously posted in this blog, although undelivered, was written to be delivered to the Legislature to apprise the members of their duties and make them aware of the tyranny confronting them.  Although all Legislators have sworn an oath, (“I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of  (“our State,”) and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of (“my office”) according to the best of my ability.”) few have read the Constitutions and fewer still have taken the time to understand them.  We, who are fighting this fight understand that we are in an existential battle to save our republic … most Legislators are unaware of this fight and if they are, they are resigned to the premise that we can do nothing about it.  We know that we can fight and win.  Our duty is to convince the Legislature to act.

————————————————

Mr. Speaker and Honorable members of the House … I arise today, at the beginning of this session of the Legislature to speak to you about our mission here in the Legislature … to urge you to think about our place in the destiny of this the greatest experiment in human freedom; about our place in the genius of the American system; about that Republic called the United States of America.

Surely, our primary job here is to provide for the protection of the persons and property of the citizens of our great state.  To provide a legal environment of mobility, safety, tranquility, and sense of hope and optimism for the future for our children … and a haven of comfort and satisfaction for our elderly and disadvantaged … but we also have a higher duty that has been sorely neglected, that duty of protecting the gift of human freedom bequeathed to us long ago by our Revolutionary Forefathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America.

Today the States of our Federal Republic are being attacked from Washington, DC in seemingly the same arbitrary manner that King George III was attacking our forefathers from London in the mid 18th century.  King George would not tolerate self government in the colonies and we are now confronted in a similar manner by an incomprehensibly enormous bureaucracy in that far away place, Washington, DC … a government that is clearly, day by day, year by year usurping the Constitutional rights of this state and its people to itself.

We are all familiar with the opening lines of the Declaration which states its intention … “When in the Course of Human Events it becomes necessary”… but how many of us can recall the reasons given for the separation?  Let us review some of those reasons … the Declaration states:

  1. In one place, “We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us” … Have you ever given thought to the fact that the US Constitution grants the Federal Government 17 enumerated powers and only those powers alone.
  2. It states in another, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it” … You should be cognizant that most of the Federal Government and its intrusive bureaucracy is not authorized by the Constitution, but has been created by unauthorized laws or by fiat judicial decisions.
  3. In another it states, “When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, It is their duty, to throw off such Government” … Our nation is a Federation of small self governing Republics; when a central government erected to promote peace and harmony among equals and to protect the whole from foreign aggression itself becomes the aggressor of our freedom, it is our right … our duty to stand up to that aggression.
  4. Further it states, “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance” … The bureaucracy to which we are subjected is so large as to be unknowable and is motivated by forces alien to, unresponsive to and uninformed of the exigencies of our State. Is our State subordinate to the US Fish and Wildlife Service in the case of the introduced wolves? Or to the US Department of the Interior in the case of managing the Sage Grouse?
  5. And further, “He has combined with others (*I would say the 3 branches) to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws” … Where in the US Constitution does it say that the Federal Courts have the right to nullify an article in our State Constitution defining marriage?
  6. And finally, “For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent” … The socialistic Obamacare outrage was sold to the Congress and us as providing for our healthcare, when in fact, when the 2000 plus unread pages of the bill were finally deciphered, we, as does the US Supreme Court, find it to be a tax.

All in all, the abuses by King George that propelled our forefathers to revolution and the abuses of the Constitution by the present Federal government toward the states are compellingly similar.  We certainly do not want to overthrow the Federal government, but as free men, elected representatives in a federated Republic, sworn by solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution, we are honor bound to do as Jefferson so eloquently proclaimed: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter.. it” … We must alter any unConstitutional infringements on our freedom!

So what does the Constitution say about it?  First it is of fundamental importance to understand that our Federal government is not a Democracy, nor are the States Democracies.  You will find no reference to democracy in either the Declaration or the Constitution.  Our forefathers were uncommonly expert in comparative government.  They, to a man, knew that democracies always fail; they fail because the masses cannot understand the issues and are therefore at the mercy of the demagogues… or more insidiously, compelled by the human failings of avarice and greed, they vote themselves largess from the public treasury until the polity is bankrupt.  The forefathers also understood that there is a tyranny of the majority that will prove fatal to general government.  Can the massive population majority of New York City efficiently govern Rhode Island, Vermont or New Hampshire or for that matter the rest of New York state?  Shouldn’t those entities have the final say in their fate?  The Revolutionary War had been about human freedom … the freedom of the individual.  The writers of the Constitution understood that only a representative form of government would work to preserve human freedom.   A government where the individual voter picked from among his peers a person who was an exemplar of his particular ideals with the integrity to represent his views in the next level of government.  They understood that democracy only worked where people of good will met face to face and presented their solutions to problems of mutual concern to the judgment of their gathered peers.  They knew that this face to face discourse worked in villages, townships, precincts, and legislatures and would work in the new Congress.  Small bodies where men of good will meeting face to face solving their problems with their peers.    The Constitution compartmentalized American government, giving due deference to the diversity of the States and to the general populace.  That is why the Constitution plainly states in Article 4 Section 4 that the States are guaranteed a “Republican Form of Government.”

James Madison, the father of the Constitution, a scholar of comparative government, initially believed that the Federal government could be given a limited list of duties to circumscribe its powers and because of the propensity of men with power to strive to always take more power, to have it administered by three separate branches of government each with checks upon the other.  He believed the bare Constitution to be sufficient in itself, we did not need a “Bill of Rights.”  But when Madison took this beautiful handiwork back to his home in Virginia for ratification, he was met with a firestorm of opposition, most aptly personified in the thinking and eloquence of Patrick Henry.  Henry objected to the Constitution because he was sure that the “unalienable Rights of Man” were not properly protected in the document from the caprices of those who would run the government.  He insisted that Rights of Man already codified in the Constitutions of the States be re-articulated in the Federal Constitution.  A vehicle was needed to block any attempt by Congress, the Executive, the Judiciary or the bureaucracy to modify the inherent rights of the Individual so recently won by the blood and toil of the Revolution.  Additionally, and the reason why Henry finally supported the Constitution, was that the States had to have the final say as to the validity of Federal law should any or all of the three branches attempt to overstep their Constitutional mandate.  His insistence on this point was met by the inclusion of the first ten amendments, the “Bill of Rights,” into the Constitution.  Henry’s amendment was the Tenth Amendment … “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.”   This powerful amendment allows the States to nullify or disregard actions of the Federal Government that are not granted in the enumerated powers.  It may be, in the final analysis, the most important of the “Bill of Rights.”   Patrick Henry certainly thought so!

We as Legislators can disregard the mandate of the Tenth Amendment at the peril of our Federal Republic or we can re-affirm our oath to the people of our State by standing against the usurpations of the Federal government.  As we watch the creeping tyranny descending upon our nation, we in the our Legislature can, we must, take action to preserve our sacred Republic.  We must make it clear to the Federal Government, “This far and no further!”  This Legislature must provide a vehicle to monitor and act upon the usurpations of the Federal behemoth.

 

 

Posted in 1 Senator, 1 Representative | Leave a comment

Walter Williams ..

Dr. Walter E. Williams, a professor of economics at George Mason University and a syndicated columnist, is one of America’s greatest living political philosophers.  This essay from his on going writings addresses our dilemma on how to check the tyranny emanating from our Federal government.  It is informative to our understanding of how to proceed.  I highly recommend that you partake of his wisdom.

Let’s Fight Tyranny        by Walter Williams

For more than a half-century, it has become abundantly clear that our nation faces increasing irreconcilable differences. At the root is the fact that there is one group of Americans who mostly want to be left alone and live according to the rule of law and the dictates of the U.S. Constitution while another group of Americans wants to control the lives of others and ignore both the rule of law and constitutional restraints on the federal government.

Should those Americans who favor the rule of law and constitutional government fight against or yield to those Americans who have contempt for the rule of law and constitutional government? Let’s look at a few of those irreconcilable differences.

Some Americans prefer to manage their own health care needs. Others wish to have the federal government dictate their health care. Some Americans want their earnings to be taxed only for the constitutionally mandated functions of the federal government, which are outlined in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. Others think American earnings should be taxed for anything on which Congress can muster a majority vote.

Though there is no constitutional authority for federal involvement in public education, some Americans want the federal government involved. The list of irreconcilable differences among the American people is nearly without end. These differences survive because of the timidity of those offended and the brute power of the federal government.

I think reconciliation is impossible; therefore, separation is the only long-term peaceful solution. Separation and independence do not require that liberty-loving Americans overthrow the federal government any more than they required Gen. George Washington to overthrow the British government in order to secede or required his successor secessionist, Confederate President Jefferson Davis, to overthrow the U.S. federal government.

You say, “All those government acts that you say violate the rule of law and the Constitution have been ruled constitutional by the courts!” That’s true. The courts have twisted the Constitution, but Thomas Jefferson warned, “To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions (is) a very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”

State governors and legislators ought to summon up the courage our Founding Fathers had in their response to the fifth Congress’ Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798. Written by Jefferson and James Madison, the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798 and 1799 stated that those states’ legislatures considered the Alien and Sedition Acts unconstitutional.

They said, “Resolved, That the several States composing, the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government … and … whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.” The 10th Amendment to our Constitution holds, “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.”

The federal government should not be permitted to determine the scope of its own powers. Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist No. 28, said, “The State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority.”

One response to federal encroachment is for state governments to declare federal laws that have no constitutional authority null and void and refuse to obey them. In other words, they should nullify federal laws that violate the Constitution. In good conscience, liberals could not object to nullification. There are hundreds of so-called sanctuary cities in the U.S. — liberal places that have chosen to nullify federal immigration laws and harbor immigrants who are here illegally.

Former slave Frederick Douglass advised: “Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them. … The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.” We Americans appear to have very limited endurance in the face of tyrannical oppression.

 

Posted in 1 Senator, 1 Representative | Leave a comment

John Marshall Harlan II ..

The reapportionment gerrymanders presently that designate the Legislative districts in the States of our Union are the result of an illegal, unconstitutional ruse that was invented for use by the minions of the New Deal to steal political power from the heart land of the United States; from what we now call “Red State America.”

The republic created by the founders was specifically set up to politically protect a large minority of Americans … those Americans who pioneered new land, braved the seas, cut the timber necessary for construction, advanced the railroads, mined the riches, broke the sod, pacified the Indians and grew the food that fed us all … the “red necks” of yore.  The founders understood that the human resources, on a population basis, in 1787 resided in the growing, increasingly urban society of their time.  They also understood that the real economic strength of our nation resided in the almost infinite treasures of the mines, forests and fields of the hinterlands whose use had to be exploited by pioneers, visionaries and adventurers.  The urbanites were absolutely dependent upon the bounty of the outlands to sustain them.  The outlanders in order to thrive had to have power enough to check the avarice of the urban majority which, with its great advantage in voting power, would, as in all previous democracies, tyrannize the rural minority.

The founders set up a Republic … representative government, a system of bottom up government.  The individual was recognized as king.  The law protected the individual.  Local problems were solved locally.  The Legislature, already existent and already much advanced, was convened in the States to consider problems of state wide concern brought to it by representatives of all the subdivisions of the polity.  Those representatives had been sent from the counties that had been created over many decades of dividing the State into communities of common interest.  The Federal government, was set up like the Legislatures to the counties, a place to consider the mutual problems of the States.  The Founders did not want the Federal Government to dictate to the States, so it was given only limited powers that were delineated in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution.  The Federal Congress had a Senate to which each State sent two ambassadors to represent the State as a whole, and a House of Representatives to give voice to the general population, each representative having an equal constituency mitigated only by the proviso that each State would have at least one member in the body.  In the States, the duly elected Legislature, being a body of local exemplars, selected the US Senators and the general population voted, district by district, for members of the House.  There were to be no general Federal taxes and the money was to be gold or silver.  This system worked until 1913, when the Socialists, now Progressives, began becoming ascendant.

The socialistic Progressives, considering themselves the intellectual and moral superiors to the “red neck” people in “fly over” country, were eager to centralize the government so that the utopia that they visualized could be realized.  With the adoption of the income tax (the 16th Amendment), the Federal Reserve Bank and the 17th Amendments, they were able to begin to seriously participate, contrary to the advice of George Washington, in world affairs.  Within 4 years after the adoption of the 16th Amendment, they had enough money to enable them to embroil the US in World War I on the side of Briton and France, even though America had a huge population of German descendants.  The effect of adopting the Federal Reserve Bank did not really manifest itself until Roosevelt’s the New Deal, when Roosevelt, in an executive order, made it illegal for Americans to own gold, the coin of the realm.  But those actions did not really address the real problem for the Progressives … how to make a behemoth of the central government that controlled all aspects of American life.

The Supreme Court was a real thorn in side of the “New Deal.”  Time after time, the Supreme struck down Roosevelt’s schemes to elevate the Federal government to the do all be all to all Americans.  Roosevelt became so impatient with this situation that he tried to pack the Court with enough Progressives so that they would rule for him.  Not even the heavily Democratic Congress would support this power grab.  But, bye and bye, all men grow old and die and by his third term in office there had been enough attrition that he had a majority.  One of the earliest decisions in increasing powers of the Federal government was the infamous “Wickard v. Filburn” decision that effectively gave the Federal government power over all commerce.  And what, may I ask is not, ultimately, in commerce?  This decision is the basis to justify our monstrous Federal bureaucracy.    But this did not solve the problem of the influence of the small county  “red neck” Senators in state Legislatures.  In order to solve this problem it was obviously necessary to eliminate them.  The Legislatures had to be apportioned not on a county basis but on a population basis alone.  A moment of reflection reveals that very soon, on that premise, the urban areas will totally dominate State Legislatures. (The feared tyranny of the majority)

There is no authority whatsoever in the Constitution for the US government to effect any change in the makeup or apportionment of State Legislatures.  So the Progressives dreamed up a new mechanism … the “Living Constitution.”  The concept is this: the Justices will read “between the lines” of the Constitution and find where the Founders “meant to say” or “forgot to say” or “mistakenly omitted” something in the Constitution.  Of course, if they are clairvoyant enough to do that, they read can read absolutely anything out of the document.  This idea is as old as the Republic … Thomas Jefferson supposedly quipped, “I have read between the lines of the Constitution and found nothing.”

After much searching, our socialistic friends found a partial sentence in the 14th Amendment that would suit their purposes:  “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”  The socialistic Justices (Chief Justice Earl Warren, and Associate Justices Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, Tom C. Clark, William J. Brennan Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron White and Arthur Goldberg) of the Court read between the lines and found that the US Courts had the right to override state Constitutions and to reapportion state legislatures, that is all except one of them, a patriot, Justice John Marshall Harlan II.

Justice Harlan’s dissent lays bare the duplicity of the other Justices in co-opting their Constitutional powers to legislate illegal powers not given the Judicial Branch or even written in the Constitution.  If you want to understand how wrong this decision is, it is imperative that you read what he said.  Since it is somewhat lengthy, I have provided you a link to it below.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Reynolds_v._Sims/Dissent_Harlan

This terrible abuse of our Republic can be remedied by acting on the prescience of the Founders that foresaw the minions of treason to our republic and inserted the 10th Amendment of the “Bill of Rights” into the Constitution.   (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) All that is necessary is for the Legislature and People of our State to “Nullify” this horrible decision and to then stand up to the socialists trying to overthrow our Republic.

 

Posted in 1 Senator, 1 Representative | Leave a comment