A Constitutional Convention Can Do …What?

Would a Constitutional Convention fix our constitutional problems?

The tiny percentage of us who’ve actually read any constitution, federal or state, know very well that all levels of our government operate in violation of these proven, fundamental, once-cherished and now-ignored laws.

So it’s no surprise that most of us sense a problem with the state of our union.  It’s similarly predictable that most of us misdiagnose the problem and then promote bad ideas as a cure.

But this problem of ungoverned government (a.k.a., anarchy) isn’t that our politicians are “out of touch.”  Far from it.  The problem is that our politicians represent us perfectly. 

We The People have completely violated “the supreme Law of the Land” at every level – federal, state, local and personal.  A constitutional convention now would only muddle matters with more laws written by lawbreakers in a society that has no respect for law. 

The real cure is to snap out of this madness, read the law and obey it as written:

The federal constitution’s tenth amendment decrees that “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.”  So whatever power isn’t specifically delegated in the constitution is completely denied. 

All state constitutions say something similar.  The Indiana constitution’s Article I, Section 25 says, “No law shall be passed, the taking effect of which shall be made to depend upon any authority, except as provided in this Constitution.”  In other words, not even legislation can create authority; only constitutions do that.

No constitution was ever amended to authorize most of what governments now do to citizens.

Even the Texas Constitution, the longest and worst (due to “runaway” amendments and usurpations some claim never happened and couldn’t happen in a new constitutional convention), obviates the need of any new laws in its Article I, Sec. 29: “To guard against transgressions of the high powers herein delegated, we declare that everything in this ‘Bill of Rights’ is excepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate, and all laws contrary thereto, or to the following provisions, shall be void.” 

Nullification of anything unconstitutional is already law in every state of the union. 

Let us pray that we do this soon, before somebody invokes Article 10 of the New Hampshire constitution: “…whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.”

You say you want a Revolution?

It’s a little disturbing that one of the most common web searches bringing people to this blog is, “Give me hope, please.”  But what really worries me is how many people are typing, “violence” and “revolution,” to end up here.

My fellow Americans, what are you thinking of? 

What is violence going to accomplish that your votes did not?  You got what you voted for.  You want something else?

What?!?

I have nothing to say to “centrists.”  These human dandelion seeds have no senses, apparently; and just float the prevailing wind.  I wish I did have words that’d shake them down.  But I’ve never had any luck with people who think it’s reasonable to split the difference between Hitler and Stalin. 

And true socialist/authoritarians are twisted, ruthless monsters who know that their violence and oppression is self-serving to the elite group to which they feel they belong.  They probably know what I’d like to say to them, but they’d happily have it tortured out of me anyway.

However, most people of the so-called “left” are not those socialists, and they’re not hopelessly foolish.  They don’t understand that politics/government is violence, so they simply don’t know that they are invoking, promoting and unleashing violence upon their fellows. 

The multiply-pierced, tattooed but still smiling Obama fan you see at Whole Foods really does want a peaceful society; he just hasn’t thought any more deeply about politics and market economics than he thought about that ring in his nose.  He doesn’t know that his free-love-and-world-peace dreams drag us all into Stalinist nightmares.  But so far, I’ve found it rewarding to talk to these people. 

Sadly, most of the so-called “right” are much more difficult to work with.  Perhaps they’re worse in hypocrisy and idolatry, and thus inoculated and steeled against reason.  So while many righties seem to pray to God, they put their hands on their hearts and promise to obey a symbol  instead (really; think about that). 

While the word “constitution” invokes wonderful, abstract imagery to them (Norman Rockwell paintings, Bob Hope, and of course, flags), they have no idea what the constitution is for, let alone what it really says.  Just like the lefties, they advocate bigger, costlier, more intrusive government – but they deny it!  They’re just as opposed to individual liberty – but they deny it!   They tear up the constitutions and stomp on them  – but they deny it!  

Frankly, I’d rather hang out at Whole Foods than listen to self-righteous ignorami spouting off about the “coming revolution,” or even secession.  Far-Righties are maybe not as bad as centrists, but their rising mood of undirected, goal-free violence is certainly not helpful. 

What do they suppose a revolution is going to do if they don’t even VOTE for what they say they want?  And what would secession accomplish if it creates only a self-deluded clone of our current mess?

After years of trying to find ten Republicans who know what it is that they want, I’m hard pressed to see any difference between the “right” and the “left” other than the aforementioned tattoos, piercings…and the type and degree of hypocrisy. 

Well, actually, I like Whole Foods.  The one near my work in Houston has a great selection of Belgian beers.  The GOP has nothing like it.

Of course, now that they’ve given up their catbird seat, and there’s no expectation of them actually doing anything substantial, the GOP talks (almost) like Ron Paul. 

But when they held the reins of power, they did only evil, and then chose John McCain to lead them into more of the same. 

They had a chance – a very good, record-breaking, youth-energizing chance – to set things right according to the words they speak from their mouths.  But their voting arms, inexcusably, chose otherwise.

And now they complain?  Inexcuseable.  Shameful. 

Even so, I think we’re seeing that even Republicans can come to their senses in sufficient numbers to shake the centrism tree.  The so-called “Tea Parties” may exemplify this.

We all know we have enemies and problems.  But the question in battle is never so much what to attack, as what to defend.

What do you want?  Please don’t say you want “American Exceptionalism” unless you can explain to even yourself what that really means.  

How do you want to live?  Please don’t tell me “with American Values.”  We’ve all seen plenty of American Values, and I think that’s why we’re all so hopeless, disgusted, and crying for revolution.

On these pages I’ve said that I want my rules written down, and that’s true.  I don’t think we can live in peace without some hard and fast rules.

Good fences make good neighbors.

But if I were to paint my picture of The Good Life, here’s what it’d look like:

1. Citizens can do whatever they want to do as long as they don’t harm anybody else, or take what’s not theirs.
2. We’d have no more government than necessary to maintain #1.
3. We write this down in plain speech and call it law.
4. We invite others around the world to emulate our success, but otherwise leave them the heck alone.

So caveat emptor would replace the FDA, FTC, FDIC, FCC and a zillion other F’agencies.  Common sense, competition, voluntary associations, charity and free market options galore replace union/corporate monstrosities, Medicare, Social Security, lobbyists, regulations, litigation and price controls.  And because of the preceding, you get to keep what you earn, buy what you like (smoke it if you’re fool enough – and as long as you don’t blow it in my face), and live however and with whomever you want…as long as you leave others, and their stuff, alone.

That’s all.

Is that really so bad?  Could you live with that?

Because you know that the alternative plan is not working, right?

Opportunity knocks, but maybe only once…

Thomas Jefferson wrote, “Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread.”   Our founders knew that ordinary citizens, when allowed their own motivations and institutions, are more adaptable, innovative and productive than even our wisest politicians could imagine or improve.  So our constitutions, state and federal, weren’t written as documents of government empowerment.  They are contracts of limitation; a leash against governments’ historical tendency to get loose and hurt those that government is supposed to protect.

Governments are good at only a few, albeit formidable tasks; and then only if properly restrained.  If we ask more of government, we’ll get less.  What we’ve come to call, “government services,” or programs that rob Peter to pay Paul, can’t work as well as the infinite and dynamic range of citizen alternatives.

Every day, our merchants display a new and endless supply of things like espresso beans, hand-made bathroom tiles, leather-lined cars, -even things like energy saving light bulbs and recycled paper in aisle after aisle of stocked shelves.  When governments attempt such a cornucopia, people wait in line for bad shoes that don’t fit.

Governments can’t command bicycle mechanics to invent airplanes, or decree that college kids will invent a computer in a garage.  Government didn’t invent schools, soup kitchens or voluntary service clubs.  Government regulations didn’t make this nation great; free citizens did that.  The economist Ludwig von Mises wrote, “Progress is precisely that which the rules and regulations did not foresee.”

Not all government programs are as bad as slavery or the segregating Jim Crow laws, of course.  And the “progressive” programs that swept away the Indians and stole property from citizens for the benefit of railroad barons aren’t the finest examples either.  But even government’s best-intended schemes have driven medical costs skyward, and quality downward.  When government tries to stimulate one industry, it squeezes out others.  Some of our most kindly politicians have created social castes and hostile subcultures with their misguided good intentions.

I’ll just come out and say it: according to our government’s statistics, and as analyzed by groups as different as the Cato and Preservation Institutes, our Goose is Cooked.  Like it or not, we are swirling toward the drainpipes of history as our leaders point to the abyss and cry, “forward ho!”

American gross domestic product and expenditures per capita, adjusted for inflation, have doubled since 1960.  Yet for all our apparent wealth, we’re working harder and longer for less and less.  Healthcare spending has gone from about 5% of the GDP in 1960 to over 16% today, much more per capita than any other nation.  But despite better technology, our stratified life expectancies, infant and maternal mortality rates, and communicable disease controls are embarrassing.   In 1950, Americans averaged about $1700 per student/year in adjusted dollars, yet public education was excellent.  We spend over $7000 per student/year now, or over 50% more than other industrialized nations.  I need say no more about the quality of our government-run schools.

Certainly, our leaders didn’t mean to cause us harm any more than they meant to paint themselves into a financial corner.  But with all that’s obviously unraveling around us, I think it’s odd that so many Americans are squawking like Chicken Little now that our egg-faced leaders have confessed that government programs must be cut.  Many are even saying that tax increases, to prop up a few more government services, would be a good “compromise” as we get less and less for our money.  That’s nuts.

We have been presented with a great opportunity to prove our civic mettle.  We can still show the world that liberty still works.  Churches and other voluntary associations can fill the gaps in charity and building projects.  With as much as we pay for political campaigns, I know we can raise money for scholarships, arts programs and day camps.

For decades now, Libertarians, Jeffersonian Democrats and Barry Goldwater Republicans have advocated such simple, proven civic reforms.  Now’s the time.

In fact, it’s now…or never again.

Our government tapeworm has been eating away our civic awareness, industrious spirit and social organizations long enough.  Excising these government dysfunctions doesn’t mean doing without anything.  It means that perhaps at last our government will focus on its core business, and stay out of ours.  It means that now we’ll be free to assess our own priorities, pay for our own causes, and do what Americans were once known for around the world: doing things better.

The media were right to dismiss our “Tea Parties”

I shouldn’t say “I told you so.”  So I’ll just say, instead, that being right has never done me any good at all.  In fact, it’s been a costly annoyance to both me, and to all my loved ones.  Being right is no advantage in the voting booth; it seems absolutely detrimental in electoral politics.  It’s no advantage in any way I can think of.  And it’s downright dangerous to be right when the government and its media are wrong.

I hope, in fact, that I’m desperately, completely and astoundingly wrong about what’s coming next.  I pray that I am very, very wrong.

So I’ll not say “I told you so” about all the warnings, predictions, admonitions and sermons I’ve written, spoken and kinetically harangued upon my friends in the ongoing battle for liberty and justice.  No, I will restrain myself by means of superhuman humility and magnanimous spirit…

But we should admit that the media got it right.  They have correctly portrayed the “tea party” hubbub, and the liberty movement in general as undirected, vague, and ultimately, pointless blather.

It pains me to say so, but my allies in liberty and justice are not just wasting their own time and money.  Rather they are destroying our combined credibility.  They discredit truth, and are, in effect, stealing from us all by spoiling the opportunity for those who’d do the right thing.

What is the right thing?  I’ve said it many times on these pages, but maybe it’s just too simple to comprehend.  Maybe it’s too basic to seem like a clever tactic or even a pragmatic first step.

We all have to agree to what it is that we want.  And there is only one thing that I am aware of that all of us actually want…Rule of Law under existing state and federal constitutions as written.

We’re out of time for all this fooling around.  We must stop thinking of tactics and games.  We must stop thinking of others as our enemies when we need no enemy other than ourselves.  We will never convince others of anything as long as we are ourselves such doddering fools that we can’t articulate for the media just what the heck it is that we want.

Before I go and say again what it is that we should be doing, here’s the setup:

“The media” are not anything other than people.  While these particular people tend very strongly toward soviet-style authoritarianism, it’s not their ideology that causes us problems.  It’s the usual human laziness, mental weakness and idolatry that plagues us all.  Like us, they worship celebrities and disparage those who attempt to become one, and fall back to earth.  They kick such people.  Trust me. 

They love excitement, but see it in all the wrong places (sports, celebrities…and weather).  And like the rest of us, it takes the firm administration of a baseball bat to make them change their ways. 

So when you get a microphone in your face, “the media” will try to label you as quickly and dismissively as possible.  If you offer ten minutes of Patrick Henry-like rhetorical brilliance, they’ll air the one point at which you stumble and say, “ummm…”  If you speak convincingly about something they don’t understand or don’t like (Rule of Law under existing constitutions as written), and offer, for example, income tax, you’ll be dismissed as a “tax protester,” and nobody will ever hear what you said about the constitutions, or the sweetness of politics on a leash.

This last point is my whole point.

We must, immediately and without any waffling, converge on a single message and deliver it without any side trips, divergence, hesitancy or missteps.  We must simply, firmly, passionately yet reasonably present the demand that politicians, policemen and soldiers keep their oaths to the laws that protect us from them.  They must obey the written constitutions, as written.  No “interpretation” from the bench, no caveats, provisos, ifs, ands or buts.

You must not protest government spending, taxation, or even overt oppression.  Do not mention Ron Paul, though this is his cause too.  Don’t talk about central banking or “The Fed.”  You must not write letters, campaign or speak to neighbors about the myriad symptoms presented by our collective social disease.  We must address only the disease.  Quit nibbling at branches; it’s time to strike the root.

What’s the root that we can all agree upon?

The existing state and federal constitutions are still the best, most practical, most proven, most fair and just social contracts ever signed into law.  So let’s agree that these are exactly, and only, what we want.

We have easy communication now.  We can still move freely.

Do not assume that this will last much longer.  And most definitely do not assume that a “revolution” will get you what you want if you can’t even agree now what it is that you hope to accomplish with violence.  The hour is late, and our side is losing.  Your choice is not up to your enemies.  It’s all up to you.  Personally.  Right now.

Read It…Now.

It may be oddly written, and I’ve learned that it’s not the best office-party icebreaker.  But every Hoosier should read, understand and memorize Article I, Section 25 of the Indiana Constitution.  It is short, unambiguous, and very, very important right now.

“No law shall be passed, the taking effect of which shall be made to depend upon any authority, except as provided in this Constitution.”

What could these words mean, but that even legislation does not create authority; laws depend upon authority.

It’s not only the Indiana Constitution that expresses this.  All throughout our constitutional republic, all political authority comes from our constitutions.

In other words, here in Indiana, as elsewhere under the Rule of Law established by our state and federal constitutions, politicians are not allowed to authorize themselves.  All of their power is written into constitutions, or that power is denied.

Just as you mustn’t allow a bad dog to hold his own leash, we mustn’t allow politicians to “interpret” the constitutions that restrain them.  “Legal precedent” and “case law” do not exist in our constitutions and have no legitimate power over constitutions.  Therefore, for example, no federal official can interpret away any first amendment rights because federal authority over religion, speech, press, assembly and petition is very plainly prohibited (see the First Amendment to the US Constitution).  All of our constitutions say this many times and in many ways; and constitutions were agreed upon and signed as solemn contracts (see the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1799).

Yet most politicians are routinely violating all of the laws that protect us from their historically demonstrated tendencies.  They have thus abrogated their legal authority, and rule by force alone.  Dick Cheney’s “nation of men, and not laws” is not just scary, it’s literally criminal.  This affects you more than you’ve been told.

Perhaps the most every-daily-relevant example is in your wallet.  State and federal constitutions mandate the use of gold and silver coin as money; and they’re clear that only our legislative assemblies have authority over this money.

But that’s not how your money works now.  And the way your money works today, is to rob you right into your grave.

With all our record-breaking taxation, regulation and litigation, there is only one private enterprise in America that has never been regulated, audited, taxed or brought to justice.  It is the so-called “Federal Reserve” Bank that’s been printing Monopoly money and charging you plenty for it since 1913.  It’s not federal, there’s no reserve, and it’s most definitely unconstitutional!

Frustratingly, many of even my political friends and allies tell me that “we’re too far from the constitutions now; we can’t demand compliance.”  But that’s like saying that once a criminal has done his deed, we, as a culture have failed, and that the criminal must therefore go free.

That is not sane.  That is self-flagellating madness.

Others claim that this is a democracy (why minorities want majority rule is beyond me), and voters can choose anything – even self-destruction.

I concede that this is pretty much what is happening.  But that’s both unconstitutional, and suicidal.

In each of my political races, and through all the years since 1995, I’ve proposed various plans to sunset all unconstitutional laws, agencies, powers and practices, and make the armed thug we call government go legit.  That is the law, it is morally right, it is proven to work…

…and our current path has proven to fail every time.

The Russian Revolution dreamed of liberty, justice and equality for all, but produced Stalinist nightmares and social collapse.  The French Revolution wielded the rhetoric but not the laws of our founders, so it was more about beheadings than freedom.  Even our own nation’s not-so-distant history illustrates oppression, slavery, genocide and war.  How can we think that now, with our government more powerful, secretive and intrusive than ever, we have put our ugly past behind us?

If you were to get curious and take the couple of hours necessary to read both the state and federal constitutions (yes, you really can read them without a federal judge telling you what they mean), you’d see that all of our biggest problems are unconstitutional.

Most taxation and government spending is unconstitutional.  All military engagements since WWII have been unconstitutional.  Pork, corruption, spiraling healthcare and education costs and tumbling dollars are all unconstitutional.

And every American constitution, both state and federal, codifies our right to alter or reform our government.  The Texas constitution couldn’t be more clear that should the federal government break its side of the constitutional contract, then Texas is specifically free and sovereign.  And that’s in the document’s very first paragraph.

You ought to read it!

Say what you will about our constitutions.  Call them outdated, call them “agrarian.”  But then read them.  We have nothing better, and we’re headed toward a truly ancient and horrible default state without them.

…You think TAXES are a problem?

Before all the “Tea Party” events swirl through the news, there’s something I have to get off my chest.

Despite what you’ve been told about the cause of our Revolutionary War, you’ll be half-way through our Declaration of Independence before you see taxation mentioned, and then only in regard to imposing taxes on us without our consent.

After that, guess what?  Taxation doesn’t appear again.

Even “taxation without representation” (not in the Declaration, and the phrase was popularized later in the conflict) isn’t so much about taxation as it is about colonists’ right to proxies in the seat of power.

You see, the real reason our founders declared independence from England was King George’s “refusal to assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.” The Declaration cites the King for 27 violations of rights that Englishmen were due by written law. It was Rule of Law instead of rule of tyrants that our founders wanted — not anything unreasonable or even new.

Of course, from the moment the US Constitution was made law, politicians resisted its limitations on their power, such that by 1799, just ten years after ratification, both Madison and Jefferson wrote the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions to reassert federalism …or face annulment and dissolution of the union!  They demanded Rule of Law under existing constitutions as written…and they meant it.

Right now, we do not operate under Rule of Law by the constitutions as written.  We are under Common Law, or law by judicial decree.  The difference is huge; and as predicted by our founders, ultimately fatal.

No political power is any longer bound by any written laws.  In fact, as the courts are servants of the greater political/finance machine, there are no real limits on political power at all. 

So you have no rights.

You have no second amendment because you have no constitution.  You have no first amendment because you have no Rule of Law.  You’ve got nothing that can’t be taken away from you.  Not your property, your rights, or your life.

I’m scratching my head wondering why we think we have any other issues?

But no.  We divide and conquer…ourselves.  Second Amendment advocates campaign against our constitutional right to sin without civil punishment (as long as we don’t hurt others).  Those who call themselves “First Amendment Champion” typically oppose the very first right mentioned in the Frst Amendment’s five enumerated rights.  We each have our favorite rights, but we doggedly, stupidly, deny others’ their rights.

And so we have none at all.

And we think, on Tax Day, that how much of the Fed’s monopoly notes we feed the meter is, in itself, a problem?

Taxation out of control is only a minor symptom of a fatal disease, and we’re running out of time.

Right now we can communicate with amazing ease.  We can travel unimpeded.  We can form groups and meet.  But because we won’t even ask for constitutional Rule of Law, these are not rights; they’re conditional privileges with increasing conditions and decreasing privilege.  Soon, we will lose these privileges to the degree that opposition to our oppressors will be very, very difficult.

You think I’m kidding?  You think I’m in mouth-breathing hysteria mode beyond any reason?  You think that happy days are, as the experts tell us, just around the corner?

Actually, our government is blowing the great bubble even bigger for one huge, stinking, bloody pop.

Read any history book.  Then look at current events and see that those who’ve been wrong every time before are today called “pundits,” “experts” and “leaders,” while those who’ve always been right are called “fringe” and “losers.” 

Look at all the fallen nations before us and imagine what they must have been thinking in their final days.  I’m betting they all thought, “surely not!  That could never happen to us!”

Well, on a happier note, God is in control. 

He knows that we’re not!

In that, I find some comfort.

A Declaration of Rights

I’m a little up-to-here with those who deify Thomas Jefferson, and who’ve never even heard of George Mason.  Without Mason, American may have never had the three-branched and separated federal powers; and there’d have certainly been no Bill of Rights. 

George Mason was a prominent (and phenomenally prescient) anti-federalist, which propels him to the top of my short list of history’s People We Should Have Listened To. 

Yes, the Declaration of Independence is wonderful.  But it’s really not as good as the work that preceded and inspired it, George Mason’s Virginia Declaration of Rights.

 So here, in its entirety, is that Virginia Declaration of Rights.  I’ll try to shut up and let the words speak for themselves, but whenever I interrupt, it’ll be in blue: 

A DECLARATION OF RIGHTS made by the Representatives of the good people of VIRGINIA, assembled in full and free Convention; which rights do pertain to them and their posterity, as the basis and foundation of Government.

1. That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

This is a much more clear, understandable and sensible statement than Jefferson’s admittedly more poetic “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”  John Locke coined the phrase “life, liberty and the pursuit of property,” but it was Mason who first made it law.

2. That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the People; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them.

3. That Government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community;–of all the various modes and forms of Government that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of mal-administration;–and that, whenever any Government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right, to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the publick weal.

4. That no man, or set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments and privileges from the community, but in consideration of publick services; which, not being descendible, neither ought the offices of Magistrate, Legislator, or Judge, to be hereditary.

5. That the Legislative and Executive powers of the State should be separate and distinct from the Judicative; and, that the members of the two first may be restrained from oppression, by feeling and participating the burdens of the people, they should, at fixed periods, be reduced to a private station, return into that body from which they were originally taken, and the vacancies be supplied by frequent, certain, and regular elections, in which all, or any part of the former members, to be again eligible, or ineligible, as the law shall direct.

Please read that again.  Particularly the part starting with “they should, at fixed periods, be reduced to a private station…”  If only we took this to heart!

6. That elections of members to serve as Representatives of the people, in Assembly, ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage, and cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for publick uses without their own consent or that of their Representative so elected, nor bound by any law to which they have not, in like manner, assented, for the publick good.

Please read that again, too.  This is so good it makes me grieve that we don’t do it.

7. That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without consent of the Representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights, and ought not to be exercised.

8. That in all capital or criminal prosecutions a man hath a right to demand the cause and nature of his accusation, to be confronted with the accusers and witnesses, to call for evidence in his favour, and to a speedy trial by an impartial jury of his vicinage, without whose unanimous consent he cannot be found guilty, nor can he be compelled to give evidence against himself; that no man be deprived of his liberty except by the law of the land, or the judgment of his peers.

9. That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

10. That general warrants, whereby any officer or messenger may be commanded to search suspected places without evidence of a fact committed, or to seize any person or persons not named, or whose offence is not particularly described and supported by evidence, are grievous and oppressive, and ought not to be granted.Oh my.  If only…

11. That in controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, the ancient trial by Jury is preferable to any other, and ought to be held sacred.

12. That the freedom of the Press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained but by despotick Governments.

13. That a well-regulated Militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State; that Standing Armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

Is this clear enough?  People defend their own lands.  Professional, permanent standing armies are dangerous.  Is this brilliant, or what?

14. That the people have a right to uniform Government; and, therefore, that no Government separate from, or independent of, the Government of Virginia, ought to be erected or established within the limits thereof.

15. That no free Government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.

16. That Religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practise Christian forbearance, love, and charity, towards each other.

These last two are woefully missing from our U.S. Constitution.  This is brilliant.  Just brilliant. 

George Mason, I tip my hat to you, sir.  We owe you much. 

Ninety Five Theses on the Reform of Government

Ninety-Five Theses on the Reform of Government. 

by Andy Horning, Freedom, Indiana, USA

On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther nailed his Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences onto the doors of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany.  Luther’s disputation, now commonly called the Ninety-Five Theses on the Power of Indulgences came at a time when the Catholic Church was horribly corrupt and abusive, and the theses catalyzed the Protestant Reformation. 

Four-hundred and ninety years later, there is no doubt that the USA needs reformation.  Most of us don’t see the “forest for the trees,” but our political system has become horribly violent, corrupt and abusive.  Some of my arguments to this are listed in the following theses. 

Please feel free to distribute these as you see fit; and to print out and nail them to whatever you think appropriate:

1.   Despite our hopes to the contrary, civil government has always been our most dangerous abstraction.  It is the medium of oppression, slavery, genocide and war.  Civil government exists only because people are too flawed to live without it.

2.   The word “govern” means to restrain.  But what we call “government” is actually a very dangerous, usually unrestrained abstraction of political power.  

3.   People with governing power are at least as flawed as the people who need to be governed.  

4.   Those who seek governing power tend to resist restraints upon power, and most people tend to be seduced by ungoverned leaders.

5.   A civilization thrives when governing power is restrained.  A civilization falls when its politicians become ungoverned.

6.   History has proven that the best means of governing political power is written law and people empowered and educated to enforce that law.

7.   Our nation’s founders devised a limited, federal form of government with divided powers opposed by checks and balances.  

8.   They wrote down the laws in plain speech to be read by all, understood by all, and obeyed without any exception or ambiguity.  

9.   The resulting Constitution for the United States of America worked better than any civil contract before or since.  The degree to which this nation erred is the degree from which our nation deviated from the core tenet that the law applies equally to all, without any exception or ambiguity.

10.  From the beginning there were both challenges to this governing contract, and also precedents for peacefully reasserting the Rule of Law.

11.  In response to the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, the legislatures of Kentucky and Virginia passed resolutions in 1799 demanding that government keep the terms of the U.S. Constitution.

12.  The signers of the Kentucky Resolution, echoing similar sentiments as in the Virginia Resolution, declared that “…if those who administer the general government be permitted to transgress the limits fixed by that compact,” that it would be their duty to nullify the union.

13.   Many limits have been transgressed in the time since those resolutions, and since 1803′s Marbury v. Madison.  

14.  In that ruling, The Supreme Court under Chief Justice Marshall decreed that “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”

15.  Our politicians have twisted those words to mean that the Supreme Court is empowered to change the meaning of the Constitution.

16.  That is not what the founders authorized by the constitution.  That is also not what Marshall meant.

17.  For Marshall also said in that same ruling that “…the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”  

18.  The constitution was exhaustively argued and explained in the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers, Madison’s Diaries, letters and books written by the men that wrote the Constitution itself.  

19.  No interpretation of the Constitution for the United States of America is necessary or legal.  

20.  Politicians can amend the constitution for clarity or alteration of government.

21.  But the Rule of Law, as opposed to the Rule of Men or the Rule of Tyrants, requires that government leaders restrain their power to written law, as written.

22.  Nothing else is legal under the Rule of Law.

23.  And history demonstrates that nothing else will last.

24.  The Constitution for the USA is short enough to be known by all.

25.  The Constitution for the USA is simple enough to be understood by all.

26.  The Constitution for the USA is important enough to obeyed without exceptions, special classes, caveats or provisos.

27.  All USA federal power is both created and limited by the Constitution for the USA.

28.  No federal actions or rulings can contravene or supersede the Constitution for the United States of America.

29.  A federal government is a specific form of limited government.  Just as it creates and empowers a central government stronger than a confederacy, our constitution forbids a unitary or all-powerful central government.

30.  All federal powers granted are clearly written into the constitution (Article I, Section 8; Article II, Sections 2-4; Article III).

31.  All other powers are prohibited from the federal government, and are the property of the states and the people (Amendment X).

32.  The legislative branch has all legislative power, and no executive or judicial power (Article I).  

33.  The legislative branch of our central government has repeatedly passed laws that breach virtually every limit on federal authority, denying both state and citizen rights and taking property and money without legal authority.

34.  Yet the legislative branch has failed to use its authority to check and balance the executive and judicial branches.

35.  The executive branch has all executive power, and no legislative or judicial power (Article II).  

36.  Through “executive orders” and other means, the executive branch has repeatedly exercised illegal legislative power both in lawmaking, creation of agencies, taxation/ funding, waging war and in making rules concerning captures.  

37.  Yet the executive branch has failed to use its authority to check and balance the judicial and legislative branches.

38.  The judicial branch has all judicial power, and no legislative or executive power (Article III).  

39.  The judicial branch has repeatedly usurped both executive and legislative authority to abrogate states’ rights (e.g, Roe v. Wade and Gonzales v. Raich) and citizen rights (e.g., Orff v. United States), as well as to diminish citizen rights by granting them to corporations (Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company).  

40.  Yet the judiciary has failed to use its authority to check and balance the executive and legislative branches.

41.  Just as states have no federal power (Article I, section 10, and Article IV), the federal government has no state powers (Article I, Section 8, and amendments 9 and 10).

42.  No agency of government other than the legislative branch, has any legislative authority.

43.  No agency of government other than the executive branch, has any executive authority.

44.  No agency of government other than the judicial branch, has any judicial authority.

45.  Therefore, the EPA and IRS, for example, have no authority to make law, execute law, or judge law.

46.  Yet many “federal” agencies have assumed powers to make law, raise tax, enforce and judge law.

47.  Only the U.S. Congress has legal authority to coin money and regulate the value thereof.

48.  Yet this authority has been unconstitutionally delegated to private banks.

49.  Our founders understood that free markets and maximum possible personal liberty serve citizen and national interests better than centralized authoritarianism.    

50.  Yet our founders also understood that, while markets should be unfettered, the power to coin and regulate the value of money is best entrusted to civil government.

51.  The private banks now controlling the USA paper money supply are not audited or overseen by any agency of civil government.

52.  There is no other area of business in which politicians play so little a role.  Yet this is the one area of commerce where law clearly mandates political control.

53.  The U.S. Constitution was written to “secure the blessings of liberty.”  The “welfare” clauses of the Preamble and Article I, Section 8:1 did not refer to “welfare” programs that would not exist for another 150 years; and instead mean that general welfare is a blessing of liberty.  

54.  The “commerce clause” of Article I, Section 8:3 was understood to mean the regulation and arbitration of commerce disputes between the states; not government manipulation of all trade within each state.

55.  Intentional misinterpretation of laws have gradually twisted “commerce” and “welfare” clauses to the effect that the USA government has forced industries overseas where less regulation (or almost no labor regulation, as in China) overseas means more opportunity, productivity and innovation overseas.  

56.  Yet this government that seems to thrive on regulation does not regulate or impose any duties upon products made without USA regulations.

57.  This has in effect robbed U.S.A citizens of liberty, opportunity, employment, and of course, welfare and commerce.

58.  The federal government was never legally granted powers over health, education or income redistribution; therefore these powers are prohibited by law.  

59.  Yet the greatest percentage of government taxation, spending and regulation is in these unauthorized domains.

60.  The federal government only briefly had legal power to regulate the manufacture, sale or transportation of a commercial product (Amendment XVIII).

61.  That power was repealed in 1933 (Amendment XXI).  

62.  Yet the central government has over time exercised unconstitutional powers to regulate production, sale, transportation and even consumption of every description (e.g., food, clothing, shelter, medicine, services); even by private citizens within each state.

63.  The implementation and enforcement of federal payroll and income taxes abrogate Article III, section 2, and Amendments I, IV, V, IX and X.  

64.  These taxes and enforcement actions are therefore illegal.

65.  These taxes harm every level of commerce, production, property ownership and even healthcare delivery (e.g., creation and maintenance of third-party payer system opposing free market care).

66.  These taxes are a medium of widespread political corruption on all levels of government (e.g., local, state and federal political favors and punishments).

67.  The U.S. Congress may not make federal law respecting any of the five freedoms enumerated in the first amendment, and only the U.S. Congress is empowered to make federal law.  

68.  There can be no execution or judgment of laws that cannot legally exist.  

69.  Hence there is a total constitutional ban on any federal authority in the first amendment freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition for redress of grievances.  

70.  Yet innumerable federal laws have been written (and judgments passed) respecting, for example, establishments of religion and the free exercise thereof.  

71.  The first amendment has been misconstrued to the effect that religious expressions have been banned from public places in clear violation of the letter, intent and exhaustive explanation (by its writers, at the time it was written) of the law.

72.  The IRS has no constitutional authority to make, judge or enforce laws.

73.  Yet tax “laws” restrict free speech within churches, political and other organizations, and in relation to political campaigns, in clear violation of the constitution.

74.  This has led to the destruction of free markets and cooperative social organizations, and a culture of corruption, political reward and punishment among all levels of civil government.

75.  Property ownership is guaranteed by the constitution; and this guarantee is a keystone to both liberty and healthy economics.  

76.  In Kelo v. New London, the Supreme Court ruled that property takings in violation of Articles III and IV and the 5^th and 14^th amendments are permissible.  

77.  The ruling itself abrogated Article III, section 2, and the separation of powers.

78.  Even prior to the Kelo ruling, governments at every level (federal, state and local) have taken property for non-payment of taxes, without any constitutional authority.  

79.  Particularly since these taxes are routinely used for constitutionally forbidden purposes such as sports arenas, and since many taxes (e.g., income taxes) are themselves illegal, this property confiscation is illegal use of eminent domain.  

80.  A proper use of the 5^th and 14^th amendments would be to prohibit such takings.

81.  The government of the USA has broken the Supreme Law of the Land (Article VI of the US Constitution).

82.  Abuse and violation of our clearly enumerated rights makes it uncertain what limits, if any, govern our government.

83.  This abuse of law and power has materially and significantly damaged USA citizens collectively.

84.  The USA, “The Land of the Free,” has the world’s highest percentage of citizens in prison.  

85.  Up to 97 percent of felonies are settled by coerced plea.  

86.  Most prisoners have been convicted of statutory offenses with no human victim.

87.  After generations of income redistribution, counterproductive programs and unsustainable government spending, Americans now work longer hours (over 20% since 1979), take fewer vacations (2 weeks since 1979) and spend less time with their children.

88.  One-third of American citizen-owned investable assets are in overseas financial centers, and innumerable enterprises have gone out of business, relocated overseas or sold-out to foreign ownership to avoid illegal and destructive taxation, regulation and litigation.

89.  Income/payroll taxes consume a half-trillion dollars in compliance costs, and drive business and personal decision-making to the detriment of the general welfare.  

90.  The embedded costs of the taxws on production put the USA on a competitive disadvantage on the global market.

91.  It is established as just governance to prosecute as criminals those politicians who violate the laws restraining the dangerous power of government.

92.  Yet abuses of such scale and scope as herein described have occurred by degrees over many generations.

93.  This nation chooses its leaders by democratic elections, and citizen juries are empowered by law to judge both facts and the law.

94.  Citizens therefore have the power to change laws and leaders.  Abuses of governing power occurred by at least implied consent of citizens.

95.  That consent must be withdrawn.

Whereas the government of the USA exists by the will of the People and only by Rule of Law under the Constitution of the USA; and whereas that government has broken the terms of that compact, and therefore operates as an ungoverned power; I demand that our leaders desist illegal operations and conform to the law of federal government.

In short I demand that our politicians obey the law.

Oh, the shame…

I’ve been told countless times by otherwise intelligent citizens that our government is too powerful to fight.  “You can’t fight City Hall” is the common refrain.  That sounds right, but it’s never been true. 

What’s even less true than that, however, is the fear that “terrorists,” dependent upon small numbers and desperate means compared to nations with navies and air forces, are a bigger threat to us than is our own government. 

History shows that great nations always fall by their own hands.  And American history should show us a better truth to shape our future.

What did our founders say when faced with the prospect of lost liberties and invasion by what was then, the global superpower?  What did our founders, living as relatively insignificant colonists in an unconquered land, say about fighting apparently insuperable odds?

Well, here’s a part of what Patrick Henry said on March 23, 1775:  

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house?

Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?

Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.

Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave.

Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston!

The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!

I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!   

How Patrick Henry, and George Mason, and Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington, and all the others of their generation would now hang their heads in shame over what we have become.  A land of such bravery as theirs has morphed into a nation dependent upon “gun free zones” and a call to 911. 

If we were a serious nation…a really serious nation, we’d arm ourselves – our citizens – to the teeth and become just as tough as the anklebiters that are beating us now. 

Drug lords are tougher than we are – and that’s our fault.  Zealots, even when armed only with boxcutters, are tougher than we are – and that’s our fault.  I’m pretty sure a truck load full of armed drunks from Terre Haute could either take over the country, or save it; we are so fragile and dependent upon the politicians who have a 100% record of failure. 

If we’d call our troops back home from the >100 nations they’re in now, and if we’d allow citizens constitutional rights, we’d have nothing to fear from anybody.  We’d be the strongest, most prosperous nation on earth.

Again. 

Just like the last time we tried it.