Spies, liars, and hackers of the public mind

For Immediate Release

Contact: Andrew Horning
Horning for US Senate
812 585 0902 cell
thefreedomfarm@gmail.com 

January 31, 2024

Freedom, Indiana – Author Andrew Horning is seeking the Libertarian Party of Indiana’s nomination for Indiana’s US Senate seat in 2024.

♬♪ They see you when you’re sleeping, they know when you’re awake; they know when you’ve been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake! ♩♫

In 2017 I made the case for several radical proposals that I reaffirm now:

• Kill FISA, of course, but also nullify the National Security Act of 1947.
• Eliminate the FBI, CIA and NSA, leaving all domestic law enforcement to more local, appropriate units of government, and already-constitutionally authorized courts. 
• Make the US Congress directly manage our foreign spy operations and funding under specific congressional warrants and limitations, including the Geneva Conventions, just as with constitutional funding and declaration of war and national defense (which hasn’t been the case since WWII, BTW).
• Make the process and results of FOIA requests more open and complete.
• Most importantly, I proposed making it a serious crime, eligible for criminal and civil punishment, for agencies and agents of government to withhold the immediate and full release of requested information to congress, and/or in most circumstances, as specified by congress, to the public.

In the years since 2017, it has become obvious to a larger number of us, that secrecy and deceit has enabled the creation of a corrupt and perverse system of control that is in the final phases of destroying our republic.   If I’d been the only one calling for us to wake up, I wouldn’t be so worried that my frequent and public proposals have been ignored.  But I’m not the only one, or the most recent, or the most familiar with the shadowy puppet masters behind the curtain.

“…We want no Gestapo or secret police. The FBI is tending in that direction. They are dabbling in sex-life scandals and plain blackmail.  J. Edgar Hoover would give his right eye to take over, and all congressmen and senators are afraid of him.” —  President Harry S. Truman

“Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.” —  President Dwight D. Eisenhower

“The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it.” —  President John F Kennedy

Liberty or Bust!

Andy Horning

###

“‘Relighting the Torch‘ presents a historical and moral picture of our founders’ better ideas, where we failed those ideas, and some proposals for setting things right…for the first time..”

Constitutional Crisis…and Opportunity

The Biden Administration’s “Fourteenth Amendment Argument” for an apparently infinite debt ceiling is quite the monkey trap for Republicans who’re just as bad as Democrats in stomping all over constitutional rule of law for ever more power, money, and, of course, corruption.

Here’s the relevant sentence in Amendment 14:4: “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘥𝘦𝘣𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘜𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴, 𝙖𝙪𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙧𝙞𝙯𝙚𝙙 𝙗𝙮 𝙡𝙖𝙬, 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘥𝘦𝘣𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘺𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘥.”

Why add the phrase, “authorized by law?” Why not make the validity of the public debt unquestionable without that proviso?
Come to think of it, what did the words, “authorized by law” even mean to people who still had some respect for those who not only wrote extensively on nullification, beat the global superpower twice without a formal central government to nullify their own government, and, not coincidentally, wrote Amendment 10? What did it mean to the people who wanted to repudiate confederate debts and further chastise the South for its rebellion?

Remember: constitutions are the literal authority/authorization of government.  Laws written without authority are null and void, as repetitiously affirmed by people like Jefferson and Madison. (see my book…nullification still happens all the time…just in the wrong direction)  This is what the 10th Amendment is all about, right?

So, “authorized by law” in context as well as clear words on paper, means that not only are some “laws” illegal and unauthorized, but also that fraudulent debts are themselves illegitimate, illegal, null and void.

How many of us have been saying this throughout the past eleven score and sixteen years?  It was a big deal in 1776, and thereafter. Until Pres. Andrew Jackson used the threat of force against South Carolina, the states held some reign against federal abuse of power and trampling of authority..by nullification.

But Republicans, who’ve held all three legitimate branches of government many times for many years, have never nullified the unconstitutional powers, programs, agencies, actions and spending of government.  Never.  There’ve been precious few libertarians like Robert Taft, Ron Paul or Thomas Massie in the GOP…and fewer all the time. 

So, in FINALLY invoking the constitution for SOMETHING, Biden’s got the GOP over a barrel.  This is the definition of a constitutional crisis: do we start nullifying unconstitutional stuff at long last?  Or do the Republicans cooperate in nullifying the last shreds of the constitution?  It looks like the latter is happening right now.

We actually do need a “Great Reset,” you know. Just not the kind proposed by Klaus Schwab’s UN Agenda 2030…

The failure of the budget in 1995 (and every budget thereafter), along with the constitutional crises of 1903, 1912/13, the New Deal, LBJ’s nullifying the “gold cover” in 1968 and Nixon nullifying the Bretton Woods Agreement in ’71, unconstitutionally creating “the Two Party System” after WWII and partisan primary elections in the ’70’s, with unbridled, accelerating growth of government power, size, cost and corruption ever since means that:

1. Either we eliminate constitutions, state and federal, for a more honestly authoritarian rule – or establish constitutional rule of law at last.  (see my book) Of course I prefer that latter. We’d all like it. I promise.

2. Repudiate pricey promises like Social Security and Medicare and/or radically reduce the elderly population/ lower life expectancy, which would require…

3. Societal behavior hacking (like CBDCs and “social credit”) to protect the people who got us into this mess, and reduce the rest of us into a relatively sustainable form of self-enslavement and poverty.

4. Or we wake up and fix this ourselves for peace, prosperity, security, justice and freedom.  (see my book…please!)

How any of this works, and to whose advantage, is still, as ever, up to both voters, and the non-voters who let others make all the choices.

You want term limits? Fire the incumbents and hire a BUNCH of new politicians.

For Immediate Release
Contact: Andrew Horning, Libertarian candidate for IN08
thefreedomfarm@gmail.com
https://horning4congress.com/

July 29, 2022

Freedom, IN – Now that most “laws” are written by unelected bureaucrats and few in D.C. seem worried about our government’s growing power, spending and debt, it seems the only job for US Congress critters, other than naming post offices of course, is to get reelected. And the key strategy to keep getting reelected is to keep your head down, don’t make waves, don’t have any unscripted public appearances, enjoy your new D.C. friends, take the money and run silent, run deep.

But that’s not how any of this was supposed to work!

I used to oppose term limits on the US Congress. But mostly because of unconstitutional state and federal codes that grant unfair power and money to incumbent parties and politicians, I would, if elected, immediately propose term limits (among many other restraints on politicians).

But that wouldn’t solve the problem of politicians who don’t live in the district, and insulate themselves from the people they’re to serve. So I’d also propose we (hang onto your hat) increase the number of US House Reps. far beyond the number set in 1929 based on the 1910 census, but also far less than James Madison’s proposed constitutional limit of, based on today’s population, 66,000!

Hang on. Hear me out…

1. We have the technology to do this. I’ve worked remote since the 1990’s, and many more do today. Consider how much different your access to federal politics would be if your representative was almost always in your district, and geographically much, much closer.
2. A lot of our reps don’t even show up to work even half the time, and there are only from around 160 to 190 days when they’re expected to show up anyway. Being closer to constituents, with less excuse to play hooky, would promote more accountability.
3. Pet pork projects and sleazy behavior would be much harder to sneak past so many more representatives that aren’t so buddy-buddy, and don’t hang out at the same golf courses.
4. Most of Washington D.C. is a theme park for corruption and political puppet masters. We really want to get our representatives out of that town.
5. More representatives would make both the House, and thus the Electoral College, more representative of our population in geography, demographics and ideology.
6. It’s pretty dirt-cheap for large special interests to buy out a majority among only 435 reps. Even the military-industrial and financial complexes would have a much harder time purchasing thousands of reps who lived and worked closer to their constituents.
7. We’d be much more likely to actually know something about the people we hire for the job if they were more accessible to us before Election Day.
8. With a few thousand reps close to home and more accessible, we wouldn’t need so many tens of thousands of new and heavily-armed IRS agents.

https://horning4congress.com/

Liberty or Bust!
Andy Horning
Freedom, Indiana

*See “Eight Steps to Success” at https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2017/12/15/eight-steps-to-success/ and https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2016/08/31/money-politics-and-central-banks/

###

A Modest Proposal to Fix our Elections

Before you say that resolutions are lame, there are three objectives to this proposal:
1. See just who would vote for fair play, and, not insignificantly, constitutional rule of law. Will they honor their oath of office and keep on their side of the constitutional fence, or are they tribalist hacks?
2. Publicly acknowledge divisive past mistakes, and set a better direction for the state.
3. Most importantly…raise awareness that our elections are unfair, unconstitutional, and unsustainably costly in every way. Most voters HAVE NO IDEA how corrupt and !@#$%?- up our laws really are.

We really can fix this. But first, we need to see a fundamental problem. Read on…

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION No. __

Whereas, Article I, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution specifies that “The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens,” and Amendment XIV of the Constitution for the United States of America clearly specifies that “No State shall …deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws;”

Whereas, Article I, Section 25 clarifies that “No law shall be passed, the taking effect of which shall be made to depend upon any authority, except as provided in this Constitution,” and Indiana Code clearly subsumes itself under both state and federal constitutions in IC § 1-1-2-1;

Whereas, Indiana Code § 3 has over time, created special classes of citizens, with a hierarchy of ballot access and political affiliation rules, varying privileges, limitations or immunities, which, upon the same terms, do not equally belong to all citizens;

Whereas, examples of special class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens are found in IC § 3-5-1-2, IC § 3-5-2-5.5, IC § 3-5-2-30, IC § 3-5-3-7, IC § 3-6-4.1-2, IC § 3-10-1-2;

Whereas, these special classes of citizen with hierarchical rights, privileges, limitations and immunities present under Indiana Code § 3 violate both state and federal constitutional rule of law, as well as fundamental principles of fairness and equality under law;

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, the Senate concurring:

SECTION 1. That the Indiana General Assembly recognizes both the errors made, and damages caused, by past legislation that inherently created corruption, division and opposing factions.

SECTION 2. That the Indiana General Assembly resolves to remedy violations of individual rights and transgressions of constitutional rule of law present under Indiana Code § 3 by appropriate legislation, to allow fair and equal campaign, ballot, party and election rules for all Hoosiers.

“The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.”

Ever since FDR’s “switch in time that saved nine,” our legal system and law schools have spewed out innumerable “constitutional law experts” who often claim that whatever any government official, agency, bureaucrat or cop can do to people is OK.  They do this by ignoring our short and simple constitutions to unleash an interminable fusillade of judicial pronouncements and federal/state code sections that, by their number of words alone, do seem to overwhelm the few political powers constitutions authorize.

…Except, of course, to someone who’s actually read the laws.

Nobody claims that Governor Holcomb’s COVID-19 mandates were actually authorized by any constitutions, state or federal.  The constitutions absolutely forbid executives from making laws.  Executive Orders are constitutionally actionable only if they’re only the details of executing laws written by legislators.

Other than invoking armed force against insurrection or invasion (which would be as ineffective against a virus as was Caligula’s attack on Poseidon), the Governor’s only constitutionally authorized emergency power is to call an emergency session of the General Assembly.

To be clear, the constitutions say that what the Governor did, and is still doing, is unconstitutional in both word and intent.

The Governor cited not the Indiana Constitution, but Indiana Code as his authority, specifically the statute, IC 10-14-3, the “Emergency Management and Disaster Law.”

That particular ream of legal effluvium does indeed appear to authorize every possible decree, action or mayhem, if read by itself; and if ignoring all the key principles of separation and limitations of powers in a republic.

Ironically, it’s even less-limited than the federal 40 U.S. Code § 1315 that Trump’s folks invoked against Portland protesters.

But consider what the Indiana Code says about its own authority in the hierarchy of law. What follows is IC 1-1-2 § 1-1-2-1:

“Section 1: The law governing this state is declared to be:

First. The Constitution of the United States and of this state.

Second. All statutes of the general assembly of the state in force, and not inconsistent with such constitutions.

Third. All statutes of the United States in force, and relating to subjects over which congress has power to legislate for the states, and not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States.

Fourth. The common law of England, and statutes of the British Parliament made in aid thereof prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First (except the second section of the sixth chapter of forty-third Elizabeth, the eighth chapter of thirteenth Elizabeth, and the ninth chapter of thirty-seventh Henry the Eighth,) and which are of a general nature, not local to that kingdom, and not inconsistent with the first, second and third specifications of this section.”

Please note the order.  Last, or fourth, is case law.  This is what most USA citizens now think comes first.   Supreme Court does, in fact, sound supreme.  But it’s actually dead last in the legal hierarchy that determines what politicians can decree what we can do, can’t do, and must do for them.

Third is the federal code. Second, is the Indiana Code, as long as the code doesn’t contradict the constitutions, state or federal.

First on the list, of course, are the constitutions that say only legislators can legislate.

The Indiana Constitution’s Article I, Section 26 says very clearly says that only the General Assembly (our legislature) has any authority to suspend the laws protecting our rights from politicians under any circumstances.  Article I, Section 25 very clearly says that laws cannot create any authority not already granted.

And nowhere is the legislature granted authority to delegate away it’s power and more local accountability by the stroke of a pen.

The law is clear.  Why the Governor still refuses to call our legislators to work, is not. You’d think he wouldn’t want all the protests, disagreements from Sheriffs and Indiana’s Attorney General landing on him alone.
Unless, of course, he intentionally crossed this Rubicon and wants to be Caesar.

That’s history we really shouldn’t want to repeat.

No, this isn’t about Nazis. It’s about humans.

For good, obvious reasons, I don’t like to leap to Nazi analogies, references or allusions.

But so many people have been claiming that the Governor is fully authorized to suspend rights because of what they think are constitutional “emergency powers,” that I’m afraid I must point out six fundamental truths (before I exhume the Nazis):

1. Indiana Code (IC 10-14-3, “Emergency Management and Disaster Law”), and not the constitution, is where the emergency powers were passed as “law.”  You will not find any emergency Executive powers in either state or federal constitution.  Please look yourself.
My contention is that this IC chapter that seems to conjure this power is unconstitutional, not law, and should be entirely eliminated, for the reasons that follow.

2. Indiana’s constitution is the necessary, fundamental authority for all Indiana laws. Just as you and I can’t just make laws from our easy chairs, the Indiana General Assembly can’t just do whatever it wants.  It has to be properly authorized to do whatever it does. The Indiana Constitution is that authority.  And the Governor cannot make any laws at all (Article 4).

FIRST, authority, and THEN, law:
Article I Section 25: “No law shall be passed, the taking effect of which shall be made to depend upon any authority, except as provided in this Constitution.”

The constitution used to clearly state that any law that transcends what’s clearly written is null and void (they “amended” that away)…but they never removed Article I Section 25.

And even the Indiana Code agrees about the constitutional hierarchy of law. This is IC 1-1-2: Sec. 1:

The law governing this state is declared to be:

• First. The Constitution of the United States and of this state.
• Second. All statutes of the general assembly of the state in force, and not inconsistent with such constitutions.
• Third. All statutes of the United States in force, and relating to subjects over which congress has power to legislate for the states, and not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States.
• Fourth. The common law of England, and statutes of the British Parliament made in aid thereof prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First (except the second section of the sixth chapter of forty-third Elizabeth, the eighth chapter of thirteenth Elizabeth, and the ninth chapter of thirty-seventh Henry the Eighth,) and which are of a general nature, not local to that kingdom, and not inconsistent with the first, second and third specifications of this section.

The Governor and GA cannot give away what does not belong to them…and that includes our rights.   The actions taken by our Governor specifically violated Article I Section 25; Article I, Section 26; Article 3; and Article 4, Section 9.

3. Our rights, however, can be compromised in emergencies. There is constitutional authority for that…but only by the General Assembly!
Article I, Section 26: “The operation of the laws shall never be suspended, except by the authority of the General Assembly.”
If you read what was said about this in period, there are very good reasons for local accountability.  Different regions have different needs.  A tornado doesn’t destroy the whole state.  Rural areas are different from cities.  And, mostly, no one person should have so much power…or accountability!
We need to have more access to the people who make decisions that affect us so severely, and we want to be able to fire them or reward them with another term as needed.
I understand why legislators don’t want to make tough decisions that could get them fired on a Tuesday in November…but this is the point!
We want these people accountable to us, locally.  So there IS an emergency power structure…and it’s in only the GA.  …Not in the Executive office.

4. This is clarified by Article 3 – Distribution of Powers: “The powers of the Government are divided into three separate departments; the Legislative, the Executive including the Administrative, and the Judicial: and no person, charged with official duties under one of these departments, shall exercise any of the functions of another, except as in this Constitution expressly provided.”
There are good, unequivocal reasons and principles here that should not be violated.  Ever.  …I mean it, not ever.

5. Ditto the federal constitution and its only-somewhat-related US Code.
Here’s the Amendment X: “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 is the same principle as the Indiana Constitution’s Article I Section 25.
Politicians cannot take, abuse or give away what doesn’t belong to them.

6. “Ah, but…” the fancy pants pseudointellectuals claim in their whiny voices, “…the constitution doesn’t specifically prohibit emergency Executive powers, so the real question is how to properly limit them in scope and duration.”
Shut up and read the preceding again.
Yes, the constitution does specifically prohibit such powers, and no court case, bench ruling or pundit rumination can change that.

Whatever isn’t specifically authorized is completely prohibited.

In fact, there are long-standing, very serious punishments (including death) made by law for those operating under the “color of law” that violate our constitutional rights.

We didn’t throw away our rights and erect Caesars over polio or the 1918 flu.  There were emergencies, and there were emergency sessions in legislative assemblies all across the country to deal with them…at state and local levels.  Even in this pandemic hysteria, there have been many Mayors, businesses and other local institutions that took local action while Presidents and Governors hesitated.  That’s the right way for things to happen.
There has always been a right way to respond to emergencies, and it’s all written down…in constitutions, state and federal.

A few more details before I get to the Nazis.

First, the obligatory Confucius quote: “An oppressive government is more to be feared than a tiger.”

Next, this country made it over 200 years before passing the National Emergencies Act.
Think about how many emergencies (pandemics, droughts, floods, wars and economic catastrophes) had already come and gone by 1976.

OK.  So.  I’ll not say much about Nazis other than to say you really ought to look up the “Enabling Act of 1933,” or “Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich” (“Law to remedy the plight of the people and the empire”).
I assume I need not mention how that turned out.
But I do need to mention that this was signed into law by Reich President von Hindenburg, when Hitler was only Reich Chancellor.

So first, the enabling act of expanding power and reducing rights; and then…

Governor Holcomb is no madman Hitler.  Not even close.  I like the guy, actually.

But you should never, ever, law or no law, give ANYBODY this much power, because the next Executive, Caesar, Poohbah or King will only add to that power.

Power takes power.  It accumulates and festers and expands until societal calamity.

On August 3, 1857, in an era of much greater harshness than we face from a virus, Frederick Douglass spoke the words that, more than any other single thing I can think of, pushed me toward philosophical libertarianism:
“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. 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, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”

You know this, right?  It’s all over human history that people’s own government becomes their biggest enemy, right?

Well, the Germans didn’t think it could happen to them, either.

Open letter to Governor Holcomb

Governor Holcomb, I know you’re not a bad man.  In fact I believe you’re a man who means well.  I’m certain your advisors assured you that what you’ve been doing is legal.  And I know that many applaud your “leadership” in closing businesses and schools, forbidding all manner of association and movement, and in general, suspending rule of law as a state-wide, one-size-fits-all rule. But right is right and wrong is wrong.  And while I know you don’t believe you’ve done wrong, you have. I of course wish you had called an emergency session (Indiana Constitution Article 4 Section 9) so that Indiana’s General Assembly could have constitutionally authorized (by Article I, Section 26) what you have been doing …in violation of your oath of office. I’m betting they’d have come up with measured, regional plans that made more sense and relieved you of total accountability for this mess. The scared-stupid post-9/11 security blanket standing order from the legislature (IC 10-14-3) was both unconstitutional and foolish – not so different from 1973’s War Powers Act that so many regret today.  Such vague, inherently corrupt delegations/ surrender of authority nullify the whole point of the separation and limitation of powers.  Besides, Governor, unilaterally taking such unconstitutional authoritarianism upon yourself when it’s not only illegal, needlessly inflammatory, and raises fears about our new, dangerous form of government, is also bad politics. No one person should wield so much power.  And under our constitutions, no one person does. I’m sure that, given the circumstance of the SARS-CoV-2 virus / COVID-19 disease, the General Assembly would have granted you specific, timely and focused authority to do what needed doing, where it needed doing …and without the suspension of laws that are in only the GA’s authority to suspend. While I think what politicians have been doing in response to this pandemic is based more in fear and self-interest than in fact (and the corruption has become obvious, in case you’re wondering), it should still be done by constitutional rules. Anything else is unconstitutional, specifically illegal (Article I, Section 25), and contrary to the most fundamental principles of this nation’s purpose. Please read this: https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/indiana-constitution-book.pdf You took “…an oath or affirmation, to support the Constitution of this State, and of the United States…” I’m sure we’d all be both relieved, and favorably impressed, if in a public mea culpa, you’d recognize the chain of errors and misapplication of force, and resolve to do what’s right…and legal. Nobody expects a politician to be perfect, you know.  But we’re all looking for somebody to earn our trust in these pivotal, tumultuous times. Going legit, and governing our government according to constitutional rule of law, would be a great start.

You know we need to do this. Will you help?

OK, I’ll keep this brief:
I want to organize a campaign to overturn the unconstitutional, immoral, corrupt and destructive partisan/ballot access/primary election “laws” that serve as a firewall, red herring and force field protecting all the worst people and worst corruption, and also protects the tax-funded tribal madness you can clearly and daily see tearing us apart, and at each others’ throats.

I need your help.

The key details are all here: https://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2019/09/29/indianas-ballot-access-primary-election-laws-are-unconstitutional-and-corrupt/

The good news is that we’d be right, and doing the right thing in the right way, and everybody would benefit massively.

Massively.  This would be genuinely revolutionary stuff and our nation’s framers/founders would be proud of us.

The bad news is that:

We’ll need to raise about $10K to bring the case to Phase 1.  I tried to do it on the cheap and pretty much on my own, and that can’t work against an enemy that responds to only numbers.

And we’ll likely lose Phase 1.

But more good news is that after that, we’ve the opportunity to, at worst, get the truth out in the open where people can see it.  And there’s a real chance at overturning a nasty, costly mess that even people within the corrupt crony duopoly parties would like overturned.

Hey, they know the rapidly devolving status quo system sucks.  It doesn’t even benefit most of them.

If you want to read more than what I’d linked above, there’s plenty.  But I’m betting that since you’re reading this, you’re already either on board with at least the goal, in at least an approval sense.

What I need is YOU to help in any way you can.

Money is of course required.  The more, the better.

But that would come with word-of-mouth promotion of this cause.  Letters to the editor.  Social media posting.  Blogs, vlogs, smoke signals and mime.  We need organizers and facilitators and meetings and events.  Catchy names and memes and slogans.

And we really need to start protesting…in public.  On courthouse steps, in the rotunda, around courthouses and offices.  We need to get to know each other, and get known, in real-world physical protests.

We need an active campaign of more than just a few people who want to see some justice and equality under law…at last.

Are you in?

Let me know, and let’s get going.

Indiana’s ballot access/primary election laws are unconstitutional and corrupt

We’ve been so systematically and trans-generationally deceived about the recent, unconstitutional, corrupt, self-appointed “Two Party System” that it’s understandably hard to believe the truth.  I’ve laid out my case several times in the past, but it’s worth trying again.  This time I’ll just lay out the facts and try (try…I really will try) to avoid pontificating.

Please read the following and come to your own conclusions.  If they’re different from mine, let me know what you think I’ve got wrong.  But if you agree with me…won’t you consider rising to action?

 

Facts:

Candidate caste system:

Indiana Code has in the past forty years created seven separate classes of candidates respecting ballot access, as well as for other increasingly divergent privileges, powers, immunities and liabilities under “law.”[i]

1. The “Major Political Parties” defined by IC § 3-5-2-30, and by which there can only be two, is by far the most empowered class. Only MPPs can have poll clerks, election sheriffs and other election officers, and have members on election-related commissions.  MPPs have the easiest, and in most cases, automatic ballot access in at least one election per cycle.  Few races require ballot signatures.  Only MPPs have actual ruling power granted to them (for example, appointment to the Indiana Election Commission IC § 3-6-4.1-2, Recount Commission, etc.).   At present and for the foreseeable future (see #2 below), only MPPs get the extra public exposure, debates, taxpayer paid promotion and primary elections to put the imprimatur of legitimacy and favorable odds on their candidates.  To be crystal clear – the MPPS are exactly and only the Democratic and Republican parties – which are, in Indiana, only recently incorporated (Indiana GOP incorporated in 2005) quasi-chapters of the national, private 527 corporations.
2. The second class defined by IC § 3-10-1-2 is hypothetical, since it would be any non-MPP political parties whose candidate for Secretary of State received at least ten percent of the votes cast in the previous election. That’s not just a difficult thing to achieve for a “third party;” it’s an odd, artificial goal for a political party where other offices would be considered much more important and ideologically relevant.  While no such parties exist in Indiana, second-class parties could have precinct committeemen, and participate in publicly funded primary elections.
3. Members of the Indiana Libertarian Party are the only people to have made the third class of citizens.  They have automatic ballot access by having maintained at least 2% of the General Election vote in the Secretary of State Race.  In some ways, third-class people have the easiest path to getting on the General Election ballot.  But they cannot participate in primary elections, or have the officers/organizational advantages and governing powers of the MPPs or 2nd-class parties.
4. In 1993, IC § 3-5-2-5.5 created the class, “Bona fide political party.” This includes the first-through-third classes, but also grants another class that allows a party its own poll watchers, and provides it certain election/voter-related information.  It is very difficult for them to get on the General Election ballot even in local races, as their hurdles are very greatly higher than the 3rd-class citizens’.  Their ability to participate in elections (debates, media, any public exposure), either General or Primary, is extremely limited.
5. All other political parties fall in the 5^th-ranked citizen class. There are many of these, but entirely out of the public view except in local races or as write-in candidates.
6. Independent candidates cannot possibly participate in primary elections, even if they can overcome the obstacles both put in their way, and doubled in severity through the past thirty years (double the ballot signature requirements for example). Independent candidates face more hurdles than even 5^th-ranked citizens, in some ways.
7. Write-in candidates are those who failed to meet the requirements for ballot access in any of the previous classes, though there is overlap with the 5^th and 6^th-ranked classes. Though it’s not supposed to happen, votes for such candidates have often been thrown out in my experience (my own write-in votes, for example).  It’s very unlikely that these candidates would ever be listed in any candidate information guides, let alone be able to participate in candidate debates and media interviews.

 

Primary Elections:

The primary election system in the USA was promoted by the “Progressive” movement (they were NOT Democrats then!).  The first statewide primary election was in Florida, in 1899; but not all states have them for all elections even today.  Most states didn’t until the 1970’s, when their importance and power to the Democratic and Republican parties increased dramatically.  The point here being that primary elections are recent inventions…not at all part of the constitutional design, or even universal today.

1. IC § 3-5-1-2 defines the purpose of primary elections to choose the following:
   1. The candidates who will be the nominees of a political party for elected offices in a general or municipal election.
   2. The precinct committeemen of a political party.
   3. The delegates to a political party’s state convention.
2. IC § 3-5-3-7 (and others) require that taxpayers bear the full cost of primary elections.
3. Primary elections provide benefits (debates, public exposure/advertising, listing in election reference sources half a year before other candidates) to only participant candidates and parties, which creates both relative and absolute disadvantages to all other candidates and parties.
4. “Blanket primaries,” which offer the most options/choice to voters in selecting candidates, have not existed since 2003, when the SCOTUS decided that primary elections are for parties allowed to participate in primaries, and not for voters.
5. Many candidates have no primary challenger. In these cases primary elections serve only the purpose of promoting candidates; not selecting them.
6. The whole purpose of a political campaign is to gain public exposure and the imprimatur of legitimacy offered in debates, public media and recent expectations of a “Two Party System.” The extended campaign cycles resulting from taxpayer-funded primary elections are worth more promotion money than most candidates can ever raise.

Issue: Indiana’s Constitution plainly forbids the separate classes of citizens under law.  The violation of Article I Section 23 by Indiana’s election/ballot laws provides benefits to only the politically favored class, and at the expense of everyone else.  The unconstitutional Indiana Code that created and maintains the anti-competitive entrenchment allows only Democrats and Republicans to write the rules, enforce the rules, and count the votes…all at taxpayer expense.

Rule: The Indiana Constitution’s Article I Section 23: “The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.”

Summary: Article I Section 23 was enacted largely to prevent corruption, anti-competitive favoritism, and government-entrenched monopolies.   Indiana’s recent election-related codes reward corruption through institutionalized favoritism and government-entrenched monopolies.

So, we need a court case.  Maybe an amicus brief.  Maybe ask for summary judgment.  If we had enough people to make it happen, a big honking jury trial with plaintiffs and damages and media and a movie starring only liberty-leaning stars from Hollywood to Bollywood.  But more likely, a multi-step legal challenge in Indiana (where we’ve got just about the worst ballot access rules, but one of the very best state constitutions) where we’d almost certainly lose the first round, but end up in the state Supreme Court with a more publicly visible, and maybe even winning case against what plagues us all.

But that’s up to you.  Whatever we do, we need more people than just me fighting this.

 

[i]Article I Section 25 nullifies any Indiana law depending upon any authority but the Indiana Constitution: “No law shall be passed, the taking effect of which shall be made to depend upon any authority, except as provided in this Constitution.”  If there can be no such law, there can be no judgment or executive action favoring laws that cannot legally exist.  Article I Section 25 is an absolute ban on any government action exceeding the limits prescribed by the state’s constitution.

A Modest Proposal to End The Madness

So perhaps now we can all agree that today’s Powers That Be – the self-appointed “Two Party System” that’s been expanding its powers unchallenged since WWII, is a destructive, unjust, wholly corrupt, costly, devolved-to-garden-slug embarrassment.

It’s also unconstitutional, in case anybody still cares about that.

I propose a solution.  Let’s end it.

Yeah, we have lots of problems for which I suppose we all have some solutions.  But I think this is one we can agree on:

The two private clubs called the Democratic and Republican parties have been left alone with power in a dark room for too long.  The system is broken, and it’s not going to fix itself.

While the phrase has been repeated innumerable times in declarations, constitutions, speeches and laws, it’s not entirely true that “all men are created equal.”  Some humans want to rule, too many are too eager to be ruled, and only a few of us don’t want any part of this follow-the-alpha tribalism and strife.

But everyone should be equal under the law.  No special deals, no special people, tribes, classes, castes or clans with respect to governance.  Every human gets the same deal when it comes to treatment by cops, judges, legislators, executives, bureaucrats, and…ballot access laws.

That sort of equality is law under both state and federal constitutions.

Indiana’s constitution says it well in Article I, Section 23: “The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.”

I’ll cut to the chase scene – The Democratic and Republican Parties are private, 527 “nonprofit,” and unreasonably tax-exempt and unaccountable organizations that never should’ve been allowed to grant themselves special powers, immunities, privileges and ballot access unavailable to any other people.  They’ve become a single crony network of corruption and destruction so costly, profligate and deceitful that you have to lie to yourself pretty hard and repetitiously to excuse this mess or fall for the lies any longer.

I’ll not bother to cite specifics here (that I’d be happy to beat to death if you ask), but just for example, there is no way possible for an independent candidate to get on Indiana’s primary ballot.  It’s almost always automatic for (D) and (R) candidates – but totally impossible for independents.  It’s not impossible for other party’s candidates to get on the primary ballot – but it’s so much more difficult than the (D) and (R) special access that no other party can do it.  Only (D) and (R) parties can have precinct committeeman.  And critically/absurdly, no other party’s members can be on most election-related commissions.

In short, only the members of two private, unaccountable and tax-free groups have colluded to grant themselves actual powers of government in violation of both constitutional rule of law, and fundamental principles of justice.

Indiana is among the three or four worst states in terms of unconstitutional ballot restriction and partisan chicanery.  And among these worst states, Indiana has the best constitution.

So, here’s what I propose:  An Indiana state court case to remove all special classes of people for ballot access, and fulfill the terms of state and federal constitutions, and fundamental fairness.  Same rules, no exceptions for anybody or any group.  Simple.  It’s already the law.

All we need is people.

We need people to help organize protests, write letters, gain media attention, occupy social media, and help bring a constitutional challenge to the Indiana Supreme Court.  Money would help, too, of course.  We need people willing to do at least a little for at least one of these actions.

We need to build and activate a focused political campaign team.

Not a lot of effort from any one person, hopefully; but it would be focused on a single goal of changing Indiana’s ballot access laws to declaw/defang/de-stink Indiana’s self-appointed “Major Political Parties,” and break their stranglehold on Indiana politics and media.

It’ll be fun, wholesome and successful if we gather a crew of focused people and build some momentum.

Whether you approve of the results or not, you’ve got to hand it to the LGBT movement.  They very quickly overturned centuries of law and social practice with determination and focus.  And that movement is focused on a low-single-digit percentage of the society.

How could we be less successful when our fundamental laws and centuries of judicial reasoning are already on our side, and everyone would benefit?  …Everyone.

Come on.  I know a lot of hard core Democratic and Republican faithful who admit this train has gone off the rails.  You do too, right?

Who’s up for this?