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 5th-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 5th-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 5th and 6th-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.”liberty

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.

Constitutional rule of law is Intelligent Design.

Constitutional rule of law is not about procedures.  It’s Intelligent Design.

I wrote the following for the Indiana Policy Review.  It’s in their Summer Journal I’m posting it here partly because the gob-smacking ignorance on display for the upcoming Presidential election is so culturally, economically, physically and spiritually destructive that I fear we are doomed.  Here is my cry for help, and an offered solution.

Orwell was right.  “Every generation imagines itself to be more intelligent than the one that went before it, and wiser than the one that comes after it.”  So it’s natural that people today think our nation’s founders were not just slaveholders and sexists, but also idiots.

However, before we eliminate the Electoral College, grant illegal aliens the legal right to vote, lower the voting age again, try to push authoritarian socialism and global domination as good ideas, erase our history and censor any alternative views, let’s humbly consider that human societies have a 100 percent eventual failure rate.  And perhaps we should review what each of our increasingly intelligent and decreasingly wise generations have already dismissed from the founders’ intents before we flush the rest.

The whole point of the state and federal constitutions was to keep government local, and keep it on a leash.  Voters were supposed to have all the information necessary to make wise choices, and those choices were to be in plain sight and locally accountable.  No secrets, no off-menu selections. Our founders almost universally feared the mob-thinking of democratic processes, and the inevitable centralization and concentration of power that would ensue should citizens be denied information or choices by a ruling elite.

Voting was never about hiring politicians.  Rulers hire themselves if you let them.  Our elections were intended as a means of peaceful revolution, so that we didn’t have to have the other kind again.  A vote is a weapon of self-gundefense, not a poker chip in a game of odds

Similarly, the early militia system, as opposed to a permanent professional standing army, was not only seen as the most potent self-defense, but also a deterrent to foreign war, since every voter would have to personally participate in any violence our government desired.  Only congress was empowered to declare war, because we could vote away the House reps every two years.  Senators were supposed to be appointed by the state legislatures as safeguards on state authority, and states controlled the militia until and unless an actual declaration of war was enacted.

This is important.  The U.S. Constitution’s Article 2, § 2:1: “The President shall be Commander in Chief . . . of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.”  And the President and militias were called into that service by only a congressional declaration of war. Until and unless that happened, Article 5, § 12 of the Indiana Constitution applied: “The Governor shall be commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and may call out such forces, to execute the laws, or to suppress insurrection, or to repel invasion.”

The GOVERNOR of the state is the CIC until the militias are federalized by a declaration of war…and that hasn’t happened since WWII. This is what the constitutions, state and federal, still say.

So we were to have a republic comprised of sovereign states and empowered individuals, not an almighty central government restrained only by majority votes, because as John Adams pointed out, “. . . democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.”

The Texas constitution’s Article I, § I says it well. “Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.”

But we significantly lost that republic during and after the Civil War, when many state constitutions were amended or newly drafted to transform them into administrative sub- units of Washington, D.C., or even worse.

This is from the Nevada State Constitution: “But the Paramount Allegiance of every citizen is due to the Federal Government in the exercise of all its Constitutional powers as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court [my emphasis] of the United States; and no power exists in the people of this or any other State of the Federal Union to dissolve their connection therewith or perform any act tending to impair, subvert, or resist the Supreme Authority of the government of the United States. . . . and whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.”

That’s not Patrick Henry talking there.

We formally lost the citizen militia in 1903 with the Dick Act, which permanently and unconstitutionally “federalized” and renamed the militia. We lost the whole point of bicameral congress in 1913 with the 17th Amendment, when state governments lost their representatives in the federal government. By the 1930s, leaders as diverse as FDR, Prescott Bush, and W. E. B. DuBois heaped praise on the fascist despots of Italy and Germany, and made authoritarian National Socialism, “progressive.”

In 1947, the National Security Act created the Central Intelligence Agency, terminated constitutional declarations of war, and overturned most of the founders’ strongest protections against corruption and eternal warfare.

Also around that time and through the 1970s the rapid expansion of Primary Elections started legitimizing “Major Political Parties” as only two private clubs — the Democratic and Republican Parties.  All independent and so-called “Third Party” candidates faced increasingly difficult ballot access and election-related rules that didn’t apply to members of the favored clubs.

It was intended, and still in the written design, that VOTERS elect the electors of the Electoral College! (see Amendment XIV:2, second sentence, which includes a harsh penalty for states denying our right to choose!) And until the 1936 presidential election, the name of each presidential elector candidate appeared on the Indiana ballot.  However, the Indiana Code now prohibits the names of the presidential elector candidates from even being listed, let alone being chosen by those who’ll have to live with the results of the electors’ decision.  Only political parties and candidate committees can choose Indiana’s eleven electors. 

And since each state’s number of electors is derived from census numbers, you can see why many want to not only let illegal aliens vote, but also count all non-citizens as citizens in the census for the purpose of both more power in the U.S. House of Representatives, and more electors; like the generally misunderstood “three-fifths” rule that gave southern states unfair representation in the early U.S.

Many defenders of the Electoral College believe that this is the key purpose of the college — to give each state fair standing in presidential elections.  

But the true purpose is much further from the current collective mindset than even that. 

While under the banner of today’s “democracy,” the majority of votes or the greatest biomass of voters is seen as the equivalent of wisdom, presidential electors were intended to reduce the influence and unwise decisions of the most ultimately powerful, but fickle and uninformed body politic — average voters.

Electors, particularly what we now call “faithless electors,” have the power to, in essence, veto voters. They can, if faced with a lying, immoral and corrupt candidate, choose somebody else to save us all from a tragic mistake made by voters.

By definition, of course (I’m not making this up to be mean), half of us are below-average intelligence, wisdom and knowledge, with many others comprising the majority probably misinformed, and unlikely to make the best choices for the most powerful single person in U.S. government.

Ouch. That sounds pretty insulting to modern ears, no doubt. But judging by our debts, endless wars, increasingly hostile internecine and tribal divisions, and obviously destructive corruption and espionage, maybe the founders weren’t the idiots.

I’m pleased that our young have mostly stopped eating Tide Pods. We can learn.

I suggest we learn what earlier generations considered intelligent, and wise, and put those lessons to work.

The constitutions, state and federal, as imperfect as they may be, are not about procedural minutiae, or partisan games. They are the practical design for individual freedom, security and prosperity, proven to be better than anything any nation had signed into law before or since.  Our current events prove that our founders, however flawed as people, were far more prescient, intelligent and wise, than wrong.

 

 

…Gun control? Who’re we kidding?

During the slippery slope SCOTUS case, VOISINE ET AL. v. UNITED STATES, Clarence Thomas shocked everyone by asking his first question from bench in ten years:

“Can you give me another area where a misdemeanor suspends a constitutional right?”

He was talking about the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, of course.

Thomas was right to raise the question, since even though all of our rights have been demoted to conditional privileges, the 2nd Amendment is under special attack these days.

And despite Thomas, our Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot-leaning SCOTUS ultimately decided that, of course a misdemeanor is sufficient to suspend a constitutional right. What isn’t?

I’m not a “gun nut” by any stretch. I love almost every other kind of gadget, device, machine or app. But I’m not a fan of guns. I’m not fond of what they do.

NoGunBut the 2nd Amendment isn’t about guns. It’s about violence, and trust. I hate violence, and I definitely don’t trust politicians with a monopoly on it.  It’s THEIR guns that most need restraint.

But humans, particularly in groups, are very emotional creatures. Where there’s a conflict between fact and feelings, feelings almost always win.

That’s why demagoguery works. That is why nearly all of human history is about oppression, slavery, genocide and war; and why peace, freedom and prosperity are very, very rare, but precious, blips.

…Because it’s not the emotions of love and loyalty and empathy that drive humankind’s political governments.

No, it’s fear, and greed and envy and sloth and…all the evil stuff.

So let’s be real clear on who oppresses, enslaves, commits genocide and war:

Our politicians, under that abstract incantation we call “government.”

It’s politicians – specifically our own politicians, invoking and blaspheming the common good while fanning the flames of all our worst emotions – that take away the freedom that’d be ours if left alone.

This is why human governments have a 100% failure rate. Aside from the obvious violence, they devalue currency, steal across generations, and generally self-destruct.

And it’s why people even consider the catchy but crazy “no fly, no buy” talk in the US Congress.

Yes, The Home of the Brave is terrified; so much so that The Land of The Free is surrendering even more of its tattered freedoms to promises of security from our entrenched, corrupt, arrogant, lying, thieving, heavily armed and violent ruling class.

While there can be some reasonable debate whether more guns mean less crime, or what the 2nd Amendment is really all about, there’s really no denying that gun control laws don’t work as politicians claim they do.

As the gun control debate has been going on for centuries now, there’s plenty of objective evidence demonstrating that, considering that some cultures are just more violent than others, gun control laws are, at best, ineffective. The pro-gun control arguments I’ve ever read or heard so far rely on either post hoc ergo propter hoc or false-choice logical fallacies, or disgorged-from-the-gut emotion. And only the purely emotional arguments for gun control suggest that gun laws would actually work.

No Fly, No Buy is No Different in terms of any promised effects.

I’m not objecting to the No Fly, No Buy marketing campaign just because of that; or because our increasingly militarized empire is pushing for a political monopoly on weapons, or because it’s another example of bureaucrats with too much power. And it’s not just that we beleaguered taxpayers are expected to arm everybody on the planet except ourselves.

I’m more concerned with how our political emotions work on the fundamental, psychological and even religious level.

We excuse the deceit, transgenerational theft, corruption and destruction inherent in politics because our fear, hatred and envy lead us pray to the false gods of politics for protection and vengeance. Wise people knew this to be unwise, so we’ve got some very excellent constitutions, state and federal, to keep a leash on our tendency to, for example, sacrifice our children to the whims of state.

But that wisdom has been discarded, and our government is now completely ungoverned. The regulators are unregulated, and the police are unpoliced.

The No-Fly, No-Buy canard isn’t just the abrogation of the enumerated rights to arms and due process; it stomps on the whole point of constitutional rule of law –

That it’s our politicians who need to be restrained…not us!

Our government has always kept secret lists of people, and there’ve been secret, but less-formal no fly lists for decades, enough has been said about the No Fly list as it exists today. The FBI and TSA denied it existed for the first 2.5 years of its now-acknowledged existence, which is plenty to lead us to suspicion about this embarrassment.

But the fear and loathing represented by this list are not only our nation’s recurrent gestalt, it’s what’s been, through the past one hundred years nurturing, fomenting, exacerbating and elevating to godhood a costly military industrial complex and thieving, murderous racket.

I’d recently written about our Middle East Madness; and by now we all know that our own government creates, trains, arms and funds our enemies such that we end up in war against ourselves all over the world.

I’ll wrap this up with some context:
Our militarized police anti-constitutionally/criminally take more property than do all other criminals combined; and you’re 58 times more likely to be killed by cops than by terrorists. But it’s politicians who’ve increasingly put police into their ever-more adversarial role. And as already mentioned above, our politicians lie about pretty much everything all the time. They’ve destroyed their moral authority to issue speeding tickets; they hardly deserve any trust with a secretive, heavily armed, and globally aggressive crony network with control of nuclear weapons and our sources of information, education, food and water.

They created the situation that we feel we must respond to with laws that increase their power, secrecy and unaccountability…at our expense.

I say we run, not walk, in the opposite direction.

Over two thousand years ago Marcus Tullius Cicero said, “The more laws, the less justice.” We know that the “War on Terror” has dramatically increased terrorism. I think facts support the notion that the less politics we tolerate, the more security, prosperity and of course, freedom, we’ll enjoy. So I suggest that instead of more laws, we nullify our way out of this corrupt and complex tangle we’ve made of our nation, and try, at long last, what our wisest founders hoped we’d actually become; a nation where all are equal under law, and where prosperity and security come from liberty, and justice, for all.

No, bureaucrats’ rules, court cases and precedents, are not laws…

The United States Constitution has a fine Preamble.  But the preamble is just a preamble.  The USA Constitution’s first words of actionable law follow immediately after that one-sentence preamble.

RememberThis sentence is Article I, Section I:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

That one sentence says that only the federal Congress can make federal laws.  In the context of the rest of the constitution, it very plainly says that no other person, group or entity whatsoever, can make federal laws.  Only the US Congress can make federal laws.  Nobody else gets any legislative powers at all.  None. Žádný.  Nada.  无. Zero.  कोई नहीं.

I have not emphasized that nearly as much as our founders did, but I will repeat it one more time: All legislative Powers are in Congress, and no federal legislative authority exists anywhere else.

Not in courts, not in Executive offices, not in bureaucracies, not in the UN.  Нигде.  Nowhere.  Πουθενά.  Nulle part.  In nessun luogo.  في أي مكان.

Is that pretty clear?

Well, no; apparently not.  Because while our busy bee US Congress does write too !@#$ many laws these days, they only write a few hundred per year (and it’s mostly unelected, semi-permanent staffers, not elected legislators, who actually both write the laws and determine what gets written – but that’s another story).  Executives, by expansion of the once-reasonable “Executive Order” process, write what amount to at least scores of laws per year, and they execute them.  Judges, in very real effect, write and rewrite hundreds of laws per year, and executives almost always choose to execute such rulings as law.

distressHowever…

Bureaucrats, minding other people’s business from “Executive Agencies” actually write many thousands of “federal[i]” regulations per year…over THIRTY TIMES AS MANY rules as do the only people authorized to write federal laws at all.

It’s very bad that unelected, essentially unaccountable bureaucrats write many times as many laws that directly affect you and me, as the three legitimate branches of government all put together.

But that misses the point.

The point, to remind you, is that ONLY CONGRESS IS SUPPOSED TO WRITE ANY FEDERAL LAWS AT ALL.

There is a reason for that.

Originally, by design, there were two species of congress people:

  1. US House Reps were numerous and up for rehire…or better yet, firing, every two years. Our founders actually expected they’d be more numerous per capita than today by far, and that We The People would pretty frequently fire them in favor of new, untainted representation.  These hundreds, or better yet, thousands of reps, were to be too numerous and temporary to build the fiefdoms and cliques we see today.  And this mass of representatives was to have tremendous power; more in most respects than any other part of federal government.
  2. US Senators were originally appointed by state legislators to be the representatives of state sovereignty. States, in the true meaning, are like Germany and Australia…sovereign governing units.  And this sovereignty was to be represented and protected in government.  Senators were to be few, and focused in their intention to limit the growth of centralized “federal” power.  That was killed with the 17th Amendment; and what used to be States are now more like administrative districts.  Even so, our founders would be horrified that we never fire these people.

CourtesyFlushSo lawmaking was placed entirely into the hands of people who could be fired at regular intervals.  And even though instead of just 535 we ought to have a few thousand lawmakers, it’s still a tiny number of lawmakers compared to the nearly 3 million bureaucrats in 70 federal agencies who’ve over time acquired varying and growing degrees of legislative, executive and judicial powers in violation of Article I Section I, Article II Section I, and Article III, Section I.

By what is still constitutional design (the constitution has never been amended to allow what’s happening today), bad laws could be easily eliminated or nullified by electing people who’d see the severed heads of former misbehaving congresscritters rolling out of DC, and write only those laws that actually served common interests.

RationalIgnoranceBut damn our foolishness!  We’ve come to believe it when judges say they’re all powerful.  And we certainly obey the various rules, regulations, laws and decrees excreted by the DHS, BLM, HHS, EPA, FDA, Etcia, etc., et cetera, et cetera, et cetera…
Why?

Well, because nobody ever reads constitutions.  Nobody knows their purpose and power.  And nobody wants to “rock the boat.”  And because voters are paralyzed in hopelessness, misinformation, and “rational ignorance,” that’s why.

Judges say that they and their courts are authorized by tradition, history, “case law” (…which can’t be law…why?  Because only legislators can write laws!), and other BS.  They claim that Precedents have power, and that Judgments are law.  That’s not what the constitutions say; nor is it what our founders meant.  Not At All.

Bureaucrats say they’re just doing their jobs…that Congress and Presidents and Judges and the mysterious properties of gravity created their agencies, and that they’re just doing their best to fulfill their agency’s charter.  Most don’t even know they’re violating our constitutions and everything reasonable.  Why?  Because they’ve not read the federal constitution either.

And they certainly can’t possibly read all the squillions and schmillions of federal rules over which they’re writing new ones.

Stop.  STOP!

Our nation is a lawless, ad hoc mess run by a few global crime cronies.  I intend to fire a shot against it in my meager way shortly.  But what we need is for people to develop for themselves a better vision of civil (domestic and global) life than what we’re doing to each other now.  We need to think about who’s been doing what to whom, and for what reasons, and think about whether we can sustain this self-destruction, let alone want to.

cropped-youWe do not have constitutional rule of law now.  We The People have voted that away.  But I’m certain that’s more ignorance than volition.  I wish we’d all take an hour or so to read this: https://wedeclare.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/the-united-states-constitution.pdf, and think…

Could you get even a dozen people to agree to a better plan for governing diverse people over a huge nation?  Do you trust our current crop of political cronies to rewrite a new plan?  OK, so let’s use what’s already the best social covenant ever properly written and passed.

The state and federal constitutions already belong to you.  You can invoke them to smash down all this corruption and destruction whenever you’re ready.

I’m asking you to get ready.  It’s time to fight the machine and finally make the American Dream come true…for everybody.

 

[i] We don’t have a federal government anymore.  It’s actually unitary now, and has been pretty-much so since the 1860’s.  We no longer have “USA” states; we have only subunits of a central government.  Words mean something…we ought to know that while the words are still applied in rhetoric, they no longer apply in actual meaning.

Rule of Law Reboot

What follows is a resolution that’d be a good first step to a better course for our nation.
If elected to congress, I’d introduce it immediately.
But don’t wait for me…please feel free to send this to your representatives in local, state or federal office.
PLEASE do this or something like it!
I’d of course prefer that this be passed as a Bill or Joint Resolution.  But even as a Concurrent or Simple Resolution, it’d open a discussion on what sort of nation we’re to be; a nation with governed government, or a great big crime syndicate:

Whereas the plain wording of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America is binding law;

Be it resolved that;

No federal law, agency, program or international treaty that depends upon authority not specifically granted by the Constitution for the United States of America shall be valid;

Any federal agency, law,  program or international treaty transcending authority specifically granted by the Constitution for the United States of America is null and void;

Unconstitutional laws, agencies, programs and treaties have created both problems and dependencies that will take time to rectify;

All unconstitutional federal powers, delegations, laws, programs, treaties and entities that cannot be immediately nullified must be phased out within no more than ten years.

 

cropped-youAn Indiana/local version of this could be (SOMEBODY PLEASE INTRODUCE THIS HERE IN INDIANA!):

Whereas the plain wording of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America, and Article I Section 25 of the Indiana Constitution is binding law;

Be it resolved that;

No federal or state law, agency, program or international treaty that depends upon authority not specifically granted by the Constitution for the United States of America  or the Constitution of the State of Indiana shall be valid;

Any federal or state agency, law,  program or international treaty transcending authority specifically granted by the Constitution for the United States of America is null and void;

Unconstitutional laws, agencies, programs and treaties have created both problems and dependencies that will take time to rectify;

All unconstitutional governing powers, delegations, laws, programs, treaties and entities that cannot be immediately nullified must be phased out within no more than ten years.

BattleofLongisland

Your vote’s not a poker chip; it’s weapon.

We never asked…

I intend to deliver the following to the Governor’s Office with a press conference at noon on July 4 on the east steps of the statehouse.

I believe this is the the most appropriate date (and a date upon which I’d staged yearly protests until 2008). I think it’s the most appropriate place to start for this Step One (a polite request to the correct officer).

I hope a good number of people, including you, can show up to join me:

 

Dear Governor Daniels,

We have read our state and federal constitutions. We understand their purpose and legal authority. And now we both understand, and suffer, the breadth and depth of our society’s transgressions against these fundamental laws.

These transgressions have occurred by public choice, and progressively over many generations, so we did not see the damage we were doing. But we do see that damage now.

It would be both tedious and unnecessary to detail the errors and resultant harm done, or to list our many reasons for wanting the illegality to end.

We will supply at least a partial list of serious grievances and injuries if that would help you remedy the breach of social contract that caused them. But our requested remedy is both simple and proven to work better for liberty, security, prosperity and justice than anything else yet tried in the history of human governance:

We ask only that you execute Rule of Law under existing Indiana and federal constitutions, exactly as these laws are written.

Governor Daniels, we want these laws to be enforced without exception, all the time, as soon as possible. They are few enough that everyone can know them; simple enough that everyone can understand them; and important enough that everyone, particularly agents and officers of government, should obey them all without exception, proviso or privileged classes, all of the time.

The laws leave no room for selective enforcement, or preferential treatment by corporate abstraction, class or process. All citizens are to be equal under the laws, and no person is above the laws. No legitimate political authority exists outside of that granted by the plain sense of our constitutions. All governing agencies, actions and rules that exist outside constitutional limitations are, by the clear words and purpose of the constitutions, null and void.

If any part of a constitution is so unclear as to prohibit enforcement, there is a constitutional process for clarifying it in print. But we herewith submit annotated copies of each constitution on the expectation that you will see little that is vague or open-ended in either contract. These annotated constitutions are also freely available online at:

https://wedeclare.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/annotated-usa-constitution.pdf

https://wedeclare.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/indiana-constitution-book.pdf

We understand that as seriously as we have failed over the generations, it will take some time to restore legitimate authority to our civil government, and peel back the false accountabilities and destructive dependencies accumulated over generations. We propose that five years is more than sufficient to phase out all illegal political entities, processes, rules, precedents, actions and taxes; and to enact amendments and phase-out plans necessary to ensure full constitutional obedience.

Yet current budget and social conditions demand all possible speed, and history demonstrates an invariable and harsh penalty for delay. Please do immediately employ the legal and political authority that is yours, to restore what is, by law, ours.

Thank you

Here are a few specific conclusions drawn from a simple reading of the constitutions, and requiring immediate action:

  1. Precedents, in courts or in policy, are not law; nor are “Executive Orders” law. Only the legislative branch can write laws, and then only in the domain authorized. Courts may not write laws, bureaucracies may not write laws, and executives may not write laws. Therefore, all such illegal “laws,” regulations, orders, rules and mandates are null and void. They must be declared so, and denied enforcement, as quickly as possible.
  2. Baseless currency is illegal. Mandated, monopoly currency issued by unconstitutional transnational private banks, is illegal. Therefore, we ask for a restoration of specie payments and gold and silver-based currency as quickly as possible.
  3. It makes no sense, nor is it constitutionally permissible, to tax private property owners for our Common Schools. We certainly don’t need taxation to facilitate the current wide and deep discrepancies between rich and poor, and it is illegal. We ask for the restoration of a constitutional Common School fund as quickly as possible.
  4. There can be no serious doubt about what a Common School system actually is. No other education system is in the authorized domain of state or federal government. We ask for the end of any political involvement in education outside of what’s authorized as a legitimate Common School system; or at least amend the constitution to describe new limits.  

The following are additional thoughts for our consideration only:

Note: In case you’re wondering why I don’t address our Governor as “The Honorable;” titles like “The Honorable” or “Esquire” are specifically unconstitutional…and for good reason.
Note: some media folk (particularly the Indianapolis Star) will do their level best to cubbyhole you to something easily dismissed. Resist their attempts to brand us “Tea Party,” “anti-government,” “anti-union” or anything else in the news. Stay on subject. Do not allow them to draw you into another subject that they’ll quickly apply to all of us.
Please: Anything you say outside of Rule of Law under existing constitutions, as written, will ruinously derail our message. DO NOT BRING UP ANYTHING ELSE. No gay marriage, war, tax…anything but ROL under existing constitutions, as written.
Please: Dress nicely, and come neatly groomed. Be as pleasant and yet firm, as possible. This would not be a good time for joking around or bringing/wearing props. This is serious; we must be serious, solid citizens.
DO NOT FORGET: We are the pro government people. We want to govern our government, restore legality to our lawmakers and justice to our judiciary. We are the ones who are legitimate, correct, and on the legal side of the law.

PLEASE NOTE: This is more of a mea culpa than a protest. We The People have what We The People have chosen repeatedly through the past hundred years. We must admit the error of our ways, and choose better. We have no cause for anger…not yet.
Extra Special Double-Note: I repeat: we have gotten into our mess because nearly everybody has chosen it, progressively, and over generations. Most people still cannot imagine what kind of trouble we’re in. If they could, they would not believe that they’re to blame. Remember, we’re not asking so much of our politicians as we are of We The People. We’re asking voters/citizens to change themselves. It is a big enough task to get people of extraordinary political understanding to join us… let us try to show patient understanding to those who still just don’t get it.
PS: I wrote that last note largely to me.

Here’s the key thing:

Tell everyone you know to check out the letter to our Governor, send it to their state legislators, and ask them to add their in-person support to our little endeavor.

Liberty or Bust!

Andy Horning

Freedom, IN

thefreedomfarm@gmail.com

Andy’s Annotated US Constitution

With all the disinformation and historical revisionism buzzing like flies on politics (even with the “Tea Party” as much as anywhere else), I just had to present what I believe to be the facts.

So here’s an annotated USA constitution again: https://wedeclare.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/annotated-usa-constitution.pdf