What We Must Do

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Colorado Springs, Colorado

I believe that the Congress and Obama Administration have profoundly underestimated the groundswell of grassroots opposition to this illegal, unconstitutional monstrosity called a federal health care reform bill. If this bill passes, it may become the proverbial line in the sand, the final straw that breaks the camel’s back, the crossing of the Rubicon, the burning of the ships and bridges, the shot heard round the world. This could be an 1860 moment in history. We are fast approaching a critical mass of opposition to the slide away from our constitutional moorings that began under Woodrow Wilson and accelerated under Franklin Roosevelt. The disrespect and utter contempt that our current ‘public servants’ display for the Constitution, the rule of law and the people who still adhere to the Constitution’s tenets is unparalleled. In my lifetime I have never seen such condescending, flippant attitudes toward our heritage and the body politic. It chills me to the bone.

In short, the Constitution simply does not allow this bill and at least 57% of the American people say they don’t want it. Do our ‘leaders’ give credence to either, much less both realities? No, they spit upon the Constitution and in the eyes of the people they serve, who put them where they are and pay their salaries. Hell must have a special place reserved for such as these. They are not fit to ‘serve.’ They should be removed from office immediately, if not imprisoned for violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. Mark my words, with God as my witness a day of reckoning is coming. A sleeping giant is awakening. We have endured the intentional erosion of our God-given freedoms and liberties by our federal government longer than any people should have to and remain obedient. Our very Declaration of Independence proclaimed that mankind is more inclined to suffer abuses as long as they are sufferable rather than take drastic action to right them and perhaps alter or throw off an abusive government and form a new one. But, it warns that when such abuses become so egregious and long-standing then people have not only a right but a duty to take such action as is necessary to alter or abolish the offending government and institute such changes or new form of government as is necessary to redress the injustices. The patience of the American people is growing strained and thin.

Many pundits tell us that we should direct our remedial anger to the ballot box; throw the bad seed out and replace them with better politicians. Sadly, we have been trying this for over 200 years and the situation only grows more dire with each passing election. The federal behemoth has taken on a life all its own, consuming well-meaning politicians and amassing more power unchecked and unhindered by the tinkering of elected officials who quickly come and go. It overruns checks and balances, ignores constitutional restraints and intimidates the states into submission while it sucks out their very sustenance; bringing everyone and everything under its control. There is hardly any nook or cranny of existence that the federal government does regulate, control or tax. This was explicitly not the intent of the framers. The federal government was to have a few specific enumerated powers necessary for the good of all the people and states, but very limited and constrained by Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. The states, on the other hand were to be the laboratories of democracy. They wrote the Constitution that created the federal government for their benefit and to serve their purposes, not vice versa. They are not mere political subdivisions of the federal government. They are the sovereign governing bodies with the most power; being closer to the people they serve. It is ludicrous for the federal government to dare think that it can order them around, trample their authority and direct them to raise taxes and spend money against their will. But that is exactly what has happened. With the clarity of the 10^th Amendment I cannot for the life of me understand why the states have cowered so before the federal altar. No doubt it is due in large part to the boatloads of money (that ironically comes out of the pockets of taxpayers in the several states) that the federal government dangles in front of the states, asking only in return their complicity and acquiescence to unlimited federal power. It is time for the states to reassert their supremacy and return the federal government to its appropriate constitutional role. We must remind those in Washington that they serve by the consent of the governed, not in spite of them. The federal government must once again have a healthy fear of the states and the people it serves instead of the people fearing the federal government. A letter from a citizen to an elected servant should strike infinitely more fear in their hearts than a letter to a citizen from the Internal Revenue Service.

If ballots are ineffective in bringing about the needed change, what other means do we have at our disposal? First of all, surely not bullets as was the case in 1860. Then how about defunding the government? Well, the people lost the power to defund the government by withholding our ‘voluntary’ income tax payments when, during World War II a temporary, emergency process was instituted requiring employers to withhold and send in tax payments automatically on behalf of their employees to insure a continuing stream of money into federal coffers to fund the war effort. Apparently, word of the end of the war in 1945 has not yet reached Washington, as this ‘temporary, emergency’ measure is still in force. Word to the wise, a federal program once begun never ends. The next closest thing to immortality after personal salvation is a federal program. Additionally, I seriously doubt that enough companies would band together and withhold the payments to make any sort of dent in the revenue or statement to the elected officials. And don’t look to the federal courts for any help. In my opinion federal judges, including Supreme Court justices are merely political appointees with personal agendas ensconced for life and accountable to no one. Then what about civil disobedience? Would enough doctors refuse to participate in this health reform fiasco to make a difference? Would enough people or companies or states refuse to participate to make a statement? Would enough companies refuse to participate in Cap &Trade to make it null and void? How would such movements be organized and implemented? What would be the federal government’s response? No one really knows. It would seem that given the history of our separation from England, the writing of the Constitution and the formation of the federal government, we should direct our hope to the states. After all, the 10^th Amendment clearly gives all powers not specifically allocated to the federal government to the states. If the framers had intended for the Constitution to be a blank check of power to the federal government (Article 1, Section 8 notwithstanding), then why a 10^th Amendment? The answer, of course is that they never intended for the federal government to amass such power and control over the day-to-day lives, fortunes and businesses of the American people. They would never have dreamed that the reach of this central government they had created would become so all encompassing. To safeguard any such eventuality they spelled out the specific powers it was to possess in the body of the Constitution and then added an additional safeguard in the 10^th Amendment, ensuring that the states would have the final say in the unlikely event the federal government were to attempt to overstep its bounds. The ultimate expression of state power is the constitutional amendment, the only legitimate path to altering the express or implied meaning of the Constitution. I believe that the framers thought that the federal government would have such respect for the supremacy and almost sanctity of the Constitution and fear of the people that it would never dream of grossly overstepping its authority. This belief was based upon the idea that a representative democracy such as this could only function successfully if the population was informed, engaged and moral. Sadly the liberal control of education over the last 50-60 years has resulted in a pathetic misunderstanding of our nation’s history, heritage, economic and political structure within a large segment of our population. One only has to look at the behavior of our politicians over the last decades to realize that any moral foundation has been utterly lost. In addition, the blurring of lines between political parties and the feeling of a single person’s helplessness in the face of a gigantic federal juggernaut has instilled a pervasive apathy (until very recently) across the electorate.

Is sufficient time left for the people to organize and seize the reins of their state governments so as to reassert their rightful power over the runaway federal government under the aegis of the 10^th Amendment? Or have we already passed the point of no return down the slippery slope to socialism, decay and demise? Only the passage of the next few years will tell. There are signs that people are beginning to awaken to the reality of what is happening. History tells us only about 2% of the American colonists actively supported the Revolution. That would be about 6 million people today, fewer by far than listen to Rush Limbaugh alone in a week. The hope for the survival of the Republic and a future for our children and grandchildren hang on these. We must encourage them to educate and enlist others in this fight. We must peacefully resist the illegal encroachments of the federal government when and where possible. We must organize and move to nudge or take control of state governments to reassert their constitutional power and authority. This is a fight we cannot and must not lose, for as John Adam’s character in “1776” ponders;

“Is anybody there?

Does anybody care?

Does anybody see what I see?”

May God save and bless the Constitution and Republic of the United States of America.

Health Care Debate

The current raging debate about health care is NOT about health care, it’s NOT about health insurance, it’s NOT about how much this bill or that bill will cost, it’s NOT about a public option or co-op’s or opting out, it’s NOT about how many Americans don’t have health insurance vs. access to health care. IT IS about the Constitution, IT IS about Article 1, Section 8 and the specific enumerated powers and constraints upon the Congress, IT IS about repeated Congressional over-reaching, IT IS about the rule of law, IT IS about a republic vs. a democracy, IT IS about States’ and People’s rights, IT IS about the 10^th Amendment, IT IS about a line in the sand. This is it, enough is enough. The People have decided to take a stand here and say, “No more!” Our republic may live or die on this issue. Yes, it’s that big.

Thinking Can Be Taxing

I just concluded a discussion (debate) with a friend regarding the question of the federal income tax. He was whooped but refused to admit it. The question was on the fairness/constitutionality of the ‘progressive’ federal income tax where the more income one makes the higher percentage tax is paid on it. My point is that the 16th Amendment authorizing the federal income tax does not speak to tax brackets or percentages. Given that, the next place to look for instruction is the 14th Amendment which guarantees that all citizens will be treated equally under the law. Anyone with passing knowledge of logical deduction would conclude that within those constraints all citizens taxed on their income would be taxed at the same percentage rate. Right? But, he replied if you make more you should pay more! Eureka, he just discovered the mother-lode. Egad, how many times have I heard that tired bromide? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need…ooops, wrong country wrong constitution. I desperately tried to explain the scenario that 10% of a million dollars is substantially more than 10% of fifty-thousand dollars. Not enough, he snapped. Says who, says I? Well, the Congress. So is 20% of a million enough, compared with 10% of fifty-thousand I ask? Maybe. Again I remind him of the 14th Amendment and the equal protection concept. He is not moved to enlightenment. So rather than obey the actual letter of the Constitution we should let the Congress arbitrarily set the tax brackets based upon the prevailing political winds of the day. And change them constantly. How’s that for equal treatment? Now the 10th Amendment becomes relevant. If the Constitution does not specifically empower the Congress, it cannot act; but rather must defer to the States acting as agents of the People. So, in carrying out its 16th Amendment power to levy income taxes on the citizens, the Congress must also be guided by the equal protection concepts of the 14th Amendment. To do otherwise would be acting extra-constitutionally or even un-constitutionally. Passing legislation to set progressive tax rates does not and cannot amend the Constitution. Gotcha, I cry! He is unfazed. Ah well, pearls before swine.
The rub is that he really knows that I am technically correct, but that to admit so would begin unraveling a huge quilt leading to the undoing of 50 years of progressive chinks (chunks) in the Constitution. The result would be a federal government about 10% of its current size and power. The States’ power would thus grow proportionally. And it’s much easier to control one capital than it is fifty. Also, under this scenario the importance of Presidential, Congressional and Senatorial races would be greatly diminished. The importance of which party controls the federal government is likewise less critical. There would be very little mischief for them to meddle in and much less damage that they could do to our pocketbooks and our freedoms.
What we are rapidly approaching is a return to simple democratic majority rule, which is of course tyranny of the majority over the minority. Since we have strayed so far from the actual text of the Constitution it has become almost meaningless to many politicians. Why not just take out a lighter and finish the job? Without our constitutional moorings the federal government is free to do anything it pleases without repercussion. That is why it does matter so much these days which party is in power and why these national elections matter so much. Conservatives tend to meddle less than liberals in our pocketbooks and freedoms, but it would be far better to remove the ability and temptation altogether.
Let’s return to the actual Constitution as it is written. And at the same time return to the constitutionally required flat-tax rate for all citizens equally under the law; or just pass a Constitutional amendment to institute a national sales tax (not a V.A.T.).