Justice Roberts Gives Some Good Advice

/in /by

In their ruling of the Arizona Immigration laws, the Supreme Court declared the“discretion of the federal agents” to be sovereign over the states.In the ruling on the Affordable Healthcare Act, the Supreme Court declared the federal government to be sovereign over the citizens.These rulings have served a nearly fatal blow to the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Constitution.Now, more so than ever, or at least since 1830, the citizens of this nation must stand together in defense of the Constitution, as the ultimate protectors of our God given rights.

Our founders did not make the federal government sovereign over the people or the states.The 9th Amendment makes it perfectly clear that all rights belong to the people, enumerated or not.The 10th Amendment makes it clear that aside from the power “delegated” to the federal government, EVERYTHING ELSE belongs to the people through their states.And the Federal government was only delegated very limited powers.James Madison said those powers were limited primarily to external objects and named them specifically as war, peace, foreign commerce and negotiations.What that means for us, is that the federal government has no business what so ever in our health care, or in our businesses, our schools, or any other aspect of daily life, whatsoever!

Over the years, through an absolute dearth of true Constitutional teaching in the government schools, especially our law schools and through the replacement of precedent over the intent of the founders, we have allowed our courts to stray far from the original limitations and purpose of the Constitution. Our founders never intended for the “general welfare” clause to mean the “everything welfare” clause.Madison explains in his 1792 argument against federal subsidies that the general welfare clause was not meant to expand the power of the government beyond its limitations, but to describe the purpose of the power delegated within strict confinement of those boundaries.This was not just his opinion, but the opinion of ALL who drafted the Constitution.

“I, sir, have always conceived – I believe those who proposed the Constitution conceived – it is still more fully known, and more material to observe, that those who ratified the Constitution conceived – that this is not an indefinite government, deriving its powers from the general terms prefixed to the specific powers –but a limited government, tied down to the specified powers, which explain and define the general terms.” James Madison On the Cod Fishery Bill, granting Bounties 1792 (emphasis added)

I dare say, James Madison himself would barely recognize the government we have today.Actually, maybe he would, because it looks identical to the one he and his patriot brothers and sisters pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to declare independence FROM and ultimately defeat in the name of Liberty.

Apart from the twisted logic and contortions Chief Justice Roberts uses to justify this tyranny under the tax and spending clause, there are some fascinating and instructive statements in this ruling.Believe it or not, embedded in this ruling, are the instructions for righting the ship, and bringing this nation back to where we need to be.

There are three things that we as a nation must do now.We no longer have the luxury of waiting until November and seeing what will happen.If we do not do these three things, if we fail in our attempts, we will fully establish the totalitarian government our Supreme Court has supported.

First, we must keep the proper perspective.The Supreme Court is NOT the ultimate arbiter of the Constitutionality of a law.The Supreme Court is 1/3 of the federal government, with no more or less power than the other two branches.It is the Constitution that is the Supreme law of the land, not the Justices of the Supreme Court, and all decisions, even ones made by the court must stand before the ultimate judge – the rule of law in the Constitution.The Constitution was written and ratified by“an act of the whole American People” as Thomas Jefferson declared in 1802.Its purpose is to “secure the blessings of Liberty…to our posterity”.To secure that Liberty, “governments were instituted among men”, not over them, and “derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.”Our founders gave us a government dependent upon OUR consent, not the will of the Supreme Court.They knew that since Liberty belonged to us, we would be the only ones suited to determine when “any form of government became destructive to those ends.”Hamilton articulated this responsibility very well in Federalist Paper #33.

“If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution…”

Believe it or not, Justice Roberts also gives us this directive in the healthcare ruling.He plainly tells the people of this nation, get off your backsides, stop complaining, accept the consequences of your decisions and do something about it!

“Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” (emphasis added,)-Justice Roberts.

Therefore, we have a job to do, since WE THE PEOPLE are the ultimate arbiters and guarantors of Liberty.

The next thing that must be done is the states must do their jobs.Madison declared our state legislators to be the “sure guardians of our Liberty.”How many of our state legislators really understand that their primary job description is to protect the people from federal encroachment? Listen to the power in Madison’s exact words.

“the State Legislatures will jealously and closely watch the operations of this Government, and be able to resist with more effect every assumption of power, than any other power on earth can do; and the greatest opponents to a Federal Government admit the State Legislatures to be sure guardians of the people’s liberty.”

Our states, especially those who thought it important enough to file a lawsuit, must stand now and say, this law is unconstitutional, this ruling is unconstitutional and we are not bound by it!Basically, our states must have the courage to say, “WE WILL NOT COMPLY”.It is our states that must“redress the injury done to the Constitution.”Once again, Justice Roberts in the very ruling that dealt such a devastating blow to the Republic, points the way.

“In the typical case we look to the States to defend their prerogatives by adopting “the simple expedient of not yielding” to federal blandishments when they do not want to embrace the federal policies as their own. Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U. S. 447, 482 (1923). The States are separate and independent sovereigns. Sometimes they have to act like it.” (emphasis added) -Justice Roberts.

Not only did he give the directive, but he gave the pathway as well.

“Instead, we determine, first, that §1396c is unconstitutional when applied to withdraw existing Medicaid funds from States that decline to comply with the expansion… As a practical matter, that means States may now choose to reject the expansion; that is the whole point.”-Justice Roberts

Anytime an addict withdraws from a drug, especially with long term use, it will be a painful withdrawal.It is time the people of this nation withdraw from the federal funding drug and discover once again how to function as a normal and healthy republic.The states must have the courage, the strength, and the resolve to lead their people through this process.If they fail to do so, the death of Liberty and enslavement of our children will be on their hands.Press your governors and state legislators to stand against this tyranny. Demand that they do as Justice Roberts has said – DO NOT COMPLY.

Finally, we must do everything necessary to replace our members of the House and the Senate with true Constitutionally-minded patriots that will repeal this law.We must especially fight for the seats in the Senate and then hit the streets like we did in 2010 to pressure them to vote the right way.I am begging; do not to put all faith in one man.Do not lay the burden of repealing this law on the President.He does not have the power to overturn or set aside ANY law.We will be giving permission to the President to set aside the Constitution to achieve an end that we desire.This “ends justify the means” style of government is what got us in this mess.No man can resist the temptation of ultimate power.It is time that we limit the executive branch of government once and for all.The ONLY way we will do that is to have a properly functioning Congress.That does NOT mean a Congress full of men and women who bare the sacred “R”.That means, whatever their letter designation, they are sold out, 100% dedicated to the Constitution and the principle of LIBERTY FIRST!

We must require them to become proficiently trained in the principles of the Constitution and then hold them immediately accountable when they fail to protect it.We cannot “like” a politician so much that we give them a pass.Many will say that Thomas Jefferson was a great patriot.If he were here today, he assuredly would have a sizeable “cult” following.Yet Jefferson himself warned that the people have a duty to ALWAYS keep their politicians in check and accountable.

“If once [the people] become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, judges and governors shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions;”

No more cult following of politicians.No more passes for personality or past employment or service.Our hired representatives must do their job, the one they took an oath to or they will be fired!No more trading Liberty for Security.No more compromising of Constitutional principles.No more legislation born out of fear or the dreaded “necessity”.We will allow only laws that limit the government and comply with the original intent of our founders.And if they do not know what that means, they are NOT QUALIFIED to do their job.

These Supreme Court rulings are absolutely unconstitutional.There is NO victory within in them.The Constitution and Liberty may have been dealt a nearly fatal blow this week, but Liberty is not dead.This God-given gift burns within our very souls and we must revive it.To whom much is given, much is required.WE must right this ship.WE must rebuild on a firm foundation.WE must take the steps necessary to overcome the consequences of our own negligence…even if it is to the point where we have to exert that ultimate Right of the people, to alter or to abolish a government destructive to those ends, and to institute new one.Independence is our right and our heritage!

This will take courage, this will take resolve, but we are guaranteed by history and experience that if we stand for this noble cause, we will win.Do not falter.Do not retreat.We will not wake up one day and apologize to our children for not doing everything we could humanly and superhumanly do to avoid their chains and slavery.Look these young people in the eye TODAY and Stand.Stand strong.Stand with courage and resolve.Stand together for the holy cause of Liberty for the sake of our posterity.In the immortal words of Daniel Webster, “Hold onto the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands…for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world.”

SCOTUS: Arizona Immigration~Direct Assault on State Sovereignty

/in /by

Never has an opinion by the Supreme Court been more aptly titled as an “Opinion,” because that is exactly what Justice Kennedy and his cohorts have delivered in Arizona v. United States.  It is nothing more than an open display of judicial activism.  The majority opinion is not a legal explanation on the Constitutionality of Arizona’s laws, but is an ideological dissertation on this current administration’s view of immigration.

Not only is this opinion devoid of any appeal to the Constitution, it is very dangerous.  It is an aberration of fundamental Constitutional principles and a brazen assault on state sovereignty!  Chiefly, Kennedy takes the Supremacy clause of the Constitution, which declares that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and translates that principle into the supremacy of the Federal government over the states.  There couldn’t be anything more contrary to our founders’ intent.   Let me repeat: this opinion is a monumental assault on the sovereignty of the states.

Article I section 8 clause 4 of the Constitution states that Congress has the power [t]o establish an uniform rule of naturalization.  The purpose of the federal government in the case of immigration, as Justice Kennedy appropriately acknowledges is “to be a single voice of the nation for foreign relations.”

This external focus is in line with James Madison’s directive that:   “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace negotiation, and foreign commerce…”

Indeed, we must have a single rule of law regarding immigration, else foreign nations will never know what to expect from state to state.  However, this is where Kennedy’s constitutional understanding ends.  He continually remarks throughout this opinion, that the states are not only not allowed, but not capable of enforcing the laws that the federal government codifies.  What is his authority for this opinion?  Not the Constitution itself and certainly not the founders.

Kennedy does not appeal to the Constitution as the standard, but rather the “broad discretion of immigration officers” as the determining factor of how immigration policy should be devised and carried out.  He says, “Removal is a civil matter, and one of its principal features is the broad discretion exercised by immigration officials, who must decide whether to pursue removal at all.”   The standard for deportation of an illegal immigrant is NOT the law, according to Kennedy, but an arbitrary determination of the Department of Homeland Security, which we all know will reflect Obama’s recent declaration.

Kennedy suggests that the states must submit to lawlessness based upon the whim of federal officials, declaring,“Were §3 to come into force, the State would have the power to bring criminal charges against individuals for violating a federal law even in circumstances where federal officials in charge of the comprehensive scheme determine that prosecution would frustrate federal policies.”

How does Kennedy justify this arbitrary determination?  “This state authority could be exercised without any input from the Federal Government about whether an arrest is warranted in a particular case. This would allow the State to achieve its own immigration policy. The result could be unnecessary harassment of some aliens (for instance, a veteran, college student, or someone assisting with a criminal investigation) whom federal officials determine should not be removed.”

According to Kennedy, enforcement of immigration laws are nothing more than a tool to harass illegal aliens.  This is a direct reflection of the policies of the President and not the law established by Congress through the powers delegated by the Constitution.  Simply put, the states must accept violations of the law if the whim of the sovereign decides it is not in their comprehensive scheme to enforce the law.  It is the whim of the sovereign to decide who gets the privilege of citizenship, not the supreme law of the land.

Kennedy further opines that the states are apparently not smart enough to know when to deport and not to deport: “There are significant complexities involved in enforcing federal immigration law, including the determination whether a person is removable…By authorizing state officers to decide whether an alien should be detained for being removable, §6 violates the principle that the removal process is entrusted to the discretion of the Federal Government.”

It should be apparent by the Federal Government’s refusal to enforce the law, that it is, in fact, the states that have better sense about immigration laws.  The federal government is not interested in following the law of the land, they are only interested in circumventing it to achieve their ideology and now the Supreme Court is aiding and abetting this lawless assault upon Liberty.  I will repeat it, if you have to circumvent the Constitution to do your job, YOU are the criminal.

In true judicial activist form, Kennedy couldn’t resist giving the liberal agenda for immigration as justification for arbitrary enforcement of federal law.  Nearly quoting the president’s position on this law, Kennedy states:

“Immigration policy shapes the destiny of the Nation.  These naturalization ceremonies bring together men and women of different origins who now share a common destiny. They swear a common oath to renounce fidelity to foreign princes, to defend the Constitution, and to bear arms on behalf of the country when required by law.  The history of the United States is in part made of the stories, talents, and lasting contributions of those who crossed oceans and deserts to come here.”

I ask you, what does this have to do with the Constitutionality of these laws?  I believe the key to understanding this opinion lies in knowing the President’s recent determination that DHS will not be enforcing immigration laws and for the court to opine otherwise would allow the states themselves to nullify the president’s order.  Here it is, in Kennedy’s own words:  “If §3 of the Arizona statute were valid, every State could give itself independent authority to prosecute federal registration violations, “diminish[ing] the [Federal Government]’s control over enforcement”

Ignoring nearly two centuries of the individual state’s role in making these decisions (as outlined cogently in Scalia’s dissent), Kennedy cuts through one of the pillars of the Republic, state sovereignty, like a buzzsaw.   He tramples the separation of powers and wholeheartedly supports just one more example of the executive branch stealing power from Congress.  Any hopes that Congress will do anything about it?

In a statement that can only be classified as patronizing, Kennedy throws the final salt in the wound, by declaring, in spite of the states “frustrations” with enforcement, the federal government is the King, and the states must subject themselves to its authority.  “Arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.”

The “victory” claimed by some is no victory at all.   The Supreme Court did uphold the ability of law enforcement officers to contact Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) when they have pulled over someone to verify whether that person is an illegal alien.  Big deal!  Justice Kennedy has informed us:

“As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States. See INS v. Lopez­ Mendoza, 468 U. S. 1032, 1038 (1984).” It’s not illegal to be illegal.  Really?

Since being here illegally is not a crime according to the federal government, even if law enforcement is informed that a person is illegally present, that officer will still have to let them go.  The Supreme Court has said any other action by the state is an infringement upon the federal government’s power.  According to Kennedy, state officers are not even allowed to detain illegal aliens: “By authorizing state officers to decide whether an alien should be detained for being removable, §6 violates the principle that the removal process is entrusted to the discretion of the Federal Government.”

According to Kennedy, the sole authority to determine whether an illegal alien is to be detained or deported rests in the Attorney General:  “[T]he Attorney General can exercise discretion to issue a warrant for an alien’s arrest and detention “pending a decision on whether the alien is to be removed from the United States…the Attorney General will issue a warrant.” Kennedy then reminds everyone that all who are enforcing these laws are “subject to the Attorney General’s direction and supervision.”  In what version of the Constitution did he find this?

Once again, it is NOT about the law, it’s about the discretion of the Federal Government and the Federal Government is King. This court has not only taken the precedent and placed it above the founders’ understanding of the Constitution, but now regulation applied by arbitrary discretion is also elevated above our foundational principles.  This supports the hopes of this current administration to further create a totalitarian government led by King Barry I.

In one decision, the Supreme Court has told every state, they do not have the authority to protect themselves; they must submit to the supervisory authority of the Federal Government and the Supreme Court supports the president’s recent directive to DHS.

Let’s be clear. The Constitution says the federal government is supposed to establish standards so that foreign nations will not have to deal with 50 different rules.  Yes, the states are bound by these standards pursuant to the supremacy clause. However, the power to create standards does not infer the ability to be the sole enforcer.  Once the standards are set, then the states are bound to enforce those laws pursuant to those standards.  The only time the federal government is allowed to be involved is when the states are not following those standards!  This power has now been expanded from the power to create regulations to the power of sole enforcer, and Justice Kennedy has now declared that the sovereign states have no ability to enforce these laws, and therefore have no right to protect their own territories.  It’s as if the US government, via the Supreme Court, has practically expelled Arizona from the Union – since, if the Federal government will not enforce the law and Arizona is NOT ALLOWED to enforce the law – then Arizona is bare and unprotected.

One need only read Justice Scalia’s dissent to discover the correct interpretation.

“ The most important point is that, as we have discussed, Arizona is entitled to have “its own immigration policy”—including a more rigorous enforcement policy—so long as that does not conflict with federal law. Today’s opinion, approving virtually all of the Ninth Circuit’s injunction against enforcement of the four challenged provisions of Arizona’s law, deprives States of what most would consider the defining characteristic of sovereignty: the power to exclude from the sovereign’s territory people who have no right to be there. Neither the Constitution itself nor even any law passed by Congress supports this result. I dissent.”

As do I, Justice Scalia.  As do I.

The First Amendment; The Future of Liberty

/in /by

The following is an excerpt from KrisAnne Hall’s new book, Liberty First: The Pathway to Reclaiming America, set to be released in the next month.

The path to reclaim America has many avenues. One in particular is embodied within our First Amendment. Freedom of press, freedom of speech, the freedom to assemble…gave our founders the foundation to rise up and restore the Liberty that had been established by over 700 years of battle and blood. Writing as Silence Dogood, Benjamin Franklin made this observation:

“Without Freedom of Thought there can be no such thing as Wisdom; and no such thing as Public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech.” No. 8, July 9, 1772

Our founders saw the power of communication and the effect that it had on the people. Case in point: Patrick Henry’s speech in the St. John’s church, March 23, 1775. Even Thomas Jefferson, after hearing this speech said many could not recall exactly what was said, Henry’s speech was so passionate and so poignant that it “had produced a great effect” and Jefferson himself “had been highly delighted and moved.”

We cannot forget the writers of that day. Thomas Paine, was just a tailor turned journalist, perhaps a revolutionary version of the modern day blogger. His pamphlet “Common Sense” has been reported to have sold 120,000 copies in the first 3 months and half-million in the first year. John Adams reportedly said, “Without the pen of the author of “Common Sense,” the sword of Washington would have been drawn in vain.”

The women were not silent either. Mercy Otis Warren was just one of our amazing founding mothers. She was a prolific writer of newspaper articles and anti-British propaganda plays. Hannah Winthrop, wife of Dr. Winthrop, describes Mercy in January 1773 as “That noble patriotic spirit which sparkles must warm the heart that has the least sensibilities, especially must it invigorate a mind of a like fellow feeling for this once happy country.”

Through the freedoms of expression, these dear Patriots sparked a revival of Liberty throughout a land that would be soon known as the United States of America. Today is no different. We have Americans with “like fellow feeling for this once happy country” who have picked up the mantle that has been left before us – those that understand that the security of all Liberty rests upon the back of our freedom of expression.

One of the most influential forces in this present restoration effort has been “New Media.” New Media includes the internet, the blogosphere, Facebook, Twitter, talk radio and the like. Probably the biggest pioneers of the New Media have been Rush Limbaugh in the talk radio world and Andrew Breitbart in the blogosphere and grass roots journalism.

Rush has been a thorn in the liberals’ side for decades. Since his talk radio debut in 1984, his pioneering efforts have spawned thousands of talk jocks and laid the foundation for the modern day talk radio juggernaut. Why talk radio works and why it is conservative is simple: it includes the people. There is no public voice or input in the mainstream media. There is no feedback from the people on the nightly news. There is no immediate public voice in newspapers or magazines. There is no input or challenge to what is being disseminated in the mainstream media; therefore, it remains decidedly slanted toward leftist, statist ideology – matching the worldview of it owners and editors. In contrast, when the people are involved, the stance will tend toward conservatism – first, because conservatism is supported by the truth; secondly, because most Americas are truly conservative. That is why liberal talk radio cannot survive unless it is supported by taxpayer dollars. That is also why mainstream media is losing its viewership left and right and has been taken to the woodshed by conservative, new media. It is no wonder that those who cannot stand on the truth hate the free expression of it. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. remarked in the Supreme Court decision in Abrams v. United States , 250 U.S. 616 (1919):

“If you have no doubt of your premises or your power, and want a certain result with all your heart, you naturally express your wishes in law, and sweep away all opposition. To allow opposition by speech seems to indicate that you think the speech impotent…or that you doubt either your power or your premises. But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas — that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.”

The internet blogosphere provides a response to the monolithic, leftist voice in the echo chamber known as the mainstream media. The late Andrew Breitbart was one of the most impactful figures in this area of new media. Starting as an editor of the Drudge report (another foundational block in New Media) and then helping Arianna Huffington launch her site, Breitbart launched his own empire. With all his BIG sites and his internet journalism, he sparked the ire of seemingly every liberal in the known universe. I once heard Andrew tell a crowd that the key to making the biggest impact is “be petty.” Andrew was funny, brilliant and a tireless and fearless warrior and we must follow on in his footsteps. Every patriot should have a video camera and be a citizen journalist. Andrew used citizen journalism as well as anyone to expose the hypocrisy and nastiness of the left. He believed this was a battle “between good and evil” and he used new media to “shine light on the darkness.” The great thing about video is even if you have no talent to write, you can hold a camera.

Something Andrew Breitbart loved, along millions of other activists, is Social Media. Social media, like Facebook and Twitter, allows super-fast dissemination of information that is not filtered or controlled by some editorial board or other “overseer.” One of the difficulties in the late conservative awakening is that a large portion of the engaged citizens are older and less adept at some of the technologies like Facebook. We must continue to expand our social media networks. It may sound silly, but the more “likes” a page has the more influence and reach it has (same principle with Twitter). We need to get as many conservatives as possible connected on social media. We also need conservatives in the field of Journalism, citizen journalism and professional journalism (it’d be nice if there were a prominent Journalism school somewhere that wasn’t liberal). If you feel yourself a techno misfit, I encourage you to attend a Right Online conference held by American’s for Prosperity. There is no better grassroots techno training available. I have AFP to thank for much of what I know and understand about these new media outlets. It was at the Right Online conference that I got hooked on Twitter. It’s also where I became friends with Andrew Breitbart and Katy Abrams. I met Michelle Malkin and scores of other great patriot activists. AFP does fantastic work at keeping the citizen network connected, motivated and engaged.

We need more tweeters, more Facebookers, more talk show hosts, more bloggers. Keep writing the op-eds. Keep publishing books, newsletters, magazines, and pamphlets. Information is power and we must dislodge the liberal stranglehold on the media. I dream of a day when New York is not the media hub in America. This is the expression of our First Amendment. This God given right can be lost without active participation-we will use it or lose it. At least one of our founders felt it was the most important right protected in the Bill of Rights. Daniel Webster said:

“If all my possessions were taken from me with one exception, I would choose to keep the power of communication, for by it I would soon regain all the rest.”

Show Christmas

UN Treaty, Sea Treaty, Gun Treaty…What Are We to Do?

/in /by

Power to create treaties is established in Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2 of the Constitution. The power to create a treaty is delegated by the people to the President with approval of a two thirds vote of the Senate. The Supremacy Clause then states:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

There is so much misunderstanding regarding treaties, the doctrines of the necessary and proper clause, and the general welfare clause, that when you aggregate this misunderstanding our government is able to reach magnificent proportions of corruption and unconstitutional activity. Our founders were very clear and its time we listen to them instead of Congressmen and Judges who have had no training on the true meaning of the Constitution.

The power to create treaties was vested in the President AND the Senate after the failure of the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation created a federal government so small that it could not successfully complete the tasks it was delegated to accomplish. James Madison explains in Federalist #45 that the power delegated to the federal government was one of very limited proportions:

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined… (and) will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.”

Our federal government was designed to be our national representative to the foreign world; a representative of the country in foreign relations. Because we lived in a world where nations where led by Kings, Czars, and Emperors, we needed to have a way that all the states could have a unified voice for negotiations and commerce. During the Articles of Confederation, our federal government could not collect taxes or even compel the delegates to show up to work and do their job. The federal government was attempting to make agreements with foreign nations and was defaulting on these agreements because they had no authority to enforce them equally throughout the states and the states themselves were suffering the greatest consequences. As reported in The Address and Reasons of Dissent of the Minority of the Convention of Pennsylvania to their Constituents, written December 12, 1787, this very point was addressed.

“It was found that our national character was sinking in the opinion of foreign nations. The Congress could make treaties of commerce, but could not enforce the observance of them. We were suffering from the restrictions of foreign nations, who had shackled our commerce, while we were unable to retaliate: and all now agreed that it would be advantageous to the union to enlarge the powers of Congress; that they should be enabled in the amplest manner to regulate commerce, and to lay and collect duties on the imports throughout the United States.”

So, why were treaties given “supremacy”? The collective decision was made to not only delegate the power of treaties to the President and Senate but to also classify its relevance in enforcement to the states. There was great debate over this issue, as many were concerned that by designating this power, it would elevate the treaties above the very Constitution itself. Fortunate for us, this argument was made, because the rebuttal to this argument is vital in understanding the limitations and scope of treaties. Without these explanations, treaties created by the federal government might justifiably supersede the Constitution. Good thing for us that these treaties, although they may attempt to supplant the Constitution, they are plainly not justified in doing so.

Our founders repeatedly stated that treaties were, for every purpose and application, CONTRACTS, agreements with foreign nations to accomplish the duties obligated in those four delegated powers Madison identified.

“The power of making treaties is, plainly, neither the one nor the other. It relates neither to the execution of the subsisting laws, nor to the enaction of new ones; and still less to an exertion of the common strength. Its objects are CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law, but derive it from the obligations of good faith. They are not rules prescribed by the sovereign to the subject, but agreements between sovereign and sovereign.” Federalist #75

Although these Contracts were not considered to be a subdivision of laws or even new laws altogether, it was necessary that they were binding upon the states to prevent the failures seen by our founders in the Articles of Confederation.

“These gentlemen would do well to reflect that a treaty is only another name for a bargain, and that it would be impossible to find a nation who would make any bargain with us, which should be binding on them ABSOLUTELY, but on us only so long and so far as we may think proper to be bound by it.” Federalist #64

These treaties were not designed to be untouchable. They were subject to the very same checks and balances of every act of the federal government. They could fail if they didn’t meet the proper standards. One way they could fail is if they attempted to infringe upon or utilize a power that had not been granted to them through the Constitution. They were to be bound and fettered by all the limitations of power inherent in the Constitution through the specific delegated powers and the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses. To us, that statement must sound like an oxymoron; to think that the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses were meant to bind Congress. Because we have become so detached from the founders intent, we have allowed these clauses to become an expansion of power, a consequence that our founders thought an abomination. [The explanation of these clauses are a whole other analysis, but for a complete explanation of the intent of the General Welfare Clause, please read my previously written analysis. I promise you will be shocked at the clarity of our founders’ intent.] So, if a treaty attempted to assume a power that was not previously delegated, for instance to bind upon the states agreement for an object outside of the realm of war, peace, or foreign commerce, it would be deemed unconstitutional.

“–I insisted that in givg to the Prest. & Senate a power to make treaties, the constn meant only to authorize them to carry into effect by way of treaty any powers they might constitutionally exercise.” (sic) –Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793.

“By the general power to make treaties, the constitution must have intended to comprehend only those subjects which are usually regulated by treaty, and cannot be otherwise regulated… It must have meant to except out of these the rights reserved to the states; for surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.” –Thomas Jefferson: Parliamentary Manual, 1800.

Another limitation imposed by our founders on treaties is that they MUST NOT be in conflict with the Constitution. If a treaty is in direct conflict with, let’s say the Second Amendment, that treaty would be considered unconstitutional. Treaties were established as a supreme law to maintain the credibility and honor of an agreement with a foreign nation, but it was NEVER supposed to be superior to the Constitution. There is no law superior to the Constitution.

“No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid. “ Federalist #78

But what are we to do when these treaties fail the tests of Constitutional limitations? I have heard it mentioned that we are stuck with these treaties short of another treaty supplanting them or a Constitutional Amendment. This perspective is not consistent with our founders’ explanations. As a matter of fact, our founders wanted us to know that if a treaty was in opposition to the Constitution, there were significant consequences.

“if they [the President & Senate] act corruptly, they can be punished; and if they make disadvantageous treaties, how are we to get rid of those treaties?…As to corruption, the case is not supposable. He must either have been very unfortunate in his intercourse with the world, or possess a heart very susceptible of such impressions, who can think it probable that the President and two thirds of the Senate will ever be capable of such unworthy conduct. The idea is too gross and too invidious to be entertained. But in such a case, if it should ever happen, the treaty so obtained from us would, like all other fraudulent contracts, be null and void by the law of nations.” Federalist #64

There is no qualification in that statement that this treaty be replaced or a Constitutional Amendment be written. The simple fact of the matter is this treaty would be a “fraudulent contract” and would be of no effect. At this point, the states would be justified Constitutionally to tell the federal government that they will not honor or enforce the treaty. We do not live in a Kingdom and the power of our government is not derived from a King. We do live in a republic and the power of our government is derived from the people. It is always the responsibility of the PEOPLE to be the ultimate check and balance. I think that Alexander Hamilton made this point abundantly clear in Federalist #33:

“If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify. The propriety of a law, in a constitutional light, must always be determined by the nature of the powers upon which it is founded. .. would not be the supreme law of the land, but a usurpation of power not granted by the Constitution.” Federalist #33

Every day our federal government seems to operate more and more under the assumption that their power is derived in the manner of a Kingdom, it is essential that the people, from which its true power is derived, stand against this tyranny and restore the balance of power. We cannot do this unless we first understand the exceptional principles under which this nation was established. We cannot do this unless we REQUIRE our representatives to operate under these principles.

Standing Strong Means Standing Together

/in /by

As a Christian and student of the Bible, I can tell you that the Scriptures have no shortage of teachings on the importance of fellowship and mutual support and encouragement. Hebrews 10:25 says Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. I am once again reminded of the importance of fellowship here at the Right Online Conference being held by American’s for Prosperity (AFP). I had the opportunity to speak to Tim Phillips, president of AFP about this issue.

Conservatives do not believe in collectivism, we are individualists by nature. I, for one, have to work hard at being “social”. We are often entrepreneurs, self-motivators, and believe strongly in personal responsibility. So, it is easy for us to forget that we were created to fellowship with one another. That is a dangerous position to be in. When we become isolated, we can become weakened and discouraged.

Anyone who knows even a little about American’s for Prosperity knows that they are a group dedicated to the economic health of our nation. Who hasn’t heard or seen the slogan, “It’s the Spending Stupid?” But for me, the most valuable aspect of these conferences is the networking and bonding that occurs between like-minded activists. I was surprised to discover that particular benefit was not an unintended consequence. Mr. Phillips explained that the initial goal of AFP in having these conferences was to connect activists together and in turn connect them to the movement as a whole. Mr. Phillips explained:

“People perform better when they discover they are working for something bigger than themselves. Teams make people stronger. Even though we are individualists, we need to bond together.”

The scripture I quoted also gives a timely directive, it says “so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.” We are bonding together for a reason, for a bigger purpose and that purpose is approaching. We are not happy with the path this nation is on and we are angry at the destruction of Liberty perpetrated by our own government. As the days of destruction are upon us, we must not become isolated and discouraged. As the days become overwhelming the natural instinct is to run away and go “Galt”. Believe me, I know, I have fought those feelings to just stop fighting and search for that “blue pill” and reinsert into the Matrix! But we literally cannot afford to become overwhelmed – our children will suffer the worst. Sam Adams wrote in the Boston Gazette in 1771:

“Let us remember that “if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom!” It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers in the event!”

We refuse to suffer tamely these assaults upon our Liberty and to succeed we must remain encouraged. Interestingly enough, that word encouraged literally means “to infuse with courage.” The fellowship of like minds works to infuse the patriot in the home and the soldier on the field with a courage that cannot be maintained when isolated and alone. As proof of this principle, AFP tracks the activists who come to their training events. They found that activists who have bonded through the Right Online experience are three times as likely to take action locally.

We have to be a team, an army of activists with the focus of our founders had – putting Liberty First to secure its “Blessings for our posterity.” Mercy Otis Warren said,

“I have my fears. Yet, notwithstanding the complicated difficulties that rise before us, there is no receding…May nothing ever check that glorious spirit of freedom which inspires the patriot in the cabinet, and the hero in the field, with courage to maintain their righteous cause, and to endeavor to transmit the claim to posterity…”

We are building an army of patriots in the cabinet and heroes in the field. Anyone who has attended military basic training knows that the most important aspect of any military corps is the loyalty to your brother in arms. Let us not be discouraged or isolated. Let us learn from each other and build each other up in mind and spirit. We are in this foxhole together, if you become discouraged and retreat, I will be left to defend this hill alone. We need to spend just as much time “infusing each other with courage” as we do battling with the enemy.

In spite of our disappointments and frustrations, we must remain resolute. Let’s stay connected with one another, so that we can be infused with the courage to go forward each day. Let’s stand together a strong and formidable force in the name of Liberty, for the sake of our children.

Show Christmas

Memorial Day: A Patriot's Call

/in /by

As we remember our brothers and sisters who have sacrificed and continue to sacrifice so we can have Liberty, let us also remember that this ultimate sacrifice is not only worthy of our honor, but also of OUR daily sacrifice and devotion.

“It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us – that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion…” Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg

People are, by nature, fickle and short sighted. But it’s because of patriots who have been courageous and committed to a future beyond themselves, that our nation is one focused upon Liberty. It is now our duty to take up this mantle and secure “the blessings of Liberty for…our posterity”. But make no mistake; it will take a whole body of people to secure this Liberty. Not a whole nation, but a whole body which is “dedicated to the great task remaining before us” and which will “take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion”. We have that obligation to “ages and millions yet unborn.”

We can fulfill this obligation, because we are not alone in our struggle to maintain the Liberty that so many have died for. In the words of Patrick Henry, “(we are) Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of Liberty (and) we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us…The battle…is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave.” WE are the “vigilant, the active, the brave” and it is time that we embrace the truth, honor our heritage, and fulfill our destiny. America is indeed exceptional, and we are still capable of exceptional bravery and commitment.

I recently had a conversation with my son, who is six and afraid of the dark. As we were getting ready for bed, I told him to turn off the light and get into bed. He said, “Mommy, I can’t, if I turn off the light it will be dark and I won’t be able to see to get back to my bed.” I explained that there is nothing between the light switch and the bed that would hurt him and that he just needed to do it. He protested for a short while and then did as he was told. I then praised him for being so brave and reassured him by pointing out that the room didn’t change simply because the lights were dim. With tears in his eyes he said, “Mommy I was not brave at all, I was scared.” What a wonderful teaching moment God had given me! I said with great pride and joy in my heart, “Honey, being brave doesn’t mean you aren’t scared. Being brave means that you do what has to be done even though you ARE scared. And you were very brave.”

We must be brave. There is much we must do.

In America’s first great struggle for Liberty, Mercy Otis Warren wrote to John Adams “I have my fears. Yet, notwithstanding the complicated difficulties that rise before us, there is no receding; and I should blush if in any instance the weak passions of my sex should damp the fortitude, the patriotism, and the manly resolution of yours. May nothing ever check that glorious spirit of freedom which inspires the patriot in the cabinet, and the hero in the field, with courage to maintain their righteous cause, and to endeavor to transmit the claim to posterity, even if they must seal the rich conveyance to their children with their own blood.” We must know as Patrick Henry said, that we need not be afraid, we will not fight our battles alone. But these battles for Liberty must be fought. And as Mercy, we must be resolute in the face of fear.

We must stand firm because we have the greatest birthright of any people. We live in the greatest nation on this planet. To whom much is given, much is required. We must deny our fears that convince us that we cannot survive without the comforts we enjoy. We must deny all fears that place anything above the Liberty that has been purchased for us. We must be resolved to make the same commitment to our children that our founders made for us.

“…though we are daily threatened with the depredations of Britain…yet each city…stands ready to sacrifice their devoted lives to preserve inviolate, and to convey to their children the inherent rights of men, conferred on all by the God of nature, and the privileges of Englishmen claimed by Americans from the sacred sanction of compacts.” Mercy Otis Warren December 29, 1774

This glorious gift of Liberty comes with a price. This price has been paid for us and is continually paid by those men and women who give all. It is time that we do more than just barbeque and wear patriotic gear. We must pick up this mantle and honor their sacrifice with our devotion to the cause of Liberty, so that our children will not have to fight a battle that should be fought by us. Just because the light of this nation has dimmed, and at times we feel we cannot see the way ahead, the path to maintain Liberty has not changed. We must stand active, vigilant, brave – for the Liberty of our children – with the passion of Lincoln’s promise…

“that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

May God continue to bless America a little while longer…

Executive Orders And The New American Sovyet

/in /by

May 17, 2012

Dear Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, et. al;

Our federal government is out of control.  It is not the role of the federal government to regulate the daily lives of the citizens.   It is not the role of the federal government to regulate domestic commerce.  It is not the role of the federal government to tell farmers what to grow, nor tell people what to eat.  It is not the role of the federal government to dictate the education of our children.  It is not the job of the federal government to trespass into state criminal investigations.

It is not the role of the federal government to control our rural or municipal affairs; yet, the President has now established federal councils for both rural affairs (Executive Order 13575—Establishment of the White House Rural Council June 9, 2011) and municipal affairs (Executive Order — Establishing a White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities May 1, 2012).  Russia called these councils the “sovyet” and they are the final building blocks to communism.  It is not the role of the Federal government to be the people’s nanny.

It’s not the role of the Federal government to spend this nation into oblivion.  Pardon me if I do not get excited about your current budget debate.  That drama has outlived itself, and I say let the government shut down for a while; we might buy a few more days of life for our Constitution.   I am also not impressed by your resolution on foreign affairs, encouraging “democracies” in foreign nations, while our republic is being actively destroyed by its own government.

It is your role, Congress, to stop the Executive encroachment into the Legislature and it is your duty to stop the Federal encroachment upon individual Liberty. Our founders took great care when creating a federal government that would be limited and always in submission to the states and the people.  WHEN is Congress going to take a real stand against the destruction of the rights and privileges of this people? Will you wait until it’s too late? Mere “outrage” doesn’t get the job done.  This Congress is pushing the nation to a point of turmoil it has not seen for 150 years.  And make no mistake; each and every one of you will be personally responsible for what will occur.  Are you prepared to live with that responsibility and those consequences?  It will not fall on the shoulders of the President alone and the blame game will not alleviate the suffering of our children when they are so grievously affected.  Yet, we can avoid repeating the mistakes of our history.  But we must act now. We must act decisively.  If not, we will regret our neglect.  We have the opportunity now, but have no guarantee it will be available much longer.

Does Congress truly understand WHY people fled communist nations to come to the greatest nation in the world?  Do you truly know the cost of such sacrifice and what you are supposed to be defending?  You are fooling yourselves if you think one more election is going to fix it.  You don’t have that kind of time.  The blocks are in place, and you have provided the mortar. Take a stand now.  Not a political stand, but a stand that involves integrity, courage, and resolve.  No more petitions asking the president to stop stealing legislative power.  No more demands that Eric Holder resign.  YOU must do your job and YOU must defend this nation and it’s Constitution from these enemies, both foreign and domestic.  You must:

  1. Put an end to the executive order madness.  Exercise your constitutionally given power, as provided through the checks and balances and separation of powers.  Show this nation that you understand that Legislative power is not to be shared and it is definitely NOT to be taken.
  2. We are not subjects of the United Nations and never intend to be.  Get them out of our business.
  3. If you are unwilling to impeach, defund any person appointed by the executive branch outside Congressional and Constitutional authority.  (i.e. all the Christmas appointments and Czars)
  4. Pick up your Congressional oversight responsibility and shut down these executive regulatory agencies whose only purpose is to “harass our people, and eat out their substance.”
  5. Get control of the immigration in this nation.  We don’t want to see GAO reports telling us that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the State Department cannot agree on the degree of terrorist association a visa applicant must have to render the applicant ineligible.
  6. It is time to indict Eric Holder for the criminal that he is. No more whining, no more demanding for resignations, INDICT him and then FIRE him.
  7. Impeach Elena Kagan.  She is obviously incapable of using the appropriate professional ethic and judgment needed to be a Supreme Court Justice.  Learn from this mistake and actually involve yourselves in the confirmation process.  Your employers are sick to death of political games.
  8. Repeal The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act.  Now. You are supposed to be protecting the rights of the people, not violating them.
  9. End the 4th amendment violations permitted in the Patriot Act.  Now.
  10. Repeal sections 1021 & 1022 of NDAA 2012. It’s not only about habeas corpus, it’s about
    1. unilateral power given to the president by congress to determine who is a terrorist and then detain them in secret with no probable cause;
    2. unilateral power given to the president by congress to invoke the laws of war during a “hostility”;
    3. unilateral power given to the president by congress to transfer the power under the laws of war to “domestic agencies fighting terrorists”
  11. Get the IRS out of the passport business.
  12. Don’t just read the Constitution, study it.  Not how you studied it in law school, that wasn’t the Constitution, that was Constitutional Law, there is a huge difference.  Those of you who went to Harvard, we understand if you don’t know what the Constitution is, it hasn’t been studied there in years.  May I suggest a course that I know will teach you the truth and is so simple a Congressman can understand it.  I happen to know the teacher personally and I am sure that she would come teach it at her own expense and sacrifice.

These are some of the demands of your employers; we demand you do your job. These are the requirements of our founders; they have entrusted us with the Liberty purchased with their lives. These are the duties imposed upon you by the Constitution of the United States, and your obligations consistent with the oaths you took.  And, these are the times that try men’s souls. How will history remember us? The generation that participated in death of Liberty or the generation that gave our last breath to prosper it? I have made my choice. How will you choose?

Sincerely,

KrisAnne Hall

www.KrisAnneHall.com

This Is Why I Teach, This Is Why I Fight!

/in /by

I have been traveling the country for the last two years, teaching people the true history of the founding of our nation. I do this because I believe two things: one, that God has placed a call on my life and two, those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat its mistakes.

Recently, I was able to spend two days with a room full of high school-aged, homeschooled students. It was amazing. The first day, we went through a practical exercise to teach both the difference between a democracy and a republic and the value of liberty as paramount to security. The second day I taught them the Roots of Liberty Seminar that I normally give to adults.

I was particularly nervous about the second day. How would I relate this history and these complex principles to people who have had few real life experiences with the economy, adult society, and political concerns or responsibility? I would be the one who would get a lesson that day.

I have been teaching for over two years the understanding the liberty is an inherent possession of man. I truly know that Liberty is a gift from God. But I more fully realized this as I spent two days with these young people. Because Liberty is inherent, teaching young people the value of Liberty was not as difficult as I had anticipated. I saw the evidence of that awakening in their spirits as I shed light in their minds on this great gift from God. The first day they were able toexperience that Liberty means something and to determine that they would no longer be so flippant with its care. They really learned and understood what most of the people in government will never know and understand; Liberty can never be traded for security, not ever. Many went home after the first night and were enthusiastically telling their fathers all about the day’s lessons. They were excited about what they had learned. They were excited that learning about history and government was so much fun. They were excited to know that they were going back to hear more the next day. I was as amazed as the parents were.

But the second day, through the lamp of history and the oracle of truth, they were able to understand why Liberty is worth so much. These young people were captivated by their history. For 5 hours, a room full of 30 or more high school students listened intently to the history and the foundation of their nation. They learned about the battles against tyranny by those who were beginning, like them, to understand that Liberty is their possession; it was provided to them by God, bought by their forefathers with a price. They also understood, by the end of the day, that it is their responsibility to maintain this possession and not allow tyrants to bully them into giving it away. They really got it. They really understood what 99% of our politicians don’t. They now know that our nation was built with a purpose; the purpose to secure the blessings of Liberty for our posterity, for ages and millions yet unborn.

By the end of the day, my soul was so uplifted by their enthusiasm and patriotism; I could have stormed the doors of tyranny all by myself with a dull butter knife. But then it hit me. I paused long enough to look into their eager eyes, and it threw me to my knees. I was suddenly overwhelmed with sadness for what we have done to them, what we have given away on their behalf. I stopped my teaching and told them that I had to apologize. I suddenly realized the mess that we left behind for them. I was weeping in front of a room full of teenagers now, and I could not stop myself. I looked into their eyes and realized, through our ignorance and our negligence we have condemned them to purchase back a gift that was given to us; a gift that we were supposed to secure for them, not require them to secure for themselves. I got angry for a minute, but that anger made me even more resolved. I told them,

“Don’t you dare use our negligence as an excuse. You go out and fight for what is rightfully yours. If the government tells you that you cannot speak, does that make you mute? If the government tells you that you cannot assemble, does that imprison you? If the government tells you that you cannot freely worship God, does that silence your soul?” To each question, with wide eyes, they responded “no.” I told them, “Then do not be silenced, do not be imprisoned, and let your soul cry out. Because I promise you, from this day forward, I will do everything I am both humanly and supernaturally able to do to take back ground for you. I will do everything I can to make sure that you have the Liberty that was purchased for you, that belongs to you, that you are entitled to have as a glorious gift from God. I promise!”

I took an oath when I joined the military to support and defend the Constitution. I took an oath when I was sworn in as an attorney in the state of Florida to support and defend the Constitution. I took the same oath when I was sworn in as an Assistant State Attorney for Florida. I know that these oaths NEVER expire. That day, with those future leaders of America, I took another oath, one that will never expire, one that I will fight to keep to my very dying breath. This is why I do what I do. This is why my family and I travel all over the country. This is why I teach. For Liberty. For America. For our children.

The "General Welfare" Clause, Justification for Obamacare?

/in /by

The federal government has assumed great responsibility to tax and provide for our citizens under the interpreted authority of the general welfare clause in the Constitution. Our Departments of Transportation, Education, Agriculture, and Interior are all justified by the general welfare clause. Most recently one of the main justifications of the Healthcare Act is that Congress has authority to create such a law because of the general welfare clause. But how Constitutional is this assumed authority? What would our founders say about this current view of federal power?

Since James Madison is called the Father of our Constitution, it makes sense that we would look to him for clarification on this point. Madison discussed this very issue in an argument he was making against subsidizing a cod fisherman in 1792.

“I, sir, have always conceived — I believe those who proposed the Constitution conceived — it is still more fully known, and more material to observe, that those who ratified the Constitution conceived — that this is not an indefinite government, deriving its powers from the general terms prefixed to the specified powers — but a limited government, tied down to the specified powers, which explain and define the general terms.” James Madison, On the Cod Fishery Bill, granting Bounties 1792

Madison was very simply explaining that the clause “common defense and general welfare” was not meant to expand the power of the government beyond its limitations, but to describe the purpose of the power delegated within strict confinement of those boundaries. How we have flipped this nation on its head! We have allowed our government to take the description of the purpose of its power and turn it into its very power. This aberration of our founder’s intent is not without consequence. We cannot have it both ways; it is either a limited government or one completely without limits.

It is clear that the framers purposefully and intentionally created a federal government that was to be limited in power and scope. Extremely limited.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. The [powers of the federal government] will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. Fed. 45

Simply speaking, if it is not war, peace, negotiations and foreign commerce, the federal government is not supposed to be involved in it. Period. And, further explanation will show, that they are not even supposed to have the power to tax and subsidize, unless it is attached to those four things. Madison knew such misinterpretations would unleash Pandora’s Box.

“There are consequences, sir, still more extensive, which, as they follow dearly from the doctrine combated, must either be admitted, or the doctrine must be given up.” James Madison, On the Cod Fishery Bill, granting Bounties 1792

Although our founders may not have known about all our great technological advancements and the needs of our modern day society, they knew that human nature remains the same. They did not have to know where we would end up, because they knew where they had come from.

“I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.” Patrick Henry St. John’s Church, Richmond, Virginia, March 23, 1775.

With astounding foresight Madison describes what an America, that ignores and distorts Constitutional meaning would look like.

“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their Own hands; they may a point teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare.” James Madison, On the Cod Fishery Bill, granting Bounties 1792

Madison and the framers knew that if the government would become more than they had intended, it would control the very lives of the people and we would be reduced to “tributary slaves.” The current use of the general welfare clause, outside of the intent of our founders, is unconstitutional and it will create slaves of freemen. It is irrelevant how any modern court has determined otherwise. If the courts have failed to follow the direction of the drafters of this contract, they have failed to follow fundamental principles of law and their decisions are void of authority. The truth is, night has fallen on the garden of America, and we have been betrayed by a kiss.

“And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves, and the House? Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss” Patrick Henry St. John’s Church, Richmond, Virginia, March 23, 1775.

However, all is not lost, the solutions to our current crisis lie within their warnings. We must, as Thomas Jefferson alluded, become attentive to the public affairs.

“If once [the people] become inattentive to the public affairs, you & I, & Congress & Assemblies, judges & governors shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions;” Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Edward Carrington Paris, Jan. 16, 1787

We must reengage ourselves, not simply as watchers and commentators, but as doers of the word as well. We must hold all accountable regardless of the sweetness of their “kiss.” We must be willing to sacrifice and restore a standard of excellence for our representatives. Too long we have said that the best candidate is the one that is simply better than the other guy. We must believe that the ONLY candidate is the one who will stand, with integrity, for the Constitution and the principles of Liberty for which our founders died for.

We must work to restore the limitations of government. The breach of these boundaries are the source of the corruption, as told by the warning, now prophecy, of John Adams in his inaugural address of 1797.

[If the government is]Negligent of its regulations, inattent[ive] to [the people’s] recommendations, … disobedience to its authority, … soon appeared with their melancholy consequences– universal languor, jealousies and rivalries of States, decline of navigation and commerce, discouragement of necessary manufactures, universal fall in the value of lands and their produce, contempt of public and private faith, loss of consideration and credit with foreign nations, and at length in discontents, animosities, combinations, partial conventions, and insurrection, threatening some great national calamity.

Until we force our current government to work within the boundaries set by our founders: war, peace, negotiations, and foreign commerce, we will suffer all of the corruption the Adams foresaw. We have to be an engaged citizen government that says the limitations are more than just recommendations, our recommendations are more than just rhetoric, and separation of powers must be viciously protected by all parties! This is the disease of our nation and we must cure the disease or it will be the death of Liberty.

The gentle kiss of a promise of peace and prosperity as provided by the all-powerful, all-knowing federal government has deceived us. We have allowed the powers of the federal government to expand far beyond what our founders intended, to the point that their warnings have become prophecy. We cannot allow this to continue. For the sake of our children, we must reign in this unconstitutional proclamation of power. We must once again hear the warnings of our founders and heed them, or suffer the inevitable consequences.

“Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.” Jefferson’s statement in Notes on the State of Virginia

“Were we directed from Washington when to sow, & when to reap, we should soon want bread.” Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography

“If we do not stand against tyranny today, our children will bow tomorrow!” Mercy Otis Warren

Senate Bill 1813: Power to Confiscate Your Proof of Citizenship

/in /by

What if you had to make a business trip overseas tomorrow only to find out that, even though the IRS does not issue your passport, the IRS has revoked your passport? This is a possible reality if Senate Bill 1813 passes through Congress.

SB 1813 is titled, Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Act of 2012. But, just like the NDAA, this bill has become a Trojan horse for an assault on the constitutionally protected rights of the people of this nation. Inserted deep within this bill, in section 40304, is a provision that gives the IRS the power to revoke your passport for a “seriously delinquent tax debt in an amount in excess of $50,000.” There appears to be no requirement for a judgment by a court; no conviction for fraud or evasion is required, only a “certification by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue”. This is a violation of your right to due process. There is also no provision for Congressional review or approval, therefore this removal of your passport is facilitated by an unelected official who is completely immune from political control of the people. This is a prime example of Legislation without representation. Sure the Senate and House must pass it, but after that the people’s representation is completely removed and a regulatory agency becomes the dictator of the common born rights of Americans.

What does the IRS have to do with your passport? How can non-payment of taxes be the impetus to remove your proof of citizenship or your right to freely travel? Doesn’t the removal of your passport practically affect the status of your citizenship? Are we now forced to believe that common rights of Americans, inherited from our Creator and the blood of our forefathers, are bought by our taxes? If this is true, we have been truly removed from the character of freemen to the state of tributary slaves.

For if our Trade may be taxed why not our Lands? Why not the Produce of our Lands & every thing [sic] we possess or make use of? This we apprehend annihilates our Charter Right to govern & tax ourselves– If Taxes are laid upon us in any shape without our having a legal Representation where they are laid, are we not reduced from the Character of free Subjects to the miserable State of tributary Slaves? [Samuel Adams, May 15, 1764, Boston Record Commissioners’ Report, vol. 16, pp. 120-122, emphasis added]

Consistent with recent legislation attacking our Constutionally protected rights, this section is infested with overbroad and vague language. What does “seriously delinquent tax debt” mean? The language seems to imply that it is limited to debts of $50,000, but is it really? Must a debt be “seriously delinquent” in time AND be at least $50,000 in debt? There is no official definition to make this limitation. How long before we see the limits of the term “seriously delinquent tax debt” further expanded? If the monetary threshold is $50,000, what does it take to accrue a debt of $50,000 to the IRS? I personally know of a man who owed $10,000 to the IRS through no fault of his own; he received bad advice from his bank. His debt remained unknown to him for 3 years until the IRS sent him a notice that his original $10,000 debt is now upwards of $25,000.00 with fines and penalties. This man is no millionaire, but a middle class retired blue collar worker. And if the IRS can establish that $50,000 is the price of your rights, how long before that price becomes $20,000 or $10,000?

When the IRS can take 3 years to notify someone of a debt, what happens when 3 years now equates to “seriously delinquent?” What if your livelihood requires this type of travel, does this not become a “debtor’s prison” law that will prevent you from paying back your debt? There are fundamentally no limitations to the level of tyranny to be inflicted by this arbitrary and capricious law.

In addition to the obvious constitutional violations of this law, I believe it is also an unconstitutional establishment of a Bill of Attainder. Bills of Attainder are unconstitutional by direct reference in the Constitution.

No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, shall be passed. [Article I, Section 9; Clause 3]

A bill of attainder is an act of the legislature declaring a person or group of person guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a judicial trial. This bill is a bill of attainder. There is no requirement of conviction of fraud or evasion, no requirement of judicial judgment of debt before these rights are taken away. It is completely reasonable to believe that someone’s proof of citizenship can be revoked by the IRS even in cases of disputed debt. Bills of attainder are considered to be not only a revocation of habeas corpus but also a violation of separation of powers. These allow the legislative body to circumvent the judicial system in determining a person or group of people guilty of a crime. THIS LAW is even worse. Not only is it a violation of separation of powers, but Congress is transferring their power to an executive branch regulatory agency! The legislature is stealing power from the judicial system and then handing that stolen power to the executive branch for unrestrained, arbitrary, and capricious enforcement.

I understand that “all experience hath shewn (sic) that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” [Declaration of Independence] But the blatant actions of our congress have become completely tyrannical in nature and, if I may borrow language from the English Bill of Rights, have become an attempt to overturn and completely destroy the laws and liberties of this country. Borrowing language from our Declaration of Independence; “A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.” When will we have suffered enough of the long train of abuses?

We must contact our Congressmen NOW! Tell them to vote against Senate Bill 1813, or we will consider them enemies of the Constitution. Our representatives must understand that we are a government of the people, by the people, for the people. If they do not, we will quickly become a government of elected officials, by Washington DC, for the good of the government.