*The Republic created under the United States Constitution has been dying for a very long time (1860). The ratification and repeal of prohibition was the last time the United States government observed the sovereignty of the States and the People under the Constitution. The freedoms that our federal government says we are defending abroad with our military only exist on paper with numerous restrictions here at home. We only get to enjoy what little freedom the federal government permits us to have. State laws in all matters, great and small, are subject to review, revision or nullification by federal authorities. When the federal courts are not telling us what we can or cannot do, some federal agency is. The accountable elected government uses the unelected and unaccountable functionaries of government to control us.
*In truth, we are not very free at all. Today the federal government does not answer to us, we answer to the federal government. We fear the federal government. The federal government does not fear us. We know that the federal government spies on us. The federal government can take our money and our property with impunity. It can even take our lives if we disagree too strongly or live too freely. Remember Wounded Knee, Kent State, Waco, Ruby Ridge and others. The blood of innocent Americans is on the hands of our vaunted federal government, the alleged constitutional defender of our personal freedoms and our general liberty. Told our federal government is good and that we must obey without question to be good citizens. The people need to be taught to think and know the truth about our Constitutional government. The federal government works for us, the people. Today the federal government serves only itself and favors special interests. It does not serve the greater human interests of Liberty, Peace and Prosperity. These should be the highest interests of Congress and the People within the States. This however is not the case. The destroyers of our mutual Liberty, Peace and Prosperity is in the corrupt United States Congress, the Federal courts, Federal regulatory agencies, Federal Reserve and the large banking cartel and so-call “green” corporations and companies in the military-industrial complex who President Eisenhower warned us about many years ago. All of them are willingly complicit in the democratic destruction of our mutual Liberty and Rights for the sake of wealth, looted from future generations in the form of our national debt today. Other destroyers of our mutual Liberty and Rights are also the great numbers of Fascists and Socialist/Progressive citizens who cheer for and vote for more of the same. Nullifying the ACA law, the NDAA or many other laws does give us back limited sovereignty.
*We will only be free and independent when states sovereignty and rights under the “Bill of Rights” of the U.S. Constitution are once again enforced. Any corrective political measure that lets the federal government remain in charge of our lives and the future of our children and their posterity is not Liberty. The federal government can still control us because it will still control our money, our economy, whether we are at war or not and most everything else in society through the vast number of federal programs, regulatory agencies and the military industrial complex. States rights and sovereignty is the only solution that works for all citizen patriots, regardless of political party, race, creed, national origin or sexual orientation. It is time to put the patriot citizens first. States sovereignty and rights can only be slavery to the federal government if we settle for anything less.
**What can you do? Join the social, political and economic fight for your Independence from Tyranny in OUR lifetime. We are The Republic Constituency…So Say We All…So Say We All…Strength & Honor
Founding Principles: What the Declaration of Independence Actually Declared by Jerome Huyler, PhD.
The 4th of July is coming. The year 2024, Americans will again gather on the public square not just to celebrate and recite, but to seriously reflect on the founders hallowed words. Millions today fear the nation is heading in the wrong direction, if not rushing head-long toward calamity. Sensing the urgent need for a dramatic “mid-course” correction, citizens should search for guidance in the doctrines that have served so many, so well, for so long.
Founding principles are fundamental. They allow us to reach the root of our difficulties rather than just deal in mere policy details. They make possible deep-seated, encompassing political reform. Unfortunately, no number of readings of the founding documents will furnish any satisfactory answers to the basic queries. Neither Jefferson’s Declaration nor the Framers’ Constitution sufficiently spells out the strict bounds of public power, the exact extent and limit of the law. The basic questions are these: What should government do for the governed? And what must the governed be expected to do for themselves? When can, when must, a people say to their political leaders this far, and no farther ? How limited must limited government be? When did the country first go off course? And how did we get from that day to this?
**Nothing so illustrates the point as the 2013 State of the Union Address. “What makes us exceptional,” Pres. Obama demanded, “is our allegiance to an idea articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.’ Precisely how is this abstract principle to be applied? It’s anybody’s guess. For, “when times change, so must we,” Why is that? Because “fidelity to our founding principles [will] require new responses to new challenges; because preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action?” Mr. Obama once pledged to effect a fundamental transformation of our political order. And so, in the Union he envisions the state would “harness new ideas and technology to remake our government . . . that is what will give real meaning to our creed.” Just how much change can a founding creed carry before it shatters into thousands of unmanageable policy pieces?”
Hearing the President, one might conclude that the Declaration of Independence says whatever anyone wants it to say. But, that isn’t so. Jefferson’s revolutionary manifesto clearly enunciates the precise limit of government’s “lawful” power. The needed guidance is there, but to grasp it fully one must learn to read between the lines. Etched into the revolutionary parchment, if only in invisible ink, is a grander, more comprehensive political vision. For, all other influences, notwithstanding, the patriots of the Revolution, the
Framers of the Constitution, the Federalists who supported, and the Anti-federalists who opposed its ratification, were all committed to a set of principles nowhere more fully enunciated than in the writings of John Locke. So, it can genuinely be said that Locke was present at the founding.
What kept Locke’s memory alive some 70 years after his passing? Writing during the turbulent years leading up to England’s Glorious Revolution, Locke spoke for the part of England that prized liberty and government of, by and for the people, and opposed the Stuart Monarchs who would rather rule by and for themselves. By 1760, a large part of that population had already settled in 13 far-off British colonies. And many believed their liberties were again in jeopardy. Locke’s Second Treatise of Government defended the idea of armed resistance against a state rife with corruption, just what the King’s colonial subjects were contemplating. Compare Locke’s language to Jefferson’s. Rebellion should not be started for “light and transient causes,” said Jefferson. For, as Locke explained, “Great mistakes in the ruling part, many wrong and inconvenient laws, and all the slips of human frailty, will be borne by the people.” But, here’s Jefferson, “when a long train of abuses and usurpations,’ and, Locke, “should a long train of abuses, prevarications and artifices” reveal, in Jefferson’s words, a design to reduce the people under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future security.”
But with what should the old guard be replaced? Here, too, Locke mentored the Americans. Locke imagined a time without government, a “state of nature.” But he really was describing “the state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit . . . without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man.” Why is that? Because of certain basic commitments Locke and Jefferson shared. The Declaration’s thus declares, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” For Locke, “there is nothing more evident than that creatures of the same species and rank, promiscuously born to all the same advantages of nature, and the use of the same faculties, should also be equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection”.
You see, “the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone, and reason which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent , no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.”. As men are created equal, so they are “endowed with certain“unalienable” rights. Locke designated these “Life, Liberty and Property.” Jefferson replaced property with “the Pursuit of Happiness.” All understood that happiness is not possible where there is no right to gain, keep, use, and dispose of material possessions.
What comes next is pivotal. For, Jefferson explains that it is “to secure these rights that government is instituted among men, deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed.” Consider all that this implies. Since the powers of government are derived from the consent of the governed, it behooves us to discern precisely what range of rights the governed possess, and so may cede to government. This means that no government may claim the power to do what the citizens did not have the right to do, in the first place. So just which of man’s rights will men willingly confer on their political institutions?
The answer will be found in exposing one additional right Locke finds in the natural make-up of man: the Right of self-defense . If men could not defend their persons and possessions from being violated, in the pre-political state of nature, in reality, they would have no rights, at all. Upon establishing civil government, then, individuals do not surrender their fundamental rights. It is to better protect their lives, liberties and possessions that they grant government the right to rule over them. The original right of self-defense is transformed into government’s power to defend all the rights of every single citizen. Citizens pledge not to take the law into their own hands, not to become vigilantes, but to rely on the rule of law and the institutions of government to prevent or justly punish any assault on men’s liberties from all threats foreign and domestic. For its part, government erects effective military, intelligence, police, judicial and correctional institutions to assure individuals the enjoyment of what is already theirs. And that it is all political leadership is authorized to do. Locke, himself, was plain as daylight on the point.
For nobody can transfer to another more power than he has in himself; and no Body has an absolute Arbitrary Power…over any other, to…take away the Life or Property of another….and having in the State of Nature no Arbitrary Power over the Life, Liberty or Possessions of another, but only so much as the Law of Nature gives him to the preservation of himself;…this is all he doth, or can give up to the Commonwealth…so that the Legislative can have no more than this.
No one had the right to restrain another from doing as he or she pleased or to abscond with what another earned by the sweat of his brow. Having no such right, in the state of nature, no number of organized special interests or humanitarian pleaders can affect such a transfer. Government was designed to serve as a Protector. The moment it begins acting not to protect (the interests of all), but rather to assist (some, and always at the expense of others), government transforms itself from Protector to Provider . And what it provides, might as well be called welfare (whether offered to rich or poor, young or old, healthy or sick, family farmer or “fat-cat” financier).
The Social/Corporate welfare complex and the Lockean/Jeffersonian conception of ordered liberty/ laissez faire form two mutually exclusive social visions. From the founders’ perspective, the wide range of social services, business subsidies and sundry other privileges doled out over the past two centuries constitute no lawful exercise of political power. (The Obamacare mandate, compelling every American to purchase a health insurance policy deemed “acceptable” by Washington hardly counts as the first “unprecedented” assault on individual liberty suffered by the people.)
To champion the nation’s founding principles is to commit to a downsizing of government the likes of which can barely be imagined, in today’s climate . Who in America is prepared to handle the whole truth and nothing but . . . or commit to so radical a cause?
Who on talk radio would dare hint of mounting a righteous crusade of abolition against the welfare principle, as such? Which Tea Party candidate will run for office pledging to slash his constituents’ benefits and put the civil servants in his district or state out to pasture?
It’s an open question whether any lesser course will spare the nation the calamitous consequences that eventually catch up to ill-begotten causes. But this little exercise allows the July 4th revelers to more clearly appreciate: (1) just when the country first veered off the founding course; and (2) how she got from that day to this.
By Locke’s reckoning, the fateful shift came with the second bill signed into law by the nation’s first President. The Tariff Act of 1789, in addition to raising revenue, something certainly sanctioned by the Constitution, authorized Congress to “encourage domestic manufactures.” It could impose a “protective” tariff, raising the price of goods coming from Europe, inviting retaliatory measures and curtailing the trans-Atlantic trade, but not without raising consumer prices for farmers and planters and depriving all those who made their living in the seafaring trades of their livelihood. How did the country get from that day to this?
Consider this principle: Once a nation decides that some of its citizens have a right not to go out and get, but to sit still and be given, it finds itself torn by two questions: Just who should be given and exactly how much should they get? There’s only one answer: Politics. As the demands for benefits and privileges grow, so must the supply. There’s no limit to what citizens, in the crucible of time, may consider themselves “entitled” to. After that, it’s politics all the way down.
**We the citizens of these United States of America have very little time to change the course of this great nation. We can all still remain free of oppression from a quasi- Socialist/Fascist and corrupt Federal Government and Religious Theocracy if we fight for our fundamental rights of humanity under the Constitution of the United States. We must eliminate our Enemies of the People and corrupt political elitist. These tyrannical autocrats will be the end of us if we do not stop them. To use an old Cold War term, we are one minute before midnight.
*CITIZENS, YOUR FREEDOMS AND WAY OF LIFE DEPENDS ON IT*
**Declaration of Restoration…. of the Republic of these United States of America, March 15th 2006
*When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the restoration of the Republic…
*We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That when ever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
*But when a long train of abuses and usurpation, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these States; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to restore their former Systems of Government. The history of the present Congress and Federal Bureaucracy is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.
*In every stage of these Oppression’s, We have petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Congress and the Federal Bureaucracy whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant is unfit to be the leader of a free people.
*We, therefore, the Republic Constituency of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these States, solemnly publish and declare, That these United States are, and of Right ought to be Free and Sovereign States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the current Federal Government, and that all political connection between them and the State of Federal Government, is and ought to be totally resolved; and that as Free and Sovereign States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Sovereign States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
*Almost 250 years ago…Conflict and Revolution 1775… April 19, 1775 about 70 armed Massachusetts militiamen stand face to face on Lexington Green with the British advance guard. An unordered “shot heard around the world” begins the American Revolution.
**Our founding Fathers gave us the Constitution of United States of America in 1789 to be free of oppression from government.
The Preamble: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
**The Bill of Rightsin 1791
*Amendment I… Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
*Amendment II… A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
*Amendment III… No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
*Amendment IV… The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
*Amendment V… No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
*Amendment VI… In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
*Amendment VII… In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
*Amendment VIII… Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
*Amendment IX… The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
*Amendment X… The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
**NEW LAWS NEED TO BE PASSED TO SAVE OUR NATION FROM THE QUASI-SOCIALISTS/FASCISTS POLITICAL ELITIST AND AUTOCRATS WHO ARE “THE ENEMIES OF THE STATE”. THIS IS A WARNING TO ALL. THERE WILL BE AN AMERICAN REVOLUTION III IF THESE LAWS ARE NOT ENACTED!
**Option I for Federal Income/Revenue Tax: The Congress shall pass a flat tax to be limited to 2% per year on ALL INCOME for everyone who has wages, salaries, investments gains, (cash) inheritance and lottery-casino above $50,000. A business of any type shall have a flat tax of 2% on gross revenue and paid quarterly. There is “ONE” exemption on a business and that is the workforce wages/salaries. *Executives pay is not exempt*. Social Security payments can not be taxed by the Federal and States government. This Law shall be in effect for 100 years. A Failure to pay your “fair share” after third offense, there will be a sanction order issued. A vote of 100% of both houses of Congress shall be needed to amend this Law.
**Option II for Federal Income/Revenue Tax: Federal sales tax of 2%. Taxable items in tax codes of the year 2000 would be used. This law shall be in effect (no exceptions) for 100 years. A Failure to pay this tax after third offense, there will be a sanction order issued. A vote of 100% of both houses of Congress shall be needed to amend this Law.
**FREEDOM IS NOT FREE! EVERYONE MUST CONTRIBUTE!
**A new law that any elected member of the U.S. Congress or States Govt. must resign two years from said office before running for the office of the U.S. President and Vice President. Must be passed by November 2024. Failing to do so, there will be a sanction order issued.
**The U.S. Congress shall pass a balance budget spending law of 18% of GDP. There shall be a 35% reduction in ALL Federal Government spending. Any person opposing shall be charged as an Enemy of the State and there will be a sanction order issued. This law shall stand for 100 years and only then can be changed by a vote of 100% of Congress for a change.
**A new Social Security card is to be issued. It is already a “National ID Card”. It needs to be bio-metric (fingerprints) and photo. It must be a tamper proof laminated card. Any person born in the U.S. after 1986 must provide proof that their parents were United States Citizens for seven years when they were born to receive a new Social Security card. A $20 registration/card fee will be imposed to cover some of the cost on everyone. Starting at the age of 16 it must be renewed on your birthday every 10 years for new card ($20 card fee) until you reach the retirement age of 66 and after 66 years of age if you remain employed. The E-Verify Law shall be enforced 100% on all companies. Violation of the E-Verify Law there will be fine of $2,500 per employee and 5% of all gross revenue for (1) year. Failure to pay in 30 days will result in business closure. Any person found with a false Social Security card shall be charged as an Enemy of the State and there will be a sanction order issued. This law shall be in effect for 100 years. A vote of 100% of Congress shall be needed to amend this law.
**The U.S. Congress shall pass a law that all individuals (starting at 16 years of age) can set up a new Social Security Roth IRA Investment Fund for persons 55 years old & under for their retirement account with a $6800 a year limit. Those who pay into the old plan at 56 (+) years old there is a $8,000 a year limit contribution. Everyone pays into the Social Security Plans (old & new) until the age of 66. NO Exceptions! This law shall be in effect for 100 years. A vote of 100% of Congress shall be needed to amend this law.
**This Law applies to Everyone with no more city, county, state, federal government, union and a company retirement accounts. At the retirement age of 66 years old you will receive full benefits. Exceptions on retirement at 64 yrs. of age you will receive 80% of your funds; at 66 yrs. of age you can not contribute any more money into your funds if you continue to work! The Government can not use any of these funds for any purpose. At the natural or accidental death of the individual account holder there is a 5% tax on said funds going to the Federal Govt (Medicare). All money in the account shall go to the spouse and children or from a will if no spouse or children. If there is no family or will, 95% of funds to the State (Medicaid) fund of residents and 5% to Federal Govt (Medicare) fund. This law shall be in effect for 100 years. A vote of 100% of Congress shall be needed to amend this law.
**The U.S. Representative Member and U.S. Senate member shall have a mandatory retirement age of 62 years old. A Representative and Senator can only hold his or her office after they turn 62 years of age if they are in there last year of the said term of office. Must be passed by November 2024. Failing to do so, there will be a sanction order issued. No Exceptions! This law can only be changed by a vote of 100% of Congress and after 100 years in effect.
**An exception to this new Investment Fund law would be the age requirements for those of the United States Law Enforcement agencies who can retire with 30 years of service and the U.S. Military/Coast Guard can retire with 28 years of service with full benefits. This law can only be changed by a vote of 100% of Congress and after 100 years in effect.
**The U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives shall receive no compensation upon leaving office. No other income shall be received while holding said office. All U.S. Senators and Representatives shall be ban from employment with any company, corporation or Lobbing Group with ties to the U.S. Federal government after leaving Congress. Failing to do so, there will be a sanction order issued. No Exceptions! These members of the U.S. Congress shall pay into the Social Security Investment Fund while serving there terms in office. Must be passed by November 2024. This law can only be changed by a vote of 100% of Congress and after 100 years in effect.
**The Federal judges, both Supreme and inferior courts, shall not hold there office pass the age of 68 years old and one term of eighteen years and shall receive for there services, a compensation of one year salary upon leaving office. The inferior court judges must submit to judicial review every sixth year in office by the Senate and be removed or confirmed for said office. There is a minimum of 35 years of age for inferior court judges and 45 years of age for Supreme Court judges. No other income shall be received while holding said office. Failing to do so, there will be a sanction order issued. No Exceptions! All the Federal judges shall pay into the Social Security Investment Fund while serving there term in office. This law can only be changed by a vote of 100% of Congress and after 100 years in effect.
**All Federal subsidies and grants of any kind shall be terminated by November 2024 and National minimum wage shall be set at $9.65 per hr on Jan.01.2025 and the states shall have domain over the minimum wage in said states which shall be no lower than $9.65 per hour. The will be no Federal minimum wage mandate after Jan.01.2025. These laws shall stand for 100 years and a vote of 100% of Congress to amend said laws.
**The President of the United States with the Vice-President shall receive no compensation upon leaving office. The President and Vice-President shall have a mandatory retirement age of 68 years old. The President and Vice President shall remain in office after 68 years of age if they are in the last year of the term of office. No other income shall be received while holding said office. Failing to do so, there will be a sanction order issued. No Exceptions! The President and Vice-President shall pay into the Social Security Investment Fund while serving there terms in office. Must be passed by November 2024. This law can only be changed by a vote of 100% of Congress and after 100 years in effect. The President of the United States with the Vice-President shall no longer receive Secret Services protection when out of office for four years.
**New U.S. Department of Government 1. Department of Federal Aviation: includes Airport Security Management… 2. Department of Maritime Administration: includes the U.S. Coast Guard… 3. Department of Customs & Border Protection Services…
**Repeal of Amendments and Laws The #16, #17, #23, #27 Amendments The Federal Reserve Banking Act of 1913 The HR 3162 Law
**New Amendments of the U.S. Constitution The term of the Representative Member shall be of four years each with a limit of three terms. The term of the Senator shall be of six years each with a limit of two terms.
*Authorization for Use of the United State Militia Forces*Public Law 101-1 Committee of Public Safety*COMMITTEE RESOLUTION*
*To authorize the use of the United States Militia Forces united against those responsible for attacks launched against any of these United States of America
*Where as, any acts of treacherous violence committed against any of these United States of America and its citizens; and…
*Where as, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States Militia Forces exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect those of the citizens of these United States of America both at home and abroad; and…
*Where as, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of these United States of America posed by these grave acts of violence; and…
*Where as, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of these United States of America; and…
*Where as, the alliance of the United States Militia Forces has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international and domestic terrorism against these United States of America: Now, therefore, be it… *Resolved by the Republic Constituency of the Alliance of the United States Militia Forces of the Committee of Public Safety assembled,
*SECTION 1: AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF THE UNITED STATES MILITIA FORCES. (a) IN GENERAL- That the alliance of United States Militia Forces is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons the Commander determines plan, authorize, commit, or aide in terrorist attacks that occur or harbor such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international and domestic terrorism against these United States of America by such nations, organizations or persons. (b) War Powers Resolution Requirements- (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution. (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution super cedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
Approved November 5, 2015 Alliance of the United States Militias Forces
**WHAT MUST NOT BE DONE
Let us begin with the negatives: what must not be done. The most obvious item in this category is that we must not turn to government for more of the same” cures” that have made us ill. We do not want more power granted to the Fed or the Treasury or the President, nor do we need another government agency. We probably don’t even need any new laws, with the possible exception of those legislative acts which repeal some of the old laws now on the books. Our goal is the reduction of government, not its expansion. We do not want to merely abolish the Fed and turn over its operation to the Treasury. That is a popular proposal among those who know there is a problem but who have not studied the history of central banking. It is a recurrent theme of the Populist movement and those advocating what they call Social Credit. Their argument is that the Federal Reserve is privately owned and is independent of political control. Only Congress is authorized to issue the nation’s money, not a group of private bankers. Let the Treasury issue paper money and bank credit, they say, and we can have all the money we need without having to pay one penny in interest to the bankers. It is an appealing argument, but it contains serious flaws. First, the concept that the Fed is privately owned is a legal fiction. The member banks hold stock, but it carries no voting weight. No matter how large the bank or how much capital is paid in, each bank has one vote. The stock cannot be sold or traded. Stockholders have none of the usual elements of control that come with ownership and, in fact, they are subservient to the central board.
2. The seven members of the Board of Governors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. It is true that the Fed is independent of direct political control, but it must never be forgotten that it was created by Congress and it can be extinguished by Congress. In truth, the Federal Reserve is neither an arm of government nor is it private. It is a hybrid. It is an association of the large commercial banks which has been granted special privileges by Congress. A more accurate description would be simply that it is a cartel protected by federal law. But the more important point is that it makes no difference whether the Fed is government or private. Even if it were entirely private, merely turning it over to the government would not alter its function. The same people undoubtedly would run it, and they would continue to create money for political purposes. The Bank of England is the granddaddy of central banks. It was privately owned at its inception but became an official arm of the British government in more recent times. It continues to operate as a central bank, and nothing of substance has changed. The central banks of all the other industrialized nations are direct arms of their respective governments. They are indistinguishable in function from the Federal Reserve. The technicalities of structure and ownership are not as important as function. Turning the Federal Reserve over to the Treasury without at the same time denuding it of its function as a central bank-that is, its ability to manipulate the money supply-would be a colossal waste of time. The proposal of having the Treasury issue the nation’s money is another question and has nothing to do with who owns the Fed. There is nothing wrong with the federal government issuing money so long as it abides by the Constitution and adheres to the principle of honesty. Both of these restraints forbid Congress from issuing paper money that is not 100% backed by gold or silver. If you are in doubt about the reasoning behind that statement, it would be a good idea to review chapter fifteen before continuing. It is true that, if Congress had the power to create as much money as it needs without the Federal Reserve System, interest would not have to be paid on the national debt. But the Fed holds only a small percentage of the debt. Over 90% of those bonds are held by individuals and institutions in the private sector. Terminating interest payments would not hurt those big, bad bankers nearly as much as It would the millions of people who would lose their insurance policies, investments, and retirement plans. The Social Credit scheme would wipe out the economy in one fell swoop. And we still would not have solved the deeper problem. The bankers would be cut out of the scam, but the politicians would remain. Congress would now be acting as its own central bank, the money supply would continue to expand, inflation would continue to roar, and the nation would continue to die. Besides, issuing money Without gold or silver backing violates the Constitution.
**Here is how it can be done:
1. Repeal the legal-tender laws. The federal government will continue accepting Federal Reserve Notes in the payment of taxes, but everyone else will be free to accept them, reject them or discount them as they wish. There is no need to force people to accept honest money. Only fiat money needs the threat of imprisonment to back it up. Private institutions should be free to innovate and to compete. If people want to use Green Stamps or Disney-ride coupons or Bank-of-America Notes as a medium of exchange, they should be free to do so. The only requirement should be faithful fulfillment of contract. If the Green-Stamp company says it will give a crystal lamp for seven books of stamps, then it should be compelled to do so. Disney should be required to accept the coupon in exactly the manner printed on the back. And, if Bank of America tells its depositors they can have their dollars back any time they want, it should be required to keep 100% backing (coins or Treasury Certificates) in its vault at all times. In the transition to new money, it is anticipated that the old Federal Reserve Notes will continue to be widely used.
2. Freeze the present supply of Federal Reserve Notes, except for what will be needed in step number eleven.
3. Define the “real” dollar in terms of precious-metal content, preferably what it was in the past: 371.25 grains of silver. It could be another weight of silver or even another metal, but the old silver dollar is a proven winner.
4. Establish gold as an auxiliary monetary reserve which can be substituted for silver, not at a fixed-price ratio, but at whatever ratio is set by the free market. Fixed ratios always become unfair over time as the prices of gold and silver drift relative to each other. Although gold may be substituted for silver at this ratio, it is only silver that is the foundation for the dollar.
5. Restore free coinage at the U.S. Mint and issue silver “dollars” as well as gold “pieces.” Both dollars and pieces will be defined by metal content, but only coins with silver content can be called dollars, half-dollars, quarter-dollars, or tenth-dollars (dimes). At first, these coins will be derived only from metal brought into the Mint by private parties. They must not be drawn from the Treasury’s supply which is reserved for use in step number six.
6. Payoff the national debt with Federal Reserve Notes created for that purpose. Creating money without backing is forbidden by the Constitution; however, when no one is forced by law to accept Federal Reserve Notes as legal tender, they will no longer be the official money of the United States. They will be merely a kind of government script which no one is required to accept. Their utility will be determined by their usefulness in payment of taxes and by the public’s anticipation of having them exchanged for real money at a later date. The creation of Federal Reserve Notes, with the understanding that they are not the official money of the United States, would therefore not be a violation of the Constitution. In any event, the deed is already done. The decision to redeem government bonds with Federal Reserve Notes is not ours. Congress decided that long ago, and the course was set at the instant those bonds were issued. We are merely playing out the hand. The money will be created for that purpose. Our only choice is when: now or later. If we allow the bonds to stand, the national debt will be repudiated by inflation. The value of the original dollars will gradually be reduced to zero while only the interest remains. Everyone’s purchasing power will be destroyed, and the nation will die. But if we want not to repudiate the national debt and decide to pay it off now, we will be released from the burden of interest payments and, at the same time, prepare the way for a sound monetary system.
7. Pledge the government’s hoard of gold and silver (except the military stockpile) to be used as backing for all the Federal Reserve Notes in circulation. The denationalization of these assets is long overdue. At various times in recent history, it was illegal for Americans to own gold, and their private holdings were confiscated. The amount which was taken should be returned to the private sector as a matter of principle. The rest of the gold supply also belongs to the people, because they paid for It through taxes and inflation. The government has no use for gold or silver except to support the money supply. The time has come to give it back to the people and use it for that purpose.
8. Determine the weight of all the gold and silver owned by the U.S. government and then calculate the total value of that supply in terms of real (silver) dollars.
9. Determine the number of all the Federal Reserve Notes in circulation and then calculate the real-dollar value of each one by dividing the value of the precious metals by the number of Notes.
10. Retire all Federal Reserve Notes from circulation by offering to exchange them for dollars at the calculated ratio. There will be enough gold or silver to redeem every Federal Reserve Note in circulation.
11. Convert all contracts based on Federal Reserve Notes to dollars using the same exchange ratio. That includes the contracts called mortgages and government bonds. In that way, monetary values expressed within debt obligations will be converted on the same basis and at the same time as currency.
12. Issue Silver Certificates. As the Treasury redeems Federal Reserve Notes for dollars, recipients will have the option of taking coins or Treasury Certificates which are 100% backed. These Certificates will become the new paper currency.
13. Abolish the Federal Reserve System. It would be possible to allow the System to continue as a check clearing-house so long as it did not function as a central bank. A check clearing-house will be needed, and the banks that presently own the Fed should be allowed to continue performing that service. However, they must no longer receive tax subsidies to operate, and competition must be allowed. However, the Federal Reserve System, as presently chartered by Congress, must be abolished.
14. Introduce free banking. Banks should be deregulated and, at the same time, cut loose from protection at taxpayers’ expense. No more bailouts. The FDIC and other government “insurance” agencies should be phased out, and their functions turned over to real insurance companies in the private sector. Banks should be required to keep 100% reserves for demand deposits, because that is a contractual obligation. All forms of time deposits should be presented to the public exactly as CDs are today. In other words, the depositor should be fully informed that his money is invested and he will have to wait a specified time before he can have it back. Competition will insure that those institutions that best serve their customers’ needs will prosper. Those that do not will fall by the wayside-without the need of an army of bank regulators.
15. Reduce the size and scope of government. No solution to our economic problems is possible under socialism. It is the author’s view that the government should be limited to the protection of life, liberty, and property-nothing more. That means the elimination of almost all of the socialist-oriented programs that now infest the federal bureaucracy. If we hope to retain-or perhaps to regain-our freedom, they simply have to go. To that end, the federal government should sell all assets not directly related to its primary function of protection; it should privately sub-contract as many of its services as possible; and it should greatly reduce and simplify its taxes.
16. Restore national independence. A similar restraint must be applied at the international level. We must reverse all programs leading to disarmament and economic interdependence. The most significant step in that direction will be to get us out of the UN and the UN out of the US, but that will be just the beginning.
17. There are hundreds of treaties and administrative agreements that must be rescinded. There may be a few that are constructive and mutually beneficial to us and other nations, but the great majority of them will have to go. That is not because we are isolationist. It is simply because we want to avoid being engulfed in global tyranny.
*Some will say that paying off the national debt with Federal Reserve Notes amounts to a repudiation of the debt. Not so. Accepting the old Notes for payment of taxes is not repudiation. Exchanging them for their appropriate share of the nation’s gold or silver is not repudiation. Converting them straight across to a sound money with little or no loss of purchasing power is not repudiation. The only thing that would be repudiated is the old monetary system, but that was designed to be repudiated. The monetary and political scientists who created and sustained the Federal Reserve System never intended to repay the national debt.
*It has been their ticket to profit and power. Inflation is repudiation on the installment plan. The present system is a political trick, an accounting gimmick. We are merely acknowledging what it is. We are simply refusing to pretend we don’t understand what they are doing to us. We are refusing to play the game any longer.
**AN EDUCATIONAL CRUSADE
*The best investment one can make at this time is to finance an educational crusade. Americans have allowed their nation to be stolen from right under their noses because they did not understand what was happening. There is no hope for the future as long as that condition remains. The starting point for any realistic plan for survival and beyond is the awakening of America. What does that entail? The power to reverse the present trend rests in the hands of only 535 people. There are 435 Representatives and 100 Senators. To control a majority, all we have to do is influence the election of 268 people. In reality, if we began to come even close to that figure, we likely would see a wave of sudden political conversions among those who remain in office. It is possible that we could achieve our goal by influencing the election in only 100 Congressional districts! By using the political freedom that yet remains in our system, we can overthrow the government of the United States every two years without firing a shot! But we had better get going on it. Time is running out!
“There is a whole lot of people who are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights.“
I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone — not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc. but the world is full of dummies, and probably always will be.
III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are among the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.
V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we’re just not interested in public health care.
VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people.If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don’t be surprised if the rest of us want to see you get the blue juice.
VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don’t be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won’t have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful
IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
X: This is an English speaking country. We don’t care where you came from, English is our language. Learn it
XI: You do not have the right to change our country’s history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, sorry if you are uncomfortable with it.
*If you agree, share this with a friend. No, you don’t have to, and nothing tragic will befall you if you don’t. I just think it’s about time common sense is allowed to flourish. Sensible people of the United States must speak out because if you do not, who will?
DO WE HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO SAVE THIS REPUBLIC?
**These Laws, If not pass by NOV.5th. 2024, GAME OVER!
“When you make peaceful protest impossible, you make violent revolution inevitable.” John Fitzgerald Kennedy
*REMEMBER, REMEMBER THE 5th OF NOVEMBER* “SO SAY WE ALL, SO SAY WE ALL”
Trashing the Constitution, Subverting the Intent
by Edwin Vieira, Jr., ESQ.
My topic is the monetary powers and disabilities of our Constitution; what the government may do, and what it may not do with respect to coinage, currency, credit, and banking. Now these, to put it bluntly, are not common knowledge. They’re not common knowledge among lay people, and they’re not common knowledge among lawyers. Indeed, in my experience, very few people can talk intelligently about this subject.
You may ask, “So what? Isn’t this a matter that’s really best left to Congress, and the Treasury, and the Federal Reserve, and the Supreme Court, and so forth; the legal and political elite?” Well, I could give you a number of very important reasons why that is not the case, why this is a vitally important subject to you. I could talk about economic reasons, the fundamental one being that a free market functions most efficiently and most fairly when the market determines the quality and the quantity of money that’s being used. I could talk about political reasons: that throughout history we have seen again and again the instability, the turbulence, in fact the self destructive tendencies of political systems in which politicians and special-interest groups exercise the power to control or manipulate the purchasing power of money.
Today I could give you geo-strategic reasons, because one could easily work out a theory whereby Islamic Fundamentalists, if they understood what they were doing, could strike at the Great Satan by attacking the fragile foundations of our monetary and banking system. I’m not going to tell you about that, because I don’t want to give aid and comfort to the enemy. I shall touch only on the legal reasons why monetary powers and disabilities are of vital importance. I want to emphasize at the outset that this is not a matter of my opinion or my views. This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides. That is a matter of historical investigation and understanding from which objective results can be obtained.
I know its a little hard work, as Larry pointed out, to read Pieces of Eight. I had to be purer than Caesar’s wife. Everything has been documented. The reason I did that was to show people that everything can be documented. There is nothing in the book that comes from my pen. It comes from the pen of the Founding Fathers. It comes from the pen of the Supreme Court. It comes from the pen of the people that keep the Congressional records. This is all a historical matter. My reason for getting into this subject is that I’ve always viewed the legal perspective as being the most important aspect of the problem. Why? Because the legal framework in any society is going to have a controlling, a directive, at least an important influence on what happens economically.
A society that is based upon freedom of contract and private property is going to have a different set of economic outcomes than a society that is based on a Stalinesque model of central planning. The legal system has a tremendous effect on the economy. I’d like to make a point here. The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights. Did you know that? The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction. I give you the famous case Norton v. Shelby County, when they were thinking straight about these issues: 1886.
The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” And that applies to any governmental action outside of the Constitution.
Our present constitutional system, with respect to money and banking, is oxymoronic, because in fact, for a very long time, with respect to coinage, currency, credit, and banking, the political class and the judicial class have not conformed to the Constitution. In the grand scheme of things, there are legal consequences that follow from not adhering to constitutional powers and disabilities, especially constitutional disabilities.
What is the genius of, the condition sine qua non, for a free society? It’s limited government, right? A totalitarian society is one in which the government claims all power; there is no freedom that the government doesn’t allow. There’s always a certain interstitial amount of freedom even in totalitarian society. Remember 1984, Winston Smith? There was a little place in his apartment where he could hide from the tele-screen, right? And write his memoirs. So interstitially, even a totalitarian society can’t control everything; but it states, in principle, its right to do so. What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do.
Look at the First Amendment. Everyone’s familiar with the First Amendment. What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion. But how does it do that? I quote: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” et cetera. “Congress shall make no law;” that’s a statement of an absence of power. That’s a statement of a disability. The problem we’ve had in the monetary system is there has been an increasing misuse of Congress’ monetary powers, and an increasing disregard of Congress’ monetary disabilities; and not only in this particular field, of course, in many other fields. But what’s happened in the area of money and banking exemplifies, and in many instances, is the source of what’s happened in other areas. I can divide this degeneration essentially into two categories. One is the application of the so-called “theory of the Living Constitution.” The other is the over extension of Congressional powers, or the assertion of powers the Congress doesn’t have. Many people may be familiar with the “Living Constitution.” This is the idea that the meaning of the Constitution has to change with the times. The Founding Fathers lived in the horse-and-buggy era. We live in the spaceship era. Obviously, the Constitution has to somehow evolve intellectually to deal with those changes. In effect, this reduces the Constitution to whatever the politically powerful find it expedient to mean from time to time. You could call that “situation law.” I call it “Santa Fe law.” They railroad their ideas through, and they expect us to accept it on faith.
Let me give you an example, the key example in the monetary field. Basic question: “What is a dollar?” Interesting question: “What is a dollar?” That’s the unit of our currency. What is it? Well, if you ask most people, some of them would pull one out these things, a little Sacagawea coin. “This is a dollar.” Or more likely they would probably pull out one of these, a George Washington Federal Reserve Note, and say, “This is a dollar.” And if you asked that person, “Well, why is this thing a dollar?” he or she would probably say, “Well, it’s because Congress says so,” or “the Treasury says so,” or “the Federal Reserve System says so,” or “the Supreme Court says so”— begging the question of whether Congress, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, or the Supreme Court has the authority to say so. Is this simply a matter of raw power?
Let’s have a quick reality check. I have some learning aids here. Here’s a card that says, “One cow.” Is this a cow? Next step: here’s a card that says, “By order of Congress: one cow.” Is this a cow? You’re getting the picture, aren’t you? Here we go, the next step: “By order of the Federal Livestock Board: one cow.” And then the final absurdity: “By order of the Federal Livestock Board: one cow. This is legal tender for all debts public and private.” You don’t have to be a farmer to understand the meaning of this little demonstration. Let’s take it to another level. “One dollar.” Is it a dollar? “By order of Congress: one dollar.” “By order of the Federal Reserve Board: one dollar.” “By order of the Federal Reserve Board: one dollar. This is legal tender for all debts public and private.”
Do you follow this? This is kindergarten material. As the Gershwin’s told us in Porgy and Bess, “it isn’t necessarily so” simply because someone writes it on a piece of paper. Where do we look to find Congress’ powers and disabilities in this regard? Well, I guess you look in the Constitution. The Constitution actually mentions the word “dollar” in Article One, Section Nine, Clause One, and the famous slave tax provision that provided a tax or duty might be imposed on the importation of slaves, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.
Do you think that was important at the time? It was one of the provisions that were put in as part of the compromise between the Southern slave-owning states and the Northern states. If something like that hadn’t been put in, the Constitution probably would never have been ratified by all the original colonies. It’s also found in the Seventh Amendment, the word “dollars”: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”
Do you think that was important to those people at that time? Trial by jury was known in that era as the palladium of British liberty, going back to Magna Carta. Do you think those people knew what the word “dollar” meant? Do you think they thought it meant this? A Federal Reserve Note. It must have had an accepted meaning at that time. The proponents of the “Living Constitution” will say: “That time has passed, and now we have Congress, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, the Supreme Court, whatever, to make a new determination”—of course begging the question of whether the definition of the “dollar” can be changed. I want to give you what I think is a conclusive analogy on this point.
If you read the Constitution, you’ll find the word “year” used. For instance: “The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the United States.” “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the legislature, for six years.” If the meaning of “dollar” can be changed by Congress, why can’t the meaning of “year” be changed? The principle is exactly the same. Yet we all know that if the Congress passed a statute, and the Supreme Court upheld it, saying that for constitutional purposes the word “year” will no longer mean three hundred and sixty-five days, but seven hundred and thirty days, or fourteen hundred and sixty days, or some arbitrary number, they would he howled down in hoots of ridicule. No one in this country would accept that.
In fact, even we the people, amending the Constitution as we can do under Article Five, could not change the true definition of the word “year.” We could change the term of the Representative to something other than two years, the Senator to something other than six years; but we could not amend the Constitution to say that a “year” is something other than what it is. We cannot fly in the face of astronomical reality. Well, if it’s obvious for the word “year,” why isn’t it just as obvious for the word “dollar”? You all know what the word “year” means in its astronomical significance, and therefore you know what it means in its constitutional significance. And if you knew what the word “dollar” meant in its historical significance, you would know what it meant, or what it means, in its constitutional sense.
What did that word mean to the Founding Fathers? It certainly didn’t mean the Sacagawea dollar. It meant this: the Spanish milled dollar. And not just in the late 1700s. The Spanish milled dollar was made the unit or standard for all foreign silver coins in the American colonies in 1704 by Queen Anne (there was a Parliamentary statute in 1707). It was made the standard for the United States by the Continental Congress under the Articles of Confederation, before the Constitution was even written. So in fact the dollar preceded the writing of the Constitution. It preceded the ratification of the Constitution. It preceded the first Congress, the first President, the first Supreme Court, the Federal Reserve Board, and everything else. Do you think it might be independent of all those things, having preceded them?As a historical fact, the dollar is independent of the Constitution. The father of the dollar, in our system, was Thomas Jefferson. He was the one who proposed it to the Continental Congress. In the first government under the Constitution, Jefferson was Secretary of State, and Alexander Hamilton was Secretary of the Treasury. They didn’t agree on very much, if anything, except this: They both agreed on the monetary system.
The Federalists and the Anti-federalists were in complete agreement. And what did Congress and the Treasury do in 1792 with the first coinage act? They went out to determine what the value of this “dollar” was. How did they do that? They went to the marketplace. In what we would call statistical analysis, they collected a large sampling of Spanish milled dollars that were circulating, and they did a chemical analysis of them to determine on average how much silver they contained. This appears in the Coinage Act of 1792 where they wrote: “The Dollar or Unit shall be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current,” that is, running in the market, “to wit, three hundred and seventy-one and one-quarter grains of silver.” Now you know something that 99.999% of Americans do not know, and probably a higher percentage of lawyers.
The “dollar” is a silver coin containing three hundred and seventy-one and one-quarter grains of silver—and it cannot be changed by constitutional amendment, definitional, any more than the term “year” can. And yet, as I mentioned before, if you ask the average person what a dollar is, he’ll probably hold this thing up, a Federal Reserve Note .Is there something wrong here? Do we see some kind of cognitive dissonance when we have a problem with this? I should hope so. The second area in which the misuse of monetary powers and the disregard for monetary disabilities has corrupted the Constitution, as I said before, is the over extension of powers. I won’t go into these in great detail. If you look at the “Necessary and Proper” clause, which has been wildly expanded to give fantastic powers to Congress, what is the foundational case for that expansion? It’s usually cited to be McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819. What was that case about? It was about the Bank of the United States. It was a money case. If we go to the doctrine of “Emergency Powers,” which is having a great uplift today, for obvious reasons, what was the foundational case that put that doctrine on the constitutional map? It was Knox vs. Lee, the legal tender cases brought after the Civil War.
If we go to the doctrine of “Aggregate Powers,” the doctrine that says, “You can take a little here and a little there and kind of sum them all up, so that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts,” again we go back to the Knox case, a monetary case. What’s very interesting is to read a dissenting opinion by Justice Stephen Field, the only Justice on the Supreme Court who had the integrity to dissent in every legal tender case that he heard. He wrote a dissenting opinion in Dooley vs. Smith, in 1872. He wrote, “The arguments in favor of the constitutionality of legal tender paper currency tend directly to break down the barriers which separate a government of limited powers from a government resting in the unrestrained will of Congress. Those limitations must be preserved, or our government will inevitably drift from the system established by our Fathers into a vast, centralized, and consolidated government.”
You notice he was not talking specifically about the monetary powers. He wasn’t saying that these arguments would lead to the monetary powers being unrestrained. It was destroying the concept of limited government. “The arguments in favor of the constitutionality of legal tender paper currency tend directly to break down the barriers which separate a government of limited powers from a government resting in the unrestrained will of Congress.” How do you define, or how would you characterize, a government resting in the unrestrained will of Congress, or any other political body? It is by definition a totalitarian government.
The philosopher Richard Weaver, and I’m sure you’re familiar with this statement that he made, said, “Ideas have consequences.” He could have gone further than that. He could have said that bad ideas, once they are politicized, almost inevitably generate crises and catastrophes. If we look throughout American history, we will see that failures of various unconstitutional currency and banking situations, and we’ve had different ones over different periods, have inevitably led to crises and catastrophes. Pre-Civil War, we had a series of cycle collapses (they called them panics in those days), which were brought about by the unstable system of state banks and, to a certain extent, by the national banks that Congress created, the two Banks of the United States.
If you go into the Civil War, you have the crisis of massive inflation that was caused by the emission of the greenbacks, and then the tremendous political controversy over the continuation or the termination of paper money inflationism. Then we come to the Federal Reserve System. Some people here may know of the arguments that were made in favor of the Federal Reserve System. It would have an elastic currency. Through scientific management of the monetary system, depressions would be eliminated. There would be stability in the banking system.
What happened? The Federal Reserve System was there when the greatest banking collapse in American history occurred, in 1932-1933, and in what was called the Great Depression of the 1930s.In that period what happened? The Roosevelt New Deal. What were the powers they were screaming for? Emergency powers. You’ll find that written into many statutes, e.g., The Emergency Banking Act of 1933. You should pay attention to the title, The Emergency Banking Act of 1933, and the “Aggregate Powers” doctrine. It’s been all downhill since then. I will not say, and I doubt that anyone could say, or defend the idea, that if the constitutional monetary system had been strictly enforced throughout American history there would have been no economic crises, because we all know that economic crises are not caused solely by bad monetary and banking arrangements. But, as sure as I am standing here, I can say that if the Constitution had been observed during that period, there would have been none of the crises that did in fact occur. They would have been essentially impossible, bringing me back to the point I made earlier about the primacy of law.
How should that have been done? Well, Americans would have had to understand and enforce their Constitution. You notice I say Americans, not the Congress or the Supreme Court, because who is the final arbiter of this document? It is not Congress, and it is not the Supreme Court. It is “we the people.” Read the thing. How does it start? “We the people do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States”; not “we the politicians,” not “we the judges.” Those people are the agents of the people. We the people are the principals. The doctrine is very clear that, being the principals, we are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters and enforcers. You don’t have to take my word for it. Let’s go back to the Founding Fathers.
The Founding Fathers were profound students of law and political philosophy. Their mentor in that era was William Blackstone, who wrote Blackstone’s Commentaries, probably the most widely read legal treatise of its time, certainly here in the United States. What did Blackstone write about this subject? He wrote, “Whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself; there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.” We the people are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters. But we all know that no people leads itself. Every people, for whatever reason, needs leadership. I look out on you people here today.
You are representatives, or a cross-section, if you will, of this country’s elite. I don’t say that to be flattering. I don’t say that to be patronizing. In fact, I’m a messenger who, in a sense, is bringing you some bad news, because the American people out there have to depend on people like you in here, and others like you, for leadership. There’s a very simple reason for that. There’s no one else. Therefore, here’s the bad news: it ultimately is your responsibility to find out what your Constitution means with respect to monetary powers and disabilities, and then to do something about it, before history takes the opportunity out of your hands, and we all suffer the consequences. Thank you.
