STATE OF THE UNION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Ican writes


Intellectually I agree with you re the 'compassion' issue. But dependence on the government is like taking a very powerful drug. Sometimes you can't just stop taking the drug as to do so would be too much of a shock to the system. So you start cutting down the dosage over a reasonable time.

The thing our Congress has done though is to make some very good starts--i.e. welfare reforms the GOP freshmen idealists forced through in the mid 1990's--but then they failed to finish the job. We have to grit our teeth and weather the political storms when the growth of a program is slowed down--the opposition will always call that a 'cut'. And because all government programs have a life expectancy approximating that of a large granite mountain, we have to be stronger in weathering the outcries when those that have outlived their usefulness are eliminated. (The opposition always accuses the brave group of heartlessness and lack of compassion whenever that happens.)

The government needs to do a much better job of explaining WHY a program with a compassionate sounding title is not doing the job, is just wasting money, and needs to go. And the government needs to find the courage to tell the public what programs will be phased out so that people that are dependent on them can plan accordingly. You don't just eliminate certain subsidies, for instance, and thereby force thousands of farmers into bankruptcy. But if they know the subsidies are going to be reduced consistently over the next X number of years and will be eliminated by a date certain, they will arrange for other financing and/or sources of income. Compassion and practical concerns are not mutually exclusive.

Government also needs to use stuff until it wears out instead of buying new stuff every time there is a new office or new program. And it needs to invest in people charged with ruthless oversight of government waste and inefficiency who will report direct to Congress and the President and there reports be fully on the record. There are SQUARE MILES of warehouses full of stuff the government bought and either never used or used once and then warehoused for perpetuity. And, without sacrificing quality when quality is important, the government should shop for the best price for anything just like everybody else does.

When you have huges amounts of cash in your pocket, impulse purchases or overtipping or inattention to price comparison is far more likely than when one is down to his/her last $10. I think even the fixed programs like defense, etc. could be significantly pared back without losing a single necessary function if the government just didn't just spend money because they can.

As for education being the ultimate key, of course it is, on many levels. I can find nothing to commend for the Federal government's's involvement in education. I could see the possibility of tax incentives or something like that to encourage private foundations to provide grant monies for preschool, kindergarten, etc. in depressed areas, but education was much more efficiently and effectively done at the state and local levels before the one-size-fits-all approach that the Federal government always has to take.

Your post reminded me of this:



Some argue that Tyler was not the actual author. I couldn't care less who the author actually is. Regardless, it's wisdom that ought not be ignored.

I post this because I think our USA is well along the road to collapse, and the only thing that will change that, if anything can change it now, is a ruthless scrutiny of federal programs to determine which must be shut down now. After these first are shutdown, then we can turn our attention to the rest.

As I have already indicated, my candidate for first shutdown is Federal Aid to Education. The second is legislating federal judges. Then the states must establish voucher systems for competive systems for educating the public.

More on this later.

Well it is a very true maxim that the one who robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.

I'll be back later too.

SHUTDOWN ASAP
(1) Federal Aid to Education.
(2) Legislating federal judges.
(3) McCain-Feingold campaign finance (the incumbent protection act)
(4) Direct tax funding of school districts at the state and local level.
(5) Current federal collective bargaining provisions that permit unions to collectively bargain for all the employees in a shop merely by winning a majority of only those shop employees who vote.

START UP ASAP
(1) Direct tax funding of students via vouchers at the state and local level to create competition in the education of the public.
(2) Every two years require unions to receive at least one vote more than half the number of employees in any shop in order to start or continue collectively bargaining for those employees.


Perhaps you have heard about the Florida Supreme Court's ruling against selective voucher systems in Florida. OK, let's provide vouchers at the state and local levels for all students.

Perhaps you have heard about a Florida teacher's lecture against competition. Among other things she said it was bad for everyone.

Clearly, local school boards and districts have to re-start managing the content of their curriculums.

I served five years on a school board in a unionized central school district in NY state. Two of those years, I was president. Of the 13 things, I tried to get done, only three got done:
--elimination of annual automatic raises for teachers who were rated unsatisfactory;
--cancellation of the plan to eliminate the honors program;
--cancellation of the plan to build a new junior high school to reduce average junior high class sizes in the district from 23 to 15.

Here are three examples of the ten things I failed to accomplish on the school board:
---expand the honors program to include those students whose parents requested they be enrolled in it and who annually met the performance requirements of the honors program (Note: at that time, the honors program was almost as good as my wife's and my public school educations (we know that because all three of our kids were in that honors program).
---publish a school district summary of annual student progress (e.g., grade level progress, Iowa test of basic skills, Iowa Competency Test).
---award teachers an annual merit bonus related to how many of their students met or exceeded annual requirements.

The union was successful in getting the teacher vote out to make sure I wasn't re-elected to a 2nd term.

So I decided to learn to fly instead.

Ican writes




IMO, finding some way to disband the teacher's unions, or at least defang them to some extent, would be a great start to any major overhaul of the nation's education system. I and three other 'reformers' ran for the school board in my former haunts in Kansas If we had been successful, we would have tilted the balance of power to allow getting rid of incompetent teachers, to recruit teachers who could teach advanced math and science and inspire kids to tackle it, and elimination of 'bird courses' designed to produce sufficient grade point to let kids graduate even though they were functionally illiterate. The union rallied behind the pro-union, status quo incumbants to ensure that not a single one of the reformers were elected.

So, not having served on the school board, I had to forego the flying lessons.

I am 100% in favor of an across-the-board voucher program giving parents a better chance at sending their kids to the best schools. I think creating such competition between the schools cannot help but improve education overall in the larger communities. Vouchers wouldn't help much in smaller communities where choices are more limited or there is no choice at all, but I am confident the people would demand that their local public schools maintain parity with the city schools so that the kids could compete for college scholarships, etc. (Something along a rising tide lifts all boats theory.)

To those who say there aren't enough private and parochial schools for all the kids to choose, I say when there is a large pool of consumer money available, somebody will always create a product that will reel it in.

To those who say that would close down the public schools, I say that if they can't educate the kids as well as the private sector can, then so be it. However, I think the instinct to 'preserve one's source of livelihood' might inspire superintendents, principals, and teachers to rethink what they are doing and meet the demand. A lower income family, voucher in hand, having the option to pony up additional money for private school tuition or send their kid to a comparable excellent public school and pay nothing additional, is likely to choose the public school.

The key is to expect excellence. Americans have traditionally managed to accomplish what was expected.

Foxfyre, we agree so much on what needs to be done to keep our USA from being flushed down the toilet, I'm tempted to move on to the next phase of our discussion: how can we get done what needs to be done?

You are probably aware of The National Right to Work Legal Foundation, and the Milton & Rose D. Friedman Foundation. Do you have any information on how effective these foundations are in making progress toward their objectives of, respectively, limiting compulsive unionism, and expanding educational choice?

I suspect they are accomplishing little more than consciousness raising among those who are already concerned, Ican, though they are doing some useful research that we may be able to use to advantage. Nothing that is very constructive will happen until we rein in our elected officials in Washington and convince them their jobs are contingent upon them doing their jobs.

Foxfyre, do you or any others you know have any ideas on how we might accomplish that reining in?

Well going back to earlier comments cited from Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams:

Sowell suggests that we pay our elected legislators $1 million a year and expect them to live on that. It would have the dual effect of attracting a better class of candidate to run for elected office and would allow us to eliminate a lot of the perks that become entitlements for legislators.

Williams wants to go back to the roots of the constitution in which no favors and no charity is provided by government. Whatever you do for one, you have to do for all. A tax break for one must be offered to all. A subsidy for one must be offered to all. This would have the dual effect of eliminating many costly largesse programs and would virtually shut down the lobbyists by making it nearly impossible to acquiesce to their wishes.

It is of course too simplistic a solution without a lot of other considerations, but the principle is solidly inferred here..

Both initiatives would have to be seriously pushed by the electorate and that's going to take a lot of talking, persuading, convincing, etc. We really do need somebody like Ross Perot (who isn't Perot) to sell it.

Clearly, Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams know what they are talking about.



If we could find for both Sowell and Williams an executive competent enough to earn their support and warrant their advice, and run an effective and winning gubernatorial election campaign in any high population state, then we would have a good beginning. Subsequently, that executive would then have to be capable of maintaining Sowell's and Williams' support and continuing to warrant their advice, and run an effective and winning presidential election campaign that includes the election of like-minded members of Congress.

Supreme Court justices Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito are a good start toward rectification of the Judicial system, but we need at least one more like them.

But more good efforts are required.

An example of another good effort!

DRAFT

III. Failure to obey the rule of law will encourage the birth of one or more factions that will seek their ends by use of deceit and/or force. Failure to obey the rule of law by us in order to maintain the comforts of some at the expense of others of us is never worth the damage it shall certainly do to our posterity.

The use of deceit and/or force breeds the use of deceit and/or force. Eventually a faction shall rise for the purpose of removing from government all those in government who disobey the rule of law with respect to rights of property and/or to the rights of innocent vocations. Another faction shall arise to practice pernicious envy (i.e., the striving to reduce what others have). Still another faction shall arise to practice pernicious jealousy (i.e., the striving to transfer what others have to themselves).

Each of these factions shall be corrupted by any increase in their power over the other factions. That corruption shall lead them to escalate their use of deceit and/or force until they finally shall deny those who oppose them their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Of course such events shall lead to the cessation of our republic in the same manner as the cessation of republics that have preceded ours.


THE OPINION OF EXPERT WITNESSES IN SUPPORT OF THE NECESSITY FOR TERMINATING OUR GOVERNMENT’S PERPETRATION OF THE SPECIFIED HIGH CRIMES

I. Alexander Tyler writing about the viability of democracy, in “The Cycle of Democracy”, 1778:

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship.”

II. Alexander Hamilton supporting the adoption of OCALA, in “Federalist Paper No. 1”, 1788:

“It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force. If there be any truth in the remark, the crisis at which we are arrived may with propriety be regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made; and a wrong election of the part we shall act may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind.”

III. John Jay supporting the adoption of OCALA, in “Federalist Paper No. 5”, 1788:

“Distrust naturally creates distrust, and by nothing is good-will and kind conduct more speedily changed than by invidious jealousies and uncandid imputations, whether expressed or implied.”

IV. James Madison supporting the adoption of OCALA, in “Federalist Paper No. 10”, 1788:

"The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source.

A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.

In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists."

V. Alexander Hamilton supporting the adoption of OCALA, in “Federalist Paper No. 85”, 1788:

“The additional securities to republican government, to liberty and to property, to be derived from the adoption of the plan under consideration, consist chiefly in the restraints which the preservation of the Union will impose on local factions and insurrections, and on the ambition of powerful individuals in single States, who may acquire credit and influence enough, from leaders and favorites, to become the despots of the people; … and in the precautions against the repetition of those practices on the part of the State governments which have undermined the foundations of property and credit, have planted mutual distrust in the breasts of all classes of citizens, and have occasioned an almost universal prostration of morals.”

VI. Thomas Paine writing about the rights of posterity, in “The Rights of Man”, 1791-2:

“The illuminating and divine principle of the equal rights of man, (for it has its origin from the Maker of man) relates not only to living individuals, but to generations of men succeeding each other. Every generation is equal in rights to the generations which preceded it, by the same rule that every individual is born equal in rights with his contemporary.”

“Government has no right to make itself a party in any debate respecting the principles or modes of forming, or changing, constitutions. It is not for the benefit of those who exercise the powers of government, that constitutions, and the governments issuing from them, are established. In all those matters, the rights of judging and acting are in those who pay, and not in those who receive.”

VII. Thomas Paine writing about the proper origin of a constitution, in “Letter Addressed to the Addressers of the Late Proclamation”, 1792:

“A Constitution is a thing antecedent to a government; it is the act of a people creating a government and giving it powers, and defining the limits and exercise of the powers so given.”


REPUDIATION OF THOSE INTERPRETATIONS OF OCALA THAT VARY WITH CIRCUMSTANCE

I. It has been argued and accepted by the Supreme Court of the United States of America, that the Supreme Court is delegated by OCALA the power to interpret OCALA in the time variable context of contemporary events, and NOT in the context of its own creation, and NOT in the context of the Declaration of Independence which declared the principles, beliefs and causes for the establishment of our republic and OCALA, itself, as reiterated in the preamble of OCALA. However, no where in OCALA is the Supreme Court of the United States of America delegated such power. Therefore the exercise of such power by the Supreme Court is thereby an usurpation of such power, it is thereby a violation of the law, and it thereby constitutes a criminal act.

II. The judges in the United States of America are expressly denied the power to exceed the bounds of the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND as written, regardless of whether one can find in OCALA, or in any laws of any State, that which can be interpreted or can be construed to permit otherwise.

III. Furthermore, interpretation of OCALA in the context of contemporary events DOES itself constitute amendment of OCALA in a manner other than that specified in Article V of OCALA. For that reason also, interpretation of OCALA by the Supreme Court in the context of contemporary events constitutes an usurpation of such power, it is thereby a violation of the law, and it thereby constitutes a criminal act.

QUOTATIONS, WITH OUR INTERPRETATIONS, FROM ODOI AND OCALA THAT CONSTITUTE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT DELEGATED THE POWER TO CHANGE THE INTERPRETATION OF OCALA, TRANSFER PROPERTY BETWEEN PEOPLE, OR TO TAX A GIVEN OBJECT DIFFERENTLY DEPENDING ON ITS HISTORY AND CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES

ORIGINAL QUOTATIONS FROM ODOI REGARDING OUR RIGHTS

1. (The Declaration of Independence, Adopted in Congress 4 July 1776, The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America) 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.

2. (ODOI) That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

3. (ODOI) That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute 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.

----OUR INTERPRETATIONS

1. We individually, acting in our own perceived individual self-interest, do mutually and equally endow all innocent people with certain unalienable rights, that among these are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

2. In order to secure these our rights, we established the government of the United States of America that derives its just powers from the consent of we the governed.

3. In the event our government obstructs our achievement of these ends, it is our right and duty to ourselves and our posterity to alter or to abolish our government, and to institute altered or new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing the powers we choose to delegate it in such form, as to us shall seem most likely to effect our mutual safety and happiness. These are not the powers we have delegated to our government; these are the powers that are ours by right of our having been born.

ORIGINAL QUOTATION FROM THE PREAMBLE TO OCALA
4. (The Constitution of the United States of America, Effective as of March 4, 1789) 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.



----OUR INTERPRETATION

4. We the people of the United States of America did adopt OCALA for the United States of America. We adopted OCALA in order to ordain and establish a government whose powers shall be limited to those specified by OCALA and shall be applied for the express purpose of securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity. OCALA accomplishes this purpose by establishing justice and the rule of law, by insuring domestic tranquility, by providing for the common defense, and thereby promoting the general welfare.


ORIGINAL QUOTATION FROM OCALA DELEGATING SPECIFIC POWERS TO CONGRESS

5. (OCALA, Article I., Section 8.) The Congress shall have power
to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

----OUR INTERPRETATION

5. The Congress shall have the power: TO do those things expressly stipulated in Article I., Section 8. of OCALA.

The following powers have NOT been expressly stipulated in Article I., Section 8. of OCALA or in any other place in OCALA, and, therefore, Congress shall NOT have the power:
TO transfer property from those who have less to those who have more;
TO transfer property from those who have more to those who have less; and,
TO tax any object of property, including an object of money, differently depending on who owns the object, when the object was owned, how the object is owned, why the object is owned, for what purposes the object is used, or the attributes of the person or persons owning the object.

ORIGINAL QUOTATIONS FROM OCALA REGARDING THE SUPREMACY OF OCALA

6. (OCALA, Article VI) 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;

7. (OCALA, Article VI) The judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

----OUR INTERPRETATIONS

6. OCALA, and the laws of the United States of America which were made in pursuance of OCALA; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority delegated to the United States by OCALA, shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND.

7. The judges in the United States of America shall always be bound by the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, and nothing to the contrary in OCALA or in any laws of any State shall ever be interpreted or be construed to permit otherwise.

ORIGINAL QUOTATIONS FROM OCALA REGARDING POWERS AND RIGHTS NOT EXPRESSLY DELEGATED OR NOT EXPRESSLY STIPULATED BY OCALA

8. (OCALA, Amendment IX, 1791)
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

9. (OCALA, Amendment X, 1791)
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.

----OUR INTERPRETATIONS

8. The enumeration in OCALA, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others claimed by the people and not expressly denied by OCALA.

9. The powers NOT delegated to the government of the United States of America by OCALA, NOT prohibited by OCALA to the government of the United States of America by OCALA, NOT prohibited by OCALA to the governments of and within the states, and NOT prohibited by OCALA to the people, are reserved to the people, or to the governments of or within the states, respectively. The government of the United States of America shall have the burden to prove the delegation to it by OCALA of any power the government shall exercise, and to prove that any person is denied by OCALA any power that person shall claim.

ORIGINAL QUOTATIONS FROM OCALA REGARDING OATHS TAKEN BY ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS

10. (OCALA, Article VI) The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution;

11. (OCALA, Article II, Section 1) Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

12. (OCALA, Article II., Section 4.) The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

----OUR INTERPRETATIONS

10. The Senators and Representatives of the Congress, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States of America and of the several states, are bound by their oath or affirmation, to act in accord with, preserve, protect and defend OCALA.

11. At the beginning of each term of his office, the President of the United States of America did swear (or affirm) to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and to the best of the President’s ability, act in accord with, preserve, protect and defend OCALA.

12. The elected and appointed officials of the government of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of high crimes. An elected or appointed official commits a high crime when she or he violates her or his oath or affirmation to act in accord with, preserve, protect and defend OCALA, the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, and is impeached and convicted of that high crime. In such an event, that elected or appointed official shall be removed from office.

ORIGINAL QUOTATION FROM OCALA REGARDING THE PROCESS OF AMENDING OCALA

13. (OCALA, Article V) proposed] Amendments... shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress;

----OUR INTERPRETATIONS

13. Article V and no other article in OCALA specifies the method for amending OCALA. OCALA does not specify any other method for ratifying amendments to OCALA than the two methods specified in Article V.

OCALA can only be amended by the ratification of the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by the ratification of conventions in three fourths of the states, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress.

Neither the legislative branch, the judicial branch or the executive branch of the government of the United States of America is delegated by OCALA the power to ratify amendments to OCALA.

ORIGINAL QUOTATION FROM OCALA REGARDING PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY AND INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE

14. (OCALA, Amendment XIII, 1865, Section 1) Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

----OUR INTERPRETATIONS

14. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States of America, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Involuntary servitude includes but is not limited to the involuntary transfer of one’s own property to another person.

ORIGINAL QUOTATION FROM OCALA REGARDING THE CONDITIONS FOR A PERSONS DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS WITHIN THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW

15a. (OCALA, Amendment V, 1791) No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

15b. (OCALA, Amendment XIV, 1868, Section 1) No state shall ... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

----OUR INTERPRETATION

15. NOT the government of the United States of America, and NOT the government of or within any state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law that is secured in accord with OCALA; and, secured in accord with OCALA, the federal government shall not deny to any person within its jurisdiction just compensation for private property taken for public use.


ORIGINAL QUOTATION FROM OCALA REGARDING THE INCOME TAX

16. (OCALA, Amendment XVI, 1913) The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration.

----OUR INTERPRETATION

16. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration.

However, the Congress has not hereby been delegated the power to abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States or deny to any person within its either the equal protection of the law, or just compensation for property taken for public use. Therefore the tax on any dollar of income throughout the United States of America shall be uniform and not discriminate against persons or their dollars of income on the basis of the attributes of persons or the attributes of their dollars of income.

WE HAVE ACCUSED ALL THOSE ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS OF OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHO ARE NOT COMPLYING WITH THEIR OATHS OR AFFIRMATIONS REQUIRED BY LAW TO SUPPORT OCALA, OF PERPETRATING HIGH CRIMES.

WE ORDER THEM TO CEASE AND DESIST PERPETRATING THESE HIGH CRIMES OR WE SHALL LAWFULLY REMOVE THEM FROM OFFICE.

Immediate termination of these proven high crimes shall cause suffering to those who themselves have previously been victims of these high crimes and forced thereby to transfer their property to others, and are now receiving property from others who have been forced to transfer their property to them. In order to ameliorate such suffering, we recommend that Congress submit the following amendment to OCALA to the States for their speedy adoption.

Recommended Amendment XXVIII.

Section 1. Congress shall have the power to adopt reasonable procedures for terminating by December 31, 2013, all currently existing laws and programs that violate Our Constitution As Lawfully Amended, “the supreme Law of the Land.”

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to establish voluntary programs for financing and ameliorating human suffering.

=====================================================================


“A generous parent should have said, ‘If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace’; and this single reflection, well applied, is sufficient to awaken every man to duty.”
---Thomas Paine in “The American Crisis,” December 23, 1776

But what criteria should be used to determine constitutionality, Ican?

Obviously a Democrat Congress is going to have a very different perspective on that than would be a conservative Republican Congress.

Jeeze . . . typical Ican idiocy, followed by Fox, who cannot seem to understand that the name of the party is The Democratic Party--look it up . . .

This thread is now hopelessly trashed . . .

Thread cancer. No cure.

True! And, some in that conservative Republican Congress might have a very different perspective as well.

The good effort I am proposing is not an effort to convince Congress but rather an effort to convince The US Supreme Court. I am proposing federal lawsuits to help right the wrongs currently taking our republic down the toilet. Because of that, it is essential that another Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, or Alito be appointed to the US Supreme Court before this effort reaches the US Supreme Court.

The example I posted here is just that, an example. The draft I posted here might better be rewritten and divided into two or more law suits. Alternatively, many different individuals, representing themselves, or represented by pro bono lawyers, could start this process by filing the same or equivalent federal lawsuit in every one of the aproximately 100 federal district courts in the US. Subsequently, they would appeal to the 11 US Courts of Appeal or circuit courts. Subsequently, they would all appeal to the US Supreme Court. The advantage of this is it will probably attract the attention of the newsmedia like nothing else we can do.

So all that's needed are 100 groups capable of paying the filing fees at each court level and willing to spend the time required.

The number one criterion is: The USA Constitution and its Amendments must be interpreted according to the meaning they had when adopted. Different meanings assigned by US Sureme Court via unlawful judicial legislation must be declared just that, unlawful.

I first recommend "The Federalist Papers--Hamilton, Madison, Jay" edited and with an introduction by Clinton Rossiter, to everyone to help them better understand the application of this criterion.