Constitution 101: Rule of Law and Limited Powers of Government


Obama and company just do not get it. Their policies and method of keep spending, just raise taxes mentality is the major reasons why Obama and company failed to fix the economic problems, reduce unemployment, and reduce the national debt. Overspending is not solved by punishing the citizens with higher taxes – and that include the portion of society that produces jobs and expands investments. Their policies do not fix anything, it just creates new problems and expands on those existing.

Instead of fixing and revamping the expensive social programs already in place, they have added a very expensive new social program called ObamaCare. The wealthy are paying 35% of the income tax, before deductions. Instead of raising the taxes, reform the tax system to where there are no more loopholes, no more allowing certain corporations to get off without paying corporate tax or smaller rates than other corporations pay. At the same time, it certainly would not hurt to create a flat tax that cannot be raised without two-thirds majority vote in Congress. But that would be common sense.
As Senator Marco Rubioof Florida statedthis week:

Tax increases will not solve our $16 trillion debt. Only economic growth and a reform of entitlement programs will help control the debt. We must reform our complicated, uncertain, job-killing tax code, by getting rid of unjustified loopholes. But our goal should be to generate new revenue by creating new taxpayers, not new taxes.

For decades, politicians on both sides of the political aisle have had a progressive tax, spend policy or less tax, and never-ending spending policy. Most of the politicians in Congress cannot see that it has been past policies, and continuing the same policies, that has compounded the problems. If the traditional policies do not work, they refuse to look for new solutions.
The media sidesteps the issue by attacking Senator Rubio’s religious beliefs. He is a traditional Christian Hispanic. He is an AMERICAN, no matter what his roots. By rights, he should play the race card like the opposition and media does, but he does not use his ethnic background as a crutch or political tool.
The gay organizations denounce Rubio’s beliefs (and others who have the same) while promoting their own beliefs, which means that only their beliefs count – overriding other American beliefs and traditions. When it comes to constitutional law, politicians should provide equality, but within that equality, Americans must realize that what they perceive is rights is not in the Constitution – like guarantee to be offered a job and guaranteed to have housing. That is up to the individuals and the private sector. If certain class of Americans want homes or other things they believe is their “right” – they have to change their attitudes and lifestyles in order to achieve it. Government can ensure that the playing board is equal, but it should never interfere and provide special rights and compensation to a population who blames its woes on the wealthy and constitutional politicians. If government is to reform, then society must reform itself and reeducate itself after decades of being misled by progressive socialists who call themselves liberal – not even close to enacting the description, most often hypocritical in their habits versus rhetoric. It is certainly true that the middle class has been the backbone of taxpayers, but if loopholes are removed, especially for corporations with a reasonable tax rate – government will not be chasing away American businesses to foreign nations. Once again, it all rests upon government changing its accumulated bad practices and policies, which the economy has proven is a failure – but politicians cannot perceive that doing the same thing will never fix problems. That is what Reagan meant when he stated that Government IS the problem.
Meanwhile, the political left and its mouthpiece media is still whining about Romney’s truthful remark about the 47 percent. So-called “moderate” politicians do not compromise, they sell principles. NewsBusters, Jodie Miller was right when she jokingly stated in video that Zurich, Switzerland has a new policy to specify a certain area of their city for prostitutes and American has already established such a specific place, it is called Capital Hill. The humor is satirical and sad, actually, because it is true.
The members of Congress sell their souls for votes and bend backwards for special interests that will provide voters and power, and sometimes-monetary compensation. The political club, the political elite are more important than constitutional law and certainly more important than the rights and liberties of the American people.
When Obama won the reelection campaign he stated that he wanted to work more with political opponents in Congress. This week, Obama declared he would not compromise on the tax raising issue. …

We’re just waiting for Republicans in the House. But so far, they’ve put forward an unbalanced plan that actually lowers rates for the wealthiest Americans. If we want to protect the middle class, then the math just doesn’t work.

He is right; the Obama plan just does not work mathematically. He wants to ever increase taxation on the “rich” who benefit the economy and create jobs and at the same time push more government intervention upon the private sector with social programs whose cost, totaled, is more than national defense costs; and that does not include frivolous foreign aid spending. Obama and company will not be satisfied until the American tax rate upon Americans making $250,000 or more a year (a small portion of the population) reaches the recent British tax rate of 50%. We know how well high tax rates and big spending social programs work so well in the Euro states.

Rubio and others like him state that America’s domestic energy capabilities would be a major step toward economic recovery. In addition, he suggests that a Flexible Savings Account be available for families to save for the increased cost of medical care. He failed to mention anything about special interest lobbyists, representing insurance companies and medical corporations, are part of the problem as well.
Both sides of the political fence, however, require getting out of the mindset of not making government more transparent and more effective by reducing its bureaucracy that has grown out of control in over fifty years of government mismanagement.

The major problems may fall onto the Democrats, but the Republicans need to become organized and reform as well. As far as the media: they need to make objective reporting a common place and keep their personal advocacy out of reporting news, and within editorial and opinion columns. The media should be interested in serving the people, like government was established, in ensuring that truth and accuracy is reported, and providing necessary information for citizens to make responsible decisions concerning OUR government.

Expanding government programs, expanding the tax code system to make it even more confusing are not part of any workable answer. An interesting idea that would help pay for the Social Security and Medicare debt is exempt workers from payroll tax (except Social Security and Medicare payments) over the age of 62.
There are good ideas coming from the Tea Party movement, if the media would quit making fun of them and instead gleaning good solutions from their advocacy.
If the Constitution is outdated or requires some tweaking, then use the amendment system – that is what it was created for. It is not up to the Supreme Court to rewrite the Constitution through their dissertations and findings, but the Congress to pass in two-thirds majority, signed by the President, and ratified by the state governments.

Thomas Jefferson foresaw that requirement, but also inserted words of caution in letter to A. Coray in 1823 (ME 15:488):

Whatever be the Constitution, great care must be taken to provide a mode of amendment when experience or change of circumstances shall have manifested that any part of it is undapted to the good of the nation. In some of our States it requires a new authority from the whole people, acting by their representatives, chosen for this express purpose, and assembled in convention. This is found too difficult for remedying the imperfections which experience develops from time to time in an organization of the first impression. A greater facility of amendment is certainly requisite to maintain it in a course of action accommodated to the times and changes through which we are ever passing.

In another Jefferson letter, this one to Edward Livingston in 1825 (ME 16:113):

Time and changes in the condition and constitution of society may require occasional and corresponding modifications.

Jefferson letter to Wilson Nicholas Cary in 1803 (ME 10:419):

Nothing is more likely than that the enumeration of powers is defective. This is the ordinary case of all human works. Let us then go on perfecting it by adding by way of amendment to the Constitution those powers which time and trial show are still wanting.

Jefferson letter to T.M.Randolph in 1787 (ME 6:165):

Though we may say with confidence, that the worst of the American constitutions is better than the best which ever existed before in any other country, and that they are wonderfully perfect for a first essay, yet every human essay must have defects. It will remain, therefore, to those now coming on the stage of public affairs, to perfect what has been so well begun by those going off it.Jefferson letter to Count de Moustier in 1788 (ME 7:13):
We must be contented to travel towards perfection, step by step. We must be contented with the ground which the new Constitution will gain for us, and hope that a favorable moment will come for correcting what is amiss in it.

Jefferson letter to James Madison in 1801 (FE 8:82):

We have always a right to correct ancient errors and to establish what is more conformable to reason and convenience.

Jefferson letter to Alexander Donald in 1788 (ME 6:426):

A schism in our Union … would be an incurable evil, because near friends falling out, never re-unite cordially; whereas, all of us going together, we shall be sure to cure the evils of our new Constitution, before they do great harm.

Jefferson letter to William Drayton in 1788 (ME 6:414):

The precept … is wise which directs us to try all things and hold fast that which is good.

Jefferson letter to Samuel Kercheval in 1816 (ME 15:40):

Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence and deem them like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well; I belonged to it and labored with it. It deserved well of its country. It was very like the present but without experience of the present; and forty years of experience in government is worth a century of book reading; and this they would say themselves were they to rise from the dead.

Jefferson letter to James Madison in 1789 (ME 7:460):

Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right. It may be said, that the succeeding generation exercising, in fact, the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law had been expressly limited to nineteen years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be, indeed, if every form of government were so perfectly contrived, that the will of the majority could always be obtained, fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form.. The people cannot assemble themselves; their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils, bribery corrupts them, personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents; and other impediments arise, so as to prove to every practical man, that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.

Jefferson letter to James Madison in 1789 (ME 7:460):

This principle, that the earth belongs to the living and not to the dead, …will exclude …the ruinous and contagious errors … which have armed despots with means which nature does not sanction, for binding in chains their fellow men.

In a previous essay, Constitution 101: Judiciary of the United States, I discussed the background of the Supreme Court within a new government of the United States, the 11thAmendment that protects states from the Supreme Court, as well as the Bill of Rights that limits the powers of federal (and state) governments. In a unified agreement of a national series of laws and policies, protection of rights and liberties for all citizens, the Constitution is the law of the land. Beyond those limited powers, however, lies the responsibility of state governments, which ensures their sovereignty and the will of the people. Social programs not mentioned in the Constitution, and the welfare clause has been misused in assuming that the federal government presides over and has the power over nationalized social programs. Social issues should be addressed by individual state governments in order to ensure that demographical issues and concerns of the people are addressed more directly. Therefore, when it comes to abortion, same-sex marriage, and the like, it is up to the state governments to decide with the will of its citizens. The state governments issue marriage license and its ensuing requirements, not the federal government. Therefore, the state governments must decide with the people’s majority decision within that particular state, whether same-sex marriage is practical or allowed, or abortion should not be the concern of government but between patient and doctors – and not paid for by taxpayers. The Supreme Court abused its powers and misused its purpose in accepting cases of abortion and same-sex marriage and not turning it over to the individual state governments and the majority decision of its people. Indeed, if the federal government would reform the tax system to where no deductions were allowed, unfairness between married and single tax rates upon citizens would no longer be an issue, and so would the movement diminish in respect to same-sex couples insisted upon marriage. However, if state government has the power to require and issue marriage licenses for legal purposes and other reasons – then it is up to the individual state government in making those decisions and/or the state courts.
At the Constitutional Convention, it was decided by majority that a republican form of government would be established, not a nationalist monarchy or pure form of democracy; for both had been tried before with no success. John Adams in An Essay on Man’s Lust for Power, in 1763:

Democracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy; such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man’s life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, with, and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few.

How ironic that it was not long before those words began to take shape into truth and a window into the future.
From his home in Monticello, Thomas Jefferson wrote in correspondence that certain matters required resolution by state governments because, the Federalists (today the Democrats and pretend Republicans – RINOs) controlled the courts and were making decisions against constitutional law. Jefferson had the backing of John Taylor of Caroline who had presented the idea to Jefferson, and Jefferson called the Federalist takeover the reign of witches. Taylor was considering secession and in a letter in June of 1798, Jefferson told Taylor that the problems would not solved by Virginia and North Carolina leaving the Union of the United States to form a separate confederation, that would result in eventual separation between Virginia and Carolina. In the end each state would be separate and end up like Europe with the only exception being that the separate states would share the same language.
Jefferson also pointed out that once Americans saw that the tax bill for the military buildup, they would see the error of siding with the Federalists. Today, with the advent of the Marxist political philosophyof progressive taxation where one class or two classes pay for another class, called income and wealth distribution, ensures that the people become dependent upon a government whose powers exceed the Constitution’s limitation of powers and the state governments lose their sovereignty, all with the help of control of the media. This in turn diminishes the power of the people, who is convinced that government can do better than they can; willingly give up rights and liberties for a false sense of security. Thomas Paine:

It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect his country from its government.

John Taylor of Caroline, not persuaded to change his idea of secession, told Jefferson that just a change of political parties would not solve the issue; because human nature dictates the desire for  more power. A southern aristocracy ruling the country would be just as bad as a northern aristocracy. Taylor proposed to amend the Constitution in order to prohibit abuse of power.
It was decided in a meeting at Monticello (Jefferson’s home) that Virginia and Kentucky state governments would adopt resolutions in their state legislatures, in writing, objections to the Alien and Sedition Act of 1798, like the colonies did leading up to the Declaration of Independence.
Jefferson and Madison then began arguments for states’ rights …

The states were sovereign and to this compact [Constitution] each state acceded as a state, and is an integral party.

Another advocate of secession was William Branch Giles (Virginia) who stated so publicly.
Madison in his Report of 1800, objected to the direction of Federalist policy over a ten-year period and argued for states’ rights. The Federalists objected to the idea that the states created the federal government – which was truth. Modern textbooks state that Jefferson and Madison invented the idea of state sovereignty, but in fact, the founders had understood state sovereignty and promoted it from the beginning in developing the Constitution. Indeed, it was the primary reason they ratified the Constitution, despite some founders wishing to change that understanding.
What Thomas Jeffersonmany predictions came true, like the Louisiana Purchase and the degradation of constitutional law; although politicians and historians today have grossly misquoted Jefferson and others. The Republicans won the election of 1800 and the Federalists lost control of Congress and the executive branch. Jefferson had a sense of the basic American of the time, despite being a wealthy plantation owner, understanding human nature in general. The Sedition Actexpired at the end of John Adam’s term as President of the United States, and it appeared the constitutional crisis had ended. Thomas Jefferson became the third President of the United States.
Thomas Jefferson in writing draft for Kentucky Resolutions of 1798:

Resolved, that the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government …whensoever the general government assumes undelegated power powers, its acts are unauthoritive, void, and of no force.

Congress repealed internal taxes, leaving tariffs and sales of federal land as sources of federal revenue. Congress also cut the military budget, eliminating all seagoing vessels form the navy and cut army manpower to almost 95%.
Jefferson pardonedeveryone convicted by the Sedition Act, and returned fines they paid. It is interesting that despite the righteous act, no historian ever questioned Jefferson’s authority to refund fines to felons. [Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution by Kevin R.C. Gutzman]
The last Federalist Congress had passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, which expanded and reorganized the judicial branch. Historians claim that John Adams filled new posts established by the Judiciary Act with Federalists, but this was not entirely true for non-Federalists were also appointed.

The issue today is the same as it has been throughout history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.Thomas Jefferson

Today’s government is a democratic oligarchy whose policies, based upon socialism. Moves farther and farther away from the checks and balances put in place by the Founders in fear of just such an occurrence happening. While Democrats are sorely to blame, they are not solely to blame, for the Republicans have lost all consciousness of what the name of their political party means, just as Democrats forgot the virtues and truthful meaning of liberalism. Both political entities require reformation, but a people who have traded their rights and liberties for government promises of false security and easy way to live; and have put aside the moral and civic values that allowed the United States to survive, grow, and become a great nation will not press this.
As an anonymous commentator once wrote:

If we cannot take care of each other and ourselves as a country, we deserve to be governed by a group of the elite.

Another commentator from NYC:

Complaining will never change this fact. Stop blaming ‘them’ – it is our responsibility to know and defend our rights. … We are responsible – if we give up that responsibility, there are those who are only too happy to take it upon themselves to lay claim to our lives and liberty. … What we need is American Reality. [E. Archer]

Destroy the educational system and you destroy the ability to self-govern. Our system indoctrinates. [Warren Olathe]

The Judiciary Act of 1801 was repealed in April of 1802, and Jefferson ensured that the Supreme Court was out of session for the 14 months it took to fully repeal the Judiciary Act; then it was the New England states that discussed secession.
Romney’s major handicap was not addressing the Media and the Leftist Rhetoric-Propaganda, as Mr. Whittle pointed out as the video above. Romney was not a good communicator, like Reagan was, who won a narrow margin against Jimmy “Peanut” Carter. It failed Romney in 2004 and 2008 and 2012. Too bad, because his character, as Whittle pointed out, is “impeccable”. How many Americans can say that they paid over $60 million during their job career to the government of the United States? None of those who chastised him for telling the truth in a private campaign meeting (captured by a Democrat plant via cellphone) paid that much to support government who insists upon creating generations of government-addicted benefit parasites. Those among the 47 percent who do not pay or pay little after year end tax refunds. Some of that 47 percent actually get more than they paid into. Romney was being realistic and telling the fellow campaigners the reality of what they were up against with Obama and his promises of continued and even more “entitlements”. Voters voted for what they could get, not what their country needed.
If the truth hurts, so be it.

BIBLIOGRAPHY