Asking for help from my Gulcher friends
Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 1 month ago to Government
Our congressional district is going to be "up for grabs" this year, as the incumbent has decided not to run again. I fear that the debate will center on irrelevancies instead of substance. To counter this, I propose 5 questions to determine what sort of perspective the slew of candidates has regarding government.
What do you think? Did I get a good set? What did I miss, or what would you recommend as being more important?
Here's my proposal.
The five important questions for our next Republican congressional candidate.
With the VA mess, the Benghazi debacle, failure of Obamacare, etc., it will be easy for the Republicans of the 6th Congressional District to lose perspective when selecting our next candidate for congress. I'd like to propose five important questions that we should be asking our slate of candidates to gain an understanding of their philosophy of governing.
Number 1: Will you support an audit of the Fed, to include an inventory of the gold reserves in Ft. Knox and all other precious metals reserves?
Number 2: Will you support and actively push for a constitutional amendment to repeal the 17th Amendment?
Number 3: What should be done regarding the alphabet soup of federal agencies (EPA, USDA, FDA, Dept of Ed, VA, etc.)?
Number 4: Should there be a constitutional amendment to invalidate Marbury v. Madison? Should the Congress have an ability to override Supreme Court decisions?
Number 5: Should the Commerce Clause of the Constitution be refined by amendment to more clearly identify that it only applies to actual commerce - that of sales of goods and services between suppliers and customers in different states, and nothing more?
Discussion:
1) The Federal Reserve has manipulated our currency and affected the economy profoundly. The American people need to know if the assets "owned" by the Fed in trust for the American people are real, or whether the money supply has been inflated to a point of unsustainability. The people deserve to know just how badly the money supply has been inflated.
2) The 17th Amendment changed the way that US Senators are selected, changing it from a selection by the state governments to a direct election by the citizens of the states. This process reduced the influence of the individual states on the working of the federal government, effectively making the states totally subservient to the federal government. Repealing this amendment would return the balance of power between individual states and the federal government.
3) The alphabet soup of agencies have usurped law making authority from the congress. They are unaccountable to the people as unelected, irrepealable bureaucrats whose actions have the force of law without the accountability of lawmakers. This power must be returned to lawmakers accountable to the electorate.
4) In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court of the US gave itself the authority to be the last authority of the land. This is a power that the framers never envisioned in the court. In fact, the SCOTUS was envisioned as the least powerful branch, not the final authority. The framers always envisioned that the court members would not be affected by political concerns in their decisions of fact, but did not expect them to be the final word - that was always meant to reside in the two branches that are accountable to the people, the House of Representatives and the President.
5) The Commerce Clause has been bent in so many directions to mean and provide justification for the intrusion of government into nearly all aspects of our lives. This was never meant to be the case. The Commerce Clause was merely supposed to ensure that trade between members of different states was honestly conducted and if there were disputes, that they would not be handled by state courts, which could be biased, but rather be handled by the Supreme Court, which was envisioned as being "impartial" to matters between the states.
What do you think? Did I get a good set? What did I miss, or what would you recommend as being more important?
Here's my proposal.
The five important questions for our next Republican congressional candidate.
With the VA mess, the Benghazi debacle, failure of Obamacare, etc., it will be easy for the Republicans of the 6th Congressional District to lose perspective when selecting our next candidate for congress. I'd like to propose five important questions that we should be asking our slate of candidates to gain an understanding of their philosophy of governing.
Number 1: Will you support an audit of the Fed, to include an inventory of the gold reserves in Ft. Knox and all other precious metals reserves?
Number 2: Will you support and actively push for a constitutional amendment to repeal the 17th Amendment?
Number 3: What should be done regarding the alphabet soup of federal agencies (EPA, USDA, FDA, Dept of Ed, VA, etc.)?
Number 4: Should there be a constitutional amendment to invalidate Marbury v. Madison? Should the Congress have an ability to override Supreme Court decisions?
Number 5: Should the Commerce Clause of the Constitution be refined by amendment to more clearly identify that it only applies to actual commerce - that of sales of goods and services between suppliers and customers in different states, and nothing more?
Discussion:
1) The Federal Reserve has manipulated our currency and affected the economy profoundly. The American people need to know if the assets "owned" by the Fed in trust for the American people are real, or whether the money supply has been inflated to a point of unsustainability. The people deserve to know just how badly the money supply has been inflated.
2) The 17th Amendment changed the way that US Senators are selected, changing it from a selection by the state governments to a direct election by the citizens of the states. This process reduced the influence of the individual states on the working of the federal government, effectively making the states totally subservient to the federal government. Repealing this amendment would return the balance of power between individual states and the federal government.
3) The alphabet soup of agencies have usurped law making authority from the congress. They are unaccountable to the people as unelected, irrepealable bureaucrats whose actions have the force of law without the accountability of lawmakers. This power must be returned to lawmakers accountable to the electorate.
4) In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court of the US gave itself the authority to be the last authority of the land. This is a power that the framers never envisioned in the court. In fact, the SCOTUS was envisioned as the least powerful branch, not the final authority. The framers always envisioned that the court members would not be affected by political concerns in their decisions of fact, but did not expect them to be the final word - that was always meant to reside in the two branches that are accountable to the people, the House of Representatives and the President.
5) The Commerce Clause has been bent in so many directions to mean and provide justification for the intrusion of government into nearly all aspects of our lives. This was never meant to be the case. The Commerce Clause was merely supposed to ensure that trade between members of different states was honestly conducted and if there were disputes, that they would not be handled by state courts, which could be biased, but rather be handled by the Supreme Court, which was envisioned as being "impartial" to matters between the states.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
I have never met a single soul who has ever stopped to question how it was they became liable for the so called "income tax". The question of liability doesn't even occur to most people, but with this ruling, anyone who is morally and justly opposed to the ACA should use this ruling to begin the process of challenging the jurisdiction of the IRS on all matters of taxation.
This has been one of the first and biggest clues yet to the American people regarding the matter of liability for the "Personal Income Tax". According to the SCOTUS, the only people who are liable to the ACA are those who are statutorily defined "taxpayers". The non-taxpayer quite obviously has no liability to either the "Personal Income Tax" or the ACA.
If you are looking at this changing the perception of the voters reaction to these candidates then your questions need to be comprehensible to the people - and important to them.
Jan
I do like the voting issue question.
I would add that the salaries of all State and Federal employees (including POTUS all the way down to floor sweepers) be reduced to the average annual income of the American worker AND all pay increases limited to cost of living with a maximum of an additional 3% based on performance", I would recommend reading AR' Anthem.
If they are constitutional, the agency should be accountable to the congress, not left to run their own show. It could be argued whether IRS is constitutional. While the Constitution does not specifically provide for IRS, I am of the opinion the government is afforded the responsibility of collecting taxes. In a recent example IRS made the ruling that businesses could not terminated medical coverage and give salary increases to employees, allowing them to find their own coverage. This is an example of a government agency effectively writing law. This should not be permitted. Congress should make law, and face their constituents when they overstep. When IRS makes a rule, or EPA, OSHA, FDA,etc; where do the people file their grievance?
I believe that with the proper transparency, this kind of thing could be mitigated, as I do agree that the popular vote should be restricted to the Congressional Representatives for the sole purpose in maintaining States' rights.
Rothschild Bank of London Warburg Bank of Hamburg Rothschild Bank of Berlin Lehman Brothers of New York Lazard Brothers of Paris Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy Goldman, Sachs of New York Warburg Bank of Amsterdam Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (Reference 14, P. 13, Reference 12, P. 152)
These bankers are connected to London Banking Houses which ultimately control the FED. When England lost the Revolutionary War with America (our forefathers were fighting their own government), they planned to control us by controlling our banking system, the printing of our money, and our debt (Reference 4, 22).
The individuals listed below owned banks which in turn owned shares in the FED. The banks listed below have significant control over the New York FED District, which controls the other 11 FED Districts. These banks also are partly foreign owned and control the New York FED District Bank. (Reference 22)
First National Bank of New York James Stillman National City Bank, New York Mary W. Harnman
National Bank of Commerce, New York A.D. Jiullard
Hanover National Bank, New York Jacob Schiff
Chase National Bank, New York Thomas F. Ryan Paul Warburg William Rockefeller Levi P. Morton M.T. Pyne George F. Baker Percy Pyne Mrs. G.F. St. George J.W. Sterling Katherine St. George H.P. Davidson J.P. Morgan (Equitable Life/Mutual Life) Edith Brevour T. Baker (Reference 4 for above, Reference 22 has details, P. 92, 93, 96, 179)" from this site http://www.apfn.org/apfn/fed_reserve.htm...
2) wipe out the 16th and the 17th please.
3) I dunno, shut them all down but the elected one will not
4) congress does have the power to overrule a scotus decision, see aforementioned 16th amendment.
Ok I only answered 1,2 and 4, but I wish you much success in getting a worthy one elected.
Delete questions regarding 17th Amendment and Marbury; our positions would get no traction with voters at this point in time.
I suggest also that your text spell out Federal Reserve System (its proper name) and specify also Federal Reserve Banks, and the Federal Reserve Board, as needed. See www.federalreserve.gov and note that it is in the Dot Gov domain. You would have to make a special case for calling it a "private" bank. Calling it "the Fed" is not clear: do you mean the federal government? We know what you mean. Not everyone will.
In the discussion on alphabet soup agencies, I would point out that many of their activities violate the Tenth Amendment (issues under state jurisdiction) and is a big contributor to out-of-control government spending. What will the congressman do to reduce staffing at all alphabet soup agencies, reduce spending, and in some cases eliminate entire agencies (Dept. of Education, NEA, Homeland Security, Agriculture, NSA, etc...) that in most cases operate in areas of state jurisdiction (10th Amendment).
You should specify what the 17th Amendment is. My first reactions were that you wanted to make alcohol illegal again or take the vote away from women.
Defining the problem of Marbury v. Madison is a challenge in "25 words or less" but it can be done. Most people - even those who consider themselves informed - will not know what you mean by the reference.
Your campaign against the Commerce Clause is highly important to anyone who shops online. You must be clear that the Founders intended to make online shopping unregulated by the states.
Your Point 3) glosses over the fact that these "alphabet agencies" are fully Constitutional. Congress created them. Congress funds them. More deeply, it is a fact that democracy depends on bureaucracy. See Max Weber: each piece of paper must move from desk to desk irrespective of class or clan. If you want to decrease their authority, you must "strike at the roots" and insist that government must only do those things that are minimally required for an ordered society. That is not an easy discussion.
My experience with conservatives and Republicans is that the activists come to processes such as this with an agenda voiced in other language, entirely. Translating across those and yours is a challenge.
If your goal is to win an election, then it might be best just to articulate the broadest possible call for an "originalist" Constitutional intention and leave the rest undiscussed and undefined.