Heads Up
A Weekly edition of News from around our country
March 7, 1997 #25
by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net
----------------------------------------------------------
Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html
----------------------------------------------------------
ANOTHER COMMISSION
Congress has farmed out most of its
lawmaking responsibilities to regulatory agencies. It
found these responsibilities inconvenient and didn’t want
to do the work involved. So, now the executive branch
also makes law.
Congress farmed out its responsibility
to coin and regulate money. That likewise was an
inconvenient function. So, they authorized the Federal
Reserve system.
Congress knows what kind of mess it has
made of the income tax system, yet doesn’t know how to
fix it. So they formed a commission to look into it.
Nothing happened, but a lot of out-of-work politicians
received good paychecks from that deal. Now they have
formed yet another income tax commission.
There are literally dozens of agencies,
commissions and boards in Washington doing functions
Congress does not wish to handle. They even proposed one
for their own Congressional ethics.
So, it is no surprise that four House Members recently
proposed a commission for campaign finance reform. Sen.
Robert Torricelli, (D-NJ), who co-sponsored a commission
bill two years ago when he was in the House, plans to
introduce a similar bill in the Senate.
In some ways, it looks like the commission
route might be the correct way to go. In fact, judging
by some of the bills coming out of Congress these past
few years, perhaps we should form a citizen’s commission
for every duty Congress chooses not to handle properly.
For instance: “Congress” could be used to
straighten out the budget problems only. They could keep
their fancy offices and all of the prestige they think
they have. But a Citizen’s Commissions could handle all
the nuts and bolts of government.
Actually, there could be some savings to
the taxpayer involved in this, too. Thousands of
over-paid Congressional aides would no longer be
necessary. Nor would any of these expensive
“fact finding” trips Members of Congress like to take.
Ditto for most of the federal regulatory agencies.
The Citizen’s Commissions could handle
all regulatory problems, run the District of Columbia,
control all federal land management, supervise monitory
policy, insure that the executive and judicial branches
do not overreach, and make sure that all federal
businesses operate at a profit.
In other words, the Citizen’s Commission
would do all of those things that Congress totally screws
up anyway.
And, what would be in it for us citizens
outside of Washington? Well, there would be the obvious
savings in Congressional staff and federal agency
budgets, but that’s not the idea for the Commissions.
Unlike Members of Congress, members of
Citizen’s Commissions would not have immunity. Their
charter would say that they must follow the Constitution,
as written. So, what would be in it for us citizens out
in the States is a word you do not hear used by anyone in
the central government much nowadays: Liberty.
That’s because, if a member of the Citizen’s
Commission tries something unconstitutional, we could
immediately prosecute them. And, if a member of another
branch of government violates the Constitution, the
Citizen’s Commission would impeach them.
Sure this is silliness. But so too is the
fact that Congress does not perform those duties assigned
to it and instead legislates on subjects for which it has
no Constitutional authority.
NEWS FROM THE FLOOD
The “Heads Up” office is high and dry.
Neighbors in surrounding areas, however, are not. And
although news reports depict the major urban areas
affected, there are also dozens of smaller towns and
other populated areas that were devastated by the flood.
Hundreds of buildings have been totally
destroyed. One house was actually seen floating down the
Ohio river. Another trailer was floating down Kentucky’s
Licking River. Many others have been washed off of their
foundations -- two that we know of were deposited on the
highway. Thousands of area homes will need nearly
complete refurbishing before they can be lived in again.
And obviously, most of the possessions within these homes
will also need to be replaced.
At this writing, the water is receding,
leaving behind it an inch or two of mud on most
surfaces. Already, teams of volunteers are readying to
help with the clean up.
Hundreds -- maybe thousands -- of
volunteers collected foodstuffs, clothing, and other
useful items. Then many dozens of good people in 4WD
vehicles put them to proper use by delivering the goods
where they were most needed.
One shelter said on local radio they needed a microwave
oven. Even before the man had a chance to hang up,
another caller offered one. That same radio station (WLW
Radio in Cincinnati) was instrumental in collecting
truckloads of food and supplies for flood victims.
Oddly enough, water is needed too. Fresh
drinking water is scarce in some areas, as will be water
for cleaning. The huge Budweiser Beer trucks are
bringing in some drinking water (friends south of us also
asked for beer, but they live in a “dry” county), which
should take care of some of the immediate needs. But,
many of these areas do not have water piped to their
homes, and vast amounts of water will soon be necessary
for cleaning.
Most needed by the victims are toiletries,
cleaning supplies and lots and lots of elbow grease.
What is not called for yet, but will certainly be
needed, is household furnishings. Because, even with the
homes that are left whole, most of the contents will be
ruined. The next two or three weeks will be very
difficult for many people. And these tired people will
need a comfortable place to sit and sleep. So will
their kids.
One associated problem people are having
is with government. Some area governments actually
“ordered” people out of their homes -- even when it was
not completely necessary. Then the National Guard came
and compounded the issue. Already, legal action is being
planned over that.
No Martial Law was declared, or necessary.
Yet, someone gave the “mandatory evacuation” order
(FEMA?). Many residents knew that some orders were
improper, but had no choice but to comply.
We should also note, though, that there
were some very quick flooding situations in which a firm
“hurry up and get out of here” was very appropriate.
In these instances, lives were surely saved because
of the quick action of local police and fire personnel.
In some areas, the Army is now “allowing”
residents to “view” their homes and businesses through
the window of a bus. One Army Colonel even forbade any
residents from going home until he gives permission.
Properly asked by friends and neighbors
south of here is: “Who the hell is he? Who put the Army
in charge? Are they here to help us or to control us?”
No one knows for sure. But, as the water recedes, there
is a growing chorus of discontent asking that question,
and it can be expected to grow quite loud in the next few
days. People want to go home -- to whatever homes they
have left.
Unencumbered by all of this is a small
civilian army of volunteers readying to start converging
on many of the effected areas this weekend. They are
armed with cleaning supplies, water and elbow grease.
And, if the Army is still there . . . well, as the old
saying goes: Lead. Follow. Or, get the hell out of
the way!
Regardless. There is much work to be
done, and this weekend is when it will begin in earnest.
KESSLER’S FOLLY
Whatever happened to our Constitution?
Is it still in effect?
The very first sentence of the United
States Constitution says: “All legislative Powers herein
granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United
States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of
Representatives.”
Oh . . . perhaps it’s the words “Powers
herein granted” that are the problem. Maybe Slick Willie
thinks that the “Powers herein granted” belong to
Congress, and the executive branch gets all others. That
would answer a few questions.
Latest in a long string of rules,
regulations and executive orders -- all of which are
“law,” by the way -- is that the identification of anyone
under 27 must now be checked before they are “allowed” to
purchase tobacco products. The penalty for violation of
this new law includes fines and even the loss of the
seller’s business license.
And where in our Constitution is this
authority given to the central government? Nowhere, of
course. There is no Constitutional authority for any
branch of the federal government to do any such thing.
One would think that Congress would
complain when the executive branch imposes on its
unconstitutional legislative authority. But nope, not a
peep from the over-paid legislators.
Of course, if Congress starts publicly
grumbling and mumbling about the executive branch
passing unconstitutional laws, that could start a really
big problem.
No one in the federal government obeys
the Constitution anymore.
Anybody care?
THE COMING POLICE STATE
Last week we gave Rep. Ron Paul’s
toll-free Legislative Update number (1-888-322-1414) and
suggested that readers listen to his message “The Coming
Police State.” We were told by a lot of people that they
missed it.
Originally, that message was part of a
one hour speech Paul made on the floor of the House.
And, thanks to Jeff in Michigan, we have the complete
text. So, below is -- as near as we can remember -- the
section of that speech recorded as Paul’s “Legislative
Update:”
“Centralizing power and consistently
expanding the role of the Government requires an army of
bureaucrats and a taxing authority upon which a police
state thrives. There are over 100 laws on the books
permitting private property seizure without due process
of law. We have made it easy to seize any property by
absurdly claiming the property itself committed the
crime. The RICO mentality relating to law enforcement
permits even the casual bystander to suffer severely from
the police state mentality.
“The drug war hysteria and the war on gun
ownership started by Roosevelt in 1934 have expanded
Federal police power to the point that more than 10
percent of all of our police are Federal. The
Constitution names but three Federal crimes, so where is
the justification? Talk about swarms of officers to
harass our people and eat out their substance. We have
hovering over us daily the Federal police from the EPA,
OSHA, FBI, CIA, DEA, EEOC, ADA, F&WL, INS, BATF, and
worst of all, the IRS. Even criticizing the IRS makes
me cringe that it might precipitate an audit. It seems
that all administrations, to some degree, used the power
of the agencies to reward or punish financial backers or
political enemies.
“So much [of] that had its origin in the
1930's, it was then that the FBI's role changed from
friendly investigator helping local authorities to that
of national police force.
“We live in an age where the fear of an
IRS registered letter bearing news of an audit surpasses
the fear of a street mugging. The police are supposed to
be our friend and the Federal Government the guarantor of
our liberties. Ask the blacks in the inner city of Los
Angeles if they trust the police and revere the FBI and
the CIA. We should not have to cringe when a Federal
agent appears at the door of our business. We should not
even see them there.
“A Congress sworn to uphold the
Constitution ought to be protecting our right to our
property, not confiscating it. Congress ought to protect
our right to own a weapon of self-defense, not
systematically and viciously attacking that right.
Congress ought to guarantee all voluntary association,
not regulate and dictate every economic transaction. We
should not allow Congress to give credence to inane
politically correct rules generated by egalitarian
misfits. Setting quotas ought to insult each of us.
“We need no more centralized police
efforts. We need no more wiretaps that have become
epidemic in this last decade. We have had enough Wacos
and Ruby Ridges.”
GUN BILL
Gun Owners of America announced that
Rep. Chenoweth is introducing a bill to repeal all of
that stupid Lautenberg gun ban -- the ban that disarms
millions of Americans for minor offenses and prevents
them from owning guns for life. That law is so poorly
written that even a parent convicted of simply spanking
a child would be forever prohibited from owning firearms.
Other bills correct parts of the Lautenberg
gun grab. But, this is the only one said to repeal the
whole thing.
According to GOA, the bill does not even
have a number yet, but already has five sponsors. That’s
a very good start, but much more is needed.
Let’s get some cards and letters sent,
folks. Then back them up with telephone calls. Get
your Rep. to sign on, and let’s see if we can’t make this
a veto-proof sweep of the House.
Then, start on the Senate.
It is time to start showing the Socialist-
Fascists in Congress, like Schumer and Lautenberg, that
we citizens have had more than enough of their
un-Constitutional laws.
BUREAUCRATIC GROWTH
“How Many Bureaucrats can dance on the head of the
Constitution?’”
by: Bill Kasper
Many apologists for the size of the
Washington DC political infrastructure (i.e. Federal
government in its current hydra-headed incarnation) point
to the expansion in the size of America as justification
for the Federal government's significant weight gain.
The US population is currently in excess
of 100 times what it was when the Declaration of
Independence was signed, they say, so of course
government can be expected to be 100 times larger than
it was then.
The Federal government, were it to have
kept pace with this expansion, should at most be
100 times its size of 200+ years ago. This is obviously
an over-generous projection, though. Do we need
100 times more Senators than our forefathers did?
Hardly. Do we need 100 Presidents? Certainly not. How
about a Supreme Court of 900 judges? The argument
disintegrates immediately.
As we can see, the ratio of citizens to
politicians is not, and does not need to be fixed so that
as citizenry increases, so must the number of
administrators. The authors of the Constitution designed
a wonderfully scaleable system which could handle
virtually infinite population growth without requiring an
equally infinite inflation of bureaucratic overhead.
The Constitutional system, as designed,
would allow expansion in those very few areas which were
expressly authorized and directly related to the
population and physical dimensions of the United States,
such as census, postal, defensive military, and interstate
and international commerce.
It was understood that, with few exceptions
(like patent protection and international military
conflict) the states themselves could grow (or shrink) by
whatever degree providence provided. The states and
their citizens could deal with their own day-to-day
specific (as opposed to "general") welfare requirements
and mechanisms, and the Federal government would only get
involved when Constitutional rights were in jeopardy or
external threat materialized. This meant that the "core"
Federal government would remain at about its same size,
regardless of how much America grew and prospered. The
burden (and benefit) of local government would fall on,
well, local government.
Currently, the size of Federal government
has outstripped the 100-to-1 ratio by at least another
factor of 10. So, Federal government is now something
like 1000 times the size it was in the late 18th century.
Let that number sink in for a moment. Try to imagine
*anything* increasing by a factor of one thousand… Your
electric bill, your mortgage, the number of barking dogs
on your street…
This means two things:
1) Government is obviously busy doing
more things for (and to) more people than it did when the
country was designed and founded.
2) Federal government is costing at least
10 times what it cost the first generation after the
Revolutionary War, even after adjusting for inflation,
technological improvements, etc. Arguably growth is much
more than 10 times in some areas (how do you gauge going
from 0 to thousands, as in the case of the DEA or BATF?).
Think of that. Would an America who grew
up with a tax and bureaucratic burden 10 times its
historical size have been able to win W.W.II, or land on
the moon? Or could it have raised several generations
where a single income was more than enough to provide
for a family?
And consider what sort of future such an
over-administered America can expect, even
optimistically. Both parents must work today just to pay
for groceries and income taxes. Will a third parent need
to be introduced next century, to stay at home and raise
the children while the other two parents each work double
shifts, one to buy basic food while the other’s income
goes entirely into taxes?
Some are asking the Federal government
to grow into new and exciting areas, like health care,
day care, and even regulation of the Internet. There is
only one problem: The Constitution. That document
describes exactly and completely those areas which may
be legislated. If its not listed, its not allowed.
Period.
“But times have changed, and these are
such good ideas. You must modernize!” the proponents of
more Federal intervention say. If these are such good
ideas, why can’t they convince enough Americans of their
value so that they will amend the Constitution to allow
these actions legally? Because they aren’t such good
ideas, at least as far as the “general welfare” is
concerned. Americans aren’t stupid, and special
interests with pet projects know it. So they pretend the
Constitution doesn’t exist, or it’s outdated, or it
doesn’t mean what it says.
The problem is that so much “modernization”
has taken place that, if the Constitution was a
blueprint, and the Federal government was the building
supposedly represented in the blueprints, the Fed would
never pass inspection and would have to be torn down due
to “variance from specification.”
The Constitution describes a strong building
with a firm foundation and plenty of structural integrity
to allow reasoned and robust expansion. The current
Federal government looks more like a squatter’s
shanty-town camp of political special interest refugees.
It is ragged, uncontrolled, ever expanding, mismatched
conglomeration of illegal residents, and a huge, unsafe
burden to its host.
WHAT IS CORRUPT
Attorney General Janet Reno says she is
“studying the law” to determine if criminal charges for
illegal campaign finance donations are warranted. Maybe
we can give her a little help.
Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown personally
shook down hundreds of business people for campaign
“donations.” Regulations were changed, special favors
were given, free trips and meetings were sponsored, and
favorable changes in the law were proposed for major
campaign “contributors.” Under Brown, the whole
Department of Commerce was little more than shake-down
agency for the financial arm of the president’s
reelection campaign. Brown might be dead now, but others
involved in selling special favors are still at Commerce.
Then, as painfully evident as a thumb
freshly smashed with a hammer, there’s the China
connection. Certainly, there was at least one Red China
mole within the administration. There were also four or
more others funneling illegal Communist Chinese money
into the Clinton, Clinton & Gore campaign fund. That
fact has become so glaringly obvious that even the
liberal New York Times and Washington Post newspapers are
writing about it. About the only verification missing is
an official communication admitting the deed from the
Communists running the Chinese government.
Major news reports place co-president
Hillary, and/or her secretary, collecting campaign funds
from Chinese operatives right in the White House.
Normally, campaign finance laws would not apply to the
First Lady. However, Hillary wants to interfere in
government. Therefore, she is culpable and should also
be charged.
On the other hand, Ozone-head Al is
specifically required to follow all campaign laws. And,
after sixteen years in Congress, he knows perfectly well
that it is a federal felony to hustle campaign
contributions while on federal property. Gore admitted
publicly to making calls to major campaign contributors
from his vice-president’s office. The penalty is three
years in prison for each occurrence, and we know of at
least fifty.
All this happened after the White House
legal council had already made it a point to inform
everyone that hustling campaign contributions on federal
property was specifically against the law. Gore’s
illegal fund-raising activities, of course, had Slick’s
(and the co-president’s) approval.
Ozone-head’s actions are especially
onerous. Many contributors called Gore’s fund-raising
pitch little more than a heavy-handed shakedown. Most of
these people had millions of dollars of business with the
federal government, and so would be very susceptible to
slight changes in federal law or regulations. They
couldn’t afford to take a chance of not contributing.
And Gore’s reply? “I’m proud of what I
did. I did not do anything wrong, but I will not do it
again.” Now he’s trying to say that the words “any
person” in the law do not apply to him. Whew!
On October 6, 1993, Clinton signed into
law the Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993. At that
time he announced: “The federal workplace, where the
business of our nation is done will still be strictly off
limits to partisan political activity.” The White House
is one such “federal workplace.”
Yet since then, nearly everything this
administration did involved partisan politics and the
reelection campaign.
So, while Janet Reno still states the
need to “study” the law, one thing seems quite evident
to most everyone else: This administration violated
every single campaign finance law on the books -- and, at
least a few times each. And, each and every violation
is a felony offense.
The facts are clear. Now is the time for
Congress to act. There is no reason to wait for Janet
Reno to “decide,” or for a special prosecutor to
investigate. Congress must enforce the law. And the
only way Congress can legally do this is by impeaching
the whole of this administration.
Indeed, to not begin impeachment proceedings
immediately is to prove to many American citizens their
worst fears: That members of the central government
really are, in fact, above the law.
-- End --