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 --