Heads Up

A Weekly View from the Foothills of Appalachia

February 22, 1998
Issue #73

by: Doug Fiedor
E-mail to: fiedor19@eos.net

Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html


Overlooked by many of our friends and neighbors watching that grossly overreaching hand of the federal regulatory bureaucracy was a great piece in Investor's Business Daily on February 13, 1998. The article reports on a paper written by H. Sterling Burnett of the National Center for Policy Analysis, titled "Reg Reformers Learn to Crawl Before They Walk." This is good stuff. It should be rubbed in the nose of every single member of Congress.

Investor's Business Daily reports: "Federal rules and regulations have backfired, causing outcomes ranging from waste to death. In their rush to make the country risk-free, regulators have often failed to see -- and in some cases have ignored -- the damage their rules can do."

For instance: "When the government ordered automakers to install passenger-side air bags in cars, regulators forgot to mention that the devices were potentially deadly to infants, toddlers and short adults -- and children died."

The report goes on to mention a Harvard University Brookings Institution study reporting that shaving weight off new cars to meet the government's mandatory fuel economy standards has caused an additional 2,200 to 3,900 highway deaths a year. Many researchers are estimating that new ozone rules alone could actually result in 7,000 deaths a year. "Yet the urge to regulate continues to grow -- with the size of the Federal Register, which announces new and proposed rules, expanding by 70,000 pages in 1994 alone."

Some call them "regulations." But, to the normal American citizen, they are laws; laws which were unilaterally imposed on America by unelected bureaucrats. Because, when they are taking you to court and fining or imprisoning you for a breach of one of these regulations, there is no distinction. Calling these things "regulations," rather than "laws," is little more than a cheap trick in political semantics to get around the Constitutional provision that only Congress may make law.

So, as Investor's Business Daily reports: "In an effort to rein in federal regulation -- which costs the average American household more than $6,000 per year – Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) introduced the Regulatory Improvement Act of 1997. The bill says the reasons for new regulations must be clear and justified."

The bill states that the American public has a right to know what certain regulations are supposed to do, and would require new mandates be subjected to a cost- benefit analysis. If regulatory agencies fail to use the least costly methods to fix health, safety and environmental problems, supposedly the public has a right to know why. Americans are also proposed to have a right to know the relative risks regulations are supposed to reduce. And, to discourage junk science, agencies must clearly state whatever scientific evidence the government has to back up the new rules.

In other words, the bill is little more than political rhetoric. Political pacification. Fluff. Baloney. It heaps Constitutional violation on top of Constitutional violation.

The very first sentence of our Constitution clearly states that: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress . . ." Only Congress may make law -- law being that which controls the actions of the citizens of the country. Rules, regulations and executive orders, then, are something other than law. Rules, regulations and executive orders may be used to direct the internal operation of government. But rules, regulations and executive orders should have no direct affect on the American people.

Senator Carl Levin is basically a socialist and doesn't know any better. Levin has always believed that the federal government knows more than the citizen and should control everything in the lives of the American people. But we expected more -- a lot more -- from Senator Fred Thompson. It's a shame, too. It looked like he had promise.

We already have something called the Regulatory Improvement Act, which has never once been used to defeat a regulation. The Congressional Review Act allows Congress 60 legislative days to review a rule. During that time, it can pass a joint resolution of disapproval -- which would stop the rule from taking effect.

Of course, that presupposes that someone in Congress is paying attention to what the regulatory agencies are doing. Which, of course, is not the case. The Lords and Ladies of the Hill cannot even find the time to read the bills they vote on, so forget about them reading rules, regulations or executive orders.

In fact, even the liberal Washington Post noticed the obvious negligence of Congress. In a February 13, 1998 piece by Cindy Skrzycki, titled: "Will Congress Wake Up to Its Rule-Blocking Weapon?" she writes in part:

"Advocates of the Regulatory Improvement Act hope they can jar Congress from its regulatory reform lethargy. The Congressional Review Act was supposed to be a weapon to block, or at least delay, questionable federal regulations. But the law hasn't helped remove even a single one of the 7,408 regulations that flowed out of dozens of federal agencies last year.

"Political observers say Congress isn't interested in blocking regulations. Some members prefer business as usual and others don't want to waste political capital attacking regulations that haven't roused public opposition. Some analysts say the strong economy has helped leave regulatory reform in the dust."

Not quite!

Congress may be negligent and basically impotent, but 'We the People' are not. The executive and legislative branches have greatly overextended their authority with these oppressive regulatory agencies. Worse, they continually disregard the opinions of the Supreme Court. So, they are soon to learn a very important lesson in grass roots politics. And, we have the United States Supreme Court opinions in "New York," "Lopez," "Printz," and others to back us up.

Today, tens of millions of American citizens want major changes in the federal regulatory bureaucracy. Many of these American citizens want the federal regulatory agencies totally abolished. The agencies may not be abolished, but their activities can be greatly curtailed. To that end, a definitive course of action is now coming out of the planning stage.

We SHALL Rout the Regulators. All of them. The Tenth Amendment shall prevail.

More on this as activities become public.


Even when they're trying to be serious, they're still fun to watch; because often they do not have a clue what they are talking about. I'm talking about the controlling elite in Washington, of course.

Americans watched and listened to President Clinton's press conference at the Pentagon on Feb. 17. He appeared tired and flubbed a few lines, but that's not the point. Everyone does that from time to time.

More interesting to those of us working in support of the Constitution is the way he compared the District of Columbia to a government compound in Iraq:

"One of these presidential sites is about the size of Washington, D.C. That's about -- how many acres did you tell me it was? -- 40,000 acres. We're not talking about a few rooms here with delicate personal matters involved."

The "delicate personal matters" crack did not pass without amusement to many of us out here in fly-over country. But we'll let that go for now.

During the presidential campaigns, the Boy from Dog Patch often bragged that he taught Constitutional law at the university level. The liberals in the national media also like to relate this fact as a method of pointing out how bright they think he is. Therefore, that leaves the subject wide open for us to point out a major disparity or two.

Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution states that, "Congress shall have the power 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."

As Clinton said, the District of Columbia includes about 40,000 acres. Which, at 640 acres per square mile, comes out to an area of 63 square miles. Oops!

Congress is mandated by the Constitution to oversee Washington, D.C. That is their playground. They are empowered to "exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever" in the District. However, as with many other tasks mandated to Congress by the Constitution, the duty was farmed out to a group not authorized by the Constitution: a city government. Consequently, Washington, D.C. is easily the worst run city in the country.

Congress, using the federal bureaucracies it set up, had another idea. Instead of exercising "exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever" over the little District of Columbia, it chose to extend that authority a bit. Congress, and the bureaucracies it created, now pass laws, rules and regulations to control all actions of all people in the United States.

No matter that the Constitution only allows that type of authority over the supposed ten square miles of the District and certain other government properties. The federal government intentionally disregard the Constitution's limitations by neglecting the District and legislating for every other place in the country.

That's right. Congress, and the executive branch, totally ignored the District for a couple of decades and concentrated on ruling the rest of the country, where it is forbidden by the Constitution to legislate. From the largest State governments to the smallest school districts, the will of the federal government is pervasive. From automobiles to zithers, from ditches to Big Macs and Whoppers, the heavy hand of the federal government controls it all.

It's more than just a matter of an extra 43 square miles and the mismanagement of the District of Columbia. The federal government has totally and completely forgotten its place in the scheme of things.

And this President doesn't have a clue.


You have got to be a flaming idiot to announce a war on a college campus and expect a good reception. It seems like at least a few of these leftist liberal war protesters of the 1960's now making up the Clinton administration would remember how it was. Or, perhaps this is just another example of how self-centered and egotistical this administration and its sycophants at CNN really are.

I mean, geezzz, give me a break here! Just cause they give their so called "town meeting" at the very liberal Ohio State University, they think things are going to be different? War is war. Who cares if it was started by conservatives or liberals after the shooting starts.

So, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Defense Secretary William Cohen and National Security Adviser Samuel Berger got the hot seat for a while. Good. It would have been totally amazing if anything else happened. As it was, CNN could only round up a crowd of 3,000 -- which was not even half of the capacity of the auditorium.

Their idea of a "town meeting" was a highly scripted forum, an "infomercial" for Iraq policy. It didn't work. It will never work. Americans will support the troops, but never that incompetent administration. And if that incompetent administration does not support the troops 100%, all hell is going to break out here.

Albright, who was clearly frustrated after repeated attempts at finishing her statement, asked CNN moderator Judy Woodruff: "Would you please tell these people I would be happy to talk to them after." University security personnel tossed out some of the demonstrators, but it didn't help much. Half of the audience were booing and jeering. Berger and Cohen got almost the same treatment from the crowd.

CNN's Judy Woodruff and Bernard Shaw acted like deer caught in the headlights. It appeared they thought there may be a riot -- and they were the center of attention. And, in truth, there was a great deal more action on the floor than on the stage.

Cohen told the crowd, "We do not see the need to carry out a large land campaign in order to topple Saddam Hussein. Our mission is to get the inspectors back. If they can't get back, to make sure he can't constitute or reconstitute this threat."

That, of course, is something less than the complete truth. Our inspectors were there for years. They destroyed a lot of war materials over the years. Then the Clinton Administration started to help, and Hussein retaliated. The investigators were first obstructed by the Iraqi government and later tossed out on their ears.

At the first sign of obstruction, the proper response to Hussein should have been simple: Tell them they have two hours to remove all people from the area refused access to inspectors because that building will cease to exist after that time. Bomb the place. Then, the building will no longer need to be inspected.

We did, after all, win the war. Those inspections were, therefore, there on our terms, not Iraq's. The Clinton Administration completely disregarded that fact.

And so too did the Clinton Administration blow the relationship with Saddam Hussein. Clinton thinks of the United States as the world's peace keeper, an international police department. Yet, Clinton allowed Hussein to make the United States look like the playground bully. Saddam thumbs his nose at us, and all Clinton does is rattle sabers -- selling wolf tickets, we used to call it in the Army. Vacant threats.

Hussein's Republican Guard are a proud lot. They would like to remain so. Because of that, they should have been used. An unofficial message to the Republican Guard that they will be totally and completely bombed off of the face of the earth, at our leisure, without warning, if the government if Iraq is not changed, could produce some very interesting results. . . .

When Clinton learns his saber rattling is not working, he sends U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan over to talk. Do we bow to the decision of Annan? Who knows. Probably. If so, nothing changed.

But right now, there are a couple other things we Americans should consider. One is that this talk of "weapons of mass destruction" is little more than political rhetoric being used to fan the flames of popular opinion here at home. All countries in that area of the world -- and many countries throughout the world -- have those very same weapons stockpiled.

Anyone wanting to see real weapons of mass destruction in operation should see our B-52's carpet- bombing. Take the word of an Army ground hugger, that massive display of raw power is both awesome and terrifying.

The other point is that, as Clinton attempts to disarm the American public, Saddam Hussein is passing out fully automatic AK-47's to anyone able to fire one.

The February 20 issue of the Federalist Digest summarizes the Iraqi situation quite succinctly: "A draft report by the U.S. House of Representatives Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, based on American, German, and Israeli intelligence, says that Iraq has secretly built chemical weapons plants in Sudan, transferred weapons-grade fissile materials to Algeria, and sent its top scientists to Libya with instructions to develop a biological warfare complex. Muslim terrorists in Hamas plan to attack Israel in the event of U.S. military strike against Iraq. Israel is preparing to turn Arab sand into molten glass with a very long half-life. Meanwhile, Mr. Clinton is busy entertaining Hollywood elite and White House interns."

Clearly, the Clinton Administration has made some very serious errors in foreign policy. China and Russia quickly come to mind. But the Iraq problem is easier to see. It is obvious that this administration is just too incompetent to deal effectively with any of these situations.

Everything happening points to one conclusion: Clinton does not have a clue what to do.


That's right. It's all going to end right here, in my neighborhood. We're paying attention, working together, making a difference, and whatever other cliché you might want to tag it with.

Remember the biosphere reserves? Gone! The local sheriff down around the Mammoth Cave area took a torch to the offending biosphere sign a few months ago. Kentucky people joined together to badger the hell out of Members of Congress to stop that biosphere madness and the people of America agreed, and joined in the quest. Congress responded by doing about three-quarters of what was necessary to effectively end the project.

Now we have a U.S. Senator who thinks it would be good for the federal government to own another chunk of Kentucky. He forgot that the U.S. Constitution mandates approval by the State legislature before that can happen. We collectively reminded him; and informed him that we the people will not allow such a vote to be approved in the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Our U.S. Senator is a bit miffed and confused, but he'll get over it someday.

Simply put, we the people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky do not want federal government agents interfering in our lives. To that end, we have every intention of enforcing all rights due us under the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Elected officials are beginning to learn that. Our basic problem now is with appointed bureaucrats, both State and federal.

Our future plans are simple. We will soon begin attempting to force elected officials to fire any and all bureaucrats who do not honor our State and national Constitutions as written. If elected officials do not do so, they will find a great number of citizens out on the street working against them during the next campaign cycle.

Some of us took on the Heritage River scam problem. State Senator Richard L. "Dick" Roeding suggested a resolution, much as he did with the biosphere reserve problem. Craig Brown, who writes here periodically, volunteered to draft such a resolution. The resolution was presented by State Senators Dick Roeding, Gex Williams, and others. And, as with the biosphere reserve resolution, it passed without dissent. The resolution states in part:

"The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky is unalterably opposed to the inclusion of any land within the borders of the Commonwealth within the purview of the AHRI [American Heritage Rivers Initiative] or any territorial use without the express consent of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, as provided by the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Kentucky."

Therein, the will of the people becomes the official opinion of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. We shall have no Heritage River projects in Kentucky. End of story.

Another win? No! Only a beginning. We still have hundreds of federal agents wandering our state, inflicting their will on State and local governments, school boards and citizens. This need not be. And, this should not be. Most people in Kentucky feel that we have quite enough State and local officials and do not need or want interference by the federal government. Therefore, we shall continue, one step at a time.

Anyone wishing information on the many grass roots programs currently in operation (and producing results) in Kentucky may write to Craig Brown at RRZH67B@prodigy.com. None of these programs require a great amount of expertise. All they require is that you get up off of your couch for a couple hours two or three times a month and talk with some of your friends and neighbors.

Many Americans have forgotten that the federal government is our government. We own it. The employees of the federal government are our employees, not our masters. And even though most of these employees have forgotten it, the Constitution is their job description. It is, therefore, our responsibility, as citizens, to ensure that government employees follow their job description to the letter. When they do not, it then becomes our duty to fire them.

-- End --