Constitution Party Of Missouri Meeting in Boise Idaho

They reject the fact that our rights are a gift from God and that they cannot properly be alienated by politicians, judges, or bureaucrats.

Our elite adversaries reject the notion that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, asserting rather that the governed are the servants of the governors.

The very first sentence in the U.S. Constitution, following the Preamble, in Article I, Section One, states that “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”.

Every word of this sentence has meaning – – – “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States”.

No other element of our Federal Republic than Congress may Constitutionally exercise legislative powers – – – not Federally funded non-profit corporations, not regulatory agencies, not judges, not the Federal Reserve, not the civil service, not any international bureaucracy, and not any Presidential Executive Order which is not legislatively authorized.

None of these usurpations is properly accountable to the states and the people through the Congress, as Article I, Section One requires.

The words “herein granted” are very important, because even the Congress, the principal branch of the Federal government, can properly exercise only those powers which are granted – – – and those powers which are vested, a term which makes clear that such vested powers cannot rightly be surrendered, subordinated, or transferred.

Article I, Section Eight of the Constitution stipulates that “The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States”.

Listen carefully: power “to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States”.

Except for these purposes specified in Article I, Section Eight, Congress has no rightful authority to collect taxes, duties, imposts, or excises.

Article I, Section Eight says “Congress shall have Power…to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations”, but Congress has surrendered this power and this responsibility to such international entities as NAFTA and the World Trade Organization.

Even as we gather here, President Bush is mounting another push for so-called “fast track” authority to once again strip Congress of its authority to craft trade policies.

Article I, Section Eight authorizes Congress “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures”.

Congress, at the outset, regulated the value of money. 371 ¼ grains of silver is, by statute, the content of a dollar. Constitutional money is by weight, whether minted domestically or provided via foreign coin. That’s why Article I, Section Eight, in the same clause, gives Congress the power to fix the standard of weights and measures.

The Spanish coin, “Pieces of Eight”, functioned as a dollar for much of our history. Two bits was a quarter dollar. Four bits was half a dollar. The Spanish dollar was divisible into eight bits.

Article I, Section Eight gives Congress the power “To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court”. That which Congress establishes, it may also disestablish. All Federal courts below the Supreme Court exist only at the sufferance of Congress.

Congress, not the President, has power “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

Similarly, Article I, Section Eight gives Congress power “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.

Today, some Republicans and most Democrats in Congress want to disregard the provision in Article I, Section Eight which gives Congress power “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District…as may…become the Seat of the Government of the United States”.

Now, the Nancy Pelosis and the Tom Davises of the world want to treat D.C. as if it were a state, with rights of representation in the U.S. House of Representatives equal to those exercised by each of the several states.

Article I, Section Eight also gives Congress the responsibility to “exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings”.

Yes, it is possible for Congress to authorize the establishment and maintenance of defense facilities within the boundaries of the United States, but there is no Federal authority for parks, monuments, or other uses of lands which are legitimately within the purview of the several states.

The three branches of the Federal government are separate, but not equal. Our Article I Legislative branch is superior to our Article II Executive branch, and to our Article III Judicial branch.

According to Article II, the President “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur”.

Article VI says “The Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding”.

Some people argue that Article VI of the Constitution should be interpreted to mean that ratified treaties, when in conflict with the Constitution, take precedence.

Does it make sense that a treaty once ratified, supersedes conflicting provisions of the Constitution?

That is an absurd notion. Our founding fathers were not stupid. They established difficult procedures to amend the Constitution, including, as one procedure, a requirement that two-thirds of both houses of Congress may propose amendments and that such amendments are to take effect only upon ratification by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states.

Did the framers intend that the Constitution could be amended in consequence of a treaty signed by the President and ratified by two-thirds of the U.S. Senate, with no participation by the House and no required ratification by three-fourths of the several states? Of course not. Yet there are those today who argue that treaties supersede the Constitution.

Article III, Section One makes clear that “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish”.

Over the years, the size of the Supreme Court has varied, as may be directed by statute and, as previously indicated, inferior courts ordained and established by the Congress may be unordained and disestablished.

“The Judges, both of the Supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior”, Article III stipulates.

There are Constitutional scholars who believe, as do I, that “good behavior” is properly defined as fidelity to the Constitution, and, moreover, that, if a judge is unfaithful to the Constitution, he can be removed by the solitary act of the President or by a majority vote of both house of Congress.

Impeachment is not required as a punishment for Constitutional infidelity by a judge.

Of great significance, with respect to the so-called high court, Article III says “the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make”.

We don’t need a Constitutional amendment to prohibit abortion, to ban sodomy, to protect private property, or to reject quotas.

Congress has the authority and, in my view, the duty to withhold jurisdiction from the Supreme Court in matters such as these.

Article IV, Section Four says “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion”.

Why has Congress not acted decisively to end the invasion of its constituent states by illegal aliens? It is long past time for Congress and the President to act.

It also needs to be emphasized that the Constitution of the United States is a Christian document.

This is made clear by its recognition of the Sabbath as a day which does not count against the deadlines imposed on the President to exercise his veto authority.

Article I, Section Seven deals with vetoes. It says “If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sunday excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law”.

Similarly, Article VII concludes with this language: “done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty-seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth”.

In yet another glaring example of a disregard of the Constitution, even some of the most crucial elements of our Bill of Rights have been set aside by our Congresses, our Presidents, and our courts.

Amendment I says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”.

Those who would remove the Ten Commandments from public places are acting in violation of the protections asserted in the First Amendment.

Those who support restrictions on political participation, such as those incorporated in the Federal Election Law Amendments of 1974 and the McCain-Feingold Act are, by their acts of omission and commission, putting their political prejudices above our Bill of Rights guarantees.

Any and all gun control laws passed by Congress violate the Second Amendment, which makes clear that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”.

The Patriot Act violates the Fourth Amendment, which says “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated”.

The Tenth Amendment, which punctuates the first ten amendments constituting the Bill of Rights, says “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people”.

The Tenth Amendment is violated almost every day that Congress is in session.

The Fourteenth Amendment, which was not properly ratified, and which has improperly been treated as part of the Constitution, says “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside”.

This has been interpreted to confer birthright citizenship, and also to make one a citizen of his home state, secondarily, in a manner subordinate to and apart from his citizenship in the United States.

I could spend the whole day talking about the Sixteenth Amendment, its fraudulent ratification, and its comprehensive misinterpretation.

Let me simply say: we need to set aside the Sixteenth Amendment, abolish the IRS, and eliminate the income tax.

I am confident that every one here would agree with me that 1913 was a very bad year for our Constitutional Republic: the establishment of the Federal Reserve, which taxes us by inflating the money supply and diminishing the value of our earnings and our savings – – – the attachment to the Constitution of the Sixteenth Amendment – – – and ratification of the Seventeen Amendment, which causes our U.S. Senators to be chosen, not by the legislatures of the states, but by so-called popular vote, a fact which has greatly enhanced the power of Big Media and Big Money.

Because of the Seventeenth Amendment, we have a situation in which a significant plurality of the members of the U.S. Senate are either millionaires themselves or deeply burdened by obligations to millionaires in the media, to multi-national corporations, and to other elements of concentrated financial power – – – instead of to the states and the citizens to whom they ought be accountable.

Since the creation of the Fed in 1913, the purchasing power of the dollar has declined to the point where in the Year 2001 it was worth merely 4 cents, compared to the 1913 dollar.

Thus far, I have shared with you a great deal of bad news. I need to seek your pardon for this because, as members of the Constitution Party, you are used to hearing and understanding the bad news, even as, you are well aware of what our founding fathers had in mind and what the real history of the United States was, even though that history is currently ignored and obfuscated in the government schools, which are unconstitutionally funded by the Federal government.

Today, under budgets proposed by President Bush and approved by the Congress, more than $3 trillion per year are being expended from the Federal treasury, all but about $600 billion for activities which are unconstitutionally beyond the delegated, enumerated functions which the Constitution authorizes.

This compares with outlays of $1.9 trillion in 2001, the first year of the Bush Administration.

The good news is that all of this can be turned around if we can get a President and a strong minority in Congress to offer a Grand Bargain to the American people which, in summary, would end all obligations to pay income taxes to the Federal government – – – in return for the election of members of the U.S. House and Senate who pledge to oppose unconstitutional expenditures, even to the point of sustaining any and all vetoes of such improper expenditures.

Here is one way in which such a Grand Bargain could be brought about: a Constitutionally committed President could be elected in 2008 on the basis of a platform setting forth just such a Grand Bargain as I have described: a tradeoff between abolition of individual tax obligations and abolition of unconstitutional expenditures.

Upon taking office, on January 20, 2009, this President would propose a Constitutional budget of about $600 billion, primarily for national defense.

Commitments under the Social Security and Medicare programs would be honored in the context of a buyout subsidized by the Federal government’s sale to the states, or to the private sector of lands and properties which it now unconstitu-tionally owns, operates, occupies, or oversees.

Most likely, the Congress elected in 2008 would have spending ideas different from those of a Constitutionally committed President and would, in all likelihood, override in 2009 his vetoes of the unconstitutional outlays.

It would then be up to the President to go to the American people and say that, in 2010, he would support only candidates for the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate who publicly commit themselves to sustain any and all of his vetoes of unconstitutional expenditures.

I will support such candidates, would say the President, regardless of their party label. If you, the people, join with me in supporting such candidates and they honor their pledges to sustain my vetoes, it will become financially possible to liberate you from the payment of income taxes.

In order to have his vetoes sustained in the 112th Congress coming to power in 2011, it would not be necessary to have two-thirds of those elected to support his vetoes or even a majority of those elected in 2010.

One-third plus one of the members in one house, either 146 members of the House of Representatives or 34 members of the Senate, should they vote to sustain his vetoes, would be enough to cut off all of the expenditures which that Constitutionally committed President deemed to be unconstitutional.

As part of this Grand Bargain with the American people, Congress would be required to abolish the IRS code, and eliminate all purported obligations for payment of income taxes.

If Congress failed to act, the President could then, as Chief Executive, withhold funding for the IRS and terminate tax collections.

In cases where the President’s vetoes were not sustained, he could then use the power of impoundment, a power exercised by nearly every President, beginning with George Washington, until the days of Richard Nixon.

In this manner, the Federal government would no longer fund Planned Parenthood or Gay Men’s Health Crisis, or the Public Broadcasting System, or the National Endowment for the Arts, or the Department of Education, or foreign aid, or the United Nations, or any other unconstitutional appropriation, program, or entity.

There is more I could say about the termination of the Federal government’s role in welfare and other so-called entitlement programs, but my time is limited.

Let me conclude by emphasizing that the two key principles which undergird our American Republic are the principles of sovereignty and accountability: the sovereignty of God and the ability of you and me and every one of our fellow citizens to hold the Federal government accountable to us and to the states in which we reside.

It is in fulfillment of these core principles that you and our colleagues in the Constitution Party have been working since 1992, and for which I also have been working through The Conservative Caucus and other related venues.

Constitutional conservatives must stop contenting ourselves with the idea that our task is to lose as slowly as possible.

The only battles we lose are the ones which we fail to fight. Let us have a vision of victory – – – let us strive tirelessly to make that vision a reality, and, by God’s grace, may we be privileged to play the decisive part in achieving the restoration of these United States of America as an independent Constitutional republic.

Let us pray that God will choose to use us, and that you and each of us will be blessed for our faithful participation in His cause.

May God guide our steps and continue to bless our beloved country – – – as our remnant takes the lead in rejecting the anti-Christian culture which is a stench in God’s nostrils.

As George Washington said, at a critical moment during the Philadelphia Convention which birthed our Constitution:

“If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disbelieve, how may we then afterward defend our work?

“Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest may repair – – – recognizing that the event is in the hands of God.”