PDA

View Full Version : Boenher’s Super Committee - transforming our representative system of government!




johnwk
09-17-2011, 03:21 PM
.

To fully understand the despotic nature of Boenher’s approved “Super Committee”, which may impose its will using the threat of blackmail [the threat to drastically reduce the funding of our nation’s military defense to encourage patriotic members of Congress to accept the Committee’s proposals], one needs to simply analyze the Washington Establishment’s repeated attempts to vest line item veto powers in the hands of the president which likewise proposes to concentrate policy making power in the hands of a few, and would also open the door to the evils of blackmail in the setting of public policy.

If line item veto were available to the executive branch of government, special interest projects and pork barrel spending favored by the president would almost assuredly prevail over projects and pork disfavored by the president. But, let us start from the beginning because understanding our Constitution and the documented intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, will expose those who now attempt to subjugate the thoughtful balance of powers our founding fathers wrote into our Constitution, especially its separation of power between a law making body [Congress], an Executive to enforce the laws, and a Supreme Court whose primary function is to document and articulate the legislative intent of our Constitution.

In regard to line item veto power, Article 1, Section 7 of our federal Constitution contains a precise procedure for the president to follow regarding a bill having passed both houses of Congress ''__if he approve, he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated__'' . No allowance has been granted to the president by the Constitution to alter a bill to his own liking by striking some parts and leaving others, and returning a bill so amended to the House in which it originated.

Likewise, no provision can be pointed to in our Constitution granting power to Congress to overrule the precise procedure stated in Article 1, Section 7 and vest in the president a “line item veto power” which is constantly sought by our Washington Establishment.

And why is “line item veto power” something to be dreaded by a freedom loving people? Madison`s Notes on the Convention of 1787 informs us that only three of the original 13 States allowed their executive to exercise a veto power (Massachusetts, South Carolina and New York), And, in discussing veto power, Benjamin Franklin, on June 4 of the Constitutional Convention (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_604.asp), reminds the delegates how veto power had been exercised by royal governors and why the Convention should not grant such power to the president. He says:


''The negative of the governor was constantly made use of to extort money. No good law whatever could be passed without a private bargain with him. An increase of salary or some donation, was always made a condition; till at last, it became the regular practice to have orders in his favor on the treasury presented along with the bills to be signed, so that he might actually receive the former before he should sign the latter. When the Indians were scalping the Western people, and notice of it arrived, the concurrence of the governor in the means of self-defense could not be got, until it was agreed that the people were to fight for the security of his property, whilst he was to have no share of the burdens of taxation.''

In fact, the primary objection to line item veto power being vested in the President is the associated blackmailing power that is connected to line item veto power.

The Convention finally did reach a compromise, and granted veto power to the president, but only in the limited fashion as detailed in Article 1, Section 7, which preempts the kind of presidential blackmail the innovative line-item veto proposal most assuredly would resurrect if lodged in the President‘s hands.

Similarly, Boenher’s dirty dozen “Super Committee” intentionally introduces the element of blackmail, by linking the funding our nation’s defense to a “YEA” or “NAY” vote upon the dirty dozen committee’s proposals!

But now, let us take a close look at some of the particulars of Boenher’s approved “Super Committee”.

Will the Representatives of each of the States be present on the “Super Committee“? No!

Will the Super Committee be creating proposed legislation? Yes!

When the proposed legislation is introduced in the House of Representatives, will the Representatives of each of the State’s various Districts be allowed to offer amendments to the proposed legislation to reflect the views of the people they represent? No!

When the proposed legislation is put up for a vote for passage, does a “no” vote automatically then require major cuts in our nation’s military defense? Yes!

Is it a fact then that Representatives of all but six States will be voting upon proposed legislation that they had absolutely no part in “making“, and if they should vote “no” on its passage, the funding of our military will be cute drastically? Yes!


Does our Constitution not state 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.” Yes!

Does our Constitution not define the House of Representatives as being composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States and not just six states? Yes.

Will the Representatives of the “several States” been involved in the “making” [offering amendments to and voting up or down on amendments offered] of legislation to reflect their constituent’s views of the handiwork of the “Super Committee”? No!

Is it not a fact that the people’s Representatives of all voting districts in the united States but six will be blackmailed into voting to approve legislation they had no part in making [offering amendments to and voting up or down on amendments offered], and especially so if they disapprove of a further weakening of our nation’s defense? Yes!

Is Boenher’s procedure to adopt legislation what you would call a representative “Republican Form of Government”, which is guaranteed under Article 4, Section 4 of our Constitution? If you do, then you would be in disagreement with our founding fathers who intended that at a minimum a majority of the people’s representatives would be present in the “making” of legislation. And they also intended that on proposed legislation, prior to an up or down vote for passage and during its debate, the people’s representatives would have the occasion to offer amendments to reflect their constituents views. Instead, under the Dirty Dozen Committee’s work, and when it is put before the House for an up or down vote, the people’s Representatives of all but six voting districts will be blackmailed into voting yes if they should see as a lethal threat to America’s safety, a further cutting in its military defensive power.

The very idea of this Committee of Twelve is to fundamentally transform our representative system of government and concentrate the law making power in the hands of the few [the Washington Establishment‘s inside crowd], and effectively exclude the people’s Representatives from the making of legislation!

And now we find Boehner wants to use the Committee’s blackmailing power to impose “tax reform” which keeps alive the socialistic tax on incomes, rather than returning to our Constitution’s original tax plan which encouraged members of Congress to be the servants of the people rather than their masers. See: Boehner wants tax reform on super committee menu (http://news.yahoo.com/boehner-wants-supercommittee-mull-tax-reform-140234073.html)

“WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican on Thursday will call on a special congressional committee to consider tax reform that would close loopholes but not raise rates as part of its bid to cut the deficit, an aide said.”

And what does Boehner have in common with Obama? Surprise! Obama also has big ideas for the unconstitutional blackmailing power of the Super Committee. See: Tax the Rich Aspect of Jobs Bill Punted to Super Committee (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/obama-jobs-bill-tax-rich/story?id=14503080)

“The president said Monday he hopes the special congressional supercommittee already charged with making $1.5 trillion in cuts to reduce the deficit by Nov. 23 will "overachieve" and consider his proposals to pay for the plan, which is intended to stimulate job creation.”


JWK

“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”, no longer in print.

johnwk
09-18-2011, 05:37 PM
Just for the record, I believe there is an extremely strong legal case to be made that the Representatives of those Districts who originally voted against the “Super Committee”, as well as their constituents, are being effectively excluded from the law making process as the process was intended to function by our founding fathers, e.g., see AUGUST 10TH OF THE CONVENTION, MADISON’S NOTES (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_810.asp) when the rule for a Majority of either House being present to do business was being discussed:



Col. MASON. This is a valuable & necessary part of the plan. In this extended Country, embracing so great a diversity of interests, it would be dangerous to the distant parts to allow a small number of members of the two Houses to make laws. The Central States could always take care to be on the Spot and by meeting earlier than the distant ones, or wearying their patience, and outstaying them, could carry such measures as they pleased. He admitted that inconveniences might spring from the secession of a small number: But he had also known good produced by an apprehension, of it. He had known a paper emission prevented by that cause in Virginia. He thought the Constitution as now moulded was founded on sound principles, and was disposed to put into it extensive powers. At the same time he wished to guard agst. abuses as much as possible. If the Legislature should be able to reduce the number at all, it might reduce it as low as it pleased & the U. States might be governed by a Juncto- A majority of the number which had been agreed on, was so few that he feared it would be made an objection agst. the plan.



Under Boenher’s Dirty Dozen Committee, which is to be selected not by the people but by the Washington Establishment, the various States, and, the people of the various congressional districts within the States, are not all represented in the making of law, which is not only a violation of the very intention for which Article 1, Section 5 was adopted, but it is a direct assault upon our “Republican Form of Government” guaranteed under Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution of the united States in that the people’s representatives of all but six States are intentionally excluded from the law making process, and may only vote on the adoption of a law after it is made by a Washington Establishment‘s inside crowd, and then must vote under the threat of blackmail and extortion with the funding of America’s defense in the balance.



How sweet of Boenher to put one of Congress’ constitutionally mandated functions, our nation’s military defense, under a threat of being defunded to obtain an approving vote for what his Dirty Dozen Committee cooks up behind closed doors. In some respected political circles and in view of the fact America is now effectively at war, I suspect such action would be considered as treasonous!



Excluding the vast number of the people’s elected Representatives from the law making process is certainly not what our founding fathers intended when adopting our Constitution. But it is up to those Representatives who voted against the Dirty Dozen Committee along with their constituents, to rise up and demand their input in the “making of law“.



Keep in mind from the very beginning of our newly formed federal government, part of the law making process is the allowance of each and every member of the House to have the occasion to offer up amendments on proposed legislation. This is even acknowledged in Jefferson’s Manual which every member of Congress receives when taking their seat in Congress.



When the House is set to do business which requires a quorum to be present, proposed bills, and this would include whatever the “Dirty Dozen Committee” has cooked up, may be presented, “… the Clerk reads it at the table, and hands it to the Speaker, who, rising, states to the House the title of the bill; that it is the first time of reading it; and the question will be, whether it shall be read a second time? then sitting down to give an opening for objections.” See, SEC. XXIV ___ BILLS, FIRST READING, page 178 of Jefferson's Manual



It is at this point in the “making of law” procedure, prior to a bill being recognized in Congress as a bill, and prior to it being committed and engrossed, all of which is necessary for a bill to have been legislated into existence and originating in the House within the context of our Constitution, that our Washington Establishment wishes to fundamentally transform in such a manner as to exclude the people’s Representatives of all but six Congressional Districts, and concentrate the law making power in the hands of the few, and the few being selected by the Washington Establishment, whose proposals must then be voted under the duress of blackmail and extortion.



Is this what the various States agreed upon when adopting our Constitution which specifically guarantees a representative “Republican Form of Government”, to be excluded from the law making process? I think not! But if anyone can find an instance in which our founding fathers engaged in what Boenher is now complicit in, please feel free to post the documentation. And just to give assistance in providing such documentation, here is a LINK TO THE ANNALS OF CONGRESS (http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwac.html) which covers the law making activities of Congress from 1789 to 1824.



JWK



Until the people have, by some solemn and authoritative act,[e.g. amending our Constitution] annulled or changed the established form, it is binding upon themselves collectively, as well as individually; and no presumption, or even knowledge, of their sentiments, can warrant their representatives in a departure from it, prior to such an act. FEDERALIST NO. 78

.

johnwk
09-19-2011, 06:20 AM
What is most remarkable is, the Washington Establishment tried to get this concentration of power going with its blackmail and extortion feature into operation with their line item veto power, which was fortunately struck down by the Supreme Court. And now they are back with an even more blatant and sweeping attempt to concentrate the law making power in the hands of the few, while keeping the same feature of blackmail and extortion as their weapon of choice.

JWK


America we have a problem! We have a group of DOMESTIC ENEMIES (http://republicmainstreet.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/members-of-the-congressional-progressive-caucus-is-your-representative-a-member/) who have managed to seize political power and whose mission is in fact to bring “change” to America ___ the dismantling of our military defensive power; the allowance of our borders to be overrun by foreign invaders, the diluting of our election process by allowing ineligible persons to vote; the circumvention of our Republican Form of Government which is now replace with a 12 member committee vested with power to make law; the destruction of our manufacturing capabilities; the transferring of America’s technology to hostile foreign nations; the strangulation of our agricultural industry and ability to produce food under the guise of environmental necessity; the destruction of our nation’s health care delivery system, the interference with our ability to develop our natural resources, namely oil, to fuel our economy; the looting of both our federal treasury and a mandatory retirement pension fund; the brainwashing of our nation’s children in government operated schools; the trashing of our nation’s traditions and moral values; the creation of an iron fisted control unauthorized by our written Constitution over America’s businesses and industries; the devaluation of our nation’s currency, and, the future enslavement of our children and grand children via unbridled debt and inflation, not to mention an iron fisted government which intends to rule their very lives!