Matthew Shea
Tenth Amendment Center
August 16, 2010
I, like many people, believe that the Constitution is not a living document. The corollary to this principle is that if it is not living then it cannot die. However, the question of whether the Constitution is followed and enforced depends on you and me. We introduced the legislation outlined in Part I of the plan and predictably many Obama defenders in our state House began calling us racist and secessionist. In fact, the quote from our Speaker Pro Tem Jeff Morris (D – Mount Vernon) was “We want to lead the state out of recession. They want to lead the state out of the country.” Obviously, this is absurd. The intent of the state sovereignty Bills are to erect barriers against an ever-encroaching federal bureaucracy, while keeping the nation unified. That said, Washington D. C. is on a course that will destroy our Constitutional Republic. Nationalized Health Care and a national Cap and Trade program will not lead us out of a recession but rather will further crush our economy. If the federal government would get out of the way, we would be free as individual states to fix our own problems as the founders intended.[i]
To that end, recently some Attorneys General across the country are questioning the constitutionality of Nationalized Health Care. In fact, at least 18 states are now suing the federal government claiming the $2.5 trillion healthcare system reform violates state sovereignty as protected in the U.S. Constitution and will force massive new spending on hard-pressed state governments. Interestingly, some of the state Attorneys General claim that only the judicial branch may decide what is or is not constitutional but not state elected representatives or county sheriffs.[ii] This flies in the face of the requirement set forth in Article VI of the U.S. Constitution (Oath to support the Constitution binding both federal and state representatives). To hold such a position renders that Oath of Office meaningless, and brings back the very scary proposition “befehl ist befehl” (an order is an order) used as a defense by Nazi officers at Nuremburg. It is important to know where your State Attorney General stands on this issue because Part II of the plan deals with state and local enforcement of unconstitutional laws.
What follows is Part II of the plan.
Step 3: Restore Sound and Honest Money
The control over the issuance of money is at the heart of sovereignty. Our current fiat paper currency is losing value by the minute and you and I are paying for it by the day. Most readers of this article know that since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913 in order to “provide a safer, more flexible banking and monetary system” and ensure “stability in the purchasing power of the dollar.” Since that time the US dollar has lost 97% of its value. So what can we do at the state level? In order to restore a system of sound money two immediate pieces of legislation can be introduced:
The more pressure states put on Congress to audit the Federal Reserve System, the greater the chance is that it will be exposed as a private group of bankers profiteering at public expense and then be phased out. Like the state sovereignty resolutions, the Sound Money Resolution would put the government on notice to return to the original monetary system envisioned by our founders.[iii] This means an end to the fractional reserve banking as we know it and a return to currency that is backed by gold and silver and perhaps even commodities.
Dr. Edwin Viera Jr., a constitutional attorney and an expert in monetary theory who has litigated cases involving money issues, has said that the entire present monetary system is unconstitutional. He proposes a precious-metals-based monetary system in which the state government collects part of its tax revenue from corporations in gold. New Hampshire and Indiana, currently have that kind of legislation before them. I would add that the next step should be to establish a private currency exchange in conjunction with a new monetary system. This will be the subject of a future article.
Next, states can require the federal government to tender all payments in gold and silver. The U.S. Constitution in Article 1 section 10 clearly states “No State shall…coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts…”[iv] The practical result of returning to this constitutional requirement will likely be the federal government ceasing to send any money to the states. What an excellent day that would be! This would force states to budget and fix problems themselves without relying on federal handouts. Another benefit will be ensuring state solvency even if the federal government goes bankrupt. Lastly, it calls the bluff of the federal government. You will recall in Part I of the plan the creation of a Federal Tax Escrow Account, which would offset this loss of money. It will become immediately apparent which states send the federal government more money than they receive.
Step 4: If State Legislatures Fail, Introduce the Laws through the Initiative Process READ ENTIRE ARTICLE
