Tea Party Republican Debate

I just don't think any of the current candidates for the Republican presidential ticket have any understanding of what 1) the REAL truth means and 2) what the American people, much less the Tea Party people want to hear from them.  What really got me upset was when the moderator, Wolf, ask the very direct question; "Is Social Security Unconstitutional?"

The answer is simple: YES!  But certainly needs to be followed up with an explanation to the way forward for the program.

There is nothing, I repeat NOTHING in the US Constitution that allows for the federal government to redistribute money from one tax payer to other taxpayers.  The authority just isn't there.  To quote one of our founding fathers: "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”  James Madison said this in 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia while standing on the floor of the House.

The Tenth Amendment – "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", again, expressly denies that right to the federal government.

And even Ron Paul capitulated.  Politics and Politicians!!!

I was simply looking for one of them to stand for the truth.  I believe it would have gone a long way to solidifying the Tea Party vote.  And yes, even those currently on or soon to be on Social Security.

Because after stating that it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, they would have succinctly stated that the program has been in place for over 70 years and to think I could walk into the White House on day one and eliminate the program would be ludicrous.  But we do need to fix it.  How?

Simple.  This already paying into or receiving benefits have a simple choice of staying in the program or opting out.  The "Opt-Out", while not completely defined here, would be a graduated system where those closer to retirement keep paying the full SS taxes while those just starting in the workforce has all of their funds diverted to an Privately-held Social Security program (IRA).  The assumption is that those closer to retirement age would not opt-out.

The first thought that might come to many of your minds is: "Great, with funds starting to be diverted, how to we continue funding for those they choose not to Opt-Out?"  In my estimation if we take the ideas of Ron Paul (bringing most of our troops home from around the world), Newt Gingrich (modernizing the federal government) and all of the candidates (repeal ObamaCare) then the federal government has more than enough funds to fund Social Security until no-one is on or needs a federally funded Social Security system.

And lastly, I would establish a wealth cap for those receiving Social Security.  Social Security was started as a help-meet for those in need during there retirement years and has morphed into and expectation of retirement income.  And although it is not justifiable I would not continue to pay SS benefits to those who have no need for them (i.e. the wealthy).  On a side note:  I'd also eliminate the Congressional Retirement plan.  Why do we have a retirement plan for millionaires?!?!?

Okay, I've ranted.  Time to do other things.  Till next time.

Federalism Destroyed

I am going to ramble for a bit but I think that once I get through writing I will have somewhere in all of these words a coherent thought.  Well, let's hope so.

Think about any business or family problem that needs to be resolved.  If you only have one person throwing out solutions, that solution could very well be the worst idea anyone can have.  But unless you are able to compare it to other possible solutions you won't know until it is too late and you have invested time, talent and resources it the "wrong solution."  On the other hand, if you have more than one person, preferably several people, suggesting solutions it is more likely you are going to come up with a better solution.  Maybe not, but at least your odds are have been improved.

The Federalist system our Founding Fathers put forth was just the very system.  Yet better.  In Federalism you more than not, with 50 states, have 50 different solutions to the same problem be experimented on at the same time.  Eventually, over time, the best solutions gets adopted by all of the other states.  Some states adopt quickly while others are slow learners.  But the key is you have real-time experimental solutions to real world problems going on all the time.

Over time, as especially accelerating beginning in the early 20th century, our central government has destroyed the beautifully planned system of federalism.  Now we have one solution, whether right or wrong, disseminated to all 50 states at once.

So what's the solution for this very real and very dangerous problem.  Well, at the risk of going against my own philosophy spouted above, here is one solution from one man.  Of course this is only theoretical with little to no chance to ever be enacted.

Merger and acquisitions, and divestitures in the corporate world go on all the time.  Nothing new here and there are real expects at each.  I would propose we bring in several of these "divestiture" expert and divest the "central" government back to the "state" government.  Simple enough and I honestly don't think if the "shareholders" backed this plan that it would take more than one year to accomplish.

First, all state governments are already in place.  Second, many of the central government programs already have equivalent state offices at most or a physical presents at least within each state's boundaries.

Within a period of one fiscal year the central government can plan for the turnover of all assets and revenues to any and all programs deemed unconstitutional by a well-qualified board of scholars.  Picking this group would have its problems all on its own.  We'll assume for this purpose that we are able to put together an acceptable board.

This board, along with the "divestiture" board would outline what is to be retained by the central government.  Each item retained would have to fall into one of following categories:

1. National Defense
2. International or Interstate Commerce
3. Money & Taxation
4. Immigration & Citizenship

All powers, departments and revenues not identified above shall be transferred to the state governments and dealt with per each state governments prerogative; to continue as is, change or abolish as each state legislature deems fit; providing for its own sources of income or means to constitute perpetuity.

*********************************************************************************

The following are, with adjustments, the powers explicitly enumerated to the federal government in the present constitution.

 

Article I of the Constitution addresses the Legislative Branch. In Article I Section 8 the "Powers of Congress" are listed as this:

1. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, but all Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
2. To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
3. To regulate International and Interstate Commerce;
4. To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization;
5. To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
6. To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
7. To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
8. To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
9. To raise and support Armed Services;
10. To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the Armed Services;
11. To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
12. 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;
13. 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, and 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; And 

14. To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States and of Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and of All Offenses against the Law of Nations;

---

Article 1 Section 9 then lists the Limits on congress:

1. The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
2. No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
3. No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.
4. No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.
5. No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.