STOP IN THE NAME EX POST FACTO!

Article 1 Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states, "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." Known as the Supremacy Clause, Article Six, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution states, 

"This 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, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

The latter establishes the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and U.S. treaties as "the supreme law of the land." The former establishes that no law can change the legal consequences of action committed or relationships established before the enactment of the law. 

Those of the financial media have been abuzz about bond exit fees being imposed on extant contracts held by  retail owners of bond mutual funds. Peter Schiff gave a decent write up on the bond exit fee chatter. Far too many believe regulators of the SEC or even the Federal Reserve can impose such ex post facto rules without knowing what ex post facto means much less having ever read any part of the U.S. Constitution, much less Article 1 Section 9.

Likely, there shall be jokers who will cite  Justice Samuel Chase and Calder v. Bull suggesting the U.S. Supremes claim the ex post facto provision of the Constitution applies solely to criminal cases, not civil cases, but to do so would be yet another undemocratic, wrong ruling by U.S. Supreme Court justices (e.g., Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, Wickard v. Filburn, Kelo v New London,  National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius). Heritage.org has a nice write up on the Supreme Court history regarding ex post facto.

Should those at the SEC feel brazen to rule such fees must exist and should the U.S. Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Roberts agree, because you know such an SEC ruling will make to the USSC, that shall be the last shred of proof anyone needs to see Americans have not been living by their Constitution for years upon years.

Americans need to see reality. The U.S. Supreme Court system is broken. That nine judges can impose their will upon Americans hardly is democratic, especially old sleeping judges and judges who never created life but yet rule on the sanctity of life.


There should be 50 justices, not nine, one appointed from each state. States' legislators should appoint U.S. Supreme Court justices, not the president. Appointees should at least be 50 in age and have fathered or mothered children. The term for any U.S. Court Justice should not exceed 10 years.

Read more ...

CASHING IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS. TRUTH, JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN WAY.

The American way of life is the way of liberty. Said another way, it is the way of self-rule, of autonomy. At least it used to be. 

There were Americans long ago who had it right. Government is a creature of men and women living in society of property, a creature that must be controlled and contained. The creature never should never grow bigger and stronger than its creators. 

That is why those Americans gave us the Bill of Rights. All of the Bill of Rights deals with the duties the then newly formed federal government had with respect to any individual. 

However, since World War 1, successive Congresses have stripped Americans of the American way, little-by-little. Many Americans have been content to let this happen as long as they have gained income through subsidy, welfare or monopoly. 

The biggest failing in discourse over the Bill of Rights is the lack of talk emphasizing the duties of Congress and agents of government has to any American.

The Bill of Rights has nothing to do with the states in compact, which is what the rest of the Constitution details. The only mention of states within the Bill of Rights is in the 10th.

A reading of the Bill of Rights with the words of then-prevailing English explained reveals how far many Congresses have gone against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. What most fail to see is how the U.S. Supreme Court works in favor of its employer, Congress.

Acts in the 20th Century and even more so in the 21st Century have been disastrous to Americans and our Bill of Rights.

There isn't a United States without full adherence to the Bill of Rights. The Constitution becomes null and void without full compliance by Congress and its executive in their duties to our rights and their prohibition from our liberties.

1st Amendment

Congress can't make laws and thus diminish liberty (autonomy, or self-rule) regarding religion, public speaking, public congregation, public petition.

2nd Amendment

Congress and its executive have a duty not to interfere in anyone's expressly stated right both to possess (keep) weapons of any kind (arms) — guns, knives, spears, axes, shields — and to bring forth (bear) those weapons whenever. 

3rd Amendment

Congress is denied the right and thus any individual lacks the duty to house any soldier during peace — when Congress has not declared war. Only owners of houses have the duty to house soldiers during times when Congress has declared war, but Congress can only exercise this right if describing the exact manner of such housing with law.

4th Amendment

Congress and its executive have a duty not to interfere in anyone's expressly stated right of possession (secure) over themselves, their houses and contents thereof, their documents and everything they have produced (effects). Only when an agent of the Federal Government has a warrant that specifically and in detail describes exactly where should be searched, exactly what should be taken in possession (seized), and exactly who should be taken in possession (seized), can such an agent act. 

5th Amendment

Congress and its executive have a right to assemble a Grand Jury but have a duty to present legal document containing a charge (indictment) against anyone for a capital crime. 

Anyone has the right to ignore any claims of having committed a capital crime, unless Congress exercises its right to assemble a Grand Jury and perform its duty of indictment. 

Congress and its executive have the right to ignore the foregoing involving military personnel during times when Congress has formally declared war or when there has been decree of public danger. 

Anyone has the right not to be tried twice for the same crime. Anyone has the right to not testify against himself. 

Thus, government has the duty to not attempt to try anyone twice. Anyone of government has the duty to not try to force someone to testify against himself. 

Therefore, government lacks authority for torture. Anyone of government has the duty not to try to trick anyone into testifying against himself.

Congress and its executive have the duty to establish law and then perform in adherence to that law before taking anyone's life or right of ownership (property) in anything or before restricting anyone's liberty (autonomy, self-rule).

When Congress and its executive have fulfilled their duty to establish law to take away anyone's right of ownership (property) in something so that all Americans can use it (public), Congress must pay that one the prevailing market price (just compensation; equitable weighing of one thing against another) and not merely any sum they feel like paying.

6th Amendment

Congress and its executive have the duty to prosecute anyone (liability) in open court (public) and to do so swiftly (speedy; without delay). Thus, anyone has the right to be prosecuted only in open court and in short time from when being charged with a crime.

Anyone accused has the right to be judged by an impartial jury. Congress and its executive have the duty to assemble an impartial jury.

Congress and its executive have the duty to define legal districts and prosecute anyone only in that district.

Anyone accused has the right to be judged only within the court district where the alleged crime has been committed. 

Anyone accused has the right to be told the reason for action (cause) and what supposedly happen (nature; course of things).

Congress and its executive have the duty to present witnesses.

Congress and its executive have the duty to create law which establishes the means for anyone accused to have supporting witnesses (witnesses in his favor). 

Congress and its executive have the duty to create law which establishes the means for anyone accused to have a lawyer (Assistance of Counsel for his defence).

Anyone has the right to have supporting witnesses (witnesses in his favor). Anyone has the right to have lawyer.

7th Amendment 

Anyone has the right to a jury at trial when facing a loss of more than twenty dollars as the outcome.

Anyone has the right to not face twice in subsequent court the same facts presented in a case when that one faces a loss of more than twenty dollars as the outcome.

8th Amendment 

Congress and its executive have the duty to not impose oppressive (excessive) bail. 

Congress and its executive have the duty to not impose oppressive (excessive) fines.

Congress and its executive have the duty to not impose neither rude, unfeeling, bloody (cruel) punishment nor not ordinary, not custom (unusual) punishment.

9th Amendment

Merely listing the foregoing rights does not give Congress the right to later define duty upon anyone in other matters not contained in the Constitution, stripping anyone of liberty and imposing duty upon them.

10th Amendment

Unless expressly stated in the Constitution, Congress and its executive lack the authority (power)  to override the capacity (power) anyone has in liberty (autonomy, self-rule). 

As well, when the Constitution prohibits the States' legislatures and their executives from having authority (power), anyone keeps his capacity (power) in liberty (autonomy, self-rule). 

Only when the Constitution fails to prohibit the States' legislatures and their executives from having authority (power), can the States' legislatures and their executives take it upon themselves to establish law and thus imposing duty and conferring right.

For a crash course in jurisprudence, read here:

LAW VS LIBERTY AND THE AMERICAN WAY.

Read more ...

THIRD WORLD SKEPTICAL KID TALKS OBAMACARE

Read more ...

THE REAL REASON WHY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT DOESN'T WORK FOR AMERICANS ANYMORE.

A few years back, when Congressmen created Medicare Part D, they did so because they grew weary of debating each year for each budget to pay for prescription drugs for Medicare recipients. Since Part D, no longer do Congressmen need to debate this as the program gets funded automatically, regardless of cost.

Americans now see the fiasco that is Obamacare, from the whopper of the Big Lie of "If you like your plan, you can keep it," told by Obama to the failed sign-up web site. 

Americans are awakening to the reality that it is Congress who wrecks everything for Main Street Americans. Americans now see that rather than working for them, Congress works for luxury-living Manhattan and Beverly Hills Americans who, through lobbying and campaign financing, gain unearned profits at everyone else's expense.

Both Obamacare and Part D yield good examples of what is wrong with the U.S. Congress.

Fixing the design of Congress would force only the most important legislation to the top, with the greatest effect for the most people, if not all.

As it is, being in Congress is a full-time party. Nearly all these guys get paid nearly $200,000 a year and when you throw in their perks, it at least doubles their pay!

Back in 1790, there were 659,114 adult males (more or less) in the newly formed United States of America. The states with state legislatures that ratified the constitution which took effect March 13, 1789, sent 66 representatives to the House of Representatives. That means there was one representative for every 9,987 adults in America.

Back in 1913, wily Congressional critters froze House membership to a permanent 435. Later, in 1929, skunks like them passed the Reapportionment Act, which established the method of shuffling about these same 435 jokers.

Also by 1913, 17th Amendment amendment conjured up by wicked ones with nefarious purpose, the 17th stripped states' legislatures from choosing their senators. This change along with freezing the house membership, effectively ending the design of the Constitution. 

No longer would senators act as ambassadors of their respective states. No longer would citizens have popular representation. Overnight, Americans went from living in a confederation of sovereign states in union to a national government, with states becoming little more than giant-sized counties.

Today, sadly, for every 520,589 adult Americans, there is but one House member (see table below). That isn't popular representation. The Founders' design has been destroyed.

To have popular representation in the way the Founders designed the government for Americans, we would need a whopping 22,676 House members!

You can be sure that with such a high head count, no one could gain capture of the House. Legislation would be hard to come by. You would be living in freedom rather under the jackboot of Officialdom.

America would be the land of prosperity and the envy of the world. There would be no terrorists wanting to attack us. 

The net effect of having a Congress consisting of a House of 435 members (and three non-voting members) and a popular-vote Senate has created a super-senate with 87.5% of whose membership stands for re-election every two years. Under the system in place since 1913, it has become quite easy to buy 51 senators and 224 house members.

Rare it is that I call for amendments. Yet, as Americans, we need to protect ourselves from members of Congress.

Above all, we need restoration of popular representation to the House. We need the ratio of representatives to voting-age persons living within their respective districts codified as amendment to the Constitution

To protect us further from Congress, we need an amendment that does these:

• ban all taxes dedicated to fund specific programs
• ban all automatic funding of programs
• ban all closed-door legislative hearings
• require all meetings held by legislators to be streamed over the Internet, regardless of who is in attendance and for what purpose is the meeting

Each year, there should be contentious fighting by members of the House and Senate as to what gets funded and by how much.

Legislation should be hard to come by. Everything should be a contentious fight among legislators. Legislating should be a pain-in-the-ass, a hard job, so hard that only the most important issues should be debated and decided upon. It should be so hard that only the most tenacious and thoughtful persons should be attracted to do the work.

Read more ...