April 29, 2014
© 2014 Kirk F. MacKenzie.
All rights reserved.
Our Efforts Are Being Blocked
I fear our efforts to take our country back are being obstructed, and from the very people that should be representing our interests. These obstructionists, no matter how patriotic or constitutional they might believe themselves to be, threaten our Republic. Every single group within our Restoration Movement, no matter the specific issue that it is focused on―common core education, stack-and-pack housing, high-speed rail, regional government, agriculture, mining, forestry, property rights, access to public lands, environment, etc.―is called upon to unite in one common goal we must all share: the restoration of truly constitutional county and state governments. We either restore local constitutional government, or suffer global governance.
The Invisible Divide
My conclusion is based upon the extensive number of meetings, presentations, conversations, and travels I have participated in over the past three years. There is an invisible divide between the People and many if not most of our Representatives. The People are ready to solve fundamental, systemic problems. Our Representatives, however, will only go so far. That divide is not always expressed openly and publicly, but can be discerned from non-discussion and non-action on issues such as the fraudulent and enslaving nature of our monetary system, to name but one, a topic considered to be the electrified third rail of politics. I fear the full and immediate use of a state's existing jurisdiction may be another.
Money Used To Bypass Our Constitution (Read more…)
The problem is the flow of money to our state and local representatives from outside sources, principally but not exclusively the federal government. For reasons that are not their fault, many state and county governments now rely on 30%, 40%, or even more than half of their budgets from federal PILT and other payments.
Creates Fundamental Problems
There are some real, fundamental, and systemic problems with this state of affairs.
1. It is a huge conflict of interest. Many, indeed most, government representatives and employees become more concerned about the continued flow of federal dollars than they are about their constituents. For example, it is common for county supervisors/commissioners and/or staff to consult with federal agents before taking any action. They simply refuse to challenge federal supremacy, even those that are clearly outside the federal government's constitutional authority.
2. It affects policy making. Outside dollars come with conditions. They are non-discretionary funds to be used solely to implement the objectives of the federal government, and none other. In effect, 30%, 40%, or even more than half of our public employees become federal agents in all but name, implementing and enforcing federal policies that are contrary to the interests of their constituents. It is no different than Intel employees taking money from Google and using their Intel jobs to benefit Google.
3. It blocks our efforts to solve our problems, especially the most fundamental ones. The closer our actions come to the fundamental issues that affect us, the less support we get. Representatives as a whole―and I'm not saying all Representatives, so don't misread me on that―too often won't challenge federal supremacy or offend federal agents. Accordingly, our Republic continues to decline. The reality is, all of those federal policies―common core education, stack-and-pack housing, high-speed rail, regional government, agriculture, mining, forestry, property rights, access to public lands, environment, etc.―are being implemented and enforced because of the consent of our Representatives.
4. It is unconstitutional. Both the state and federal representatives are acting under color of authority, outside of their constitutional authority. State and federal agents become willing co-conspirators, whether they conscientiously understand it or not, extending federal powers beyond those enumerated in the Constitution, and thereby denying us a constitutional form of government. We pay our taxes, but no one listens to us, and we have no representation.
President Andrew Jackson Warned Us In 1833
President Andrew Jackson recognized these threats and said exactly what I'm saying, only 181 years earlier:
"Money is power, and in that Government which pays all the public officers of the States will all political power be substantially concentrated. The State governments, if governments they might be called, would lose all their independence and dignity; the economy which now distinguishes them would be converted into a profusion [actually perpetual debt], limited only by the extent of the supply. Being the dependents of the General Government [the federal government], and looking to its Treasury [actually the Federal Reserve System] as the source of all their emoluments, the State officers, under whatever names they might pass and by whatever forms their duties might be prescribed, would in effect be the mere stipendiaries and instruments of the central power [the federal government]." ― President Andrew Jackson, Land Bill Veto Message of December 4, 1833
Must We Be Forced To Resort To The Supreme Court, Once Again?
Sheriff Richard Mack made us all well aware of the Printz vs. United States Supreme Court Decision, No. 95-1478, decided June 27, 1997. In that case, the Court added a second link to the chain that binds federal overreach. The relevant clause reads:
"We held in New York [New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144, 146] that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program [the first link]. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the State's officers directly [the second link]. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States' officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. ... such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty." ― Printz vs. United States
We are forced to now consider a third link: Can the federal government bribe State officers to use their offices to administer or enforce federal programs? The answer should be obvious to all.
Let's Unite On This Objective
I encourage every arm of our Restoration Movement to unify in a joint effort to restore local constitutional government, immediately.
We Either Restore Constitutional Local Government,
Or Suffer Global Governance
* * *