My fellow citizens:
SOMETHING HAS BEEN LOST, and it must be found. “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free,
in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thus, Thomas Jefferson reminds us of what we
forget at our peril: Knowledge is the
foundation of the American Republic.
By remembering
who and what we are, this nation can complete the mission Alexander Hamilton described on the first page
of The Federalist Papers.
“It has been
frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this
country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question,
whether societies of men are really
capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and
choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political
constitutions on accident and force.”
“Reflection
and choice” or “accident and force”? The
stakes are high.
The nation
that masters the interplay between domestic and foreign affairs—with the
economy on the cusp—commands the future.
And, in the nature of things, a republic has a better chance of getting
the right balance and blend. But first
one has to exist.
The lofty
principle about “governments…deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed” must be put into practice. And
Thomas Paine noted its significance.
“The right of
voting for representatives is the primary right by which other rights are
protected. To take away this right is to
reduce a man to slavery, for slavery consists in being subject to the will
another, and he that has not a vote in the election of representatives is in
this case.”
According to
Article IV, Section 4, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in
this Union a republican form of government,” which is clarified through brief
remarks by James Madison. “A republic,
by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes
place….” (The Federalist Papers, No. 10 and No. 39 provides a longer
definition)
Relying on the
Constitution itself is a powerful response beyond the remains of the Voting
Rights Act. The Executive can go to a
District Court and couple Article IV, Section 4 with Section 2 of the
Fourteenth Amendment. Fusion that is the
true nuclear option. But the time has
come to threaten recalcitrant States with loss of representation in the House,
which simply adheres to the old adage—Where
there is a right, there is a remedy.
Internal and
external threats can be met. Separate
Federal paper ballots are needed to insure the integrity of the voting booth,
which shall be maintained by a simple rule:
Count, by hand, where cast—before the public, the press, and the parties.
The contours
of the campaign are clear. National
security, properly understood, is the issue.
“A foreign
government messing around in our elections is, I think, an existential threat
to our way of life,” said Michael J. Morrell, former Acting Director of Central
Intelligence. “To me, and this is to me
not an overstatement,” he said, “this is the political equivalent of 9/11.”
The Russian
Connection gets all the attention, but what also had an impact on the election
was Operation Crosscheck. And while that
may sound like the authorization included plausible denial—“As always, should
you or any member of the I.M. Force be caught or killed, the Secretary will
disavow any knowledge of your actions”—it was a domestic effort to deny certain
American citizens their right to vote.
Kris Kobach, the Secretary of State of
Kansas, was the commander. His faulty
list of approximately 7 million voters was used by GOP counterparts in 27
States to remove Democratic or Democratic-leaning voters from the rolls by
claiming they were voting in multiple States.
A first and last name was enough for a match. Jr. & Sr. did not matter, nor middle
names, nor different Social Security numbers.
“The program’s
method of identifying and purging voters especially threatens the registrations
of minority voters who are…67% more likely than white voters to share America’s
most common names: Jackson,
Washington, Lee, Rodriguez and so on,” according to Greg Palast.
In the three
crucial States that were supposed to be the Democratic firewall, the gentleman
from New York “won” by 44,000 in Pennsylvania, 11,000 in Michigan, and 23,000
in Wisconsin. Crosscheck removed up to
344,000 in the first and 449,000 in the second.
In the third, Photo ID, which is used to stop non-existent “voter
fraud,” made the difference by depressing turnout in Milwaukee. Thus, the 20 electoral votes in Pennsylvania,
16 in Michigan, and 10 in Wisconsin went to the Republican instead of Mrs.
Clinton. And so, the legitimacy of the
gentleman from New York goes beyond the question of foreign influence.
The
misunderstood, misrepresented, and misused Electoral College has two functions. They are popular choice and national
security.
At the time of
the Federal Convention, there was no way to reduce, as James Madison noted,
“the different qualifications in
the different States to one uniform rule.”
(The Federalist Papers, No. 52)
But that barrier has been removed.
Thus, the complete transition from the Articles of Confederation to the
Constitution is at hand. For the
original intention is clear. “The
President of the United States,” as Alexander Hamilton noted, “would be an
officer elected by the people.” (The
Federalist Papers, No. 69) And the
National Popular Vote would insure the protection of popular choice—for reasons
of national security.
The contours
of the campaign are clear. National
security, properly understood, is the issue, and the definition is
hardly mysterious. Its key elements are
in plain sight, as they have been for over two centuries, in Article I, Section
8, Clause 1—taxes, debt management, the common defense, and the general welfare. Thus, it cannot be denied that the Framers
understood domestic and foreign affairs and the economy are intertwined.
“Taxation without
representation is tyranny” was one objection to be overcome during the
Revolution. Yet there was also
opposition when the situation changed, as if to say, “Taxation with representation is terrible.” But after attempts to reach an accommodation
failed, President Washington mounted up and reviewed the Militia “called into
the actual service of the United States” to put down the insurrection known as
the Whiskey Rebellion, making it clear that taxes are the dues of citizenship,
and they have to be paid. (Article II,
Section 2, Clause 1) For the cry during
the troubles with King George III was “No taxation without representation,” not
“No taxation.”
The President who had
the first income tax fades away as the apostle of tax cuts steps forward. The party of Lincoln has forgotten him but remembers
Reagan. The party of TR, who supported
progressive taxation and the estate tax and conservation, favors
the flat tax, hereditary wealth, and denies climate change. The supposed party of fiscal responsibility
is out of touch with physical reality. And
their insurrection is the Whiners Rebellion.
History tells the tale,
and the numbers tell the truth. The
purpose of taxation is to raise revenue for Government operations in a manner
consistent with the system it supports. Concentrated
wealth, which tends toward monopoly in economics and politics, and usually
benefits a minority, is antithetical to a republican form of government that
exists to “promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity.” Effective
taxation provides inoculation against such a threat to national security.
Sufficient revenue is
the first principle of tax reform, not “revenue neutral.” The measure must take into account the recent
tax cuts, the wars unpaid for, the corporations which benefited from them, and
then set appropriate rates to restore the status quo ante—the surplus and
paying off the national debt. In the
interest of bipartisanship via a time warp, let us examine progressive and
estate taxes.
“No man should receive a dollar unless that
dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar
received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered—not gambling in
stocks, but service rendered. The really
big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size acquires
qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is
possessed by men of relatively small means.
Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another
tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective—a graduated
inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and
increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate.”
So said Theodore
Roosevelt.
Corporations cannot
claim to be persons and then pay less than flesh and blood people because of a privileged position at odds with the Revolution. The Constitution’s prohibition on granting
any titles of nobility—a step toward equality—was not about a label but the
display of distinctive traits, hereditary succession and an enormous disparity
of wealth. (Article I, Section 9, Clause
8 & Section 10, Clause 1) Otherwise
the “artificial aristocracy,” of which Thomas Jefferson spoke, whether actual
or artificial persons, becomes de facto royalty, a way to make the world safe
for feudalism or mercantilism, as was the case with the East India Company.
Corporations must be
subject to a head tax so that, regardless of tax credits, they make a minimum
payment. And, unlike real human beings,
they do not possess “unalienable rights.”
But corporations have duties. Executive
action must be taken in regard to offshore parking and inversions, for they
must be viewed as tax evasion. Senator Sanders’s bill to stop them from
getting Government contracts, when they use a phony overseas address, is
another way of getting their attention.
From 1914-1966, a Wall
Street transaction tax was in effect and it needs to be reinstated, perhaps
based on the average State sales tax throughout the Union. To prevent a reoccurrence of the events which
contributed to the Great Recession, the President must have standby authority
to increase the regular tax by up to ten percent.
Social Security can be made solvent and
sustainable by two related adjustments. First,
adopt a Carter Administration proposal that would use general revenue, if
unemployment reaches a certain rate, to make up for the projected shortfall. Second, raise the income ceiling. Not doing so makes the payroll tax
regressive.
A critical factor
respecting income inequality is ignored.
Too often, taxation is discussed, understandably, in terms of
details—rates, credits, depreciation. But
the question of sovereignty must not be overlooked: Is the GOP’s States’ rights position a cover
for divide and conquer? For the party
that is opposed to centralization of power, specifically, in the Federal
Government, whose policies they abhor, has no problem applauding that
condition—in economics and politics—when created by a corporation. Accordingly, there must be acknowledgement
and action as to the impact of tax policy in that regard. Furthermore,
instead of just the minimum wage, the pay gap between employers and employees must be addressed in terms of the maximum wage—or ratio.
Taxes were necessary
“to pay the debts…of the United States” because, according to Article VI, “All
debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this
Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this
Constitution, as under the Confederation.”
As Secretary of the Treasury Hamilton observed in a report to the House
of Representatives:
“If the
maintenance of public credit, then, be truly so important, the next enquiry which suggests itself is:
By what means is it to be effected?
The ready answer to which question is, by good faith; by a punctual
performance of contracts. States, like
individuals, who observe their engagements, are respected and trusted, while the
reverse is the fate of those who pursue an opposite conduct….
In nothing are
appearances of greater moment than in whatever regards credit. Opinion is the soul of it; and this is affected by appearances as well
as realities….” (Emphasis added.)
Alexander Hamilton gave
force and effect to Article VI. His
measures made meaningful the power “to borrow money on the credit of the United
States.” (Article I, Section 8, Clause
2) He established the good faith of the
nation and gave us our good name.
Now, when Republicans
have a majority in the House, there is a debate over the advantages of debt
management versus default, something which was settled in the beginning. James Madison dismissed “…the pretended
doctrine that a change in the form of civil society has the magical effect of
dissolving its moral obligations.” (The Federalist Papers, No. 43, JM on
“All debts and engagements”) So if the
original intention was to make our word true, can we now act in a way that
makes our word worthless? And should
that even be a consideration? Section 4
of the Fourteenth Amendment is a reaffirmation of Article VI. And, therefore, all debts and engagements
entered into shall be valid against the United States under the Constitution.
Although the appearance
of an issue has been created by the House Republicans’ periodic threat not to
pass the debt ceiling resolution, after careful examination and review, their
arguments are, upon mature reflection, as empty as the cupboard of Old Mother
Hubbard. In actuality, there is no
debate, if the words of James Madison and the deeds of George Washington and
Alexander Hamilton are accepted as precedent.
On the one side of the scale is the debt ceiling, a statutory provision,
the technicality of technicalities
and of dubious constitutionality. On the
other is the Fundamental Charter itself, The
Federalist Papers, the reports of the first Secretary of the Treasury, and
Chapter XIV of the Second Treatise of
Civil Government. Therefore, the
Executive, if forced to choose between the Constitution and the statute, shall faithfully
execute the supreme law of the land. Accordingly,
after giving due notice to the press and the public and a delinquent Congress
by a Proclamation on Public Credit, the President would issue an Executive
Order on the Means of Extinguishment and invoke the Gephardt Rule.
In the early days, “the
common defense” was a meaningful phrase.
Yet, today, some—who never served in the Armed Forces, the Intelligence
Community, or the Diplomatic Corps—are all in favor of the common defense, as
long as it is the common people who do the defending. They want to shoot first and ask questions
later. But diplomacy was not a dead
letter to President Washington. The
father of our country used the Proclamation of Neutrality and the Jay Treaty to
teach his infant how to walk on the world stage.
Originally,
the common defense was to be a common experience, a constant reminder that
citizenship consists of rights and
duties. And while the common defense meant the
protection of the Union as a whole, it also concerned that of the several
States, as the Second Amendment attests, and referred to a civic duty—active
participation in the same.
In the old
days, David, Alexander, Scipio, Arthur, Henry V, Napoleon, and Washington were
in the field with their troops, a place the gentleman from New York will never
be found. For he is the type of guy that
will fight to the last drop of your blood.
Strutting and
posing does not a leader nor an effective policy make. Tough guy schtick is entertainment. Toughness is a quality of the mind empowered by
the spirit.
As Secretary
of War Henry Knox reminds us in the report President Washington had him send to
Congress in support of Universal National Service, much is required of those
who aspire to leadership: “Therefore, it
ought to be a permanent rule, that those who in youth decline or refuse to
subject themselves to the course of military education, established by the
laws, should be considered as unworthy of public trust or public honors, and be
excluded therefrom accordingly.”
Taxes, debt management,
and the common defense are the foundation of the general welfare, “the
permanent and aggregate interests of the community,” to use Madison’s words—the
very reason a republic exists, and which the Knox Report addressed. (The Federalist Papers, No. 10) Universal National Service, as envisioned by
President Washington and set forth in that message he had the Secretary of War
send to Congress, dealt with more than an order of battle.
“If the United
States possess the vigor of mind to establish the first institution, it may
reasonably be expected to produce the most unequivocal advantages. A glorious national spirit will be
introduced, with its extensive train of political consequences. The youth will imbibe of a love of their
country; reverence and obedience to its laws; courage and elevation of mind;
openness and liberality of character; accompanied by a just
spirit of honor. In addition to which
their bodies will acquire a robustness, greatly conducive to their personal
happiness, as well as the defense of their country. While habit, with its silent, but efficacious
operations, will durably cement the system….”
A return to the national security policy of the Framers will be a blessing—an opportunity to see that no one is left behind—because of jobs, healthcare, and education; and with alternative service available to conscientious objectors, the New American System picks up where Henry Clay left off. So, it is time to get America moving again.
Knowledge is the
foundation of the American Republic. By
strengthening the intellectual and the interior lines of defense, Universal
National Service increases the synapses and the sinews of our power. For national security is about survival, and
the ability to adapt involves playing to one’s strengths.
Memories must light the
corners of our mind. According to an ancient
Chinese proverb, “The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right
names.”
If America were a
movie, George Washington would be the above the title star. He was the Commander in Chief of the
Continental Forces, the President of the Federal Convention, and the first
President of the United States. He is in
a class by himself. Therefore the
airport that serves the Federal City, which honors him, should bear his
name—alone.
Treason and patriotism
are like oil and water. They do not mix. Both are bad for the environment.
George Washington's endowment rescued Liberty Hall Academy,
and it was renamed in his honor. But
after the Civil War and Robert E. Lee’s tenure as president of Washington
College, the name was changed to Washington and Lee
University. One was a patriot and the other was a traitor, which
does not justify the latter’s elevation. So, instead, why not honor
the man who accompanied the Commander in Chief of the Continental
Forces to New England when the troops of the North and South were to be
reviewed for the first time? That gentleman's name was Billy
Lee, someone the Father of the Country remembered in his will. Is that too much to ask of a private college?
Misty water-colored memories of our history… Destroying another’s identity is a
means of conquest. For those who do not
know who they are offer less resistance.
By definition, a nation of immigrants cannot be an h_ _ _land—a place
for a particular ethnic or racial group—also referred to as motherland or
fatherland. “Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein
Fuhrer” belongs elsewhere. But here, we
sing The Star Spangled Banner, not H_ _ _land Uber Alles. Thus, a constitutional phrase provides
the proper name for the most recent Cabinet post—the Department of Public Safety, a phrase also used in nine times The Federalist Papers.
(Article I, Section 1, Clause 2)
Furthermore, Social Security—and Medicare and Medicaid—are not
entitlements. They are insurance—a whole
life policy that helps to promote the general welfare.
Finally, restoration of the fairness doctrine will help in
calling things by their proper names. The
broadcast press will not be beyond challenge.
There will be a check on inaccuracy.
Once
established, free states have a tendency to take their liberty for granted. While enjoying the benefits, some neglect the
burdens. Such an imbalance cannot
continue.
The greatest
threat to the survival and the success of liberty is the attitude of those who
do not comprehend that the United States of America is a country, not a country
club. For privilege tends toward
cognitive dissonance and the fate of Sisyphus.
The would-be
gods are impediments to progress. Their
attitude was revealed in response to Eleanor Roosevelt’s desire to provide
indoor plumbing to those who had none. But
those descended from on high wanted to know, How could one then tell the rich
from the poor? “In matters of such
simple decency,” the First Lady replied, “we should not be able to tell the
rich from the poor.”
Until we close the gap
between the nation’s ideals and the reality, until those who see themselves as more than mere mortals have to bear the
burden, until they have to sacrifice, the chatterboxes are not citizens. But they have been described by T.S. Eliot.
We are the
hollow men
We are the
stuffed men
Leaning
together
Headpiece
filled with straw. Alas!
These proposals—voting rights and the proper use of the Electoral College; national security, properly understood; Universal National Service; enforcement of the emoluments clause; the importance of names; restoration of the fairness doctrine; and others to “promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity”—constitute a revolution within the framework of law. They are necessary for what lies ahead. To travel at warp speed, the ship of state needs good shields and a sound navigation system. Fellow citizens, it is time to batten down the hatches.
America is under attack—at home and abroad. Catastrophe can be avoided and the victory of
our values assured. But preparation is the prerequisite of survival. And a leader lights the way.
May God bless all the members of the Armed Forces, the Intelligence Community, and the Diplomatic Corps. And may God bless the United States of America.
