|
A PLAN
FOR VICTORY!
by Gordon Francis Corbett
Let's Discuss
Some Constitutional Amendments
Here is an idea. How could the members of the
Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party, and the
Right-Rebels of the Republican Party
unite?
Originally, the Tenth Amendment gave the States
a lot of latitude. The Founders wanted to let the
States compete economically and socially.
The Fourteenth Amendment killed that, forcing on
the States the restrictions of the Bill of Rights.
In the wake of slavery's abolition, to Radical
Republicans anxious to let newly freed black
Southerners vote, this sounded good. Unfortunately,
it was never passed legitimately, and it spawned
the political cancer we face today.
Originally, the closest that the Federal
government came to an income tax was the capitation
tax. Based on information from the census, a
capitation tax forced each person living in a given
State to pay the same amount of money.
The Sixteenth Amendment let the Federal
government collect income tax without regard to any
census or enumeration. This permits today's
graduated income tax.
Originally, State legislatures elected United
States Senators. This was an important part of the
Founders' idea of "Freedom Through Gridlock."
Legislature-elected senators were more remote from
popular pressure than today's senators are, but
because they represented their States, they opposed
Federal encroachment more than today's senators
do.
The Seventeenth Amendment killed that, allowing
the people to elect senators directly. This made of
the Senate a kind of super-House, something the
Founders never intended.
Originally, the Constitution provided that when
a president died, the vice-president would assume
the president's duties. In practice, the
vice-president was allowed to become president.
This should not have been permitted, because he had
not been so elected.
The Twenty-Fifth Amendment created today's
situation, which gave us President Ford and
Vice-President Rockefeller without their having had
to run for those offices. This widened the gap
between the voting-booth and the Oval
Office.
Here are four situations that arise either from
defects in the original Constitution, or which
result from "innovative" interpretations of the
Federal government's rightful powers.
The first involves relations between the Federal
and State governments. In 1798, the new Federal
government passed the "Alien and Sedition" Acts.
These Acts' un-Constitutionality led Thomas
Jefferson to draft the Kentucky Resolution and,
with James Madison, to write the Virginia
Resolution.
The Kentucky Resolution proposed the Doctrine of
Nullification, which would have let a State find a
given Federal law contrary to its citizens' rights.
The Virginia Resolution proposed the Doctrine of
Interposition, which would have let a State shield
its citizens from a Federal law's
oppression.
These Resolutions would have refined the
gridlock already in place. They might have
prevented our Civil War. Today, they would give us
a long step toward freedom.
Second: Article VI of the Constitution says,
"...[A]ll Treaties...shall be the supreme
Law of the Land...any Thing in the Constitution to
the contrary notwithstanding." This is not a crack
in the Liberty Bell, but a chasm.
Since World War II, the Federal government has
passed many treaties, and our presidents have made
many so-called "executive agreements." Some have
weakened our national sovereignty and expanded
Federal power at the expense of the
States.
Third: after our War Between the States, the
Federal government passed the Thirteenth Amendment.
It says, "Neither slavery nor involuntary
servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof
the party shall have been duly convicted, shall
exist in the United States or any place subject to
their jurisdiction."
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines "to
conscript" as, "To enroll into service by
compulsion." Despite this, and regardless of the
Thirteenth Amendment, the Federal government
conscripted men for two World Wars and continued
conscripting through "police actions" in Korea and
in Viet-Nam.
Fourth: for almost three decades, the Federal
government has taxed to obtain money that it
returns to the States in the form of
"grants-in-aid." This not only lets the Federal
government dictate how the States spend those
monies, but enables Washington to make the States
dance to their tune in ostensibly unrelated
matters.
Fifth: originally, the Constitution provided
that, when the House of Representatives impeaches
the vice-president, the Senate officer presiding
over the Senate's trial is the president of the
Senate: the vice-president.
Here is my idea: a package of Constitutional
Amendments around which the elements of the
American Dissident Right could rally.
Abolish the Fourteenth Amendment, thereby
restoring the Tenth Amendment's full power. This
would put abortion, drug use, firearms ownership,
school prayer, and taxpayer defrayal of education
where they belong: in the hands of the States.
Republican Conservatives, Taxpayers, and
Libertarians could present a United Front at the
Federal level, while agreeing to hammer out their
differences on those issues in their respective
States.
Abolish the Sixteenth Amendment, thereby
dissolving the Internal Revenue Service and forcing
the Federal government to depend on its original
sources of revenue. Besides slashing Federal
income, this would create a new era of
psychological freedom. Citizens would no longer
have to fear Federal tax audits, and would feel
free to support unpopular political causes without
fear of punishment from politically directed tax
auditors.
Abolish the Seventeenth Amendment, thereby
restoring the power of State legislatures to elect
U.S. Senators. This would bring back an important
division of power.
Abolish the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, thereby
restoring the previous chain of succession. Its
last previous statutory modification specified that
if the president and the vice-president should die,
their successors would have been the Speaker of the
House and the Senate's president pro tempore. This
would keep unelected men out of the top two
Executive offices, unless Cabinet members were
needed.
Pass an Amendment embodying the essence of
Jefferson's Kentucky and Virginia
Resolutions.
Pass the Bricker Amendment:
- Section 1. A provision of a treaty which
conflicts with this Constitution shall not be of
any force or effect.
- Section 2. A treaty shall become effective
as internal law in the United States only
through legislation which would be effective in
the absence of treaty.
- Section 3. Congress shall have power to
regulate all executive and other agreements with
any foreign power or international
organizations.
- Section 4. The Congress shall have power to
enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.
Pass an Amendment expressly forbidding
conscription.
Pass an Amendment prohibiting the Federal
government from making "grants-in-aid."
And, finally, pass an Amendment that would let
someone else besides the vice-president preside
over the Senate's trial of the vice-president's
impeachment.
This slate of Amendments would provide "The
Dissident Right" a standard around which all
freedom-loving opponents of small-d democracy could
repair. The members of today's three groups could
form a "United Front" to push these Amendments
without compromising on their conflicting
principles. They would offer candidates jointly.
The Democrats and the Rockefeller Republicans would
probably unite, letting our people choose between
their collectivism and the new coalition's
Jeffersonian libertarianism.
At the Federal level, the Amendments would strip
the Federal government of its usurped powers. At
the State level, the coalition's parties' honchos
could fight among one another and with the
Democrats and Republicans at a level much closer to
the people than is our District of
Columbia.
These Amendments would not end the disputes
dividing "The Dissident Right," but the struggle to
pass them would cripple the Left and give us all a
new birth of freedom.
Corbett
Archive
Enrich
your life with a book about politics and current
events...
Enrich
your political & social life with a politics or
news magazine...
|