|
This nation is rushing headlong into debt,
dependency and decay. Unconstitutional acts have
become the precedent for more of the same, which
become precedent for still further acts of
despotism.
Can the People elect their way out of such
tyranny?
Unfortunately, no! It is not possible, as
Ron Paul’s candidacy has proven. Every time he
exposed the constitutional truth regarding an issue
(e.g., the undeclared
Iraq war and the Federal Reserve System) he lost a
block of voters who possess a vested interest in the
status quo.
What then is the solution?
A forceful defense of the Constitution! This
nation’s major problems would all but disappear if
1/10 of one percent of the People (i.e., 300,000)
decided to collectively force the leaders of the
political branches of the federal Government to
honor their oaths of office and abide by the federal
Constitution.
Can the People, without violence, force the
Government to follow the Constitution?
Yes, by claiming and exercising their
individual, First Amendment Right of Redress:
“Congress shall make no law…abridging…the Right of
the People …to Petition the Government for Redress
of Grievances.”
What was the Framers’ intent behind this
clause?
The historical record is clear and totally
uncontroverted: The purpose of the Petition clause
was to be the "accountability" clause – the clause
by which the People could peaceably hold the
Government accountable to the rest of the
Constitution. It was meant to be the “capstone
Right,” that capped all the others, a critical
element in the overall balance of power between the
People and the government.
How was it intended to work?
If the People Petition the Government for
Redress of violations of the Constitution and the
Government refuses to respond, the People have the
Right to withdraw their allegiance and support from
the Government, without retaliation.
Why must 300,000 people act “collectively”
if our Rights are individual, unalienable Rights
endowed by one’s Creator?
Because individuals (and small groups)
cannot prevail against either the brute power of the
state or the tyranny of the majority. Governments
simply will not relinquish power unless forced to do
so. Majorities likewise are loath to surrender the
many forms of beneficence made available by the
state.
Liberty has never been given; it has always been taken.
Are there 300,000 people in
America who understand the Constitution is a set of
principles to govern the Government, and that the
Constitution is all that stands between them and
total tyranny and despotism?
Yes. Despite his low probability of achieving
the presidential nomination, 1.3 million
people voted for Ron Paul and his call for
constitutional Freedom. They not only went to the
polls, they aggressively entered the mainstream
political fray, generating significant displays of
public support for Paul and his potent message,
confronting the political opposition by creating
high-profile signage (think "blimp"),
high-visibility rallies and staking out a
significant on-line presence across the Internet.
His supporters rallied, marched and attended
thousands of local grassroots meetings. Many even
maxed out their credit cards to further his
campaign.
What then IS the problem?
With over one million Americans apparently strongly
embracing the vision of
Liberty espoused by candidate Paul, why are we not
experiencing a domestic "Freedom Surge" committed to
restoring Constitutional Order? Why is there not a
more widespread movement toward an active defense of
the Constitution and her sacred principles,
including acts and investments that, by definition,
must fall outside the political process?
The answer: treasured shibboleths and hero
worship. Above all else, People value and trust the
familiar formula of all Democracies – political
cycles, public elections and party privileged
candidates to select from, even though all objective
experience hath shown the formula, though
indispensable, is nothing more than a myth in terms
of its practical ability to preserve and protect our
constitutional Republic and our individual Rights,
Freedoms and Liberties.
The reason our nation suffers is that we, the
people, have been tricked into believing that our
constitutional salvation lies solely at the ballot
box. We have been systemically misled and distracted
from knowing the true power and protection provided
by the Constitution -- in particular the profound
Right of Redress. Our population's deficient and
defective perspectives regarding the limited nature
of the electoral process and inherent dangers of
political influence and corruption have facilitated
these abuses.
Can the People's treasured shibboleths be
exposed for what they are and driven into disrepute
and discredited as the principle means to hold
government accountable to the Constitution and its
essential principles, giving rise to a true surge of
Freedom in
America?
Yes, but like anything else worth having, it
won’t come easily. A paradigm shift in the People’s
behavior will be required. New exercises of law and
tools of protest will be required. A strategic plan
is necessary. Organizational development is
essential.
In the absence of any other, WTP again
offers its Plan to Restore Constitutional Order.
Admittedly, much, much more needs to be done to
develop the organization needed to achieve the
Redress the People are entitled to and to
institutionalize vigilance.
The rest of this article relates to the Plan
and its progress. We will soon address
organizational development.
The details and logic behind the Plan are
reviewable at
www.GiveMeLiberty.org/revolution.
Plan Update:
The Petitions for Redress of Grievances
As of today, there are more than 80,000 signatures
on the seven (7) Petitions for Redress of Grievances
regarding substantial violations of the
Constitution:
1. The Iraq invasion in violation of the war powers
clauses.
2. The Federal Reserve System’s violation of the
money clauses.
3. The USA Patriot Act’s violation of the privacy
clauses.
4. The direct, un-apportioned taxes on labor in
violation of the tax clauses.
5. The federal gun control laws in violation of the
Second Amendment.
6. The failure to enforce immigration laws in
violation of the “faithfully execute clause.”
7. The construction, by stealth, of a "North
American Union" without constitutional authority.
These but scratch the surface. There are other
current and popular abuses of government power that
could and should become the subject of additional
Petitions for Redress.
Plan Update:
Service of the Petitions on Congress
The number of Congressmen who have not yet
been served with the seven
Petitions for Redress has been
reduced to 65. As of this week, 470 have been
successfully served.
Click here for a list of the 65
members of Congress who still need to be served.
Click here
to volunteer to serve these Congressmen.
Plan Update:
Testing the Attitude of the Judiciary
Early this year, our landmark
Right-to-Petition case, We the People v
United States
reached the Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”).
It was an action for declaratory relief in which we
sought a declaration of the Rights of the People and
the obligations of the Government under the
accountability clause of the First Amendment. No
court has ever declared the meaning of the clause.
SCOTUS decided not to hear the case.
RIGHT-Click to download
WTP's
Petition for Writ of Certiorari
to the U.S. Supreme Court and its
Appendix.
If we fail to receive responsive responses
to the Petitions for Redress of constitutional
violations that are now being served on every member
of Congress, we plan to file a similar lawsuit in
each of the eleven federal judicial circuits outside
the DC Circuit. It will be much more difficult for
SCOTUS to duck the issue by deciding not to hear the
case if two circuit courts disagree on the meaning
of the last ten words of the First Amendment to the
Constitution.
Quite unexpectedly, one such lawsuit was
filed on Tuesday of last week in
Missouri by Ray and Elaine Herron, the two people
who served the Petitions for Redress on their
representative in the U.S. House of Representatives
(Rep. Ike Skelton). The case was filed in the
federal district court in the Western District of
Missouri (Case No. 08-0531-cv).
The case was filed because Rep. Skelton
retaliated against the Herrons. The
Herrons have asked the court to declare Skelton’s
obligation to provide a formal Response with
specific answers to the Petitions for Redress and to
undo the harm done to the Herrons by Rep. Skelton.
Click here to read the Herron’s
Complaint against Skelton.
To date, there have been ten other
responses to the Petitions for
Redress:
Last week we also requested your
feedback and ideas regarding our effort to evaluate
and select plaintiffs for the upcoming series of
Right-to-Petition "Circuit Court" lawsuits. We thank
the many people who provided feedback. We are
currently analyzing your comments and will provide
additional information in the near future in a web
update.
The Ron Paul Question:
Will He Respond?
An interesting and potentially serious situation is
developing regarding Rep. Ron Paul. It appears as
though Ron’s staff may not have informed the
Congressman of the Petitions for Redress,
notwithstanding: a) the fact that there exists proof
that on June 30 the Petitions for Redress were
properly served on Ron Paul at his district office
in Texas by a constituent; b) the fact that on June
30, Bob Schulz dropped in to Ron Paul’s DC office to
deliver a personal letter to Ron Paul, along with a
copy of the Petitions for Redress: and c) Ron Paul’s
public declaration in 2001 that the People’s First
Amendment Right of Redress includes an inherent
Right to a response to their Petitions for Redress.
Last week, Plan supporter Ray Mills had the
opportunity to personally speak to Ron Paul in
Boone, NC at a Ron Paul rally and book signing
event. Ray was able to question Ron Paul regarding
the Petitions and his intention to respond. Rep.
Paul stated he knew nothing about the service of the
Petitions for Redress and that he would look into
the matter.
Last
Friday (July 25),
Bob Schulz spoke by phone with
Ron’s chief of staff, Tom Lizardo, about the
Petitions for Redress. Tom said he was generally
aware of the Petitions but would have to check with
his Legislative staff to see what was being done
about them. Tom did express a concern of his. He
asked if Bob believed the Right to Petition required
Ron Paul to respond to every communication received
by him from any constituent. Bob told Tom he did not
believe each and every communication would
necessarily receive the protection of the First
Amendment as a proper Petition for Redress requiring
a response. Bob then sent Tom a
definition of a
proper Petition for
Redress – one that would require a
response.
Needless to say, a serious situation would
ensue should Ron Paul fail to respond, responsively
(i.e., with formal, specific answers to the
questions in the Petitions for Redress). Absent such
a response Ron Paul’s credibility as an adherent of
the Constitution could quickly be called into
question.
The Constitution is not a menu. Rep. Paul is an
official of the U.S. Government, and as a true
believer and outspoken defender of the Constitution
he cannot be found defending only some of its
provisions, such as the war powers, money, privacy
and tax clauses, while disobeying another, such as
the accountability clause of the First Amendment.
Again, it is important to note he has
publicly
admitted such an
obligation to Respond.
Ironically, should Ron Paul fail to Respond
to the Petitions, he would in effect, not only be
ignoring the affirmative duty expressly placed upon
him by the last ten words of the First Amendment, he
would (through his "Campaign for Liberty") be left
promoting the notion of majority rule as the sole
avenue of recourse by which the People can
(peacefully) cure constitutional torts or secure
their individual Rights.
In other words, Ron Paul's potential failure to
Respond would place him in the awkward position of
publicly embracing political principles endemic to a
pure democracy, while simultaneously holding
himself, as a duly elected official, beyond the
legal construct protecting the actual exercise
of Individual Rights and Popular Sovereignty as
guaranteed by the Constitution, the Declaration of
Independence, and numerous other expressions of
Fundamental Law dating back to Magna Carta.
It is time to move the battle for
Liberty beyond the limited paradigm of electoral
politics and governance by the majority: It is time
to exercise the individual Right to Petition our
Government for Redress of Grievances and Restore
Constitutional Order.
Plan Update:
Hungering For Redress
The Plan includes a hunger fast in August should no
member of Congress honor their oath of office and
obligation to respond to the Petitions for Redress
of the seven violations of the Constitution.
More details about this will be released soon….
Go to
www.GiveMeLiberty.org/revolution
for all the details of this important Liberty project.
Donations
to the tax-exempt 501(c)3 WTP Foundation are fully tax
deductible.
|
