The People’s Government


            The Declaration of Independence starts off talking about the “people’s ability to dissolve political bands, which have connected them with another.” Then it continues with “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.” Once again, the Declaration of Independence depicts “the people’s right to alter or to abolish it,” which would be a destructive policy or individual who optimizes the ability not to uphold and interpret the Constitution and ignores the people. The Articles of Confederation, Article III, states “The said states hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare.” Basically, it is the ability of the people to control their government. In the end, “The people chose to abolish the government.”

            Then we have the inviolable “Constitution,” that begins with, “We the people of the United States.” Article I section 1 gives the people the ability to choose their representatives among the people of each state. Section 3 tells how senators are selected, what they can do, procedures, thanks to the 17th Amendment which allows the people to elect their leader. Article II also gives “the people the ability to vote for president, along with the outdated electoral college.

            It would seem that this country was formed by the people, for the people. Article IV Section 2 gives “the people” privileges and immunities of citizens in several states. We are guaranteed in every state a Republican form of government, Article IV Section 4. With the Constitution, Bill of Rights, the people of this “republic” have copious ways to control the federal Government or bureaucrats who try to create their own personal utopia. One such method is preexisting state common law writ that Article I Section 9 protected against undue suspension, thus confirming state governments through their courts could and should prevent malodorous federal laws. Publius or Alexander Hamilton remarked, “If the federal government invaded the people’s rights, Americans could turn to states as instruments of redress. Any state judge issuing a habeas writ against a lawless president would not be defying but rather enforcing the Constitutions Supremacy Clause, which made the Constitution the supreme law, predominant over contrary presidential decree.” A president would most likely challenge the assertions in federal court and claim, acting under the scope of the Constitution.

            The Supremacy Clause, Necessary and Proper Clause, and the Commerce Clause are just are just some tools in the tool box called “The Constitution,” written and approved by the people, for the procurement of our freedoms and liberties. These same tools used to benefit the people are being used to control the people. Forcing the people into commerce so that they will be forced to buy healthcare through the Commerce Clause, forget competition, let’s control the people’s ability choose. Let’s control speech, thoughts, and the people who voice their concerns about government, even though the people who want to control say the most egregious comments. This country was founded on the premise of “We the People,” as I briefly stated, the axiom of this country was for the people to control the government, not the other way around. Let us not completely lose “We the People,” for a thralldom country and an oligarchy government. “We the People” started this country so “We the People” can keep this country.



RSS feed

1 Comment Leave a comment

Two problems

swvapatriot (Diary) Saturday, January 29th at 10:01PM EST (link)

If I understand you correctly, the 17th Amendment, which changed the selection of senators from state legislatoures to popular election was a good thing. Rather, it was one step in reducing State sovereignty, as the senators were to represent the states in the upper house of the federal government. As it now stands, senators are just a separate body of representatives for their constituents, and the states lost their corporate representation. In other words, the state legislatures were to be a sort of filter between the people and the senate, given the distaste fo the founders for direct democracy. The lower house was to be the “peoples house,” and the senate a check and balance on the fickleness and changableness of popular sentiment.

The same is true of the electoral college, to some degree. It was a protection of the interests of the smaller states in the election of the president, giving the a little more say by the composition, being the total of senators and representatives, along with the possibility that electors could vote for a candidate which was not the one with the majority vote in that state in case of a tie, or other possible difficulties.

In sum, both provisions were emplaced as a check on the people, to prevent “democracy”, and to preserve the federal government as a representative republic, established to secure the divinely endowed rights of the people against all threats, even the people.

This may seem convoluted, but the founders were also aware of the danger of demagogues who could so mislead the people that they would vote for senators and presidents who would threaten those liberties.