Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
Letter in response to Lyle Tuttle - August 13 letter to the Briefs: http://archives.mcrcbriefs.org/
That letter you received is interesting and contradictory to campaign statements made by her at appearances at the Tuesday morning coffee on July 31, 2018, and again at the Tea Party Patriots meeting on Wednesday evening, August 8th. While speaking at these meetings, she says she believes in local control of education and getting the federal government out of education all together. How does her statements in the letter to you line up with that?
I ask Senator Lesko to sponsor legislation that starts the dismantling process of the Department of education based on law, specifically Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution. Or, I ask Senator Lesko to show the authority for her and all other members of congress to sponsor any legislation that dictates, funds, or initiates any education program or system in all 50 states.
Consider the issue of grants.
New York vs. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992) – “The Federal Government”, we held, “May not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program.”
As a candidate for state senate, I want complete local control of our education system in accordance to law, our constitution. That means, the practice of taking our state money for education and then returning it for pennies on the dollar will stop. If Senator Lesko truly believes in local control as she states to us, then back it up with action to support and represent those who voted for you. I understand you can’t do this alone, so be our voice and start the process of discussion.
In the meantime, our state should act to nullify any federal agency’s impact on our state for the very reasons stated above. Federal grants are a violation of residual state sovereignty by the state being complicit in allowing the state to act as an agent of the federal government and implementing federal control where it otherwise would not exist.
New York vs. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992) – “We have held, however, that state legislators are not subject to federal direction.”
LD 21 Candidate for state Senate.
Thank you for stating what should be obvious to All our elected officials! Follow our state constitution!
Although you're right about education money as not allowed for in Article I, Section 8, you can't ask Lesko or any other member of Congress to address it by themselves. You have to get both houses to agree to end the illegal spending. It's silly to ask Lesko to do it on her own. I sure hate to lose a Republican in Congress because of your misplaced search for a solution.
The only way to stop the fed spending on illegal agencies is force a structural change to the Constitution's two clauses that affect Congresses action: welfare and commerce.
If you ask Congress to stop their spending do you think they'll listen to you? No. That leaves us with only one option to mend the Constitution: a convention of states just like the ones used to make America beginning over three centuries ago. It's not rocket science and can be done by people who use our history to reason over irrational fear of a runaway or some such dumb reason to abandon our founders tool for removing illegal tyranny. Trump can't do it. An amending convention is the only way. Learn the history at HuntForLiberty.com.
I addressed the idea of Representative Lesko being a voice to get the process started, recognizing, as I stated, that she can't do it alone.
An Article V is not designed to add amendments because the federal government isn't doing what they're supposed to or add amendments to address ideological differences, it is to fix something in the constitution that is in error. Adding more amendments to suggest it will force the government to follow other amendments is an exercise in futility. We have in the constitution today what we need to address usurpation of powers and removal from office those that violate their oath.
Spending is not what I was addressing in my post. It was the existence of an unconstitutional agency, one of several, partnering with states through way of grants, to tell states how and what to teach. Spending is a separate issue all together.
It sure sounds like you're going after Lesko. Article V was designed by our founders for adding amendments to adjust the Constitution, right or wrong, by either Congress OR the state legislatures (through their people). Examples include Prohibition, women's right to vote, income tax, voting age, term limits on the president, states giving up their sovereignty by turning over the Senate selection to an uneducated electorate. Article V is the only solution. Individual Congressmen are not. Congress will not give up their power and authority willingly. There is no other way than Article V. BTW, before 1787, and even after, the people met in convention to resolve problems that legislators couldn't. The process began in the early 17th century.
Yes, I agree on the appearance of "Going after Lesko". However, I am not going after her personally, it is her history of saying one thing and then not doing it in action. We aren't dealing with golf carts, speed cameras, continuing to work on public safety retirement that has been in the works for several years prior to her getting her turn. We are dealing with an out of control federal government that has had decades of usurping their power and authority with our state legislators having no knowledge or intestinal fortitude to intercede on our behalf. Debbie was one of those and I have had discussions with and Rick to no avail. I too accept blame for being a typical citizen going to work on a daily basis and having no clue what was going on until about 18 years ago during my career as a probation officer I realized what was happening.
I started to get more involved, paying attention to more things and learning with others, our constitutions. While being a PC here with Debbie and Rick, I got to know them and see more of what was happening here. During conversations and listening to them, I became more disappointed in what I was hearing. I witnessed indifference to the constitution and no understanding of their purpose and role as legislators.
We are in an ideological war and we need generals that know their shit and have a battle plan to combat the enemy. We can't dance around issues with ill informed ideas and going along with other mentally wounded warriors that are reactionary and great at ducking rather than coming out with an informed action plan. At minimum we and our elected representatives should be speaking with knowledge and truth to build a coalition of like minded warriors instead of cheerleaders. We can't support people because we are friends or want to belong to a click or feel like a member of a group. We have to wake up as a nation, as a people, and as a community and do our part to pick our warriors that will lead rather than sit back and say "lets have another convention and tell them to do their job but in a firmer voice". They aren't following the constitution now! The states need to step up and do their job, which is in the constitution by the way.
Yes conventions are needed on occasion and yes we have had a couple. Most of our amendments were by 2/3rds congressional acts. I am impressed with your knowledge, thank you. I also read Federalist Paper 49, written by James Madison, on February 2, 1787, on Article V. But I am not here to debate if we should have a convention or not, or the reasons for historical needs for having them.
You can agree or disagree, I respect your right to do so. My original post had nothing to do with this sidebar we are on here, so with that I thank you for your comments and appreciate your side of whatever direction you wanted to go.
I have written several times about my concerns with directions Debbie has gone and decisions she has made. There are other well documented perspectives as well. Like I said, I am not attacking her, I am saying we can, and must do better than what she is capable of doing because we are in trouble.
Thank you for NOT SUPPORTING ARTICLE V for the reasons you stated. As with our Constitution it is self-evident that people who are only following the laws, rules and edicts that help their agenda will ignore any new laws, rules and edicts that conflict with their agenda. Use our Constitution, elect people who will honor our Constitution and we are on our way to solving many, many problems.
Oh, Mr. Kapic. I do so agree with you that much fear of a runaway convention seems to have a tiger's hold on many people. It was put into the Constitution for a good reason, I believe. Whether this is the right vehicle for this issue, I wish I could say. But on the whole, oh, yes, it should be used sparingly for the proper reasons.
For a summary on the American history of conventions, go to my website, HuntForLiberty.com and you'll find access to my recently published book, Conventions That Made America: A Brief History of Consensus Building. In 100 + pages, it lays out the more notable conventions as researched and analyzed by constitutional scholars illuminating our three centuries of using the process. None of the records indicate a runaway. But more importantly, they were used by colonies and states alike, and they show us how legislatures were impotent on issues that were considered larger than life and the solution was to meet in convention to resolve. Although all meetings didn't settle its issue, they operated, surprisingly, nearly the same over that time span. As an American patriot, you owe to yourself to understand the process that actually built America. There is so much history that has been missed or ignored by us. To not repeat the same mistakes, we need to learn how we made them so we can do it right the next time.