Monthly Archives: August 2012

Economic Calamity Upon the Middle Class

I do not subscribe to class warfare.  I am disgusted by those in elected office or running for elected office that employ this Marxist term for political ends.  The ruling class uses the “middle class” to divide and compartmentalize citizens.  The end game is to gain support for the ruling class’s policies and to persuade people to cast a vote for or against someone.  I only use the term in this article to illustrate a point.

We are witness to the systemic dismantling of the middle class.  The ruling class is dividing the country into two groups of people; the aristocracy and the rest of us. The rest of us subsist completely or partially dependent on the government or go to work every day to earn a living.  The more people pushed into subservience the more people tend to vote for those venal DC’vers promising free things.

I read recently two articles that get to the heart of the economic calamity facing middle class families.   You can read them here and here.  Both articles fail to explain the real culprit but make valid points regarding government policy and the impact on the middle class.

From the first article:

According to Sentier Research, in January of 2009, the median annual household income was $54,962.  In June of 2012, the median annual household income was, again, $50,945.  The rising cost of food also hits middle-class families directly in the pocketbook.  According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion’s most recent data (June 2012), for the moderate-cost food plan for a family of four, the average cost per week is $236.60.[1]

From 2009 to 2012 the median annual household income decreased by 7.3%.  The annual food cost is $12,303.  In the average family let’s assume both people work and each drives 20,000 miles per year.  Assuming an average of 20 miles per gallon for both vehicles and the current gas price average of $3.65 per gallon the average family spends $7,300 annually on gasoline.  Combined the family spends $19,603 on food and gas.  That represents 38.5% of the gross household income.

Let’s assume the family has no federal, state, or local tax liability, but they do have Social Security and Medicare taxes withheld from their paychecks.  At 7.65% the family pays $3,897 in taxes.  Added to the food and gas costs the family has spent $23,500 on these items.  That is 46% of the family’s gross income.

What does food and gas have in common?  Ethanol.  Ethanol is produced by corn.  Due to drought conditions and the mandate to that every gallon of gasoline contains 10% ethanol the price of food increases.  Corn is used in many foods such as corn starch, flour, and syrup.  Corn is a staple in many societies throughout the world.  And make no mistake the price of corn has a materially impact on the rest of the world.

From the second article:

When global grain prices rise, it is always the poor who suffer the most.  Of course, Americans, who spend an average of 18% of their income on food for home consumption, will be hurt as well.  But for the poor in countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Ethiopia, increased grain prices are a matter of life and death.   

In fact, almost one billion people worldwide will go to bed hungry tonight, half of them children.  On average, 5 million children die of starvation each year before reaching the age of five.  This year, that number will be much higher.  For poor children at the margin, a large increase in grain prices is nothing less than a death sentence.[2]

By 2022, government mandates would require 130% of today’s corn production to be used for ethanol.  That leaves nothing for food or feed.  You know things have reached a tipping point when the United Nations and other governments around the world have asked the Obama administration to suspend or reduce ethanol production as grain prices are resulting in starvation and death worldwide.  Sadly, the DC’vers remain committed to their ideology and refuse to revise their policies.

Fifty percent of this year’s corn crop will be used to produce ethanol.  Government mandates are driving up the cost of food and fuel.  Government centric preferences to reduce the emission of CO2 — a non-pollutant essential to life — is driving the policy along with the goal of reducing dependency on foreign oil.  Government provides nearly $2 billion in subsidies or 51 cents per gallon of ethanol produced.  Government preferences distort markets.  Because less corn is available for food and feed, the price of corn rises.  The price of feed corn rises so the price of meat rises.

Moreover, it costs more to produce a gallon of ethanol than a gallon of gasoline.  And, ethanol is less energy efficient than gasoline.  Ethanol contains roughly 70% of the efficiency of gasoline which means you get less mileage per gallon of ethanol blended gasoline.  Lastly, ethanol cannot be transported through petroleum pipelines because it binds with water.  So, ethanol must be transported via truck, trains, or barges to refineries.   So, there is additional transportation costs in producing ethanol.

The two articles I referenced fail to connect the dots.  One goal of ethanol is to reduce dependency on foreign oil.  In the aftermath of the 1970s oil crisis the government created something called the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFÉ) program.  The purpose of this program was to reduce dependency on foreign oil.

I published an article nearly two years ago titled Congress, Toyota, and CAFÉ Standards which illustrates the negative effects government programs have on our lives.  In summary, the article documents the tens of thousands of deaths attributed to CAFÉ standards due to minimum fuel efficiency requirements.  Essentially, the use of lighter weight materials causes more traffic fatalities and serious injuries.

If the goal of CAFÉ standards is to reduce to dependency on foreign oil it is a dismal failure.

I’ve demonstrated how government intervention in food and energy are related and wreaks havoc on middle class families.   Government policies cause economic calamity for many Americans not just the middle class.

The other aspect is government monetary policy.  From 2009 thru 2012 the median family income declined by 7.3% in real terms.  During the same time the Federal Reserve Bank increased the money supply from $800 billion to $2.7 trillion.  Currency debasement has contributed to increases in nearly all goods and services, but particularly in the price of food and energy.  Coupled with government subsidies for ethanol and the strain on the corn supply, food prices continue to rise.

Unfortunately, most if not all of this was avoidable.  Government policies have distorted markets, manipulated prices, and misallocated resources according to government preferences rather than the preferences of the people.  The cynic in me says this:

“The government mandates higher fuel efficiency in automobiles resulting in less safe automobiles.  Then the government forces me to purchase ethanol based fuel that is produced using my money – taken through taxes – to subsidize ethanol producers from an automotive maker that was bailed out by the government with my tax money once again.  Then I get into an accident and am seriously injured due to more dangerous automobiles and taken to a hospital where my insurance coverage is under the Affordable Care Act.  The doctors on staff are under qualified as most of the qualified doctors have left the health care industry.  According to the ACA the medical staff contacts some unelected bureaucrat in DC to determine if the cost/benefit ratio warrants providing medical care to me.  As this takes hours or even days to get an answer from the bureaucrat in DC – who happens to be on a junket in Vegas paid for by my tax dollars — my condition worsens.  Eventually, a government official appears, decides I’m not worthy of medical care, and they use a gun to shoot me and report it as a violent crime to push their agenda for more gun control laws instead of recognizing it was all their policies in the first place that caused the entire situation.”

Economic calamity courtesy of the DC’vers!  Meanwhile, people suffer, starve, and die.


[1] American Thinker Article by Peter Morrison published on August 23, 2012.

[2] American Thinker Article by Jeffrey Folks published on August 15, 2012.

1 Comment

Filed under Economy

The Confidence Game

Three Card Monte is a confidence (con) game devised to swindle hard-earned money from people believing they can win by participating in the game.  The game’s operators show how you can follow the card and win.  It appears rather elementary, but very few people win because the operators cheat.  Likewise, a Ponzi scheme is an investment plan in which the investments of later participants are paid out to earlier participants.  Generous returns for early participants lure future participants into the scheme.  The scheme eventually collapses as the promise of returns disappears as fewer future participants enter the system.

The Three Card Monte and Ponzi scheme operators are selling an illusion – a promise, a dream — to people taken in by the rhetoric of smooth operators.  The allure of an outcome, the realization of a goal or dream is used by the operators against their victims.  And, there is no shortage of victims to these confidence games.

We live within the vast expanse of a modern day confidence game perpetrated by smooth operators on the citizens.  Today, the political and monetary systems are the confidence game forced upon the citizens.  The systems are designed by the operators, for the operators, to deceive and manipulate citizens.  Ideally the operators prefer the citizens to enter into these systems voluntarily under the guise of a level playing field.  Furthermore, the system is premised upon something called free elections.  The idea that citizens can freely elect their representatives provides an illusion of legitimacy and fairness.

The political and monetary systems are self-serving, vicious monstrosities devouring freedom, liberty, and property like swarms of locusts devouring a wheat field.  However the government and central planning locusts didn’t start as a swarm.  Roughly one hundred years ago the government needed only 3-5% of GDP to function.  There was no federal reserve bank.  There was no income tax.  The currency was backed by gold.  States appointed their Senators to Congress.

Prior to 1913 the country was mostly a free-market capitalist society operating independent of government authority, rules, and regulations.  However, the great transformation that started in 1913 really took off in the 1930s.   A private company called the Federal Reserve Bank controlls the currency.  Income taxes were extremely progressive and punitive.  The currency – at least domestically – was no longer backed by gold.  Instead, the currency was backed by nothing more than a promise from the U.S. government which, in reality, was a promise to others that the people would be liable for all debts incurred by the government.

To ensure those debts would be paid the government must have the ability to confiscate property from its citizens.  That assurance to the country’s creditors was the income tax.  There is no coincidence that the income tax was passed the same year the Federal Reserve Act was signed into law.  Furthermore, government issued currency, backed by nothing more than a promise, required citizens to accept the currency.  In 1933, the Federal Reserve Note was no longer backed by gold.  Legal tender laws forced citizens to use government created currency.

The stage was set to move forward with the great transformation towards a socialist country.  The government had the power to tax and the power to print currency without constraint.  This gave birth to what we know as deficit spending.   The country saw a massive expansion of government programs, power, and authority throughout the 1930s.  Progressive and punitive taxation was instituted and is still enforced today.  Government programs were created out of thin air without any legitimate constitutional authority.  While some were struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional many were upheld, especially after President Roosevelt’s threat to pack the Supreme Court.

After WWII, the size and power of the government grew unabated.  Every President since FDR has expanded the authoritarian state.  The expansive authoritarian state included new federal departments or agencies, new statutory laws, new rules and regulations, new entitlement programs, and massive increases to the federal debt.

In 1971, President Nixon broke the Bretton Woods agreement and removed the U.S. from the international gold standard.  In other words, the U.S. would no longer settle international claims with gold payments.  This launched the modern day monetary and financial systems we live with now.  The entire global monetary system is based on fiat currencies based on debt.  There are debtor nations and creditor nations.  Every country is trying to debase its currencies in a race to the bottom.  Those holding currency over time lose wealth and purchasing power.

Consequently, the U.S. trade deficits started after 1971.  The rapid growth in the U.S. debt started after 1971.  The debasement of the currency accelerated after 1971. Since 1971 the currency has lost 82% of its purchasing power.  The oil crisis started in the 1970s because OPEC understood exchanging oil for fiat currency was a losing proposition.  Since oil was settled in Federal Reserve Notes and the issuer can print freely the oil producing countries were put in a precarious position.   In 1966, Alan Greenspan said this on the issue of gold and fiat currency:

“Under a gold standard, the amount of credit that an economy can support is determined by the economy’s tangible assets, since every credit instrument is ultimately a claim on some tangible asset. But government bonds are not backed by tangible wealth, only by the government’s promise to pay out of future tax revenues, and cannot easily be absorbed by the financial markets. A large volume of new government bonds can be sold to the public only at progressively higher interest rates. Thus, government deficit spending under a gold standard is severely limited. The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion of credit.

They have created paper reserves in the form of government bonds which — through a complex series of steps — the banks accept in place of tangible assets and treat as if they were an actual deposit, i.e., as the equivalent of what was formerly a deposit of gold. The holder of a government bond or of a bank deposit created by paper reserves believes that he has a valid claim on a real asset. But the fact is that there are now more claims outstanding than real assets. The law of supply and demand is not to be conned. As the supply of money (of claims) increases relative to the supply of tangible assets in the economy, prices must eventually rise. Thus the earnings saved by the productive members of society lose value in terms of goods.

In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to make its holding illegal, as was done in the case of gold [in 1933]. If everyone decided, for example, to convert all his bank deposits to silver or copper or any other good, and thereafter declined to accept checks as payment for goods, bank deposits would lose their purchasing power and government-created bank credit would be worthless as a claim on goods. The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists’ tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists’ antagonism toward the gold standard.”

The changes to the financial system created the fertile ground to fundamentally transform government.  What Greenspan stated is true.  Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. I hope that sinks in.   The political and monetary systems are inextricably linked are now inseparable as they are dependent upon one another to continue their insatiable quest for power and authority.  The chickens are coming home to roost and we the people are going to pay the price.

Entitlement programs are government’s Ponzi schemes.  Early participants in Social Security and Medicare reaped the benefits of these programs as new participants money was used for the early participant’s benefit.  The number of people entering the Ponzi scheme has diminished greatly the level of benefits paid out continues to decline.  There is somewhere between $80 trillion and $200 trillion of unfunded liabilities in the Social Security and Medicare system.  In other words, there is no way to pay for future benefits promised to people if they simply accept and participate in the system.

The smooth operators used false promises and rhetoric to gain public support to foist these Ponzi schemes on the citizens.  It was the ruling class pulling a Three Card Monte on the citizens.  Look here they say.  We promise the government will provide you with this level of benefits.  But you have to vote us into power and keep us in power to ensure you receive these benefits.

Meanwhile social security and medicare taxes are collected by the government and put into “trust funds”.  However, those Three Card Monte operators on Capitol Hill and in the White House took the money and spent it.  To replenish the funds the government sells bonds to creditors resulting in an increasing in the federal debt.  In turn that burden to repay the debt, plus interest accrued, falls on the children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren of the very people that believe they are entitled to the benefit in the first place.

Lastly, the productive citizens that are able to save or invest are preyed upon the most.  Progressive and punitive tax policy is used against the industrious.   Government uses legal tender laws to force the citizens to accept their fiat currency.  The buyers of U.S. debt know the U.S. government will tax the productive citizens and continue to force citizens to use their fiat currency.  That is what backs the promise to repay the debt.  Nothing more, nothing less!

Meanwhile because government can deficit spend, can borrow money without limit, and can print money at will, government continues to grow unabated.   Undoubtedly, the smooth operators known as the ruling class wants to retain power and continue growing the authoritarian state.  The schemes, the lies, the deceptions are being perpetrated on the American citizens as part of the fundamental transformation from a free-market capitalist, constitutionally limited society into an all-powerful authoritarian state.

The ruling class is the Three Card Monte dealer.  The ruling class is the Ponzi scheme operator.   Except we don’t volunteer to participate in their confidence game.  We are forced, by threat of fines or prison, to participate the confidence game knowing the game is rigged.  The ruling class uses rhetoric to cajole us.  The ruling class lies and deceives us.  The ruling class plunders property from some citizens to give to other citizens (or non-citizens) in exchange for votes.

The only winning move is not to play.

3 Comments

Filed under Philosophical

Machiavellian Style Politics

The Prince, written by Italian author and statesman Niccolo Machiavelli, described the tactics used by rulers to maintain power and control.  Political expediency is elevated above morality and ethics to gain power and maintain authority.  Machiavellian tactics are characterized by cunning, deception, expediency or dishonesty, and these tactics may be employed subtly or unscrupulously.

The modern day political arena fully encompasses Machiavellian tactics which are employed in the electoral, legislative, and executive processes.   A politician’s first priority is winning elections.  To win elections politicians cajole, lie, deceive, manipulate, and evade.  Politicians omit facts to distort truths.  Politicians make promises.   Politicians use poll tested words and phrases to elicit responses from a Pavlovian electorate drooling at the thought of getting their guy elected to office, and hoping that this time will be different, and the electorate is once again disappointed and dejected.

Once elected to office, politicians keep or break promises whenever necessary to satisfy their own ambition and avarice.   The enticement of government benefits, programs, subsidies, grants, tax advantages, etc. are made available to the largest group of voters in exchange for their vote or to those people that can swell the politician’s campaign coffers.  Indeed, politicians offering benefits to the poor or middle class at the expense of a less numerous class of voters is used to secure votes from subservient constituents.  Likewise, politicians offer subsidies, grants, or tax advantages in exchange for significant campaign contributions.

In both scenarios, politicians are simply selling political influence for personal gain.  Morals, ethics, and laws are damned.  What was promised to you in the electoral process is violated in the legislative process unless it serves the politician’s purposes – to stay in power and get re-elected.

Government is now a bloated leviathan sucking the life, liberty, and freedom from one segment of society and redirecting it to government centric preferences, favored political organizations, fat-cat donors, and government created dependents.  The government connects its life source – productive citizens – to the central planners and dependents through a rotting umbilical cord.  Life’s simplest and most basic decisions are controlled by the ruling class, central planners, and millions of bureaucrats imposing draconian rules and regulations upon the very citizens they are supposed to represent.

The illusion of freedom and liberty is bought and sold using Machiavellian tactics.  Irrespective of rationale or logic and with contempt for the limitations of power placed upon politicians, they believe they are empowered to use the force of law to take from some in society and give to others in society.

Do not listen to the sophistry.  Do not believe their explanations. Politicians lie, deceive, and speak with forked tongues.

Truth is so passé.  Morals are relative.  Laws don’t apply to them.

Furthermore, the media is complicit as they are nothing more than a propaganda tool, espousing opinion and subjective news laced with half-truths, lies, deceptions, and omitting information to further the agenda of the ruling class.  It’s nearly impossible to wade through the fabricated stories or find the hidden stories that remotely represent truth and fact.  While television and traditional print media are heavily left leaning, talk radio has a substantially bigger right leaning or conservative element.  Both sides are guilty of propagating false narratives on us.

Undoubtedly, the majority of stories contain a small nugget of truth wrapped in innuendo, opinion, unnamed sources, and omissions.  To distinguish fact from fiction often requires hours of personal time.  Most people don’t have the time or the inclination to invest in the charade.  It’s simply easier to remain ignorant or only pay attention for a few hours every election cycle.

Lastly, politicians create a public facing persona.  Some may call equate this to “rock stars”.  Some call it the cult of personality.  But, much time and effort is put into the politician’s persona for public consumption.  How the politician looks, dresses, walks, speaks, and even the narrative around their life story – whether true or fabricated.  In fact, many have speculated the country would not have elected President Roosevelt knowing he was in a wheelchair.  Likewise, President Kennedy’s 1960 victory over Richard Nixon was attributed partially to television.

Some voters simply look at the public facing persona and support candidates for that reason.  Even random characteristics such as skin pigmentation or gender sway some voters.  Politicians use these things for political advantage.  Sadly, voters buy this garbage.

In my opinion, voters simply want someone to lead them not to represent them.  Too many voters want the government to take responsibility for their lives rather than the voter taking personal responsibility for their decisions.  Politicians recognize this and capitalize on it.  Politicians use Machiavellian tactics to sell an image, an ideal to an unwitting yet complacent and apathetic public.  The people refuse to recognize politicians for what they are; humans.  Politicians are not Gods.  They are not super humans.  There not not to be idolized, worshiped, or fawned over.  They are merely human and are no better than you or me.

In return politicians give assurances to voters that all is well.  That the economy is recovering when its not. The financial markets are sound but the financial markets are rigged casinos.  The banks are too big to fail.  Favored industries, labor unions, and others are bailed out.  Unemployment is falling when it’s rising.  Inflation is under control when it’s really 5-10% greater than what’s reported.  Prices are stable when they are rising.  Corporations and profits are blamed instead of government greed and incompetence.   Businesses move overseas because of greed and profit rather than burdensome taxes, rules and regulations.

In other words, someone else is to blame for all this.  But it is never, never, never the politician or government’s fault.  In fact, in most cases it is their fault and that fault is covered over with lies, deceptions, half-truths, and omissions.

I liken these times to controlled chaos.  Everyone knows something is wrong.  Something is amiss in our union.  In fact, it has been for a long time.  People yearn to believe that all is well and all will be well.  They ignore all the facts and data around them.  Instead of putting their toes in the sand the people put their heads in the sand.

It reminds me of the ending of the movie Animal House.  After the fraternity has wreaked havoc on the small college town and people are running around frantically, the character played by Kevin Bacon says “Remain calm!  All is well.”    Well, all is not well and Machiavellian style politics are being used to convince you otherwise.

Leave a comment

Filed under Philosophical

What is a Representative

No taxation without representation!  This was the siren song of the colonial era.  Under the Constitution, we the people, have a representative in Congress.  Our congressman is our representative.  What does it mean to be a representative?  Have you ever given it serious thought?

An understanding of the founding generation’s core principles and values is embodied in the idea of representation.  Those core principles and values are:

1)       Liberty – In the Lockean sense of the word

2)      Effective government

3)      Republican government

4)      Decentralized government – federalism

5)      Fiduciary government

Representation is embodied under the last item; fiduciary government.  The modern dictionary definition of fiduciary is:

A person to whom property or power is entrusted for the benefit of another.

Some examples of a fiduciary are:  an agent, a trustee, a guardian, a corporate director, a property manager, and an executor of a will.   The founding generation believed that government should be a fiduciary enterprise.  Participants in constitutional debates referred to government officials as the people’s agents, trustees, servants, or guardians.  The Founders believed government officials were fiduciaries and were bound by the standards traditionally imposed upon fiduciaries.

Some obligations of fiduciaries are:

1)      To obey instructions given them, and therefore honor any limits imposed on their power.

2)      To act in a manner loyal to the interests of those they work for, and therefore to avoid (or at least disclose) conflicts of interest.

3)      To act in good faith – in other words, to be honest.

4)      To exercise independent judgment.

5)      Not to delegate that judgment without permission.

6)      To exercise an appropriate level of care.

7)      If a fiduciary managed property for more than one person (e.g. several family members), to treat each of them impartially.

8)      To provide regular accountings explaining how funds and other property were managed.

The founding generation was more conversant with fiduciaries and their responsibilities compared to people today.  It was commonplace for one person to have an agent acting on their behalf.  Small farmers hired large farmers as brokers.  Large farmers employed brokers overseas.  There were guardians, trustees, executors, and administrators.

The founding generation deduced several principles from the notion that public office was a public trust:

  • Like private fiduciaries, government officials had to follow “instructions” – the terms of the Constitution and the laws.
  • Government officials had to be loyal to the people they represented.  They had to have an identity of interest with the people.  The Founders called this sympathy.
  • Public officials should be honest.
  • Decision makers – whether government officials or voters – should be able to exercise independent judgment.  They should not be in a position in which their best judgment might be overridden by others.  For this reason, the Founders generally believed that only self-sufficient people of independent judgment should vote or hold office.
  • Independent judgment required that agencies of government remain independent.  State officials should be free of federal influence and federal officials free of state influence.  Within the federal government the legislative, executive, and judicial branches were to be independent of each other.  This independence should not be confused with separation of powers.
  • It was forbidden for an agent to delegate decision making without the consent of his employer, therefore it was a breach of duty for the people’s representatives to delegate their decision making.
  • Government officials had a duty to treat citizens as impartially as possible – a duty the Founders stressed perhaps more often than any other fiduciary obligation.
  • Government officials had to account to the public for their actions.

Consider you are a business owner and you own several buildings.  Two buildings are located near each other and you hire a person – an agent – to sell Building A and not to sell Building B.  You also instruct your agent the he can do what is necessary and proper to ensure the building could be sold.

The agent goes to Building A and finds that there are some unpaid property taxes.  He also finds some general repairs are required to fix some plumbing, repair a door, and patch a hole in the roof.  So, the agent arranges for payment of the unpaid taxes, hires people to perform the necessary repairs, and puts the building up for sale.  In the end, the agent paid $12,000 for the repairs, paid $10,000 in back taxes, and Building A was put up for sale and sold for $1,000,000.  The agent reported back to his employer these things and accounted for the expenses and the sale.

The agent was instructed to do these things.

Consider some alternative scenarios.

Two months later the agent returns to his employer and provides an accounting of his actions.  The Agent said, I saw Building A needed some minor repairs but after much consideration I thought it was best to demolish Building A and rebuild it.  It cost $3,000,000 to demolish and rebuild it and it was sold for $3,000,000.

Or, the Agent says I looked at Building A and Building B and I thought it was best to sell Building B instead of Building A.

Or, the Agent says, I did not inspect Building A and was not aware of what was required to prepare it for sale.  But, the Agent did hire someone else to do these things and delegated authority to them to do what was necessary to repair the building.  When the Agent received a bill for the repair work it totaled $200,000.  Many unnecessary “repairs” were done to the building.

The agent was not instructed to do these things.  The agent was obligated not to delegate his powers to another person.  The agent was obligated to sell Building A, not Building B.

Your representative in the United States House of Representatives or your delegate in the Maryland General Assembly is expected to:

  • Behave as a fiduciary and a public trustee.
  • Your representative is supposed to be impartial.  Not to favor people or a group of people based on race, gender, religion, wealth, status in the community.  Not to represent special interest groups, foreign interests, or corporate interests.
  • Your representative is obligated to and authorized by you to perform specific duties which are enumerated in the U.S. Constitution or the State Constitution.
  • Your representative cannot delegate their powers to another person or another branch of government.  Today, the administrative state is a leviathan.  Many powers originally delegated to Congress (i.e. your representative) have been delegated to agencies in other branches of the government.  This is a blatant violation of your representative’s obligations to you.
  • Your representative is expected to by loyal to you, to identify with you.  It was understood that all laws enacted by your representatives ALSO applies to them as well as you.  No special consideration was to be given, by a law, to your representative.  For example, Obamacare excludes Congressional members and their families.  This would be a blatant violation of the public trust.
  • To exercise independent judgment – Clearly, very few if any representatives exercise independent judgment.  They vote according to political party lines, ideology, or for person gain (which includes campaign contributions).
  • State and federal officials should not interfere with each other.  This idea has been obliterated.  States no longer appoint their Senators.  The two distinct governments work hand in glove with each other.

I give attribution for this article to Robert G. Natelson, constitutional scholar and author of the book, “The Original Constitution”.  Much of this comes directly from the book or was paraphrased based on Mr. Natelson’s work.

Leave a comment

Filed under Constitution