Posted on Feb 19, 2016
Senator Ted Cruz here, what questions do you have for me? (Answering your questions on Feb 26th!)
69.1K
1.89K
914
67
67
0
From RP Staff:
*Senator Cruz will be joining us for a live Q&A on Friday, 2/26 at 1:00pm EST. Post your questions below in advance of the Q&A. Questions with the most up votes will be answered first. Please be upfront and to the point with your questions. RP Staff will be monitoring this discussion.*
From Senator Ted Cruz:
America now faces a momentous decision. Almost a decade of irresponsible defense cuts has slashed the number of combat personnel, seriously degraded their combat readiness, and shrunk the size of our military below any reasonable standard. If America continues to lead from behind, we will lose the ability to guarantee our safety at home and abroad.
Our all-volunteer force deserves better. They deserve a leader who will provide them with the finest weapons systems and the best training. They deserve the full and unapologetic support of their Commander-in-Chief, not a minimal commitment and overly restrictive Rules of Engagement.
Furthermore, Americans make up the finest military professionals and veterans in the world, and they deserve an investment in their careers, their health, and their families. We must honor of our military members, families, and veterans by ensuring they receive the respect and care they have earned.
Under focused, new leadership, America can, and will, rebuild our military and take care of our veterans.
The financing and the details of my plan: https://www.tedcruz.org/american-resolve/
*Senator Cruz will be joining us for a live Q&A on Friday, 2/26 at 1:00pm EST. Post your questions below in advance of the Q&A. Questions with the most up votes will be answered first. Please be upfront and to the point with your questions. RP Staff will be monitoring this discussion.*
From Senator Ted Cruz:
America now faces a momentous decision. Almost a decade of irresponsible defense cuts has slashed the number of combat personnel, seriously degraded their combat readiness, and shrunk the size of our military below any reasonable standard. If America continues to lead from behind, we will lose the ability to guarantee our safety at home and abroad.
Our all-volunteer force deserves better. They deserve a leader who will provide them with the finest weapons systems and the best training. They deserve the full and unapologetic support of their Commander-in-Chief, not a minimal commitment and overly restrictive Rules of Engagement.
Furthermore, Americans make up the finest military professionals and veterans in the world, and they deserve an investment in their careers, their health, and their families. We must honor of our military members, families, and veterans by ensuring they receive the respect and care they have earned.
Under focused, new leadership, America can, and will, rebuild our military and take care of our veterans.
The financing and the details of my plan: https://www.tedcruz.org/american-resolve/
Election 2016
Ted Cruz
Office of the President (POTUS)
Q&A
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 340
6
6
0
Senator Cruz, thank you for being available to take questions from us.
As a Navy sailor, it pains to see our men and women in uniform struggle financially, some working multiple jobs to support their families or seeing veterans who are homeless. As a potential CIC, what steps will you take so that our military while serving the country with their life don't have to worry about financial survival or in some cases abject poverty?
As a Navy sailor, it pains to see our men and women in uniform struggle financially, some working multiple jobs to support their families or seeing veterans who are homeless. As a potential CIC, what steps will you take so that our military while serving the country with their life don't have to worry about financial survival or in some cases abject poverty?
(6)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
Thank you. This is a question near and dear to my heart, especially when I see our very young disabled SVMs at Walter Reeds. Some have no arms, no legs, coupled with PTSD and other issues.
I can tell you one reason some vets are on the streets, the retirement pay is nothing but peanuts. A vet gets out, already neck deep in debt, say and E-6 and his retirement pay is about 1/3 of his pay check while in service...not 1/2. You have to first subtract the BAH and BAS. Then whatever is left, you take an average of the last 3 years, which is lesser that the last base pay. Throw in some disability, which the VA tries very hard to find reasons not to pay or reduce the benefit, this SVM is left with next to nothing. God helps him/her if their disability makes it hard for them to hold any job, like those maimed for life. Even for those who can hold some kind of employment, my understanding is that to work for the Government, your GS level is usually based on you military rank, regardless of how long you served.
I can tell you one reason some vets are on the streets, the retirement pay is nothing but peanuts. A vet gets out, already neck deep in debt, say and E-6 and his retirement pay is about 1/3 of his pay check while in service...not 1/2. You have to first subtract the BAH and BAS. Then whatever is left, you take an average of the last 3 years, which is lesser that the last base pay. Throw in some disability, which the VA tries very hard to find reasons not to pay or reduce the benefit, this SVM is left with next to nothing. God helps him/her if their disability makes it hard for them to hold any job, like those maimed for life. Even for those who can hold some kind of employment, my understanding is that to work for the Government, your GS level is usually based on you military rank, regardless of how long you served.
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
The Republican party is well known for its religious influences. As a libertarian, my main concern is this: Where do you draw the line between church and state, and how do you stay objective in making your decisions?
(6)
(0)
SCPO Penny Douphinett
Great question! I am following the Republican primaries closely and I am often left wondering if the separation of (the Christian) church and state is just a myth. While it may be argued this Country was, at one time, a Christian country, much of this country is no longer Christian. Sen Cruz, the talking heads say again and again you must win the evangelical vote to secure the nomination and you have been talking about your deep Faith for over a year now. Frankly how does this "play" in the general election? I am not voting for a Christian President; I am voting for a President of the United States. Not to belabor or misspeak SPC Chartrand's point, but you seem to have made it clear you can only make decisions through a Christian lens.
(2)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
The correct word is "No" to any religion:first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" As a congressman he should obey "NO"
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
Senator Cruz, I'm a big believer in what you're doing and what you stand for. How would a recently retired Soldier submit a resume to join your staff?
(6)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Not going to lie...it'd be hilarious if he replied by sending you to the abysmal black hole of USAjobs.gov.
(3)
(0)
LTC Martin Metz
I wouldn't be surprised if he had organization on the ground in your state. They can use all the volunteers that are interested. It may not come with a paycheck, but your efforts will still count for something and certainly be appreciated.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
We're hearing a lot about rescinding ObamaCare and other wedge issues. But the two core issues for our country is the national debt and the overall economy. If elected, what are you going to do in the first 100 days to set a new direction and get the country back on fiscal track, creating jobs, and influencing the millions of Americans who prefer accepting welfare to go back to work?
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
5
5
0
Will you stop the social experiments and war on religion within the military since Obama has been POTUS and remove all his political appointees within DOD.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
Senator Cruz, I am a humanist and an atheist. As Commander in Chief, how will you represent members of the U.S. military who have religious faiths other than Christianity, or no religious faith at all?
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
My liberal friends think that it is "alright" to have an activist supreme court justice, and many of the SOTUS votes seem to be 5-4 decisions along ideological lines. From your experiences with SOTUS what can you say to liberals to convince them that a court that follows the constitution is actually in their interest too?
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
Thank you for taking the time to visit us here at Rally Point.
First, if elected, you will likely see the emergence of several extremely disruptive technologies such as quantum computing and advanced virtual reality. How can a country with failing infrastructure and struggling schools take advantage of these developments?
Second, the US currently spends roughly 21% of GDP while taxing 18% of GDP. While tax cuts are likely to provide some economic stimulus, that stimulus is not likely to close the gap between revenue and spending. Where will you cut spending to close the gap?
First, if elected, you will likely see the emergence of several extremely disruptive technologies such as quantum computing and advanced virtual reality. How can a country with failing infrastructure and struggling schools take advantage of these developments?
Second, the US currently spends roughly 21% of GDP while taxing 18% of GDP. While tax cuts are likely to provide some economic stimulus, that stimulus is not likely to close the gap between revenue and spending. Where will you cut spending to close the gap?
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
Intro: Madison vetoed the first attempt by Congress for the Federal government to assume the role, responsibility, and power (RRP) in a Bill that would have created the Department of Transportation in 1817. In his veto message he said the Federal government could not use the General Welfare, Commerce, Necessary and Proper, or the Supremacy Clauses and that these clauses only pertained to the enumerated powers within the Constitution. He further stated that for the general (Federal) government to take on this RRP that they would have to follow the Article V process to amend the Constitution getting three-fourths of the States to approve this RRP in the ratification process. If this is true than how is it that the so many RRP Departments exist without Amendments to the Constitution?
If one reads Madison's notes on the Convention of the Constitution and the Ratification debates there was no allowance for the Judiciary to create new Constitutional matters or RRP's, and there was no allowance for Statutes of Limitations or even precedence or case Law when it came to what is Constitutional and what is not. Jefferson and Madison pointed out to the Republic that States could nullify unconstitutional laws, so why do the States not convene a convention to audit and nullify all unconstitutional RRP's in a Convention of what I will refer to as "Republic Review," per my second book in fixing the Constitution and Reclaiming the Republic. As President would you call for and lead the States into this Convention?
Best Regards G. R. Mobley
If one reads Madison's notes on the Convention of the Constitution and the Ratification debates there was no allowance for the Judiciary to create new Constitutional matters or RRP's, and there was no allowance for Statutes of Limitations or even precedence or case Law when it came to what is Constitutional and what is not. Jefferson and Madison pointed out to the Republic that States could nullify unconstitutional laws, so why do the States not convene a convention to audit and nullify all unconstitutional RRP's in a Convention of what I will refer to as "Republic Review," per my second book in fixing the Constitution and Reclaiming the Republic. As President would you call for and lead the States into this Convention?
Best Regards G. R. Mobley
(5)
(0)
LTC Thomas Tennant
This question made my head hurt. Calling for a Constitutional Convention will be a two edge sword. Given our current political environment I could forsee the whole Bill of Rights getting change and result in our loosing our freedoms.
(1)
(0)
GySgt G. R. Mobley
After reading your response I reread my question to verify that I did not use the term “Constitutional Convention.” Fortunately I did not use this term because it is a completely different type of Convention than what I am calling for. That said; before I continue let me clarify what our Constitution is. I do mean to insult you or any one, but I have found that over 99% of the electorate are constitutionally illiterate.
Most people consider the Constitution a guide for the general (Federal) government; however, this is the furthest thing from the truth. Our Constitution is a contract and per the framers (the men) and the Founders (the States) this is clearly spelled out in the Federalist Papers and the Ratification debates. In addition, according to Jefferson and Madison in their Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions this compact or contact is locked tight and only the States possess the power to change the definitions as well as the roles, responsibilities, and powers (RRP). This is why Article V exists and make no allowance for any of the branches of the general government to assume any new without the States permission. Let me also refer again to the Ratification debates concerning this. Why because the Ratification debates are actual appendages to the Constitution and are legally binding to the contract. If one peruses each of the debates one will find a harmony as to how each line of the Constitution was defined and explained to the States.
Furthermore, one will also find that the general government only has Supremacy in those powers that were delegated to the general government. Madison stated it best in the Virginia Ratification debate regarding the limitations of powers and that because the Constitution is specific all things that are not listed cannot be implied or assumed. Consequently, for a new RRP to be assumed the authority must come from the States. This is why the States are the actual founders and the “living” Stakeholders of the Constitution.
Hopefully this helps set the stage for the Convention I referred to. However, before I jump into that convention let me cover the types of conventions.
There are fundamentally three types of conventions within our Republic. The first is the one that has taken place and it is called a “Constitutional Convention.” This is where the drafting and submitting of a Constitution takes place; I or no one of sound mind would ever recommend this type of convention to ever occur again. Another type of convention in our Republic is called an Article V Convention. This is where two-thirds of the State petition Congress to convene Convention to “Amend” the constitution and the details are within Article V of the Constitution. The Article V convention is also being referred to as a “Convention of States (CoS) by many. Bottom line, for an Article V or CoS convention to be successful it will require 38 States to coalesce and reach an accord and ratify any new submitted amendments. This is a very very tall order to accomplish. However, the is a large consensus by a majority of States that many of the RRP’s that have been assumed since 1849 are unconstitutional. I contend that 80% of the existing RRP’s that are exercised by the general government are unconstitutional.
The third type of convention is an administrative convention. This type of convention does not serve to write, rewrite, or amend the Constitution. This convention is specific in function to administer the powers held by the States regarding all things not enumerated in the Constitution. Some administrative conventions that have occurred can be a small convention between a few regional States such as Western States. It would commendable if the Western States convened a convention to come to an agreement to distribute water from Oregon and Washington to California for an example. Bear in mind that the Constitution is a contract and there are a specific duty that accompanies any contract and that is the act of oversight and auditing. If the States conclude that they have been duped and that many of the RRP’s being exercised by the general government are unconstitutional; simply due to the fact that the general government violated the contract (i.e. Constitution), then they can call for an auditing of the Constitution. The contract spells out how any new RRP can be delegated to the general government and by their failing to follow the codified process in Article V they have usurped these RRP’s for themselves. Whether they did this with noble or nefarious intent it does not matter.
As Jefferson and Madison state these are palpable violations and render the contract null and void if any party chooses to secede. They also state that they have the power and duty to protect the citizens of their States from Federal tyranny and are obligated to nullify all unconstitutional RRP’s.
Therefore, inherent in our Republic is the power of the States to convene a convention for an audit, which is what I refer to as “Republic Review” in my second book. I made the mistake of calling it an Article V because I believe all States owe it to their “union” to come together to resolve these problems that only they can resolve. This is why I assert that it would be best to convene a convention once two-thirds of the States come to the realization of all the constitutional violations. Now if I went in to the how and when these things occurred I would be writing a much longer response. Suffice it to say I academically cover these in my first book and my second book as well.
The best example is the one I used in my question regarding Madison’s veto of Congresses first attempt to create the Department of Transportation. Madison said that the Constitution has to be amended and so if there is a Department of Transportation and there is no amendment, then there must be an amendment that has changed the Article V process that empowers the general government to assume new RRP’s. This amendment does not exist.
I hope this clarifies what I am asking one of the only two candidates that express a reverence for our Constitution. You can check out my site here:
http://mobiusstrippress.com/index.html
I also have a YouTube Channel where I discuss the Concept of Republic Review in more details and show how close we are, our tall task is to educate key people as to what we can do and how to do it here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAYO0Ao-38T3XUu5vNsxKVw
And a status to the Constitution association last year here:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4GMiDCVrDPSIakJ0k5SiTI0Y7CgGFon1
Other References:
The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/virres.asp
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jeffken.asp
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/kenres.asp
Madison’s veto of the “Bonus Bill” of 1817:
http://millercenter.org/president/madison/speeches/speech-3630
A Listing of other founding Documents (including the Ratification Debates):
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/constpap.asp
Sorry if this is rough grammatically, but I wanted to give you clarification ASAP.
B/R
G. R. Mobley
Most people consider the Constitution a guide for the general (Federal) government; however, this is the furthest thing from the truth. Our Constitution is a contract and per the framers (the men) and the Founders (the States) this is clearly spelled out in the Federalist Papers and the Ratification debates. In addition, according to Jefferson and Madison in their Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions this compact or contact is locked tight and only the States possess the power to change the definitions as well as the roles, responsibilities, and powers (RRP). This is why Article V exists and make no allowance for any of the branches of the general government to assume any new without the States permission. Let me also refer again to the Ratification debates concerning this. Why because the Ratification debates are actual appendages to the Constitution and are legally binding to the contract. If one peruses each of the debates one will find a harmony as to how each line of the Constitution was defined and explained to the States.
Furthermore, one will also find that the general government only has Supremacy in those powers that were delegated to the general government. Madison stated it best in the Virginia Ratification debate regarding the limitations of powers and that because the Constitution is specific all things that are not listed cannot be implied or assumed. Consequently, for a new RRP to be assumed the authority must come from the States. This is why the States are the actual founders and the “living” Stakeholders of the Constitution.
Hopefully this helps set the stage for the Convention I referred to. However, before I jump into that convention let me cover the types of conventions.
There are fundamentally three types of conventions within our Republic. The first is the one that has taken place and it is called a “Constitutional Convention.” This is where the drafting and submitting of a Constitution takes place; I or no one of sound mind would ever recommend this type of convention to ever occur again. Another type of convention in our Republic is called an Article V Convention. This is where two-thirds of the State petition Congress to convene Convention to “Amend” the constitution and the details are within Article V of the Constitution. The Article V convention is also being referred to as a “Convention of States (CoS) by many. Bottom line, for an Article V or CoS convention to be successful it will require 38 States to coalesce and reach an accord and ratify any new submitted amendments. This is a very very tall order to accomplish. However, the is a large consensus by a majority of States that many of the RRP’s that have been assumed since 1849 are unconstitutional. I contend that 80% of the existing RRP’s that are exercised by the general government are unconstitutional.
The third type of convention is an administrative convention. This type of convention does not serve to write, rewrite, or amend the Constitution. This convention is specific in function to administer the powers held by the States regarding all things not enumerated in the Constitution. Some administrative conventions that have occurred can be a small convention between a few regional States such as Western States. It would commendable if the Western States convened a convention to come to an agreement to distribute water from Oregon and Washington to California for an example. Bear in mind that the Constitution is a contract and there are a specific duty that accompanies any contract and that is the act of oversight and auditing. If the States conclude that they have been duped and that many of the RRP’s being exercised by the general government are unconstitutional; simply due to the fact that the general government violated the contract (i.e. Constitution), then they can call for an auditing of the Constitution. The contract spells out how any new RRP can be delegated to the general government and by their failing to follow the codified process in Article V they have usurped these RRP’s for themselves. Whether they did this with noble or nefarious intent it does not matter.
As Jefferson and Madison state these are palpable violations and render the contract null and void if any party chooses to secede. They also state that they have the power and duty to protect the citizens of their States from Federal tyranny and are obligated to nullify all unconstitutional RRP’s.
Therefore, inherent in our Republic is the power of the States to convene a convention for an audit, which is what I refer to as “Republic Review” in my second book. I made the mistake of calling it an Article V because I believe all States owe it to their “union” to come together to resolve these problems that only they can resolve. This is why I assert that it would be best to convene a convention once two-thirds of the States come to the realization of all the constitutional violations. Now if I went in to the how and when these things occurred I would be writing a much longer response. Suffice it to say I academically cover these in my first book and my second book as well.
The best example is the one I used in my question regarding Madison’s veto of Congresses first attempt to create the Department of Transportation. Madison said that the Constitution has to be amended and so if there is a Department of Transportation and there is no amendment, then there must be an amendment that has changed the Article V process that empowers the general government to assume new RRP’s. This amendment does not exist.
I hope this clarifies what I am asking one of the only two candidates that express a reverence for our Constitution. You can check out my site here:
http://mobiusstrippress.com/index.html
I also have a YouTube Channel where I discuss the Concept of Republic Review in more details and show how close we are, our tall task is to educate key people as to what we can do and how to do it here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAYO0Ao-38T3XUu5vNsxKVw
And a status to the Constitution association last year here:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4GMiDCVrDPSIakJ0k5SiTI0Y7CgGFon1
Other References:
The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/virres.asp
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jeffken.asp
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/kenres.asp
Madison’s veto of the “Bonus Bill” of 1817:
http://millercenter.org/president/madison/speeches/speech-3630
A Listing of other founding Documents (including the Ratification Debates):
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/constpap.asp
Sorry if this is rough grammatically, but I wanted to give you clarification ASAP.
B/R
G. R. Mobley
Official site of Constitutional Orthodoxy, promoting the call to a Constitutional Convention.
(0)
(0)
GySgt G. R. Mobley
After reading your response I reread my question to verify that I did not use the term “Constitutional Convention.” Fortunately I did not use this term because it is a completely different type of Convention than what I am calling for. That said; before I continue let me clarify what our Constitution is. I do mean to insult you or any one, but I have found that over 99% of the electorate are constitutionally illiterate.
Most people consider the Constitution a guide for the general (Federal) government; however, this is the furthest thing from the truth. Our Constitution is a contract and per the framers (the men) and the Founders (the States) this is clearly spelled out in the Federalist Papers and the Ratification debates. In addition, according to Jefferson and Madison in their Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions this compact or contact is locked tight and only the States possess the power to change the definitions as well as the roles, responsibilities, and powers (RRP). This is why Article V exists and make no allowance for any of the branches of the general government to assume any new without the States permission. Let me also refer again to the Ratification debates concerning this. Why because the Ratification debates are actual appendages to the Constitution and are legally binding to the contract. If one peruses each of the debates one will find a harmony as to how each line of the Constitution was defined and explained to the States.
Furthermore, one will also find that the general government only has Supremacy in those powers that were delegated to the general government. Madison stated it best in the Virginia Ratification debate regarding the limitations of powers and that because the Constitution is specific all things that are not listed cannot be implied or assumed. Consequently, for a new RRP to be assumed the authority must come from the States. This is why the States are the actual founders and the “living” Stakeholders of the Constitution.
Hopefully this helps set the stage for the Convention I referred to. However, before I jump into that convention let me cover the types of conventions.
There are fundamentally three types of conventions within our Republic. The first is the one that has taken place and it is called a “Constitutional Convention.” This is where the drafting and submitting of a Constitution takes place; I or no one of sound mind would ever recommend this type of convention to ever occur again. Another type of convention in our Republic is called an Article V Convention. This is where two-thirds of the State petition Congress to convene Convention to “Amend” the constitution and the details are within Article V of the Constitution. The Article V convention is also being referred to as a “Convention of States (CoS) by many. Bottom line, for an Article V or CoS convention to be successful it will require 38 States to coalesce and reach an accord and ratify any new submitted amendments. This is a very very tall order to accomplish. However, the is a large consensus by a majority of States that many of the RRP’s that have been assumed since 1849 are unconstitutional. I contend that 80% of the existing RRP’s that are exercised by the general government are unconstitutional.
The third type of convention is an administrative convention. This type of convention does not serve to write, rewrite, or amend the Constitution. This convention is specific in function to administer the powers held by the States regarding all things not enumerated in the Constitution. Some administrative conventions that have occurred can be a small convention between a few regional States such as Western States. It would commendable if the Western States convened a convention to come to an agreement to distribute water from Oregon and Washington to California for an example. Bear in mind that the Constitution is a contract and there are a specific duty that accompanies any contract and that is the act of oversight and auditing. If the States conclude that they have been duped and that many of the RRP’s being exercised by the general government are unconstitutional; simply due to the fact that the general government violated the contract (i.e. Constitution), then they can call for an auditing of the Constitution. The contract spells out how any new RRP can be delegated to the general government and by their failing to follow the codified process in Article V they have usurped these RRP’s for themselves. Whether they did this with noble or nefarious intent it does not matter.
As Jefferson and Madison state these are palpable violations and render the contract null and void if any party chooses to secede. They also state that they have the power and duty to protect the citizens of their States from Federal tyranny and are obligated to nullify all unconstitutional RRP’s.
Therefore, inherent in our Republic is the power of the States to convene a convention for an audit, which is what I refer to as “Republic Review” in my second book. I made the mistake of calling it an Article V because I believe all States owe it to their “union” to come together to resolve these problems that only they can resolve. This is why I assert that it would be best to convene a convention once two-thirds of the States come to the realization of all the constitutional violations. Now if I went in to the how and when these things occurred I would be writing a much longer response. Suffice it to say I academically cover these in my first book and my second book as well.
The best example is the one I used in my question regarding Madison’s veto of Congresses first attempt to create the Department of Transportation. Madison said that the Constitution has to be amended and so if there is a Department of Transportation and there is no amendment, then there must be an amendment that has changed the Article V process that empowers the general government to assume new RRP’s. This amendment does not exist.
I hope this clarifies what I am asking one of the only two candidates that express a reverence for our Constitution. You can check out my site here:
http://mobiusstrippress.com/index.html
I also have a YouTube Channel where I discuss the Concept of Republic Review in more details and show how close we are, our tall task is to educate key people as to what we can do and how to do it here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAYO0Ao-38T3XUu5vNsxKVw
And a status to the Constitution association last year here:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4GMiDCVrDPSIakJ0k5SiTI0Y7CgGFon1
Other References:
The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/virres.asp
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jeffken.asp
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/kenres.asp
Madison’s veto of the “Bonus Bill” of 1817:
http://millercenter.org/president/madison/speeches/speech-3630
A Listing of other founding Documents (including the Ratification Debates):
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/constpap.asp
Sorry if this is rough grammatically, but I wanted to give you clarification ASAP.
B/R
G. R. Mobley
Most people consider the Constitution a guide for the general (Federal) government; however, this is the furthest thing from the truth. Our Constitution is a contract and per the framers (the men) and the Founders (the States) this is clearly spelled out in the Federalist Papers and the Ratification debates. In addition, according to Jefferson and Madison in their Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions this compact or contact is locked tight and only the States possess the power to change the definitions as well as the roles, responsibilities, and powers (RRP). This is why Article V exists and make no allowance for any of the branches of the general government to assume any new without the States permission. Let me also refer again to the Ratification debates concerning this. Why because the Ratification debates are actual appendages to the Constitution and are legally binding to the contract. If one peruses each of the debates one will find a harmony as to how each line of the Constitution was defined and explained to the States.
Furthermore, one will also find that the general government only has Supremacy in those powers that were delegated to the general government. Madison stated it best in the Virginia Ratification debate regarding the limitations of powers and that because the Constitution is specific all things that are not listed cannot be implied or assumed. Consequently, for a new RRP to be assumed the authority must come from the States. This is why the States are the actual founders and the “living” Stakeholders of the Constitution.
Hopefully this helps set the stage for the Convention I referred to. However, before I jump into that convention let me cover the types of conventions.
There are fundamentally three types of conventions within our Republic. The first is the one that has taken place and it is called a “Constitutional Convention.” This is where the drafting and submitting of a Constitution takes place; I or no one of sound mind would ever recommend this type of convention to ever occur again. Another type of convention in our Republic is called an Article V Convention. This is where two-thirds of the State petition Congress to convene Convention to “Amend” the constitution and the details are within Article V of the Constitution. The Article V convention is also being referred to as a “Convention of States (CoS) by many. Bottom line, for an Article V or CoS convention to be successful it will require 38 States to coalesce and reach an accord and ratify any new submitted amendments. This is a very very tall order to accomplish. However, the is a large consensus by a majority of States that many of the RRP’s that have been assumed since 1849 are unconstitutional. I contend that 80% of the existing RRP’s that are exercised by the general government are unconstitutional.
The third type of convention is an administrative convention. This type of convention does not serve to write, rewrite, or amend the Constitution. This convention is specific in function to administer the powers held by the States regarding all things not enumerated in the Constitution. Some administrative conventions that have occurred can be a small convention between a few regional States such as Western States. It would commendable if the Western States convened a convention to come to an agreement to distribute water from Oregon and Washington to California for an example. Bear in mind that the Constitution is a contract and there are a specific duty that accompanies any contract and that is the act of oversight and auditing. If the States conclude that they have been duped and that many of the RRP’s being exercised by the general government are unconstitutional; simply due to the fact that the general government violated the contract (i.e. Constitution), then they can call for an auditing of the Constitution. The contract spells out how any new RRP can be delegated to the general government and by their failing to follow the codified process in Article V they have usurped these RRP’s for themselves. Whether they did this with noble or nefarious intent it does not matter.
As Jefferson and Madison state these are palpable violations and render the contract null and void if any party chooses to secede. They also state that they have the power and duty to protect the citizens of their States from Federal tyranny and are obligated to nullify all unconstitutional RRP’s.
Therefore, inherent in our Republic is the power of the States to convene a convention for an audit, which is what I refer to as “Republic Review” in my second book. I made the mistake of calling it an Article V because I believe all States owe it to their “union” to come together to resolve these problems that only they can resolve. This is why I assert that it would be best to convene a convention once two-thirds of the States come to the realization of all the constitutional violations. Now if I went in to the how and when these things occurred I would be writing a much longer response. Suffice it to say I academically cover these in my first book and my second book as well.
The best example is the one I used in my question regarding Madison’s veto of Congresses first attempt to create the Department of Transportation. Madison said that the Constitution has to be amended and so if there is a Department of Transportation and there is no amendment, then there must be an amendment that has changed the Article V process that empowers the general government to assume new RRP’s. This amendment does not exist.
I hope this clarifies what I am asking one of the only two candidates that express a reverence for our Constitution. You can check out my site here:
http://mobiusstrippress.com/index.html
I also have a YouTube Channel where I discuss the Concept of Republic Review in more details and show how close we are, our tall task is to educate key people as to what we can do and how to do it here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAYO0Ao-38T3XUu5vNsxKVw
And a status to the Constitution association last year here:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4GMiDCVrDPSIakJ0k5SiTI0Y7CgGFon1
Other References:
The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/virres.asp
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jeffken.asp
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/kenres.asp
Madison’s veto of the “Bonus Bill” of 1817:
http://millercenter.org/president/madison/speeches/speech-3630
A Listing of other founding Documents (including the Ratification Debates):
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/constpap.asp
Sorry if this is rough grammatically, but I wanted to give you clarification ASAP.
B/R
G. R. Mobley
Official site of Constitutional Orthodoxy, promoting the call to a Constitutional Convention.
(0)
(0)
GySgt G. R. Mobley
I apparently duplicated my response - sorry, I was not sure the first time I submitted my comment actually went through.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google