Real Time Analytics


 

Constitution Study Group

Information

Constitution Study Group

Study the U.S. Constitution to learn the original meaning as shown by The Federalist Papers

Members: 819
Latest Activity: Apr 11

RULES!

1. STAY ON TOPIC! This Group is about our founding documents:The Declaration of Independence, The U.S. Constitution, The Federalist Papers, etc. Please do not post photos, info about rallies, candidates, your own pet theories, your own agenda, links to groups you want to promote, stuff you are selling, rumors, forwarded emails which have circulated throughout the country, etc.

2. Vulgar & obscene language is not tolerated. 

3. PLEASE read previous posts & discussions before you post anything. You may find that your Questions have already been addressed! I'm trying to keep the posts as CONCISE as possible so new members don't have so much to read to catch up.
4. DO NOT START ANY NEW DISCUSSIONS UNLESS YOU HAVE READ EVERY EXISTING DISCUSSION & ARE ASSURED THAT YOUR TOPIC HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED!

Discussion Forum

Dangers to representative government and Safeguards

Started by Jack Coleman. Last reply by Publius Huldah Jan 24. 7 Replies

 This Training Manual No. TM 2000-25 on Citizenship, U.S. History and the Constitution was compiled and issued by the U.S. War Department, November 30, 1928, to teach our young men in the services…Continue

Gun Control, the Dick Act of 1902, Bills of Attainder & Ex Post Facto Laws

Started by Publius Huldah. Last reply by Publius Huldah Jan 24. 3 Replies

GUN CONTROL:  All you need to know .... and you really need to know it.…Continue

The 14th Amendment (Sec. 4) and the National Debt

Started by Publius Huldah. Last reply by David J Edwards Jan 6. 72 Replies

Someone asked about the claim made by barry soreto's regime that Sec. 4 of the 14th Amendment authorizes soreto to raise the debt limit if Congress refuses to do so. Here is an excellent article on…Continue

Tags: power over the Purse, enumerated powers, Sec. 4 of the 14th Amendment, debt ceiling

Why the Balanced Budget Amendment is a Plot Hatched in the Pits of Hell

Started by Publius Huldah. Last reply by Publius Huldah Jan 4. 176 Replies

Here is my second paper - just out today - on the BBA where I address the version which all the U.S. Senate Republicans co-signed:…Continue

Tags: cutting spending, separation of powers, Senate J.R. 10, Sen. Jim DeMint, Balanced Budget Amendment

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Constitution Study Group to add comments!

Comment by Charlie on February 18, 2010 at 6:44pm
Nope, no federally-owned land or property at all, excepting what is explicitly authorized by the Constitution. If the federal government has a need for other properties (in order to facilitate the execution of Constitutionally-delegated powers of course), it should be leased from a private owner.
Comment by Phil Hoffman on February 18, 2010 at 6:12pm
If you want to see medical cost drop like a lead balloon. Let every company and the government drop all coverage . Necessarily medicare would have to be phased out. You take all the money allocated for pork projects and put it into the medicare fund.( A true lock box and placed into private investments with a history of long term positive yields) Keep it forever away from the hands of the Congress and administration. This would not only reduce the cost of medicare for the duration it would reduce the budgets knowing that pork money would go to the medicare not the the states and businesses that put pay for play money into the pockets of politicians.
Comment by Trumpet Blast on February 18, 2010 at 6:04pm
Utah legislature is draftng a bill to demand the feds give back all the land that they have wrongfully secured. An astounding 60% of Utah is owned by the federal govt. Perhaps this is a start! In the case of "landmarks" sited by Danny, they could be given back to the states for preservation.
Comment by Publius Huldah on February 18, 2010 at 5:41pm
Yeah, Danny! I have no sense of humour! And Bobby nailed it. In fact, he gets a gold star! The federal government has no authority to own land for parks or monuments. And they don't have authority to tax us to pay for their monuments. Madison made a point in Federalist No. 43, paras 5 & 6, that the size of the District of Columbia was & should be "sufficiently circumscribed" ["tiny" for any of you from Rio Lindo] so as not to make people worry about the federal government getting too big (I'm paraphrasing). Private organizations may contribute funds to build memorials in the DC and in forts, arsenals, & dock-yards. But not one dime from me for the memorial to FDR! But I'll pay to take it down.
Comment by Land Shark aka Bob E on February 18, 2010 at 3:57pm
Danny, I don't think Publius is joking. Is there another part of the Constitution that you want to do just "a little" of? The Constitution is not a "pick-a-part" document. It's either accepted in its' original intent or it is considered to have been perverted. Note that if there is no enumerated right of the federal government in the Constituiton to do what you want, then the States can do it.
Comment by Danny Kirkpatrick on February 18, 2010 at 3:19pm
Charlie, i think and hope Publius was joking a little about selling all so called " Government Owned " land, maybe some, but not all should be sold. Most national parks could be sold, the ones that are just a lot of land, good arable land. All Landmarks should be kept.... Idea's?
Comment by Publius Huldah on February 18, 2010 at 3:07pm
Well, owning & operating national parks is not among the enumerated powers of any branch of the federal government. Weren't national parks Teddy Roosevelt's doing? Down with Progressives! And I too have relinquished ss & medicare.
Comment by Charlie on February 18, 2010 at 1:38pm
Yes, health care is absolutely none of the government's business. The question should not be what to replace Medicare with, but rather, how do we get rid of it entirely?

There are some proposals (originally from Goldwater?) for phasing-out Medicare that I support. These would involve keeping promises made to the elderly, while allowing younger workers to opt out and preventing new workers from entering the system. Personally, although I've been paying Medicare taxes for over a decade, I'd gladly walk away from the system without compensation if it would mean a permanent end to those deductions from my paycheck.

Of course, that leaves the (exacerbated) problem of unfunded Medicare liabilities (making the Ponzi scam worse). I like Publius' suggestion of selling-off federal land to cover the costs, as I am morally opposed to government/public property of any type based on principle.
Comment by Publius Huldah on February 18, 2010 at 12:40pm
Obviously, Medicare is unconstitutional as outside the enumerated powers of Congress. But millions of Americans have been forced to pay into the system - and many are now dependent upon it. We will have to restore constitutional government gradually. Dr. Walter E. Williams, former chairman of the Economics Department at George Mason Univ., and sometime guest host on Rush Limbaugh's show, mentioned a while ago that there is an age at which most American workers would be better off financially just forgoing all the money they had paid into social security and making their own arrangements. For the others, I think Dr. Williams said we would have to keep the bargain which was made with them. Legally, he is correct - it is the doctrine of "Estoppel" which says that you can't promise stuff to people, and then when they have relied to their detriment on your promise, pull the rug out from under them. So, a similiar approach would work with Medicare; and there may be ways we could fund the Medicare program for those of a certain age who choose to stay on it: selling the national parks and all federally owned lands other than the DC, military installations, and dock-yards? Question to anyone who knows: Who owns the oil in places like ANWAR (those oil fields in Alaska)? Does the federal government own that? If so, we could drill them and use the proceeds to fund the winding down of Medicare. And Yes! Eliminate the fraud & waste in Medicare!
Finally: As a People, we have become obsessed about medical care. I am old enough to remember when Americans actually paid their own medical expenses! Imagine that! AND, medical care was a whole lot cheaper when it wasn't "free" to so many people. Today, the self-payers and the insurance companies (I think) are overcharged to make up for the .....ahem... parasites who get it for free. Where did we get the idea that other people should pay our medical expenses!?

Most illnesses are entirely preventable: one of the results of the collapse of self-government in our culture is this: Americans stuff themselves with unhealthy food; and then, when they get obesity caused diseases, they want someone else to pay for it! We deserve what is coming to us!
Comment by George C. McMurtry on February 18, 2010 at 11:36am
In case you missed my point, get the government out of health care, they don't belong there constitutionally. The private sector, with the equivalent Medicare tax dollars would operate efficiently if the government did what is constitutional, protect us from the private sector taking advantage of us through proper legislation.
 
 
 

Tea Party Nation is a social network

 






© 2013   Created by Judson Phillips.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service