Just WHO is in Charge?

Just Who Is In Charge
- by Neal Ross
22 April, 2008

"Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the
people." -- John Adams

"Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be
their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge
gives." -- James Madison

"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure
reliance for the preservation of our liberty." -- Thomas Jefferson

It is apparent from the quotes above that our founding fathers considered it
essential that the people of this country be knowledgeable if they wished to
retain their liberties, but knowledgeable about what? I don't think they
were talking about trivial matters such as what is on television this evening.
I think they just may have been referring to what their government was doing
and whether their governments actions were within the confines of their
Constitutional authority.

For the people to be able to determine if their elected representatives were
governing according to the Constitution, they would first have to know what the
Constitution says. In that instance I find the knowledge of many to be severely
lacking.

Daniel Webster once said that "There are men in all ages who mean to
govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they
mean to be masters."

So, as the title of this article suggests, just who is in charge? Most people
would be inclined to say that the President is in charge. That is not true, we
the people are in charge, at least we would be if we had the courage to be. 

The Constitution was a compact, or a contract, agreed upon by the people of
this country that gives the government certain specifically defined powers.
Thomas Jefferson stated it this way, "I consider the foundation of the
Constitution as laid on this ground: That 'all powers not delegated to the
United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are
reserved to the States or to the people' (10th Amendment). To take a single
step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of
Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer
susceptible to any definition." (emphasis added)

In Federalist Paper #78, Alexander Hamilton wrote the following, and although
it was in regards to the Judiciary, the meaning is clear. (For those who are
not familiar with the Federalist Papers, they are a definitive collection of
essays regarding the intent of the Constitution), "Nor does this
conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the
legislative power. It only supposes that the power of the people is superior to
both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes,
stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the
judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former."
(emphasis added)

Hamilton explained that in greater detail moments later in the same essay,
"There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every
act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under
which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the
Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy
is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the
representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men
acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize,
but what they forbid. "(emphasis added)

We, the people of this country, have allowed our government to take upon
themselves powers which are not theirs to wield. Why have we allowed them to do
this? There are numerous reasons. Over two hundred years ago, a man named
Alexander Tytler wrote the following, "A democracy cannot exist as a
permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they
can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on the
majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the
public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose
fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." In other words, we vote
for the candidates who make the best sounding promises, regardless of whether
the Constitution grants them the authority to keep those promises.

Returning to Federalist Paper #78, Alexander Hamilton had this to say about
that exact scenario, "Though I trust the friends of the proposed
Constitution will never concur with its enemies, in questioning that
fundamental principle of republican government, which admits the right of the
people to alter or abolish the established Constitution, whenever they find it
inconsistent with their happiness, yet it is not to be inferred from this
principle, that the representatives of the people, whenever a momentary
inclination happens to lay hold of a majority of their constituents,
incompatible with the provisions in the existing Constitution, would, on that
account, be justifiable in a violation of those provisions; or that the courts
would be under a greater obligation to connive at infractions in this shape,
than when they had proceeded wholly from the cabals of the representative body.
" (emphasis added)

Another reason we have allowed our government to assume powers it has no
authority to assume is because of fear. We are warned of threats to our safety,
or our national security that can only be answered by legislative action by our
benevolent, (sarcasm intended), government. A perfect example is the many laws
passed in the name of Homeland Security following September 11. James Madison
warned us about that when he said, "It is a universal truth that the loss
of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or
pretended, from abroad."

Whatever our reasons may be, the desire for government subsidies, (handouts),
fear, or just plain apathy, we have allowed our government to step outside the
boundaries of power and authority which the Constitution grants them. 

If we truly wanted our government to take these additional powers upon
themselves, there is a way provided, and it is found in the Constitution
itself. Article 5 of the Constitution states, "The Congress, whenever two
thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this
Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the
several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in
either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this
Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several
states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode
of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment
which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall
in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the
first article; and that no state, without its
 consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

If we want the government to have these powers, the only legal way to grant
them those powers is by a Constitutional amendment. However, as Alexander
Hamilton explained, "Until the people have, by some solemn and
authoritative act, annulled or changed the established form, it is binding upon
themselves collectively, as well as individually; and no presumption, or even
knowledge, of their sentiments, can warrant their representatives in a
departure from it, prior to such an act."

In other words, unless we amend the Constitution to grant our government powers
that are not currently clearly enumerated within the Constitution, they do not
have those powers, and for them to assume them is ILLEGAL!

Although it is pure hypocrisy for Abraham Lincoln to even have said this, there
is one final quote which I would like for everyone to consider, "This
country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever
they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their
constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember
it or overthrow it." 

Over the course of our nations history the people of this country have given
their power and authority to the government. Now, instead of being the masters
of the government, we are now their servants. We have forgotten the meaning of
the words Thomas Jefferson penned in the Declaration of Independence, "We
hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these
are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ­ That to secure these rights,
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed, ­ That whenever any Form of Government becomes
destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish
it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles
and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to
effect their Safety and Happiness."

Our rights and our liberties come from God, not the government. We have given
up those rights and are not likely to regain them. Samuel Adams expressed my
sentiments much better than I ever could, "If ye love wealth greater than
liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for
freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; My your chains set lightly upon
you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

Neal Ross
Feel free to critique,
just remember...BE NICE:
bonsai@syix.com 
Enter the fray at
http://www.neals-soapbox.blogspot.com/