My Response to the Census Bureau's American Community Survey - Bite Me.

I just thought I might share my letter to the Census Bureau, in response to the American Community Survey they've been nagging me to complete.  Google the survey to get an idea how intrusive the questions are and what kind of data they want to collect on each of us, if we are willing to bend over and take it like good little sheep.

My letter is a compilation of information obtained from various sources.  I used some of what I previously wrote in my blog, back in March 2010 http://stifflizard.blogspot.com/2010/03/noncensus.html, and got some useful info from Truth is Treason http://www.truthistreason.net and The Rutherford Institute https://www.rutherford.org. I'm hoping that I will be able to count on the support of like-minded patriots if the excrement hits the turbine.

Feel free to use any of my material that might be of help to you, but understand that I am not qualified to give legal advice to anyone other than myself, so make your stand at your own peril.  I expect further harassment from the government, as others who defy them have experienced.

I have been resisting the harassment of the US Census Bureau / Department of Commerce for about four years now; I never experienced such treatment by the government before that.  This may seem to be a small matter and that I'm not risking much in this little act of civil disobedience.  That may in fact be true.  However, if I'm not willing to risk a little in a small matter, how much would I be willing to risk if the stakes were higher?

Any right worth having is worth defending.  This is a matter of principle, upon which I choose not to compromise.  I will update as this matter continues to unfold.

Here is the content of my letter:

APRIL 09, 2012

US CENSUS BUREAU

PO BOX 5240

JEFFERSONVILLE, IN 47199-5240

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing in response to my receipt of the American Community Survey questionnaire.  The letter enclosed with your questionnaire states, "You are required by U.S. law to respond to this survey."

My response to the American Community Survey is contained entirely within this letter and the questionnaire is being returned to you blank.  While the literature enclosed in your mailer implies, under color of law, that I am under legal obligation to complete and return the survey, the United States government has no authority under the US Constitution to make such a demand, nor does the Legislative Branch possess the authority to pass such a law so as to require it.

In regards to the Census itself, Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the authority for and states the purpose of the Census (referred to as the enumeration), in determining the composition of the House of Representatives:

"[Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.]*  The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.  The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to choose three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three."

The American Community Survey is not the enumeration referred to in Article I, Section 2 of the US Constitution.  I complied with the legal requirements of the constitutionally authorized enumeration in 2010; I am not obligated to do so again until 2020.  My name, sex, age, date of birth, race, ethnicity, telephone number, relationship, housing tenure, etc. have absolutely nothing to do with apportioning direct taxes or determining the number of representatives in the House of Representatives.  Therefore, neither Congress nor the US Census Bureau has the constitutional authority to make that information demand.  Additionally, I cannot be subject to penalty for basing my conduct on the US Constitution since that document supersedes any law passed by Congress.

I submit, as further evidence of a lack of constitutional authority, the following SCOTUS references:

As indicated in Interstate Commerce Commission vs. Brimson, 154 U.S. 447, 479 (May 26, 1894) Supreme Court:

"Neither branch of the legislative department [House of Representatives or Senate], still less any merely administrative body [such as the U.S. Census Bureau], established by Congress, possesses, or can be invested with, a general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen. Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168, 190. We said in Boyd v. U.S., 116 U. S. 616, 630, 6 Sup. Ct. 524, -and it cannot be too often repeated, -that the principles that embody the essence of constitutional liberty and security forbid all invasions on the part of government and its employees of the sanctity of a man’s home and the privacies of his life."

Pacific Ry. Commission, 32 Fed. 241, 250 Justice Field stated, and was upheld in the following:

"…of all the rights of the citizen, few are of greater importance or more essential to his peace and happiness than the right of personal security, and that involves, not merely protection of his person from assault, but exemption of his private affairs, books, and papers from inspection and scrutiny of others. Without the enjoyment of this right, all others would lose half their value…"

While the Census Bureau states that Title 13 requires the information collected to remain strictly confidential, I hold such assurance to be suspect, with historical justification.  Data from the 1940 Census was used to identify Japanese, Italian and German Americans for internment during World War II.  Beyond providing geographic information to the War Department, the Census Bureau released a wealth of personal information to the Treasury Department on Japanese Americans, in response to an "unspecified threat" against President Roosevelt in 1943.  The release of "strictly confidential" data was perfectly legal during World War II, under the Second War Powers Act, and more recently in 2001 and 2003, under the terms of the Patriot Act, when the Census Bureau turned over information collected on Americans of Arab decent to the Department of Homeland Security.  Such are the reasons our founders crafted the constitution with such strict limitations on the authority and powers of the federal government; it is incumbent upon the responsible citizen to be aware of such protections.

I further argue that, as there is no constitutional authority to demand such information, any further pursuit toward this end, absent a warrant, constitutes clear violation of my rights under the Fourth Amendment and shall be responded to accordingly.

If any further attempt is made to distort the law or threaten me with a fine or other penalty, I shall refer this matter to both local law enforcement and the US Department of Justice, requesting prosecution of any individuals making such threat(s).

Respectfully,

A Citizen of the United States of America


© the stiff lizard 

Is the Constitution Still Relevant Today?

Wonderful thing about the internet: it’s never been easier to find someone who disagrees with you.  I find that to be valuable and desirable.   When we only surround ourselves with people of like mind, we become rather narrow-minded.  Once in a while I encounter a question or comment that forces me to really challenge my presuppositions and think things through to remind myself why I hold what I consider to be some of my core beliefs.

While this isn’t exactly the question, word for word, I think this is essentially the spirit of it:  Why should we still be bound by the Constitution today; shouldn’t we be able to change our government as we see fit; what was really so extraordinary about these guys who authored the document 200+ years ago?

Essentially, I think a way to summarize it is: Why is the Constitution still relevant today?

I must say, I had a Joe Dirt moment when I first encountered this question; I’m thinking, “Why does the Pope wear a funny hat?  Why does a bear shit in the woods?  Why’s the sky blue?  Why are titties good?”  The answer to some questions is "Just because."

Saying that something is, just because it is, has never been a good enough answer for me and I owe a better answer than that to anyone else.  This question, which may seem rather simple, requires a quite complex response in order to adequately answer.

“The US Constitution is the oldest written national constitution still in use today.  For over 200 years it has stood at the center of American political life and been celebrated by people from all walks of life and across the political spectrum.” – The Constitution Project

The US Constitution is a work of art; it is a masterpiece.  It has endured because of the wisdom of its crafters and, amazingly, there has yet to be a procedural situation it has failed to adequately address.  Do I consider it as ‘inspired’ or of ‘divine’ origin?  No, but it’s pretty damn close.

To begin to understand how the founders were qualified to draft such a document, you must consider not only the colonization of North America and our revolution, but also feudal England, the Magna Carta, and other significant events even further back in history.  You see, the principles articulated in our Constitution and the Bill of Rights were nothing new.  In fact, it had for some time been recognized that human beings are endowed with natural rights; this has not changed in millennia.  Our founders were clearly educated in these principles, which sowed the seeds of revolution and shaped the writings that eventually culminated in the drafting of our constitution.

The American Revolution also just happened to be rather unique.  As opposed to most revolutions before and since, ours was not a revolution of the ‘have-nots’ but rather a revolution of the middle and upper class.  Rather than descending into revolt over perceived economic injustices, our forefathers choose to take a stand and demand that they not be taxed unjustly, that they have a representative system of government, and maybe most importantly, that their natural rights be protected from violation at the hands of the state.

Our forefathers had experience, up close and personal, living under tyranny.  They also had a pretty good perspective about the conditions that are favorable in culturing a tyranny.  Great lengths were taken to craft a foundation of limited government, with checks and balances, which could logically never lead to a tyrannical centralized government, if the rules were followed.  The fact that the Constitution has endured to this day, despite the changes in our society, technological developments and other significant factors, is a testament to the wisdom contained within the document.  Many of the problems we are experiencing today (economy, foreign policy, etc.) could be directly tied to failures in following our nation’s instruction manual.

There’s quite a bit more I’d like to expand upon, but it’s late and I’m extremely short on time these days.  I hope to continue this in my next posting, which I’d like to get to in the next few days.

© the stiff lizard 

An Interesting Parallel

As a young man, I put my faith and trust in Jesus Christ and experienced the joy of salvation. All seemed wonderful until I started talking about it; it made some uncomfortable, convicted others, caused some to view me as a nut job; I was ridiculed and I lost several friends. However the reward has been great and those who share in this joy understand.

I find myself in an interesting parallel today: I have always believed in liberty - what our founders describe in this nation's early documents. I have become much more aware in recent years and know that life in this country would be unrecognizable to those who founded it. I further educated myself in the principles of liberty; I am a libertarian. It all seems wonderful until I start talking about it; it makes some uncomfortable, convicts others, causes some to view me as a nut job; I am ridiculed and I lose friends because of my beliefs. However the reward is great and those who share in this joy understand.

Nothing worthwhile is easy or convenient; truth, justice and liberty come at a price. If we are not willing to pay it, we are not worthy of it.

© the stiff lizard

Keep the US Congress Accountable to the People

A proposal that ties their compensation to our financial success

I've been fooling with ideas on these kinds of things for some time, but this is the first I have reduced my thoughts on this particular matter to writing.  I’m sure there are details I’m missing but you should get the general gist.  If you agree, pass it on; although I think it would be difficult to get anything like this to the floor for a vote... but you never know.

This would, number one, be a different kind of federal legislation.  It gives the power and authority back to the individual states to determine what their congressional representatives are paid but sets a cap on compensation, based upon the income of the people represented.  Here’s how I envision it:

*****

Salaries and retirement plans for members of the US House of Representatives and the US Senate shall be funded by the states represented.  All federal tax monies previously budgeted for the compensation of Senators and Congressmen shall no longer be considered when determining rates of taxation at the federal level.  It is required that these funds remain with the individual states, and their respective tax rates be adjusted (and offset by the federal tax reduction) to fund such obligations.

Salaries for members of the US House of Representatives and the US Senate shall be determined by the legislative bodies of their respective states, within the following guidelines:

• The annual salary for members elected to the US Senate shall not exceed the annual median income of individuals in the state from which the senator was elected;
• The annual salary for members elected to the US House of Representatives shall not exceed the annual median income of individuals in the congressional district from which the representative was elected;
• The state legislatures, in both instances, may provide additional compensation to the degree necessary for the elected senator or congressman to contribute and participate in the same health care and retirement plans offered to their state’s employees;
• Eligibility requirements for retirement shall be determined by the state legislature.

*****

I think this might accomplish a number of positive goals.  While compensation for members of Congress is not a huge portion of the federal budget, the compensation they currently enjoy has some affect in the financial decisions being made on behalf of their constituents.  We are also, in an ideal world, less likely to attract the types to run for office who will not represent us well.  When our income improves, their income improves.  When unemployment is high, they will also take a hit in the wallet.  Promising lots of things to people who don’t work will suddenly not look like such a good idea.

Just some random thoughts.  If you like where I'm going with this, comment and pass it on.

© the stiff lizard

Peace, Commerce and Honest Friendship

A look at lessons not learned...

Sometimes sharing your thoughts can cause people to think you're un-American. This may likely be one of those times. Therefore, I must establish a few things up front:

1. The September 11th attacks are NOT America's fault, and I won't even be suggesting that;

2. The people who carried out the attacks, and those who directed them, are solely responsible for murdering the victims in New York, Pennsylvania and Arlington;

3. Anything I write about understanding motives or of political perspectives should in no way be construed as sympathizing with terrorists - merely that we need to, at times, be able to relate to geopolitical realities from more than just an American perspective.

With those disclaimers now being established, I hope my words will not be taken out of the context in which they are intended.

My feelings have been conflicted over the past several weeks, surrounding the ten-year mark of 9/11. I think a lot of it is because my views and positions on a number of things have changed, some of them dramatically, over the course of these past ten years. I certainly haven't come any closer to becoming a Democrat, mind you, but I do find myself moving farther away from being a textbook representation of today's Republican party.

I've always been interested in studying the US Constitution but it's become increasingly important to me as I have finally starting realizing how much of it has either been disregarded or misunderstood. It is through this renewed obsession with the constitution that I have been prompted to revisit other founding documents, such as the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation, as well as other writings of our founders (e.g. The Federalist Papers) and speeches made during their tenures as statesmen. These are the sources for understanding original intent, if that is in fact our goal, as opposed to bending the constitution to our own desires.  It is through these self-directed studies that it has become clear to me that the founders masterfully crafted nearly all of their writing and public speaking in response to a shared vision of what this nation ought to be and what it ought not to be. They had first hand experience with the latter, which shaped their convictions for the former.

A famous quote from Jefferson comes from his first inaugural address, delivered on March 4, 1801: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations — entangling alliances with none."

I think somewhere along the way, we have lost sight of that principle. It is a tenet that, when followed, discourages empire-building and fosters good international relations; two things with which we currently are experiencing some difficulty.

We presently find ourselves involved in undeclared and unconstitutional "wars" and we have troops deployed, in one form or another, in something like 130 countries. We use the force of our military to topple foreign governments, prop up dictators and interfere with the internal affairs of other sovereign nations. We serve up pre-packaged revolutions and occupy lands where many of the people don't want us there anymore (if they ever did in the first place).  As if that isn't enough, we enforce embargoes that generally end up increasing the mortality of foreign children and elderly, rather than impacting the governments or leaders we intend to influence by them. We have strayed rather far from Jefferson's vision... and we wonder why hatred toward America brews to the point of boiling over.

Now, don't get me wrong here. I am not bashing our people serving in the military. They do not choose the conflicts nor do they specify how they will be deployed. They are merely trying to selflessly serve their county (and all of us) in the best way they know and most of them do so faithfully and honorably. Many have made the ultimate sacrifice, giving life and limb in the service of country - that is what sickens me about how they are used. I think our current policies dishonor these brave men and women. We throw them into harm's way, filling their minds with the illusion they are defending freedom and changing the face of the world for the better, when it may be having quite the opposite effect. Before you assume that I will now heap the blame upon the Obama administration, think again; this all started way before he was sworn into office. There is plenty of blame to be shared by all.

We need to bring our troops home.  Period.

In addition to our military presence in many parts of the world being unconstitutional and fiscally unsustainable, I think it has also had the unintended consequence of making us less safe.  Our military assets are stretched so thin across the globe that we are experiencing the equivalent of conscription, by routinely extending enlistments to keep troops in theater.  We don't have US troops available to actually protect the United States.  With a foreign policy that routinely pisses off a lot of the world, and makes it much easier for terrorists to advance their recruiting efforts, we are in quite a precarious position.

I think the best thing we can do is return to what used to make us the envy of the world - showing our commitment to liberty and freedom by setting a good example, both at home and abroad.  That is what made us a Shining City on a Hill, which is something worth recapturing.


© the stiff lizard

Shoot the Hostage

In real life, things aren't that easy.

In real life, shooting the hostage isn't a particularly good idea. I’m just sayin'. However, the president and supporters of his economic policy seem to think that's exactly what ought to happen.

Hearkening back to the 1994 movie Speed, you'll recall that when faced with a seemingly impossible situation, Jack (Keanu Reeves) shoots fellow good guy Harry (Jeff Daniels) in the leg, effectively taking the hostage out of the equation while dealing with the villain played by Dennis Hopper. It appears gloriously brilliant in the movie, but all the annoying complexities of real life make it a reckless and likely ineffective strategy.

President Obama is certainly faced with a seemingly impossible situation; there's no way around it. However, his approach has already proven to be ineffective, not only in his prior attempts but also those of previous administrations. It would be synonymous with Jack trying to shoot the hostage in previous encounters, finding that neither his nor his predecessors' similar attempts ever proved to be fruitful in such a situation, yet at that moment he still thinks it's a good idea. Maybe this time it will work.

Even in the movie, Hopper gets away and wreaks more havoc later, yet the decision to shoot the hostage still appears quite daring and heroic. America is being held hostage by rising debt and a federal government that is growing in size and cost but not effectiveness. The president already shot the hostage, a couple of times, yet these United States are still in the grip of a villain who continues to wreak havoc. Everybody wants to be a hero; I get it. But what works for an action movie hero seldom works for a statesman (I write 'statesman' while fantasizing how wonderful it would be if we had a few of those).

In an ideal world there would be no hostages; however, we live in a real one. It would be nice if Washington stared to realize that.

© the stiff lizard

When in the Course of Human Events...

Time for a Second American Revolution?

There was something quite different about the words our nation's forefathers penned at the founding and early days of the republic. These words carried a weight and commitment that has not been seen in anything drafted by the legislature over the past several generations. These men put their own lives and fortunes at stake, right alongside those of the families that made up this fledgling nation. Their modern contemporaries, it seems, stake only our lives and fortunes and future, risking little of their own.  The greatest risk they ever seem willing to make, if ever, is to take a stand on a point that could negatively impact re-election to their seat or election to a more powerful one. Where have all the statesmen gone?

I'm sure that many of the men and women who supposedly represent us in Washington embarked upon their political careers with great aspirations and the best of intentions. However, they easily become corrupted by the political machine; back door deals, the influence of lobbyists, selling their souls to the devil, etc. Even when they maintain the values that helped get them elected, they are often marginalized and rendered ineffective. These men and women cave to pressures that very few could withstand; sometimes, it is really hard to blame them. We have the best system of government in the world, but long-term, persistent corruption has resulted in a poor application of the system. It has suffered a fatal error and, for lack of a better remedy, needs a hard reboot.

We the People are also heavily to blame. We cannot simply point our collective finger at those we have elected, because after all, we elected them. Sure, we can try to blame it on the poorly-understood finer points of how we elect our representatives and executive in a republic, referring to mechanisms such as the primaries and the electoral college as "asinine" or "outdated," all the while not realizing how it all is supposed to work. It is easy to blame things we don't understand. It makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck when I hear things uttered like, "This is supposed to be a Democracy," or "How can he be president when he didn't win the popular vote?"

It is time for a Second American Revolution. Those are dangerous words; such words were dangerous in 1776 and they remain so today. Talk of revolution can quickly throw one to the fringe, in the realm of treasonous nutjobs, or get you on half a dozen government watch lists. As such, we must be prudent in our use of such a weighty term, especially if we mean it with the same degree of commitment as our founding fathers did. I think we can be committed, yet not require a call to arms to effect the necessary change; I think we can be effective, without advocating the overthrow of our present system of government. As previously stated, we have the best system in the world, but the players aren't playing by the rules, the officials have been corrupted, and we've essentially all forgotten how to play the game. One way or another, things are going to change, at someone's hands, things are going to change; it can better our situation or we can botch it up and send us further down the path toward tyranny. This Second American Revolution need not be a violent overthrow; this next revolution must be one of education in the founding principles of the republic and intentional, consistent action to facilitate the election of a new generation of principled leadership, beginning with the US House of Representatives.

The US House of Representatives? Yes.

Many overlook the potential of using the US House of Representatives as a lynchpin in taking back control of the federal government. The Constitution grants the House several exclusive powers: the power to initiate revenue bills, to impeach officials, and to elect the President in the case of an electoral college deadlock. Probably the most important of these is the control over revenue; they hold the authority to decide whether or not to spend our money. The founders understood that having control over spending carries the potential of quickly leading to corruption. As such, we have the opportunity to replace our representatives in the House every two years, allowing us to hold them more accountable for their votes concerning funding things with taxpayer money. If the federal government wants to spend our money, it must first be authorized by the House.  The Senate can only vote up or down on the funding aspect, from what I understand.

What if, through public-awareness mechanisms like the Tea Party movement, we could re-introduce an understanding of how our government is supposed to actually function and advocate the election of representatives who will vote to only approve funding for matters directly related to the enumerated powers of the federal government.  This has the potential to effectively stop massive, unconstitutional programs (like Obamacare) by refusing to spend any money on the administration of the program. Measures such as these, combined with the passage of an Enumerated Powers Act (requiring all bills introduced in Congress to include a statement setting forth the specific constitutional authority under which each bill is being enacted) could go a long way toward restoring some order and restraint on this runaway freight train that is hauling our money into a black hole, along with our liberty. Perhaps this is an over-simplified and sophomoric perspective, which I'm sure someone will point out to me if it is, but couldn't that start the ball rolling in the right direction?

No matter how you look at it, a revolution of some kind is on the horizon. We can make it happen or we can let it happen, but it's going to happen. Let's be on the proper side of this battle and fight it using the rule of law and light of day to expose the things that need to be fixed. If we don't, things are going to get really messy. We've only gotten a little taste of it so far. Let's make our Declaration this November and draw that line in the sand.

So, revolution anyone?


© the stiff lizard