New Federalist a More Perfect Union

8/8/2019 New Federalist a More Perfect Union

1/6

New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union

The defining conservative platform for this American Century.

Preamble1.

Honoring Our Founding2.

A More Perfect Union3.

Establishing Justice4.

Ensuring Domestic Tranquility5.

The Common Defense6.

The General Welfare7.

Secure Blessings of Liberty.8.

A More Perfect Union

The Constitution provides that our government possesses a federalstructure, in order to serve the objective of self-government throughrepublican representation. As the Declaration of Independence makesclear, governments are instituted in order to secure the rights of individualcitizens, and governments derive their just powers solely from the consentof the governed. We New Federalists believe that our nation has currentlystrayed from this understanding that the only valid purpose of governmentis as guarantor of individual citizens' rights, substituting in its placevarious purposes and intentions that, whether designed for good or ill,have abridged and infringed those rights. And because the nation has lostthis perspective on the legitimate objectives of government, the federalstructure outlined with detail and specificity in the Constitution is nolonger honored. This straying from constitutional boundaries is worrisome

in and of itself, both because it calls into question the legitimacy of thegovernment and because it inhibits the government from carrying outthose legitimate functions authorized by the Constitution. Further, though,a government that has lost focus on its only valid purpose will embarkinexorably on a course of systematic violations -- and ultimate destruction-- of its citizens' rights. Coupled with the observation that the twentiethcentury has seen governments kill tens of millions of their own citizens,this is cause for deep concern.

The Declaration of Independence asserts plainly "that these UnitedColonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states." Thiswas the basis of our nation's founding, and this remains the cornerstonethat should guide understanding of the respective powers, duties and

responsibilities for guaranteeing rights of citizens of the United States,under that "more perfect union" envisioned by the nation's Founders.

The Constitution limits the powers of government by division of thosepowers into separate branches and levels of government. At the nationallevel, the central governing powers are divided into the coequal legislative,executive and judicial branches, so as to offer checks and balances on theunbridled exercise of ruling authority over the states and individualcitizens. Moreover, the Constitution is explicit in listing the few andrestricted powers that are assigned to the United States, together with thepowers that are prohibited to the several states. As the 10th Amendmentmakes clear, "The powers not delegated to the United States by theConstitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States

Home

Subscribe FREE

About Reagan 2020

The Speech

Candidate's Statement

Executive Order onFederalism

New Federalist Platform

Reagan Speeches

Reagan TributesReagan Eulogies

Remembering Reagan

Reagan Record

Reagan Biography

Photo Gallery

Historic Documents

Links

Contact

Search Reagan 2020

The Patriot Post

Patriot Shop

Patriot Petitions

The Patriot Shop

an 2020 - New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union http://reagan2020.us/platform/a_more_perfect_

2/4/2010


2/6

respectively, or to the people." This means that only those powers,responsibilities and duties the Constitution explicitly authorizes arelegitimate for the national government, and all that is not so authorized isforbidden.

We believe that the Constitutional Authorization Report, as describedelsewhere in this Platform, would assist in returning the existingovergrowth of government power to the narrow channels ofconstitutionally limited federalism -- if honestly and faithfully followed byCongress and the state legislatures. However, more is certainly necessary

to overturn the violations of federalist principles existing in this 21stcentury, in such an orderly way as to avoid wrenching dislocations of civicand governmental functions.

The major sources of such violations of federalism involving the separationof powers have arisen through executive and judicial usurpations oflegislative functions appropriately exercised only by Congress. Theseusurpations have, in turn, served to centralize power within the nationalgovernment, violating the federalist principle of preserving states' rightsand powers. As additional measures to restore a more perfect union to ourcountry, as envisioned by our nation's Founding Documents, we proposethe following.

Restoration of Congressional Powers Act

Congress should adopt legislation restoring to direct congressionaljurisdiction and purview all the powers, duties and responsibilities explicitlyentrusted to Congress under Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution,whether by this action Congress outright abolishes or merely transfersaway from the executive branch any departments, regulatory agencies orfederal bureaucracies, or whether by this action Congress rescinds anyexisting treaties or agreements with international and private agencies ororganizations. Congress should further state that none of the agenciesunder its jurisdiction shall be empowered to promulgate any regulations,orders, statements or advisories that have the force of law, as theConstitution vests legislative powers only with Congress, and theselegislative powers may not permissibly be transferred away to any otherentity.

For example, the constitutional provision that "Congress shall have powerto lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises" in no way permitsCongress to reassign this power to a tax collection agency such as theInternal Revenue Service, which currently exercises that power beyond thedirect jurisdiction of Congress. Similarly, the constitutional provision that"Congress shall have power ... to regulate commerce with foreign nations"yields Congress no authorization to transfer this power away from itselfand to an international body such as the World Trade Organization. Andlikewise, the constitutional provision that "Congress shall have power ... toestablish an uniform rule of naturalization" does not properly allow anexecutive department bureaucracy like the Immigration and Naturalization

Service to wrest exercise of this power from Congress.

Furthermore, we urge Congress, once having jurisdiction over suchagencies as persist under its purview, to follow the guidelines for returningpowers and responsibilities to the states that were laid down by PresidentRonald Reagan in Executive Order 12612, from October 26, 1987.

Restoration of Executive Boundaries

Much of the mischievous violation of federalism has resulted from theprofligate use of presidential orders (executive orders, presidentialproclamations and presidential directives) exceeding the powers andresponsibilities vested in the executive branch of government. Correctly


2/4/2010


3/6

viewed through constitutional authorization, presidential orders are limitedin application and effect solely to the executive branch. We NewFederalists therefore support actions of Congress to restore the separationof powers between the Congress and the President.

For example, we support as a minimal gesture legislation expressing thesense of the Congress that any executive order that infringes on thepowers and duties of the Congress under Article I, Section 8, of theConstitution, or that would require the expenditure of federal funds notspecifically appropriated for the purpose of the executive order, is advisory

only and has no force or effect unless enacted as law (such as 1999's H.Con. Res. 30).

More importantly, though, we urge effective measures to restore theseparation of powers between Congress and the executive branch. Suchmeasures include repeal of the War Powers Act, termination of states ofemergency, termination of presidential or executive authority to declarestates of emergency, and requirement that each presidential order includea statement of the specific constitutional or statutory provision grantingauthority for the proposed action (as in 1999's H. R. 2655).

We also encourage efforts to bring challenges to presidential orders inappropriate United States courts by Congress and its Members, by state

and local governments, and by aggrieved individual citizens whose libertyand property rights have been adversely affected by presidential orders.

Moreover, a New Federalist President should reimplement President RonaldReagan's Executive Order 12612, from October 26, 1987, directing allexecutive branch officers and agencies to operate according to federaliststrictures limiting the role of the national government to solely itsenumerated and authorized powers.

Restoration of Judicial Boundaries

The Constitution's Article III, Section 1, vests judicial power of the UnitedStates in the Supreme Court and "such inferior courts as the Congress mayfrom time to time ordain and establish." Article III, Section 2, of the

Constitution specifies the very limited extent of cases subject to judicialpower. According to The Federalist Papers, the constitutionally authorizedrole of the judiciary in dealing with the Constitution and its impact uponthe laws passed by Congress was certainly not to ascertain "the spirit ofthe Constitution," but rather it was to examine the words within theConstitution as "the standard of construction for the laws, and thatwherever there is an evident opposition, the laws ought to give place tothe Constitution."

Assuredly, our present-day federal courts have far exceeded the authorityof their offices. Among other lines of faulty justification contrary toconstitutional authorization, the federal judiciary in recent times has citedthe 14th Amendment in striking down state laws, in the process creating a

single, centralized superstate unlike any national government projected bythis nation's Founding Documents. This era of judicial activism, to date themost arrogant violation of the Constitution, can be traced to 1936, when ina U.S. Supreme Court decision, Justice Hugo Black penned the words, "Wemust attempt to ascertain the spirit of the Constitution to interpret it."That flawed statement, in contravention of the restrictions placed on thefederal judiciary by the Constitution, upset the delicate system of checksand balances among the three branches of government designed under theConstitution's model of government.

We New Federalists thus support congressional actions intended to returnthe federal judiciary to the limited role described in precise terms in ArticleIII of the Constitution. In particular, the Constitution's statement that


2/4/2010


4/6

Congress "may from time to time ordain and establish" inferior federalcourts surely implies that Congress may restrict the time during whichsuch courts are ordained and established. We recommend Congress adopta five-year sunset on authorization for each such federal court inferior tothe Supreme Court, together with the five-year review of all judgesassigned to such courts, to ascertain whether those judges have exhibitedthe "good behavior" of adherence to their oaths of office to support theConstitution, as described elsewhere in this Platform. This process ofreconstituting the federal courts, in rotation every five years, shouldfacilitate removal from office of judges not demonstrating thisunderstanding of "good behavior" prior to being once again being properlyauthorized by Congress.

Moreover, though, occasional unconstitutional lapses of the courts maynecessitate immediate remedy, by actions of Congress, the President, orperhaps even both. We urge these other federal branches of governmentto be ever vigilant to excesses of the courts. We urge Congress to overrideany extra-constitutional decisions of the judiciary, by enacting legislationremoving from judicial purview any matters in which the federal courtsoverstep permissible boundaries. We also urge the President, under ArticleII, Section 2, of the Constitution, to exercise the "power to grant reprievesand pardons for offenses" incorrectly decided by the Supreme Court orinferior federal courts and in contravention of the Constitution's plain

meaning.

Restoration of States' Rights and Powers

The surest guarantee of states' rights is a federal government that restrictsits operations only to the enumerated powers specifically listed in theConstitution, as part of honoring the 10th Amendment. Absent aself-limiting national government, the states have little recourse forrestoration of their rights and powers, beyond developing parallelprograms solely within their respective jurisdictions and refusingparticipation in national mandates.

Nevertheless, we suggest states develop 10th Amendment strategies toreclaim their rights and powers, whether by bringing court cases or bylobbying Congress, and we urge the states to stand ready to reassumetheir proper constitutionally specified roles once federalism isreimplemented throughout the nation.

However, there are two constitutional amendments, both dating from1913, which have had supremely deleterious effects on the balance ofpower between the states and the national government, and both of whichshould be repealed. We thus urge action to amend the Constitution byrepeal of the 16th and 17th Amendments.

Repeal of the 16th Amendment

The 16th Amendment to the Constitution introduced direct taxation ofincomes from United States citizens, replacing the indirect levies that hadpreviously been used to fund the national government. In fact, thisamendment overturned the Constitution's statement (Article I, Section 9)that "no capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion tothe census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

We New Federalists would favor returning to the Constitution's originalplan for funding the national government. We further supportsimultaneously repealing the 16th Amendment, in the process abolishingthe Internal Revenue Service, and replacing this onerous, burdensomedirect tax on incomes with an alternative levy, preferably in the form of atax collected by the states on behalf of the national government and held


2/4/2010


5/6

within the jurisdiction of the states until Congress authorizes spendingfunds in the respective states on constitutionally authorized matters inadherence to federalist principles. We believe this change wouldsubstantially alter the skewed balance of power between the states and thenational level of government, by no longer automatically amassing largefunds to Washington, D.C., for subsequent redispersal to the states. (Onlythose few monies needed to fund the direct operations of the nationalgovernment, such as congressional allowances and funding for operationsof Congress, would be sent from the states' accounts to the nation'scapital.)

One such alternate source of funding would be a flat-rate income taxcollected by the states on behalf of the central government. Thisreplacement revenue source would have the benefit of gradualism inimplementation, especially for those states whose residents are alreadysubject to taxation of their incomes.

However, a national sales tax can be considered greatly preferable to a flattax on incomes, because we believe such direct taxes necessarily are inviolation of the 4th Amendment's guarantees of "the right of the people tobe secure in their ... houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonablesearches and seizures." We believe that the IRS has now amassed such alarge collection of centralized information about individual American

citizens, that the 4th Amendment cannot be realistically viewed as stillhaving any force or effect in regard to personal, private financial dealings.And merely devolving maintenance of such intrusive records by the statesin data bases linked to the central government conveys no return ofconstitutional guarantees. Only destruction of existing collected recordsand replacement of such corollary information collection by an entirelydifferent system will restore the full complement of individual rightsacknowledged under the 4th Amendment.

Repeal of the 17th Amendment

The 17th Amendment to the Constitution brought election of Senators bydirect voting of citizens in each state, replacing the previous method of

election of Senators, as given in Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution,providing that Senators be chosen by each state's legislature. We NewFederalists believe that this amendment has had severely deleteriouseffects, both in reducing the relative power of states with respect to thenational government and, ironically, in decreasing the level of "democratic"representation of citizens by their Senators. We thus support repeal of the17th Amendment.

We view this proposal as seriously needed to return to a more appropriatebalance between the states and the national government, as well asrestoring a more appropriate balance between the two chambers ofCongress. In the Constitution's original, thoughtful design, the House ofRepresentatives was the only body whose Members were directly electedby citizens, the term of office was purposely short at two years, and thoseactions of government of greatest effect on citizens were assigned to thischamber of Congress. By contrast, the Senate was designed as a moredeliberative body, with Members providing a bridge betweenresponsiveness to their respective state legislatures and the national levelof government, and serving six-year terms of office. However, with theadvent of modern telecommunications and the growing expense ofstatewide campaigns, Senators now find themselves more responsive tomonied "special" interest groups, which can provide campaign donations,thus less responsive to the concerns of their respective state legislatures,and so by extension, less responsive to direct appeal by their state'sconstituents.


2/4/2010


6/6

Restoration of Representative Republican Elections

In order to restore the faith and confidence of the American people in therepresentativeness and trustworthiness of elections, we New Federalistsfavor restoration of an electoral process controlled at the state and locallevel rather than by national-level judges and bureaucrats. All mattersrelevant to district boundaries, electoral procedures, and campaignactivities are the proper province of the states and the people. We supportabolishing The Federal Election Campaign Act, together with its 1974

amendments, and we favor disbanding the Federal Election Commission.

The Electoral College was created in accordance with Article II, Section I ofthe Constitution, which provides, "Each state shall appoint, in such manneras the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to thewhole number of senators and representatives to which the state may beentitled in the Congress: but no senator or representative, or personholding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall beappointed an elector." Although the Constitution does not specify methodsfor electing these electors or how they cast their votes, its wordingsuggests that prominent individuals from each congressional district, andfrom the state at large, should be elected or appointed as electors thatrepresent that district. We favor returning to this arrangement, in which

voters could vote for three individuals, one to represent the voter's districtand two "at large" representatives to represent the voter's state.

We do not support voting by Internet, nor do we favor continuing anysystem of machine-readable ballots that are not simultaneously readilyreadable by visual scanning. We support a return to the use of paperballots by all state and local election officials, together with an evidentiarychain of physical custody of ballots, which permits recourse to a manualcounting process of ballots overseen by, and accountable to, voters of eachrespective precinct, should any challenge be lodged to the announcedelection results.

English As Official Language

We New Federalists also support actions to declare English the officiallanguage of the United States and all states forming our union. We do notfavor this proposal to denigrate any culture or national origin of citizens ofthis Republic, nor is this proposal intended to discourage citizens fromlearning and using other languages. We favor declaring English the officiallanguage of all levels of government in this country in order to promotegreater understanding and to strengthen the bonds of commonality andcommunity necessary for all citizens to understand each other and thelaws and documents that in fact bind us together as a citizenry.

Section 4: Establishing Justice

Home | Subscribe FREE | About Reagan 2020 | Candidate's Statement | Executive Order onFederalism | New Federalist Platform | Major Party Platforms | Reagan Speeches | Reagan Tributes |Reagan Record | Reagan Biography | Photo Gallery | Historic Documents | Links | Contact | SearchReagan 2020 | The Patriot Post | Patriot Shop | Patriot Petitions

Reagan 2020 is a Patriot Post Sponsored SiteCopyright 1981-2006 Publius Press, Inc.


New Federalist a More Perfect Union

Documents

Transcript of New Federalist a More Perfect Union