[Lnc-business] Fwd: Re: Improve the Ground Game for the LP State Legislator Candidates
Wes Benedict
wes.benedict at lp.org
Fri Aug 31 13:51:10 EDT 2018
Forwarding in case any of you want to propose this to folks in your region.
Wes Benedict, Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
(202) 333-0008 ext. 232, wes.benedict at lp.org
facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
Join the Libertarian Party at: http://lp.org/membership
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: Improve the Ground Game for the LP State Legislator
Candidates
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 13:50:03 -0400
From: Wes Benedict <wes.benedict at lp.org>
To: John Rodenkirch <johnjrodenkirch at yahoo.com>
Hi John, thanks for sending your proposal and thanks for being a
Libertarian. I'll forward this to a few folks but I can't guarantee who
might or might not want to participate via the path you are suggesting.
Our candidates and activists are bombarded with suggestions on what they
need to focus on and as you can imagine, there's a huge variety of
suggestions. In any case, thanks for your interest and motivation. I
suggest you post this in some places on facebook to see if others grab a
hold of the ideas--probably you've done that. Take care,
Wes Benedict, Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
(202) 333-0008 ext. 232,wes.benedict at lp.org
facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
Join the Libertarian Party at:http://lp.org/membership
On 8/30/2018 3:15 PM, John Rodenkirch wrote:
> Improve the Ground Game for the LP State Legislator Candidates
> The LP State Legislator Candidates should challenge their opponents to
> support the USA-Referendum. It will enable citizens to propose and
> then pass federal cost reduction laws by the same voting margin as if
> they were ratifying amendments. These laws could only be over-ruled by
> U.S. Constitutional Amendments, which Congress and the state
> legislatures could propose and ratify.
> The USA-Referendum will be supported by the state legislatures,
> because it will _permanently_ re-establish the Constitution's check
> and balance on the federal government. The power to make laws will
> then be appropriately split between the federal government, the state
> legislatures, and the people, with each of these three entities being
> subject to a check and balance from the other two.
> The USA-Referendum cannot be blocked by the federal government. The
> state legislatures have submitted the required number of valid
> applications for an Article V Convention many times, but Congress
> unconstitutionally refuses to call the convention. The Supreme Court
> uses its "Political Question" doctrine to avoid ruling on the matter.
> The "Political Question" doctrine has no basis in our Constitution.
> For more information about the USA-Referendum, see the draft email
> below that I plan to send to all state legislators after the Nov 2018
> Election.
> The USA-Referendum is a Libertarian idea. It would result in much
> more media attention for the Libertarian candidates and hopefully get
> them into more debates with their opponents. It is critical that the
> Libertarian Party leads the USA-Referendum implementation, so the
> state legislatures do not make inappropriate modifications to it.
> Ideally, the Libertarian Party supports and promotes the
> USA-Referendum, and consistently states the following about it. "There
> should be no reduction of the appropriate amount of power being
> transferred to the people, as contained in the book *_USA-Referendum
> and the Article VII Check and Balance."_* I would not interfere with
> the Libertarian Party's efforts to implement the USA-Referendum, we
> can discuss the details. There is nothing about me that could
> discredit the USA-Referendum.
> I can draft Press Releases and Question & Answers for the Libertarian
> Party to use. I can be available to answer questions, and to
> participate in discussions about the USA-Referendum.
> Possibly, the Libertarian Party could (1) suggest changes to the
> USA-Referendum for use in the book's second edition, planned for Jan
> 1st 2019 and (2) help modify the draft email below before I send it to
> all state legislators. Feel free to call me concerning both of these,
> at your earliest convenience.
> The USA-Referendum is a " ..... referendum .... used as popular checks
> on government" *(LP 2018 Platform, 3.6 Representative Government)*.
> When the federal government blocked the Constitution's check and
> balance on the federal government, the federal government became
> "destructive of individual liberty, it is the right of the people to
> alter " *(LP 2018 Platform, 3.7 Self-Determination)*.
> If the Libertarian Party does not want me to contact their current
> candidates about the USA-Referendum, email me by Sept 7th and I will
> not contact the LP candidates about it.
> Thanks for your consideration.
> John J. Rodenkirch
> Member since 1994 M-000208826
> (630) 777-6671
> *_Draft Email To all State Legislators after the Nov 2018 Election _*
> **
> *Live-Up to **Alexander Hamilton's Expectation***
> **
> Congress and the Washington-special-interest groups have our economy
> headed for a devastating crash. After the crash, Congress and the
> Washington-special-interest groups will make our economy worse when
> they "re-build" our economy, without any meaningful input from the
> state legislatures or the people. In addition, Congress will use the
> "national emergency", caused by the crash, to encroach further on the
> U.S. Constitutional Rights of the state legislatures and the people.
> The state legislatures and their people can limit federal government
> spendingby creating and implementing a version of the USA-Referendum
> from the draft at the end of this email _that cannot be blocked by the
> federal government._ The state legislatures need to add their version
> of the USA-Referendum and all ratified amendments to a copy of the
> existing U.S. Constitution for the people to ratify the combined
> document. Before the combined document is ratified by the people in
> each of two-thirds of the states, Congress will propose the version of
> the USA-Referendum for three-fourths of the states to ratify as an
> amendment. The Article VII Check and Balance will remain unused and
> it will become much less likely to be ever needed. If two-thirds or
> more of the states did ratify the combined document, it would _not_
> break the rules and agreements that maintain the perpetual union of
> the states. *It would _permanently_ restore the Constitutional right
> of these state legislatures to propose U.S. Constitutional Amendments,
> *which could include the USA-Referendum as an amendment. If
> three-fourths of the states ratify the combined document, their
> citizens would be able to propose and then pass federal cost reduction
> laws by the same voting margin as if they were ratifying amendments.
> These laws could only be over-ruled by U.S. Constitutional Amendments,
> which Congress and the state legislatures could propose and ratify.
> The power to make laws will then be appropriately split between the
> federal government, the state legislatures, and the people, with each
> of these three entities being subject to a check and balance from the
> other two.
> Article VII of our Constitution would have allowed the Constitution to
> be only in effect for just two-thirds of the states, if these states
> had been the only states to ratify the Constitution. When the federal
> government, which was created by the Constitution, went into
> operation, two of the states had not ratified the Constitution. The
> Constitution did not need fulfillment of the requirements in the
> Articles of Confederation concerning replacing/amending/altering the
> Articles of Confederation; it just needed to be ratified by the people
> in each of two-thirds of the states.
> If the state legislatures do not work hard enough to implement the
> USA-Referendum, they will end up being forever criticized by
> historians for letting things fall apart. The window of opportunity
> will not remain open much longer. This email is being sent to all
> state legislators.
> Hopefully, the federal government does not delay implementation of the
> USA-Referendum until it is too late to prevent Congress from crashing
> our economy.
> The state legislatures have submitted the required number of valid
> applications for an Article V Convention many times, but Congress
> unconstitutionally refuses to call the convention. The Supreme Court
> uses its "Political Question" doctrine to avoid ruling on the matter.
> The "Political Question" doctrine has no basis in our Constitution.
> In The Federalist 85, where**Alexander Hamilton reaffirms the state
> legislatures' right to propose amendments, he states, "We may safely
> rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers
> against the encroachments of the national authority."
> The different groups of state legislatures that want to propose
> different U.S. Constitutional Amendments, need to first work
> together. They need to permanently restore their Constitutional right
> to propose amendments. Their current lack of much interest in
> amendments is because the state legislatures have submitted over 500
> applications for an Article V Convention and Congress just refuses to
> call the convention.
> These different groups of state legislatures cannot allow themselves
> to be split up into opposing groups, which is what will be attempted
> by the federal government, Washington special-interest-groups, and by
> some news media that advocate for a centralized federal government.
> The more centralized a government is, the less efficient it normally
> is. Governments typically get more centralized, as the government
> people in power tend to want more and more power. The victims of this
> centralization in the U.S. need to work together to permanently
> restore the Constitution's check and balance on the federal government.
> The problem today is Congress versus both the state legislatures and
> the people, not Congressional republicans versus Congressional
> democrats or Congressional democrats versus Congressional
> republicans. The problem is also not the poor versus the rich or the
> rich versus the poor, since crony capitalism and excessive
> entitlements make both these groups winners. The losers are the
> ordinary taxpayers and the states that have to pay for the debt and
> the unfunded mandates Congress creates to make those winners. Making
> those winners, also makes Congress a winner.
> Congress cannot block the USA-Referendum just like the Continental
> Congress could not have blocked the Constitution if only two-thirds of
> the states had ratified it. The Supreme Court and other federal courts
> cannot block it because of the "Political Question" doctrine. The
> President indicated in his inauguration address that he is in favor of
> transferring this type of power from Washington DCto the people whose
> country the USA is.
> USA-Referendum will uphold our Constitution including all existing
> amendments. The best way to uphold our Constitution including all
> existing amendments is to ratify them. The Supreme Court's "Political
> Question" has enabled Congress to get away with not upholding the
> Constitution, such as in regards to Article V of the Constitution.
> The USA-Referendum is inevitable because it is the only workable
> solution to prevent Congress and the Washington-special-interest
> groups from (1) devastatinglycrashing our economy, (2) "rebuilding"
> our crashed economy without any meaningful input from the state
> legislatures and the people, and (3) encroaching further on the
> Constitutional rights of the state legislatures and the people. The
> sooner the USA-Referendum is implemented, the better for our economy.
> Implementing the USA-Referendum after Congress crashes our economy
> will not be practical. The "national emergency" caused by the crash
> would delay and possibly prevent implementation of the USA-Referendum.
> Even if the USA-Referendum did get implemented after the crash, the
> Washington-special-interest groups will have already received
> everything there is to get from Congress and it will be next to
> impossible to get even a small portion of it back.
> Congress may try to coerce the state legislatures into proposing the
> USA-Referendum Amendment at an Article V Convention, when and where
> Congress decides. Congress, Washington-special-interest groups, and
> some news media that advocate for a centralized federal government
> would all make the convention so disastrous that no one will want to
> discuss restoring the state legislatures' Constitutional right to
> propose amendments for the next 50 years.
> There is already a well-founded fear that the Supreme Court's
> "Political Question" doctrine would enable Congress to manipulate an
> Article V Convention into doing more harm than good to our Constitution.
> Congress may engage in fear mongering concerning the unfounded
> possibility that the state legislatures proposing amendments could
> lead to a loss of personal freedoms, liberties, and equal rights.
> Congress knows that there is no such risk of this. All our personal
> freedoms, liberties, and equal rights come from the Constitution with
> Amendments, which were all ratified by the states. There is no way
> that three-fourths of the states would ratify an amendment that takes
> away our personal freedoms, liberties, or equal rights. The federal
> government has a long and extensive history of taking away our
> personal freedoms, liberties, and equal rights. I would rather trust
> my personal freedoms, liberties, and equal rights to a three-fourths
> majority vote by the states versus a 50% majority vote in Congress.
> There is nothing that is even close to being as dangerous to our
> Constitution as Congress devastatinglycrashing our economy and then
> Congress "rebuilding" our crashed economy without any meaningful input
> from the state legislatures and the people. Congress will remain
> unable to stand up to the Washington-special-interest groups that will
> have caused Congress to crash our economy. Congress will continue
> down the same path, increasing federal debt, increasing unfunded
> federal mandates, building more inefficiencies into both our economy
> and the regulations that our states are forced to follow, and
> encroaching further on the Constitutional rights of the state
> legislatures and the people.
> In the ten years since the 2008 Financial Crisis, the federal debt has
> more than doubled from under $10 trillion to over $20 trillion. This
> debt is our nation's biggest problem; we cannot wait any longer to fix
> it.
> When federal politicians state that the $2.8 trillion Social Security
> trust fund will cover Social Security checks for the next 15 to 20
> years, they are leaving out a major detail. Congress borrowed the $2.8
> trillion Social Security trust fund and spent it on non-Social
> Security programs that the Washington-special-interest groups wanted.
> Where is the $2.8 trillion going to come from to cover Social Security
> checks when Congress is already borrowing $1 trillion a year to fund
> non-Social Security programs? Also, where is the money to pay for the
> $8 trillion of Agency debt (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, and
> Federal Home Loan Banks)? Medicare and Medicaid will also need
> additional future funding.
> Earlier this year Congress had to raise the federal debt limit to
> avoid having the federal government shut down. In order to vote in
> favor of raising the federal debt limit, Congress increased federal
> government spending by $400 billion without any public debate. The
> federal debt limit does not reduce federal government spending, it
> just creates an excuse to increase federal government spending.
> Instead of approving each other's spending requests, the Republicans
> and Democrats in Congress should be fighting over how to spend the
> limited amount of money they are allowed to spend. For increasing the
> federal debt limit, there is no reason for Congress to spend more of
> our money.
> Congress' devastating crash of our economy will permanently and
> significantly lower our standard of living versus the rest of the
> developed world. Our society's safety net will collapse and probably
> never grow to the inflation-adjusted sustainable level it could have
> been maintained at if the states had implemented the USA-Referendum
> and prevented Congress' crash of our economy.
> When our economy crashes, Congress will not acknowledge any fault.
> Just like what happens now, Congressional democrats will blame
> Congressional republicans and Congressional republicans will blame
> Congressional democrats, all of which will distract people from
> realizing that the real problem is Congress. Congress continues to
> bury the people further in debt, so that Washington-special-interest
> groups will continue to help the members of Congress stay in office
> and prosper.
> The more freedoms and liberties the state legislatures and the people
> get, the more different ideas that different states will try
> concerning things like their school systems. The ideas that work
> well, will spread to other states.
> USA-Referendum Amendment draft from the book *_USA-Referendum and the
> Article VII Check and Balance_ *
> **
> Section 1. U.S. Constitutional Amendments can be proposed any time
> from any place by any two-thirds of the state legislatures. Amendments
> proposed by state legislatures can always and only be ratified by the
> people as in Section 3.*__*
> Section 2. All U.S. Constitutional Amendments (1) will go into full
> effect for all the states and for the federal government, immediately
> after ratification, and (2) will be exempt from all federal and state
> laws, treaties, executive orders, court rulings, and anything else any
> government could do that interferes with the amendments. For this
> amendment and all future amendments, state ratifications will be
> un-rescindable with no time limit for ratification.
> Section 3. Statewide U.S. Constitutional Amendment ratification
> conventions will be replaced by the USA-Referendum System.
> Ratification by the people of a U.S. Constitutional Amendment,
> proposed by the state legislatures or Congress, can always and only be
> done using the USA-Referendum System that will only require a majority
> vote, using the following voting system, in each of at least
> three-fourths of the states. The voting system must (1) keep
> everyone's vote secret, (2) allow everyone to verify how their vote
> was counted, (3) have the Social Security Administration verify that
> every voter is an alive U.S. citizen who is old enough to vote, (4)
> have the U.S. Department of Justice verify that every voter has not
> been convicted of a federal crime or a crime in any state that would
> make the person ineligible to vote in their state, and (5) contain the
> following provision. Anyone convicted of violating a federal or state
> voting law in regards to this amendment or to any amendment proposed
> by the state legislatures or Congress, will receive a lifetime ban
> from having a federal job or working, directly or indirectly, under a
> federal contract. Organizations can pay to use the system to conduct
> anonymous surveys, where responses are entered on the voting portal
> and the survey results get broken out based on which preceding votes
> the respondent voted in.
> Section 4. The Federal Government's Social Security Administration
> (SSA) will manage and have an on-line USA-Referendum System set-up
> that (1) meets the five Section 3 requirements, (2) can be used by
> people to ratify amendments, (3) can be used by people to request that
> a candidate be on the ballot and to vote for candidates on the ballot,
> and (4) can be used by people to propose and pass federal cost
> reduction laws that can only be over-ruled by U.S. Constitutional
> Amendments. Once a month, people can vote on the SSA website to (1)
> propose federal cost reduction laws and to (2) pass federal cost
> reduction laws that were proposed by at least 25% of voters at least
> eight weeks earlier. A federal cost reduction law is a law that
> reduces total net combined financial costs for the federal government,
> plus all state governments, and plus all U.S. citizens. If a federal
> cost reduction law ends up increasing the total net combined financial
> costs, the law will become null and void. The entire wording of each
> proposed law that people vote on, will be on the ballot immediately
> above where people vote on the proposed law. Complete voting results
> will be broken out by state and included with each USA-Referendum's
> result. When a vote is entered in a voter's SSA portal, a sequential
> number is assigned, which gets recorded in both the portal (without
> being displayed) and along with the vote in the official tally of the
> votes. For a week after a voting period ends, voters can go into
> their portal and see how their vote was counted in the official tally
> of votes. Anytime after voting, a voter can permanently block their
> portal from displaying the particular vote choice. No one can go into
> the official tally of votes and look up who the voters are. There will
> be a record of all transactions to and from each portal; this record
> will only be used if a person says that their vote was not counted
> correctly. Everyone who is eligible to vote can vote, even if they
> did not register before the last day of the vote. Registering to vote
> requires the person to (1) enter information that the SSA already has,
> such as social security number and date of birth, and (2) update
> information the SSA has, such as primary home address and full legal
> name. Voters whose registration and/or eligibility determination are
> not completed before the vote, can cast their vote, which will be
> counted when the registration and eligibility determination are
> completed. This will delay the overall vote result for as long as the
> vote result would change if all and only the remaining pending "No"
> votes were counted or all and only the remaining pending "Yes" votes
> were counted. If the USA-Referendum is used by the people to vote for
> candidates, the "No" and "Yes" above would be replaced by the
> candidate's names. Hacking into someone else's voting portal will be
> a crime. Casting someone else's vote, without their written
> permission, will be a crime. The SSA will provide all available
> information requested by the states to verify that only eligible
> citizens voted on ratifying amendments, federal cost reduction laws,
> and candidates.
> Section 5. If the USA-Referendum gets used for voting on anything
> where there are more than two choices and none get over 50% of the
> vote, a run-off vote will be held. Choices will be included in the
> run-off voting based on which had the highest vote count, and will
> include just enough of these choices so that their combined vote count
> exceeded 50% of the vote. Additional run-off votes will be held if
> needed. The maximum number of choices for each thing being voted on
> is the eight choices that were requested by the most voters.
> Section 6. The USA-Referendum voting portal for all choices
> (amendments, federal cost reduction laws, and candidates) will have
> access to the following. During the first 28 days after a federal
> cost reduction law or an amendment is proposed, people eligible to
> vote on it can request a person, from a list linked to the portal, to
> provide written information on the portal "For" or "Against" it; the
> request can be changed prior to the 28th day. Any eligible voter can
> have their name added to the list, along with optional information
> that distinguishes them from others with the same name. As of the
> 28th day, the top four people requested "For" the choice and the top
> four people requested "Against" the choice can submit the written
> information that will be linked to the portal. The written information
> can be updated any time before the vote. The written information will
> show the name of the person who wrote it and the number of requests
> received for the person. The information will be sorted first by
> "For" and "Against" and second by the number of people who requested
> each person, from most to least. Portals used to vote for candidates
> will have access to the following: Four weeks before the vote, each
> candidate can write why they should be elected. Then at three weeks,
> two weeks, and one week before the voting, each candidate can update
> why they should be elected and respond to what their opponent(s) have
> written. The people in each state will be able to decide by majority
> vote to use the USA-Referendum System for their primaries and/or
> elections in their state.
> Section 7. Contributions/Spending for and against federal cost
> reduction laws and amendments will have the same reporting
> requirements as contributions/spending for candidates. The
> USA-Referendum voting portal for all choices (amendments, federal cost
> reduction laws, and candidates) will have links to everything the FEC
> (Federal Election Commission) has for all of the following: By each
> choice there will be a "contributions" link on the portal that will
> show all contributors and what they contributed to the choice. For
> each contributor, there will be two links, "all contributions" and
> "affiliates." The "all contributions" link will list all of the
> contributor's contributions for all choices that ever qualified for
> voting in a USA-Referendum. The link will have contributions broken
> out by each choice that the contributor supported. The "affiliate"
> link will list all affiliates of the contributor. For all affiliates,
> there will be an "all contributions" link that will function the same
> as the "all contributions" link above. The information available from
> the portal in this section is just whatever was ever in the FEC
> records. The submission dates for required information to be
> submitted to the FEC for USA-Referendums will be early enough for the
> information to be available in the portals on the first day of voting
> for the applicable choice.
> Section 8. Within 28 days of a federal cost reduction law or an
> amendment being proposed, the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) will
> issue their forecast of the proposed law or amendment's NPV (Net
> Present Value) over the first 10 years. The NPV will be broken out by
> NPV for each of the following, if materially significant - federal
> government, state governments, and U.S. citizens. The federal
> government's discount rate for future cash flows will be based on its
> expected cost of borrowing. The issued forecast will include all
> details and assumptions used in the forecast and an explanation of how
> all the details and assumptions were used. On the first 10
> anniversaries of when each federal cost reduction law and amendment
> goes into effect, the CBO will update and issue, within 28 days, their
> NPV forecast for the original 10-year period. The issued update will
> have all the supporting types of information and breakouts as the
> original forecast had, along with an explanation of any change in the
> forecasted NPV for the original 10-year period.
> Section 9. Changes to the frequency and timing of everything in
> Sections 4 through 8, as well as to the following, can be changed by
> majority vote of the people: The percentage of voters required to
> propose a federal cost reduction law. The percentage of voters
> required to get a candidate on the ballot. The 50% used to decide
> which choices get voted on in the next run-off vote, the changed
> percentage would be applicable to all of the run-off voting. Changes
> to the required information to be submitted to the FEC. Changes to the
> method used by the CBO to calculate and report NPV.
> Section 10. After 2017, any federal government action that the
> majority of state legislatures and/or the majority of eligible voters
> consider to be a reduction in their constitutional rights, will be
> blocked from being in effect until six months after the following:
> Congress must propose two U.S. Constitutional Amendments, each of
> which just reverses the action; one amendment will be designated for
> ratification by state legislatures and the other designated for
> ratification by the people using the USA-Referendum.
> Section 11. If proposed by Congress, this amendment's designated mode
> of ratification is by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.
> There is only one path that can save our economy from a devastating
> crash and keep our Constitutional rights from slipping further. The
> path begins with the state legislatures working together and agreeing
> on a version of the USA-Referendum for their citizens to ratify.
> Thanks for your consideration.
> John J. Rodenkirch
> (630) 777-6671
-------------- next part --------------
Forwarding in case any of you want to propose this to folks in your
region.
Wes Benedict, Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
(202) 333-0008 ext. 232, [1]wes.benedict at lp.org
facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
Join the Libertarian Party at: [2]http://lp.org/membership
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: Improve the Ground Game for the LP State Legislator
Candidates
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 13:50:03 -0400
From: Wes Benedict [3]<wes.benedict at lp.org>
To: John Rodenkirch [4]<johnjrodenkirch at yahoo.com>
Hi John, thanks for sending your proposal and thanks for being a
Libertarian. I'll forward this to a few folks but I can't guarantee who
might or might not want to participate via the path you are suggesting.
Our candidates and activists are bombarded with suggestions on what
they need to focus on and as you can imagine, there's a huge variety of
suggestions. In any case, thanks for your interest and motivation. I
suggest you post this in some places on facebook to see if others grab
a hold of the ideas--probably you've done that. Take care,
Wes Benedict, Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
(202) 333-0008 ext. 232, [5]wes.benedict at lp.org
facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
Join the Libertarian Party at: [6]http://lp.org/membership
On 8/30/2018 3:15 PM, John Rodenkirch wrote:
Improve the Ground Game for the LP State Legislator Candidates
The LP State Legislator Candidates should challenge their opponents to
support the USA-Referendum. It will enable citizens to propose and
then pass federal cost reduction laws by the same voting margin as if
they were ratifying amendments. These laws could only be over-ruled by
U.S. Constitutional Amendments, which Congress and the state
legislatures could propose and ratify.
The USA-Referendum will be supported by the state legislatures, because
it will permanently re-establish the Constitution's check and balance
on the federal government. The power to make laws will then be
appropriately split between the federal government, the state
legislatures, and the people, with each of these three entities being
subject to a check and balance from the other two.
The USA-Referendum cannot be blocked by the federal government. The
state legislatures have submitted the required number of valid
applications for an Article V Convention many times, but Congress
unconstitutionally refuses to call the convention. The Supreme Court
uses its "Political Question" doctrine to avoid ruling on the matter.
The "Political Question" doctrine has no basis in our Constitution.
For more information about the USA-Referendum, see the draft email
below that I plan to send to all state legislators after the Nov 2018
Election.
The USA-Referendum is a Libertarian idea. It would result in much more
media attention for the Libertarian candidates and hopefully get them
into more debates with their opponents. It is critical that the
Libertarian Party leads the USA-Referendum implementation, so the state
legislatures do not make inappropriate modifications to it.
Ideally, the Libertarian Party supports and promotes the
USA-Referendum, and consistently states the following about it. "There
should be no reduction of the appropriate amount of power being
transferred to the people, as contained in the book USA-Referendum and
the Article VII Check and Balance." I would not interfere with the
Libertarian Party's efforts to implement the USA-Referendum, we can
discuss the details. There is nothing about me that could discredit
the USA-Referendum.
I can draft Press Releases and Question & Answers for the Libertarian
Party to use. I can be available to answer questions, and to
participate in discussions about the USA-Referendum.
Possibly, the Libertarian Party could (1) suggest changes to the
USA-Referendum for use in the book's second edition, planned for Jan
1st 2019 and (2) help modify the draft email below before I send it to
all state legislators. Feel free to call me concerning both of these,
at your earliest convenience.
The USA-Referendum is a " ..... referendum .... used as popular checks
on government" (LP 2018 Platform, 3.6 Representative Government).
When the federal government blocked the Constitution's check and
balance on the federal government, the federal government became
"destructive of individual liberty, it is the right of the people to
alter " (LP 2018 Platform, 3.7 Self-Determination).
If the Libertarian Party does not want me to contact their current
candidates about the USA-Referendum, email me by Sept 7th and I will
not contact the LP candidates about it.
Thanks for your consideration.
John J. Rodenkirch
Member since 1994 M-000208826
(630) 777-6671
Draft Email To all State Legislators after the Nov 2018 Election
Live-Up to Alexander Hamilton's Expectation
Congress and the Washington-special-interest groups have our economy
headed for a devastating crash. After the crash, Congress and the
Washington-special-interest groups will make our economy worse when
they "re-build" our economy, without any meaningful input from the
state legislatures or the people. In addition, Congress will use the
"national emergency", caused by the crash, to encroach further on the
U.S. Constitutional Rights of the state legislatures and the people.
The state legislatures and their people can limit federal government
spending by creating and implementing a version of the USA-Referendum
from the draft at the end of this email that cannot be blocked by the
federal government. The state legislatures need to add their version of
the USA-Referendum and all ratified amendments to a copy of the
existing U.S. Constitution for the people to ratify the combined
document. Before the combined document is ratified by the people in
each of two-thirds of the states, Congress will propose the version of
the USA-Referendum for three-fourths of the states to ratify as an
amendment. The Article VII Check and Balance will remain unused and it
will become much less likely to be ever needed. If two-thirds or more
of the states did ratify the combined document, it would not break the
rules and agreements that maintain the perpetual union of the states.
It would permanently restore the Constitutional right of these state
legislatures to propose U.S. Constitutional Amendments, which could
include the USA-Referendum as an amendment. If three-fourths of the
states ratify the combined document, their citizens would be able to
propose and then pass federal cost reduction laws by the same voting
margin as if they were ratifying amendments. These laws could only be
over-ruled by U.S. Constitutional Amendments, which Congress and the
state legislatures could propose and ratify. The power to make laws
will then be appropriately split between the federal government, the
state legislatures, and the people, with each of these three entities
being subject to a check and balance from the other two.
Article VII of our Constitution would have allowed the Constitution to
be only in effect for just two-thirds of the states, if these states
had been the only states to ratify the Constitution. When the federal
government, which was created by the Constitution, went into operation,
two of the states had not ratified the Constitution. The Constitution
did not need fulfillment of the requirements in the Articles of
Confederation concerning replacing/amending/altering the Articles of
Confederation; it just needed to be ratified by the people in each of
two-thirds of the states.
If the state legislatures do not work hard enough to implement the
USA-Referendum, they will end up being forever criticized by historians
for letting things fall apart. The window of opportunity will not
remain open much longer. This email is being sent to all state
legislators.
Hopefully, the federal government does not delay implementation of the
USA-Referendum until it is too late to prevent Congress from crashing
our economy.
The state legislatures have submitted the required number of valid
applications for an Article V Convention many times, but Congress
unconstitutionally refuses to call the convention. The Supreme Court
uses its "Political Question" doctrine to avoid ruling on the matter.
The "Political Question" doctrine has no basis in our Constitution.
In The Federalist 85, where Alexander Hamilton reaffirms the state
legislatures' right to propose amendments, he states, "We may safely
rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers
against the encroachments of the national authority."
The different groups of state legislatures that want to propose
different U.S. Constitutional Amendments, need to first work together.
They need to permanently restore their Constitutional right to propose
amendments. Their current lack of much interest in amendments is
because the state legislatures have submitted over 500 applications for
an Article V Convention and Congress just refuses to call the
convention.
These different groups of state legislatures cannot allow themselves to
be split up into opposing groups, which is what will be attempted by
the federal government, Washington special-interest-groups, and by some
news media that advocate for a centralized federal government. The
more centralized a government is, the less efficient it normally is.
Governments typically get more centralized, as the government people in
power tend to want more and more power. The victims of this
centralization in the U.S. need to work together to permanently restore
the Constitution's check and balance on the federal government.
The problem today is Congress versus both the state legislatures and
the people, not Congressional republicans versus Congressional
democrats or Congressional democrats versus Congressional republicans.
The problem is also not the poor versus the rich or the rich versus the
poor, since crony capitalism and excessive entitlements make both these
groups winners. The losers are the ordinary taxpayers and the states
that have to pay for the debt and the unfunded mandates Congress
creates to make those winners. Making those winners, also makes
Congress a winner.
Congress cannot block the USA-Referendum just like the Continental
Congress could not have blocked the Constitution if only two-thirds of
the states had ratified it. The Supreme Court and other federal courts
cannot block it because of the "Political Question" doctrine. The
President indicated in his inauguration address that he is in favor of
transferring this type of power from Washington DC to the people whose
country the USA is.
USA-Referendum will uphold our Constitution including all existing
amendments. The best way to uphold our Constitution including all
existing amendments is to ratify them. The Supreme Court's "Political
Question" has enabled Congress to get away with not upholding the
Constitution, such as in regards to Article V of the Constitution.
The USA-Referendum is inevitable because it is the only workable
solution to prevent Congress and the Washington-special-interest groups
from (1) devastatingly crashing our economy, (2) "rebuilding" our
crashed economy without any meaningful input from the state
legislatures and the people, and (3) encroaching further on the
Constitutional rights of the state legislatures and the people. The
sooner the USA-Referendum is implemented, the better for our economy.
Implementing the USA-Referendum after Congress crashes our economy will
not be practical. The "national emergency" caused by the crash would
delay and possibly prevent implementation of the USA-Referendum. Even
if the USA-Referendum did get implemented after the crash, the
Washington-special-interest groups will have already received
everything there is to get from Congress and it will be next to
impossible to get even a small portion of it back.
Congress may try to coerce the state legislatures into proposing the
USA-Referendum Amendment at an Article V Convention, when and where
Congress decides. Congress, Washington-special-interest groups, and
some news media that advocate for a centralized federal government
would all make the convention so disastrous that no one will want to
discuss restoring the state legislatures' Constitutional right to
propose amendments for the next 50 years.
There is already a well-founded fear that the Supreme Court's
"Political Question" doctrine would enable Congress to manipulate an
Article V Convention into doing more harm than good to our
Constitution.
Congress may engage in fear mongering concerning the unfounded
possibility that the state legislatures proposing amendments could lead
to a loss of personal freedoms, liberties, and equal rights. Congress
knows that there is no such risk of this. All our personal freedoms,
liberties, and equal rights come from the Constitution with Amendments,
which were all ratified by the states. There is no way that
three-fourths of the states would ratify an amendment that takes away
our personal freedoms, liberties, or equal rights. The federal
government has a long and extensive history of taking away our personal
freedoms, liberties, and equal rights. I would rather trust my
personal freedoms, liberties, and equal rights to a three-fourths
majority vote by the states versus a 50% majority vote in Congress.
There is nothing that is even close to being as dangerous to our
Constitution as Congress devastatingly crashing our economy and then
Congress "rebuilding" our crashed economy without any meaningful input
from the state legislatures and the people. Congress will remain
unable to stand up to the Washington-special-interest groups that will
have caused Congress to crash our economy. Congress will continue down
the same path, increasing federal debt, increasing unfunded federal
mandates, building more inefficiencies into both our economy and the
regulations that our states are forced to follow, and encroaching
further on the Constitutional rights of the state legislatures and the
people.
In the ten years since the 2008 Financial Crisis, the federal debt has
more than doubled from under $10 trillion to over $20 trillion. This
debt is our nation's biggest problem; we cannot wait any longer to fix
it.
When federal politicians state that the $2.8 trillion Social Security
trust fund will cover Social Security checks for the next 15 to 20
years, they are leaving out a major detail. Congress borrowed the $2.8
trillion Social Security trust fund and spent it on non-Social Security
programs that the Washington-special-interest groups wanted. Where is
the $2.8 trillion going to come from to cover Social Security checks
when Congress is already borrowing $1 trillion a year to fund
non-Social Security programs? Also, where is the money to pay for the
$8 trillion of Agency debt (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae, and
Federal Home Loan Banks)? Medicare and Medicaid will also need
additional future funding.
Earlier this year Congress had to raise the federal debt limit to avoid
having the federal government shut down. In order to vote in favor of
raising the federal debt limit, Congress increased federal government
spending by $400 billion without any public debate. The federal debt
limit does not reduce federal government spending, it just creates an
excuse to increase federal government spending. Instead of approving
each other's spending requests, the Republicans and Democrats in
Congress should be fighting over how to spend the limited amount of
money they are allowed to spend. For increasing the federal debt
limit, there is no reason for Congress to spend more of our money.
Congress' devastating crash of our economy will permanently and
significantly lower our standard of living versus the rest of the
developed world. Our society's safety net will collapse and probably
never grow to the inflation-adjusted sustainable level it could have
been maintained at if the states had implemented the USA-Referendum and
prevented Congress' crash of our economy.
When our economy crashes, Congress will not acknowledge any fault.
Just like what happens now, Congressional democrats will blame
Congressional republicans and Congressional republicans will blame
Congressional democrats, all of which will distract people from
realizing that the real problem is Congress. Congress continues to
bury the people further in debt, so that Washington-special-interest
groups will continue to help the members of Congress stay in office and
prosper.
The more freedoms and liberties the state legislatures and the people
get, the more different ideas that different states will try concerning
things like their school systems. The ideas that work well, will
spread to other states.
USA-Referendum Amendment draft from the book USA-Referendum and the
Article VII Check and Balance
Section 1. U.S. Constitutional Amendments can be proposed any time from
any place by any two-thirds of the state legislatures. Amendments
proposed by state legislatures can always and only be ratified by the
people as in Section 3.
Section 2. All U.S. Constitutional Amendments (1) will go into full
effect for all the states and for the federal government, immediately
after ratification, and (2) will be exempt from all federal and state
laws, treaties, executive orders, court rulings, and anything else any
government could do that interferes with the amendments. For this
amendment and all future amendments, state ratifications will be
un-rescindable with no time limit for ratification.
Section 3. Statewide U.S. Constitutional Amendment ratification
conventions will be replaced by the USA-Referendum System.
Ratification by the people of a U.S. Constitutional Amendment, proposed
by the state legislatures or Congress, can always and only be done
using the USA-Referendum System that will only require a majority vote,
using the following voting system, in each of at least three-fourths of
the states. The voting system must (1) keep everyone's vote secret,
(2) allow everyone to verify how their vote was counted, (3) have the
Social Security Administration verify that every voter is an alive U.S.
citizen who is old enough to vote, (4) have the U.S. Department of
Justice verify that every voter has not been convicted of a federal
crime or a crime in any state that would make the person ineligible to
vote in their state, and (5) contain the following provision. Anyone
convicted of violating a federal or state voting law in regards to this
amendment or to any amendment proposed by the state legislatures or
Congress, will receive a lifetime ban from having a federal job or
working, directly or indirectly, under a federal contract.
Organizations can pay to use the system to conduct anonymous surveys,
where responses are entered on the voting portal and the survey results
get broken out based on which preceding votes the respondent voted in.
Section 4. The Federal Government's Social Security Administration
(SSA) will manage and have an on-line USA-Referendum System set-up that
(1) meets the five Section 3 requirements, (2) can be used by people to
ratify amendments, (3) can be used by people to request that a
candidate be on the ballot and to vote for candidates on the ballot,
and (4) can be used by people to propose and pass federal cost
reduction laws that can only be over-ruled by U.S. Constitutional
Amendments. Once a month, people can vote on the SSA website to (1)
propose federal cost reduction laws and to (2) pass federal cost
reduction laws that were proposed by at least 25% of voters at least
eight weeks earlier. A federal cost reduction law is a law that
reduces total net combined financial costs for the federal government,
plus all state governments, and plus all U.S. citizens. If a federal
cost reduction law ends up increasing the total net combined financial
costs, the law will become null and void. The entire wording of each
proposed law that people vote on, will be on the ballot immediately
above where people vote on the proposed law. Complete voting results
will be broken out by state and included with each USA-Referendum's
result. When a vote is entered in a voter's SSA portal, a sequential
number is assigned, which gets recorded in both the portal (without
being displayed) and along with the vote in the official tally of the
votes. For a week after a voting period ends, voters can go into their
portal and see how their vote was counted in the official tally of
votes. Anytime after voting, a voter can permanently block their
portal from displaying the particular vote choice. No one can go into
the official tally of votes and look up who the voters are. There will
be a record of all transactions to and from each portal; this record
will only be used if a person says that their vote was not counted
correctly. Everyone who is eligible to vote can vote, even if they did
not register before the last day of the vote. Registering to vote
requires the person to (1) enter information that the SSA already has,
such as social security number and date of birth, and (2) update
information the SSA has, such as primary home address and full legal
name. Voters whose registration and/or eligibility determination are
not completed before the vote, can cast their vote, which will be
counted when the registration and eligibility determination are
completed. This will delay the overall vote result for as long as the
vote result would change if all and only the remaining pending "No"
votes were counted or all and only the remaining pending "Yes" votes
were counted. If the USA-Referendum is used by the people to vote for
candidates, the "No" and "Yes" above would be replaced by the
candidate's names. Hacking into someone else's voting portal will be a
crime. Casting someone else's vote, without their written permission,
will be a crime. The SSA will provide all available information
requested by the states to verify that only eligible citizens voted on
ratifying amendments, federal cost reduction laws, and candidates.
Section 5. If the USA-Referendum gets used for voting on anything
where there are more than two choices and none get over 50% of the
vote, a run-off vote will be held. Choices will be included in the
run-off voting based on which had the highest vote count, and will
include just enough of these choices so that their combined vote count
exceeded 50% of the vote. Additional run-off votes will be held if
needed. The maximum number of choices for each thing being voted on is
the eight choices that were requested by the most voters.
Section 6. The USA-Referendum voting portal for all choices
(amendments, federal cost reduction laws, and candidates) will have
access to the following. During the first 28 days after a federal cost
reduction law or an amendment is proposed, people eligible to vote on
it can request a person, from a list linked to the portal, to provide
written information on the portal "For" or "Against" it; the request
can be changed prior to the 28th day. Any eligible voter can have
their name added to the list, along with optional information that
distinguishes them from others with the same name. As of the 28th day,
the top four people requested "For" the choice and the top four people
requested "Against" the choice can submit the written information that
will be linked to the portal. The written information can be updated
any time before the vote. The written information will show the name
of the person who wrote it and the number of requests received for the
person. The information will be sorted first by "For" and "Against"
and second by the number of people who requested each person, from most
to least. Portals used to vote for candidates will have access to the
following: Four weeks before the vote, each candidate can write why
they should be elected. Then at three weeks, two weeks, and one week
before the voting, each candidate can update why they should be elected
and respond to what their opponent(s) have written. The people in each
state will be able to decide by majority vote to use the USA-Referendum
System for their primaries and/or elections in their state.
Section 7. Contributions/Spending for and against federal cost
reduction laws and amendments will have the same reporting requirements
as contributions/spending for candidates. The USA-Referendum voting
portal for all choices (amendments, federal cost reduction laws, and
candidates) will have links to everything the FEC (Federal Election
Commission) has for all of the following: By each choice there will be
a "contributions" link on the portal that will show all contributors
and what they contributed to the choice. For each contributor, there
will be two links, "all contributions" and "affiliates." The "all
contributions" link will list all of the contributor's contributions
for all choices that ever qualified for voting in a USA-Referendum.
The link will have contributions broken out by each choice that the
contributor supported. The "affiliate" link will list all affiliates
of the contributor. For all affiliates, there will be an "all
contributions" link that will function the same as the "all
contributions" link above. The information available from the portal
in this section is just whatever was ever in the FEC records. The
submission dates for required information to be submitted to the FEC
for USA-Referendums will be early enough for the information to be
available in the portals on the first day of voting for the applicable
choice.
Section 8. Within 28 days of a federal cost reduction law or an
amendment being proposed, the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) will
issue their forecast of the proposed law or amendment's NPV (Net
Present Value) over the first 10 years. The NPV will be broken out by
NPV for each of the following, if materially significant - federal
government, state governments, and U.S. citizens. The federal
government's discount rate for future cash flows will be based on its
expected cost of borrowing. The issued forecast will include all
details and assumptions used in the forecast and an explanation of how
all the details and assumptions were used. On the first 10
anniversaries of when each federal cost reduction law and amendment
goes into effect, the CBO will update and issue, within 28 days, their
NPV forecast for the original 10-year period. The issued update will
have all the supporting types of information and breakouts as the
original forecast had, along with an explanation of any change in the
forecasted NPV for the original 10-year period.
Section 9. Changes to the frequency and timing of everything in
Sections 4 through 8, as well as to the following, can be changed by
majority vote of the people: The percentage of voters required to
propose a federal cost reduction law. The percentage of voters
required to get a candidate on the ballot. The 50% used to decide
which choices get voted on in the next run-off vote, the changed
percentage would be applicable to all of the run-off voting. Changes
to the required information to be submitted to the FEC. Changes to the
method used by the CBO to calculate and report NPV.
Section 10. After 2017, any federal government action that the
majority of state legislatures and/or the majority of eligible voters
consider to be a reduction in their constitutional rights, will be
blocked from being in effect until six months after the following:
Congress must propose two U.S. Constitutional Amendments, each of which
just reverses the action; one amendment will be designated for
ratification by state legislatures and the other designated for
ratification by the people using the USA-Referendum.
Section 11. If proposed by Congress, this amendment's designated mode
of ratification is by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.
There is only one path that can save our economy from a devastating
crash and keep our Constitutional rights from slipping further. The
path begins with the state legislatures working together and agreeing
on a version of the USA-Referendum for their citizens to ratify.
Thanks for your consideration.
John J. Rodenkirch
(630) 777-6671
References
1. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
2. http://lp.org/membership
3. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
4. mailto:johnjrodenkirch at yahoo.com
5. mailto:wes.benedict at lp.org
6. http://lp.org/membership
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list