May10, 2014

5/29/90  HATONN

 

BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT: CRUEL FRAUD ON AMERICANS

The logical alternative to holding a second convention would be for Congress to act upon its own volition, and pass a Balanced Budget Amendment [BBA] if that is what is actually intended.  But Congress obviously won't tie its own spendthrift hands with such an amendment.

So far the proposed ones are simply fraud on the American public.  In fact, it is now the consensus of opinion that the BBA's proposed to date don't do anything at all to end deficit spending by the government.  How can this be?  Simple.  It's because of five "hidden flaws".

FLAW #1:  THE BBA'S FAIL TO DEFINE KEY WORDS.

Key words are not defined. This is important, because words such as "receipt" and "outlay" can have their entire meanings changed within the clear context of the amendment itself.  How?  By an act of Congress removing an item from the "official" budget and declaring it an "off-budget" item.

FLAW #2:  THE BBA's HAVE BUILT-IN "ESCAPE CLAUSES".

The proposed BBA's usually contain special provisions, called "escape clauses", which give Congress the ability to vote to IGNORE the provisions of the amendment.  You can imagine how easy it would be, even under a "tough" BBA, to get today's big-spending Congress to vote to circumvent key provisions of the amendment in order to push through more spending bills. Instead of eliminating deficit spending, the BBA's merely formalize the process, and legitimatize its use.

FLAW #3: THE BBA's CONTINUE TO ALLOW BORROWING

Deficit spending is caused by borrowing.  There will never be a balanced federal budget as long as borrowing continues to finance last year's programs and cost overruns.  Since the BBA's except borrowed funds from being counted as a receipt, the maintenance of the status quo is inevitable. The borrowing, and spending, continue as usual.

FLAW 34: THE BBA's FAIL TO COVER "CONTRIBUTING FACTORS"

All of the major factors that contribute to federal deficits -- borrowing, interest payments, monetization of foreign debt, loan agreements, etc., must be included in any budget-balancing proposal, if its stated goal of "balancing the budget" is truly to be achieved.  Unfortunately, there is nothing in the proposed BBA's that would disallow foreign or domestic loan guarantee agreements, or the monetizing of foreign debts.  Both are MAJOR contributors to inflation, which helps cause deficits, which necessitate borrowing, which results in interest payments, which drain revenue from circulation, which necessitates additional borrowing, and so on ad infinitum. This is already a worsening cycle.

FLAW #5:  THE BBA's ARE BASED ON "GUESSTIMATES"

The proposed BBA's are based chiefly on Congress' ability to predict the future and they can't even work on intelligence from the "past".  In other words, a budget that is "balanced" on paper is completely Constitutional as far as the BBA is concerned -- even though that budget is based largely on long-term projections, estimates, predictions, averages, and guesses -- statistics can be arranged to meet any need what-so-ever to suit the writer and who would ever even check it out?  For instance, if revenue fails to be generated "as predicted" in the budget, the resulting deficit would not be considered in violation.  Therefore, the federal government could and would continue to pile up huge deficits, all the while claiming to have "balanced the budget".  How convenient!

You can see that passing a BBA would do nothing to solve the government's monetary problems.  It also must become obvious that a CRC [Constitutional Rip-off Convention] would not improve the situation -- so you must realize that this is only a cover touted as need for a CRC.  Therefore, in conclusion, the BBA is one of the cruelest and most blatant frauds ever foisted upon the taxpayer.  A Constitutional Convention certainly would not improve the situation... especially when your current Constitution has a safe, sane, fool-proof method for balancing the budget built right into it and we shall look at it next.

 

BALANCE THE BUDGET CONSTITUTIONALLY -- AS IS!

You can accomplish a balanced budget the same way you did the first 150 years of existence. 

Constitutional scholars have long recognized that the power of direct taxation included in the Constitution is the only legitimate, historically-proven and fully-Constitutional means with which to effect a balanced annual federal budget.  This power of direct taxation for balancing the federal budget can be found by an attentive reading of Article I of the Constitution, and within the official legislative history of both America and the Constitution.

* "Representatives and Direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included in this Union, according to their respective Number. . ."

* "No Capitation, or other Direct Tax shall be laid unless in proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

(Sources: Article I, Section 2, Clause 3; and Article I, Section 9, Clause 4, respectively.)

Now, do not misunderstand what I say to you.  I am neither taking pro or con sides to the topic of taxation; we are speaking of "Balancing a budget and pointing out that you already have that which you need--in the Constitution.

How about those first 150 years?  Congress was to first use tariffs to fund the needs of the nation.  Then, if more money was needed, they could use excise taxes.  After that, if the federal government still needed more money to fund its various projects and obligations, then Congress would send each of the State Legislatures a bill for their share of the amount of funding needed.

The determination of how much money each state's "share" should be was based on the Census formula -- the same rule which determines the number of members each state receives in the House of Representatives.  Upon receiving their "bill" from Congress, the individual state legislatures would then determine the best ways to raise the needed money from among the residents of the state.

WHAT IS GOOD ABOUT THIS?  IF THE "BILLS" SENT TO THE STATE LEGISLATURES BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STARTED GETTING EXCESSIVE, THE GOVERNOR AND PEOPLE OF EACH STATE COULD SIMPLY AND HONESTLY POINT TO THEIR OWN STATE'S DELEGATION TO CONGRESS AND CALL THEM TO ACCOUNT FOR IRRESPONSIBLE SPENDING HABITS IN CONGRESS.  Then, come election time, the people of each state would vote out any big spending [by] Congressional representatives, and replace them with individuals who were more apt to vote "No"! on anything that even appeared to increase federal spending.  In this way, excessive federal government spending was minimized, the federal budget was balanced annually, and the tax burden of each citizen was kept to a bare minimum.

Today, however, Congress appears quite afraid to use those Constitutionally-mandated powers of direct taxation.  The reasons for this are four-fold:

#1:  THEY ARE VERY APT TO UNCOVER THE FACT THAT THE INCOME TAX LAW IS UNLAWFUL, NULL AND VOID (16TH AMENDMENT) AND THEN THE FAT WOULD HIT THE FIRE AND EXPLODE.

#2:  Congress has been telling you for years that there is no way out of your present deficit crisis without a Constitutional amendment mandating a balanced federal budget--in order to get a CRC and really blast you taxpayers.  Therefore, for Congress to even admit the existence of this proven method for balancing the budget, they would also have to admit they've been looking you right in the eye and lying to you all along.

#3:  Some members of Congress WANT a CRC to be convened so limitations on Congressional powers can be removed and the balance of power can shift in their favor.  Having to admit the existence of a Constitutional power that eliminates deficits almost overnight would take the wind right out of the sails of those who claim to support a CRC for the purpose of eliminating those very same federal deficits.

#4:  Today's big-spending Congressional representatives do not want to impose a direct tax on the states.  Why?  Because they know that to do so would force them to be held accountable to the governor, legislature and citizenry of their own state.  Instead of being able to vote indiscriminately in favor of legislation that drives federal spending higher and higher, they would have to justify every new expenditure to you the people.  DON'T BE LONGER FOOLED, THE CRC IS TO IMPOSE LAWS AND CHANGE LAWS--NOT BALANCE A BUDGET OR STOP FLAG BURNING!

Keep in mind, beloved friends, that the very ones who are pushing for a convention are the very ones directly set up by the "Cartel" who would have global control--it is not even well-hidden.  Please note that you are so brainwashed that you don't even notice who the enemy actually is.  You fall into the old trap of believing these global puppet masters are the good and altruistic philanthropists.  Nay, and you will pay dearly with your freedom and your material goods.  Look very, very carefully at that which is being foisted upon you in your inattention.

Hatonn to clear please.  Thank you.

***

Resource:  PHOENIX JOURNAL EXPRESS, May 1990, Volume 2, Number 4, Pages 6-8.

http://www.phoenixarchives.com/express/1990/0590/02-04.pdf

---

 

Comment by R. Montana / 5-9-2014

Fast forward 24 years in American politics.  Are we witnessing yet another very well thought-out and orchestrated propaganda campaign by the New World Order boys; the global puppet masters; the would-be rulers of our world, to nullify the United States Constitution FOREVER?  In order to do that, they would have to have infiltrated the various state legislatures and governors' seats in 34 states.  Much of that was done decades ago.  Don't think for one minute that that is beyond their capability.  Even Republican Party hopeful, Senator Rand Paul, has joined the CRC band-wagon which is disappointing to me; I thought he was smarter than that.  So what am I saying?  Simply this; re-read the above article; read the article segments below, and ask yourself if Americans are not being fooled yet again, BIG TIME.  And then ask yourself which of the two ways (the above or below) is the less riskier, less dangerous way for America to balance the federal budget and regain fiscal integrity within the federal government.

* * *

Balanced Budget Advocates Seek Article V Constitutional Convention

 

HUFF POST POLITICS

Posted: 03/28/2013 5:29 pm EDT

******************************

 

Growing Chorus of State Lawmakers Call for Constitutional Convention to Force Fiscal Discipline in Washington

Inaction in the face of a $17 trillion debt by the federal government has prompted lawmakers from 29 states to call for a constitutional convention to pass a balanced budget amendment.

 

The list of lawmakers – all Republicans so far — includes state House speakers, Senate presidents and lieutenant governors, among others.

Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution allows for a constitutional convention to be convened if two-thirds of the states call for one. If a convention approves an amendment, three-fourths of the states must vote to adopt it into the Constitution.

Though this option has never been used for amending the Constitution, Tennessee House Speaker Beth Harwell expects enough states to sign on within the next two years to force a convention. Traveling the state, she said she finds that most citizens are frustrated and disillusioned with the federal government.

“It’s a house of cards. We can’t go that way as a nation,” Harwell told TheBlaze, referring to federal spending. “In Tennessee, we live within our means and have a rainy day fund and fund our pension plan. But we have hanging over our heads the fiscally irresponsible federal government.”

The Tennessee legislature gave final approval last week to a resolution in favor of a convention.

Already, 22 state legislatures have passed resolutions supporting a convention to pass a balanced budget amendment through both chambers, according to the State Government Leadership Foundation, which is spearheading the Demand Balance Now initiative. Meanwhile, five states passed such legislation in one of their legislative chambers during this year’s legislative session. ...

************************

 

Wisconsin Moving to Advance ALEC Constitutional Convention Scheme

PR Watch

Posted by Brenda Fischer on February 10, 2014.

Wisconsin is the latest state to line up behind a national effort to amend the Constitution and cripple the federal government's ability to spend -- likely forcing steep cuts in popular earned benefit programs such as Social Security and blocking Congress from responding to economic downturns or natural disasters -- apparently with the ultimate goal of completely overhauling America's system of governance.

Assembly Joint Resolution 81, which passed out of committee on Wednesday, would call for an Article V Constitutional Convention to force a federal balanced budget amendment. Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides that thirty-four states (two-thirds) can trigger a convention to propose an amendment, which must then be ratified by 38 states (three-fourths). The legislation closely tracks the "Balanced Budget Amendment Resolution" from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and allied advocacy groups promoting an Article V convention. ...

 

---

a