[Poll] Is providing water a basic function of government?

John Oxendine said in his Fox 5 Interview that ‘providing water is a basic function of government’.

I tend to disagree with him, citing the Declaration of Independence, which states that

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

However, the crowd over at Peach Pundit seems to agree with Ox so far, so I put the question to you in the form of SWGA Politics’ first ever poll:

Does Your Senator or Congressman Follow the Law All The Time?

How many of us if given the opportunity to hire law enforcement officers would hire an officer who said that he would enforce the law “most of the time.” Would you hire a police officer who said that if someone robbed your house that he would pick up the offender “most of the time?” Would you really want law enforcement officials who would only pursue burglars, rapists and murderers “most of the time?” Would you want a sheriff in your county who said that if you were accused of some crime that “most of the time” he would look into the charges and make sure they were valid before arresting and putting you in jail? I don’t think you would. Most of us want the law enforced all the time. Otherwise, it’s no good at all.

The reality is that the biggest problem we have in the country today is a result of the elected officials we send to Washington abiding by the law “most of the time” if at all. The supreme law of the land is the United States Constitution. Every elected official from the President of the United States down to the lowest city or county elected officer takes an oath of office that says they will “uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

The Framers of the Constitution were very wise in spelling out the limits on the federal government. In fact, the entire purpose of the Constitution was to put limits on the federal government, not on the states or the people. These limits were stated in the enumerated powers of Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution.

The Constitution was written under the principle of “positive grant.” Quite simply, the federal government is authorized to exercise only those powers which are “positively” “granted” to it by the Constitution. If a power is specifically listed in the Constitution, the federal government can do it. If it isn’t listed then it’s forbidden to the federal government. It really is that simple. This principle was so important to the Founding Fathers that they codified it in law as the 10th Amendment.

Herein lies the problem. It has been a very long time since most any of our elected officials have paid any attention to the Constitution except when it suits them. They routinely violate their oath of office by voting for new laws or for expenditures that are not constitutionally permitted.

Many politicians take a very liberal approach to Article I Section 8, and the 10th Amendment, by claiming that all the taxing and spending they do is permitted under what’s called the “general welfare” clause. They claim that as long as their actions promote the overall general welfare, it’s OK. This is clearly not what was intended by the Founding Fathers. Anyone willing to do just a little homework can find evidence of the real intent of the general welfare reference which is what true conservatives should use as a benchmark.

In the first Congress a bill was brought forth to give money to cod fishermen in New England. Nothing in the Constitution permitted this and James Madison, who is credited with being the primary author of the Constitution, responded with the following:

“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.”

How can you tell if your elected official is one of those “most of the time” people?

First, keep the above Madison quote in mind.

Second, get a copy of Article I Section 8 of the Constitution and see what it allows. You can find a copy online here: http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec8

Third, go to http://www.votesmart.org and check your Congressman or Senator’s voting record. Find out how many issues not covered in Article I Section 8 he or she has voted to authorize. You may find that “most of the time” has become “some of the time” or possibly “none of the time.”

Complaints from the recent TEA parties focused mainly on too much spending or too much taxation. Both of these are just symptoms of the real problem. The actual problem is that our elected Congressmen and United States Senators have not been and are not obeying the law 100% of the time as you would expect of a local city or county police officer. If they were obeying the law, and their oaths of office, there would not be billions and trillions of dollars spent by the federal government. The vast majority of the money spent every year in the annual budget and in the recent bailouts is totally unconstitutional. If they weren’t spending so much money unconstitutionally there would be no need of high taxes.

We can continue to argue about whether spending and taxes are too high or we could just start refusing to send people back to Washington who are not totally committed to obeying the intent of the Constitution, the law of the land, all the time.

The best way to begin to correct the problem is to demand accountability for past actions of those candidates running for re-election. If you want to expose the constitutional transgressions of a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives or U.S. Senate ask them if they’ve ever cast a vote for a bill that wasn’t permitted by Article I Section 8. If their answer is yes, then ask them why they aren’t obeying the law 100% of the time. Go even further and ask them why they violated their oath of office. If they answer no, and you know better, break out your votesmart.org research. Go line by line through their voting record for their last term in office. Ask them to show you where the authority lies for every questionable vote.

As always, we need elected officials who will remain true to the Constitution. Unfortunately, many elected officials will follow the Constitution only if we expect it of them. Now is the time to make our expectations known to those who want us to put our trust in them as representatives of the people.

-Ben Brandon
Ben Brandon is a libertarian Republican from NWGA and friend of SWGA Politics.

John Oxendine and Liberty, Part 2a: Oxendine Business Plan: Goal to Agriculture

Part 1 of this ‘John Oxendine and Liberty’ post dealt with the ‘Transportation‘ and ‘Family Values‘ pages in the Issues section of JohnOxendine.com. This post deals with the ‘Business‘ page, from the heading ‘The Oxendine Goal’ through the heading ‘Agriculture, the King of Georgia Business’.

‘The Oxendine Goal’:

Make Georgia the most business-friendly state in America.

A noble and admirable goal in fact. But I doubt Mr. Oxendine will be able to accomplish it, because he intends to get government MORE involved in business and individual decisions, when the correct way to assume a ‘pro-business’ stance is to REMOVE government from business and individual decisions.

‘The Oxendine Belief’:

A conservative, free market approach to government will create jobs; enhance revenue for the state without new taxes and burdensome regulations. Thereby, improving the quality of life for all Georgians.

Mr. Oxendine, you and your fellow conservatives only want to GROW government regulations. How does that encourage the free market? It in fact does exactly the opposite, slowing the free market from achieving the results that are best for all concerned. Again, the correct solution is LOWERED government regulation of both business and individual decisions, resulting in higher quality of life for a business’s employees and higher profit for the business itself.
[Continue Reading]

13 Gangs

I’m going to take my full control over SWGA Politics out for a spin and cover something that Jeff would never talk about:

Albany Gang Taskforce officers met with city officials yesterday. The verdict? They’ve identified 13 gangs in Albany. They’ve even indicted 10 men for being gang members and participating in a shoot out with rival gang members (more on this later). Of course, with 13 gangs, indicting ten men seems like a drop in the bucket. Continue reading