Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – What I think I figured out is that the Obamacare act has so many of you so frustrated, politically frustrated, and since it has become nearly the singular cause célèbra of the “conservative movement,” and that there doesn’t seem to be a constitutional remedy to escape it. We’re not going to take it, but there are probably three constitutional remedies. Check out today’s transcript for the rest…
Begin Mike Church Show Transcript
Mike: I had mentioned that I had this piece here from Pete Haworth, who is running a great new website that I really, really enjoy browsing every day now, NomocracyInPolitics.com. If you are of the ilk that thinks the way out of our current pickle is just to elect the right coterie of Republicans to the federal or national leviathan and our kids are going to get in there, and after they have a good lunch with hot dogs and mustard and some apple pie, [mocking] “You just wait and see. They’re gonna fix all of this, Mitter Church. You just wait and see.” I do not share your optimism for that. As a matter of fact, I do not share your optimism that there is anyone short of a St. Paul of Tarsus or a Martin Luther that’s going to come along and “fix this.” It can’t be fixed. We talked about this yesterday. It’s not fixable. So where do you go from there?
First of all, we talked about this in hour one and I’ve talked about it a lot, and I’m heartened to hear that some of you are picking up on this. Do what you can in your own sphere. Do what you can in your own personal life. That means mind your manners. Live, sleep, eat and breathe republicanism in your community as you can. You’ve got to stop this fixation and obsession with worrying about the impending doom of the dark cloud. What I think I figured out is that the Obamacare act has so many of you so frustrated, politically frustrated, and since it has become nearly the singular cause célèbra of the “conservative movement,” and that there doesn’t seem to be a constitutional remedy to escape it. We’re not going to take it, but there are probably three constitutional remedies. There’s nullification and interposition, there is an Article V Amendment convention, and if none of that works, leave the Union, leave it. Don’t tell me that that’s insane or that that’s not a viable option because it is. If you’re going to have your life insurance policies confiscated and you’re going to have your estate confiscated because you died from the Affordable Care Act, my question to you is: What are you waiting for? Take one of the three courses and pursue them and do them immediately.
I also have been chiming in and saying, for quite some time now, that this is happening because the Constitution does not provide us with a remedy. The Constitution is dead. Things like this were never supposed to happen under a confederation, which is what we were supposed to have, a federation of states. We don’t have that now. We have a national legislature now. If I go to Nomocracy In Politics today, I’ll find a piece by Jeff Taylor based on his book Politics on a Human Scale: The American Tradition of Decentralism. This is a brief essay from the book. I’m just going to read the first three paragraphs because it’s instructional on what it is that we’re talking about today.
For the rest of today’s transcript please sign up for a Founders Pass or if you’re already a member, make sure you are logged in!
Power is centralized in our nation today. It was probably inevitable. [Mike: No, Jeff, don’t say that, dude. Man, they are going to come after you. I’m kidding.] The Anti-Federalists saw it coming. “Brutus”—probably Robert Yates of New York—[Mike: By the way, Yates stars in my film Spirit of ’76 in the debates in the Federal Convention. If you’ve seen the movie, he’s the one that walks out. If you haven’t seen the movie, get it.] began his consideration of the proposed Constitution with what he called the “first question”: “Whether the thirteen United States should be reduced to one great republic, governed by one legislature, and under the direction of one executive and judicial; or whether they should continue thirteen confederated republics, under the direction and controul of a supreme federal head for certain defined national purposes only?” He explained, “This enquiry is important, because, although the government reported by the convention does not go to a perfect and entire consolidation, yet it approaches so near to it, that it must, if executed, certainly and infallibly terminate in it.”
Mike: I had never read that quote from Judge Yates. He said that in 1788. Let me translate. If you ratify the Constitution as it was written in Philadelphia and you don’t amend it and you don’t fix its fundamental fatal flaws, it will result in consolidation. The states and the sovereignty of the people in the states will be eviscerated and eliminated and that’s what it will terminate in, a national legislature that reigns supreme. Question: Was Judge Yates right? For those that say [mocking] “It can’t be the Constitution’s fault,” it is the Constitution’s fault. It is true that we had virtuous people who were attempting to live under it and by it as it was intended, it’s possible that consolidation would not have happened, but that’s not the way it happened.
Later, in his address to the citizens of the state of New York, Brutus commented, “History furnishes no example of a free republic, any thing like the extent of the United States. The Grecian republics were of small extent; so also was that of the Romans. Both of these, it is true, in process of time, extended their conquests over large territories of country; and the consequence was, that their governments were changed from that of free governments to those of the most tyrannical that ever existed in the world.” In contending against “the idea of an extensive republic,” Brutus cited “the opinion of the greatest men, and the experience of mankind,” as well as arguments “drawn from the reason and nature of things.”
Members of the Pennsylvania ratifying convention’s minority faction explained their opposition to the proposed Constitution partly on the basis of what they feared would be the “total destruction of the state governments”:
“We apprehend that two co-ordinate sovereignties would be a solecism in politics. That therefore as there is no line of distinction drawn between the general, and state governments; as the sphere of their jurisdiction is undefined, it would be contrary to the nature of things, that both should exist together, one or the other would necessarily triumph in the fullness of dominion. However the contest could not be of long continuance, as the state governments are divested of every means of defence, and will be obliged by ‘the supreme law of the land’ to yield at discretion.”
Mike: Wow! I had never read that either. There it is in a nutshell. It was predicted. Consolidation was inevitable. It has happened. Now, look at the Affordable Care Act. What is your recourse? What is the recourse? The obsession with it and the fear of it, I think, is justified. I never said that it wasn’t. The pursuit of relief — what you’re looking for is relief from what you believe is going to be this enormous pain that it’s going to cause. Even though I was accused of never providing solutions, there are three federal, legal, constitutional options to get rid of it. Again, let’s go over them: Nullification and interposition, Article V Amendment convention, or leave the Union. Some of you are saying, [mocking] “Can’t we just repeal it?” Yeah, good luck with that. Now, an amendment convention might do something like the 20th Amendment did to repeal prohibition. You could just have an amendment that would just — if you were smart in writing that amendment, you would bar all medical services from ever being administered by the Feds, all of them.
End Mike Church Show Transcript