The Imbalance of Power

Blog Post written by on .
Imbalance of Power
We the people, in our fallible wisdom, long ago attempted to establish a form of governance in America which purports a balance of power over our lives and liberty by three distinct and equal branches.  History and the current state of this deteriorated Republic, now so readily affirmed as a Democracy by the ruling mob class itself, has proven the inefficiency of our acts and cries foul the erroneous ratification and implementations of most articles and amendments of our Constitution for which I must now lament in this foregoing statement of regretful mourning upon the death of the principles of liberty outlined in our early Declaration of Independence, which our adopted form of governance completely ignores.

It was our Declaration, secured through bloodshed at Concord and throughout the American Revolution and subsequent wars, that not only instilled a belief by all Americans that we have the inherent rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, this document by its words and enforcement is the legal source of our authority to institute or abolish our own form of governance.  Why then, have we formed a government which defiles this document?

Many of you who now take the time to peruse these words may elect prematurely to consider my question itself erroneous, without consideration of its merits.  While I revere the Constitution of the United States and the subsequent Bill of Rights, and have myself taken the personal election of an Oath to support and defend them, the politics of their creation and maintenance has rendered these documents inadequate to the protections of liberty espoused by our declaration, and would strongly favor further amendment for the purpose of more adequate security.

A legislative, executive and judicial segmentation of government was considered by those who voted in favor of ratification as such a perfect balance of authority that no breach of liberty could be attained without a full concurrence of the entirety of society so fairly represented by such institutions as Congress, the Presidency and the Supreme Court of the United States.  Yet, the reality of our documentation infers something quite contrary to that concept and further fails to consider the danger of collective tyranny by all three institutions.

The imbalance of power first begins by excluding the consideration of a fourth branch having ultimate veto power over the acts of the other three.  This branch is made up of those who granted its limited authority to the others upon its inception and includes the entire body of the population.  While there is ordained power granted to Congress and the States to call for a convention amending the Constitution, no such provision exists expressly providing any protection for a right of the people themselves to throw off either state or federal government which supercedes the authorities to which they were granted.  This of course can be argued by the force of the militia clauses, the second, ninth and tenth Amendments, but neither of them "expressly" deliver such protection.  In fact, both the ninth and tenth amendments rather allow for the expulsion of liberties based upon any misguided interpretations of the Constitution by any branch of government or collective will of their combinations.

My ancestor, Elbridge Gerry, one of the founders of the Constitution and member of the House of Representatives during the drafting of the Bill of Rights, failed in his effort to add just a single word to the tenth amendment which would have gone a long way to secure a majority of our rights.  He propose the word "expressly" be interjected into the Amendment so that it would read, "The powers not expressly delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Yet even that revision I argue lacks the required protection as it considers the federal government as master over the States, and the States as master over the people.  If it were my duty to offer a correction to the Tenth Amendment, it might read, "The power of the people not expressly delegated respectively to the States or the United States, shall not be infringed, regardless of any compelling government interest."

A preamble to the Bill of Rights was offered but removed by the Congress prior to its being sent out for ratification.  It read as follows:

"First. That there be prefixed to the Constitution a declaration, that all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people.

That Government is instituted and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

That the people have an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their Government, whenever it be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution."

Such words clearly would have been in full support of our earlier declaration.  Yet, the political majority declined to adopt these words, or the advice of Elbridge Gerry and several others, as the federalists generally felt that the entire debate and process concerning the Bill of Rights was a waste of time.  The resulting ten amendments, commonly referred to as throwing a "tub to a whale", was basically considered to have been watered down, in a diversionary tactic to allow the new federalist government to continue by reducing the threat of a new convention which would make any substantial changes.

Another problem with the separation of powers principle can be observed by taking a closer look at the judicial branch of government.  While the Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President, approved and/or removed by Congress, its entire formation and operational policies are also directed by Congress.  Interestingly as well, we the people have been given no place or representation in the decisions of the Supreme Court or other Article III inferior courts "as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish" which consists only of  panels of judges and no jury.

"In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

In other words, the Supreme Court is NOT an independent branch of government in any sense, as Congress has authority over it, and can negate its privilege of jurisdiction or influence its decisions.  This can be seen time and again, when the Supreme Court decides its cases based upon the compelling interests of government rather than any individual liberties, even those proposed to be protected by the Bill of Rights.

You might even consider the modern day thought that the decisions of the Supreme Court ultimately create law in the form of precedent which becomes quantified as the "Supreme Law of the Land", even after recognizing that our Constitution gave the power of law making only to Congress.  However, since the federal judicial system is merely an arm of Congress, which has the capacity to create regulatory agencies such as the FCC and IRS, the Supreme Court, along with other Article III inferior courts are merely extensions of Congressional power.

The Executive branch also answers to Congress.  In fact Congress is tasked with the duty of counting and confirming the votes of the electors for President and in the event of tie or absence of requisite electors, determine who will be President and Vice President.  The President of the United States, while capable of nominating individuals for office, the Senate retains the authority of consent over such appointments.  While there are established terms limits for the President, members of congress have no such restrictions and retain the power to remove any sitting President, Federal Judge or appointed officer and to top things off, control all of their budgets.

It may be argued that those who are elected to Congress, the people of the United States, have the ultimate authority over that seemingly all powerful branch of government, but reality will dictate otherwise.   Congress has approved legislation regarding the limited apportionment of representatives of the people and establishes the policies of the U.S. Census Bureau, all designed to enforce adequate majorities in favor of their wealth distribution bribes, promoted through private financiers who fund the campaigns of legislators who will support their interests.

The end result is a horrible imbalance of power, where the weight of the people is reduced to that of a feather, where the self serving financial interests of an elite class retains the ultimate authority, subjugating the entire population into slavery as the rights of liberty are reduced to legislated privileges.

The scales of justice in America are broken.  Officers of the United States have enacted policies restricting your ability to hold them accountable.  Even the Supreme Court has declared while you have a right to petition the government for redress of grievances, there is no requirement upon government to listen or respond to such grievances.

The Militia is our only hope to correct this great inequity.  As we the people have the ultimate veto power over all acts of government, including our declared right to alter or abolish it entirely.  Our inherent right to keep and bear arms in our mutual defense of liberty can not be taken away by the government, except through force, and only if you permit them to do so.  We must gather and unite together in a common purpose to regain our authority. We are in a state of Nature with those who encroach upon our freedom.  Liberty avails itself not through the influence of words or parchment, but from the balance of bloodshed.

This blog post from an executive staff member is not to be contstrued as an official statement or act made by or on behalf of the American Militia Association and might not represent the views or opinions of the Association, its Directors, officers or employees.

Such posts and their comments are personal and not intended to represent the views of the organization.

Comments: 0

More Blog Posts: