User Picture

Pelt the President with the Pill

By: T. P. Alexanders Sunday April 22, 2012 3:00 pm

[The conversations represented here took place over the last week and are compressed for your reading pleasure. My husband and I are real people and said the things represented here. The rest of the dialogue is provided by intentionally fictionalized characters that are not meant to represent any one person. All sentiments and facts expressed here are genuine to the best of my recollection, but the characters saying them were selected by drawing names from a hat. I, alone, am responsible for this content.]

The Quickening

“They canceled Andrianna’s tubals yesterday,” I inform Steve in the hall outside the conference room. “They didn’t even give her a whole day’s notice so she could talk to her patients before they did it.”

“I got virtually no notice either when they canceled mine on Monday,” he replies.

“Really?” I am shocked by this. I have never heard of a hospital canceling cases so abruptly without involving the surgeon. “Who ordered the cancellations like that?”

“Don’t know. We’re only told the surgery scheduler, but someone gave her the order.”

We enter the conference room to find Norm waiting for us. The other gynecologists filter into the room. Both the hospitals the Sisters of Orange own are represented: the hospital in my town, St. Joseph’s, and the one south of us, Redwood Memorial.

“We had hoped this would blow over but the sisters feel backed into a corner.” Norm starts. “They have no choice but to get tough on this issue.”

“What brought all this on?” Steve asks.

“The edict came down from the new Bishop in Santa Rosa,” Norm says, “but we got targeted when they pulled the diagnosis codes for the hospital. It was obvious we were doing more sterilizations than they were in Southern California.”

“In Southern California you can go down the street from any Catholic institution and run into a secular hospital.” I try to defend us. “The Catholic Church bought almost all the hospitals in this area. For the last six years they’ve been trying to drive the last secular hospital under.”

“Never the less, we were doing a lot of tubals for ‛psychological’ reasons.”

“We were hardly doing a lot of sterilizations,” I say. “Other hospitals preform far more tubals a year. The stigma the Church gives the procedure already curtails many woman from asking for sterilization.”

“So what’s the plan?” Steve says, rescuing the meeting from disintegrating into complaints about the Church.

“Nothing.” Norm states. “This is a game we can’t win. The more public pressure the Catholics face, the more they will dig in. We have to keep quiet and wait. That will take the pressure off the nuns. When you’re approached by the media, and you will be approached, my advise is to refer them to the CMO. That’s what he gets paid for. Don’t talk to the media, or write letters to the editor. Don’t talk to your patients about it. We need to keep the lid on this to stop it from blowing up.”

“Too late. The patients already know.” I inform him. We all know there was an article in the local alternative paper, The Journal. The “real” paper in town, the Times Standard, has been silent on the issue. “I spent half an hour at a Pap smear today with an irate woman who vented the whole time about how this was unreasonable and unfair.”

“I wouldn’t encourage her. And don’t talk to your staff about this either,” Norm says.

“How am I going to do that? I’m taking my patients to Mad River. They all know why I stopped operating at St. Jo’s.”

“What do you say to the patients?” Steve wants to know.

“The truth. I don’t think it’s fair to deny all the women in an entire county a procedure on religious grounds. And the patients agree with me. I have an eighty year old woman who lives as far south in the county as you can go. I told her why I was taking my patients north, but seeing where she lived and considering her age I told her I would make an exception for her and operate on her at St. Jo’s. She told me, ‛Don’t you dare. I don’t want to support that any more than you do.’ This octogenarian wants to drive past the two hospitals the Sisters own to have her surgery at Mad River Hospital.”

“This hospital is facing hard times right now.We’re barely holding on ourselves. We can’t afford to lose any patients. We don’t want to lose patients or doctors.” Norm seems genuinely alarmed.

“Great. Go back to the way it was, and I’ll bring my surgeries back to St. Jo’s.” I feel for Norm, but I will not be moved.

“Look, if they made us take all the hysterectomies to ethics committee, the way they threatened to, then I would do the same thing.” Wendy said. “But it’s just the tubals.”

“The only reason they didn’t is because they found out the insurance companies already reviewed all our hysterectomies and would not pay without an adequate medical diagnosis.” I tell her. “They weren’t being magnanimous. They just didn’t want to duplicate the work.”

“You can’t take your surgeries to Mad River.” Quinn, always the practical one, tells me. “I’ve looked at the labor numbers. St. Jo’s is hemorrhaging money in Obstetrics. The hospital will take the Laborist program away. The only reason you came here was for that program. You don’t want to see it die, do you?”

“I don’t.” Everything he says is true. Medicaid doesn’t even cover the cost of deliveries for most hospitals. The one wing devoted exclusively to women is a loss leader for most hospitals in the nation. Obstetricians get treated like the red-headed-step-children of the family of physicians because we don’t make the hospital any money. Having a Laborist program is a rare luxury. It meant I could sleep through the night for the first time in years, watch a whole movie in a theater, have a conversation with my husband–uninterrupted by the other woman…one with vaginal discharge. I do desperately want to keep that indulgence. “It’s not just about what I want. If they take the Laborist program, there’s little reason for me to be at St. Jo’s at all. I’ll not just take surgery to Mad River, I’ll take my labor patients as well.”

“If we don’t support the hospital it won’t be there to care for us.” Wendy says. “I for one want a hospital here when I retire.”

“Not taking care of the needs of half of the population is not caring for us.” I can feel my control slipping. “If they are unwilling to serve half the population’s health care needs, what are they doing in the business in the first place? They should sell the hospital—preferably back to the community to be run cooperatively.”

“This happens every seven years or so.” Elroy, the oldest member of our tribe, says. “The last time it was a new nun sent to take over the hospital. She had all the tubals canceled too.”

“How did that get resolved?” I ask.

“She died and it got forgotten.”

“So we’re waiting for the Bishop to die? Or just waiting for him to change his mind?” I say with more than a little heat. “The Bishop isn’t the only one with strong feelings on this.”

“The hospital can make it hard for you.” Adrianna has arrived late to the party due to her patients. “Remember Tony? He got in that spat with the hospital and started talking to people—even people in the Foundation. It got back to the Board of Trustees and they dragged him into Medical Executive Committee. Now he has that mark on his record forever.”

I know she is trying to warn me. I’m no stranger to this tactic. Though I have not seen it used at St Jo’s, I’ve seen it used elsewhere to strike fear into doctors. A hospital will use its power to remove incompetent doctors on a doctor who is medically competent but has a disagreement with the hospital. They sacrifice one physician, ending his or her career, to scare the other physicians into compliant silence. There are even courses for hospital administrators instructing them how to do this effectively. I’ve avoided such abuses of power so far, but I’ve seen it used time and again on colleagues.

“Look, it’s not just our patients. I was already scheduled to talk about this subject on a national level. I can’t act like it’s not happening to me on a personal level as well. You see, I’m an editor of this blog…”

The Egg

I rarely write about health care and almost never discuss the war on women, because our “uniquely American” health care system has given me battle fatigue. Everyday it is some new insult. Last week, I was handed a list of over 90 medications the pharmaceutical industry is withholding in order to drive the price of drugs higher. On the list are popular pain medications, almost all the nausea medications, life saving emergency drugs and cancer therapy drugs.

Cathleen Kaveny explaining how the Catholic Church works.

This week, at the direction of our new Bishop, Northern California will deny birth control to as many women as possible. Tubal ligation, even if future pregnancies endanger the life of the mother, will not be allowed in any of the Catholic hospitals.

Somehow, my small isolated burg has been caught up in a national health care battle over just who should have control of a woman’s body.

The Affordable Care Act guidelines already include a religious exemption. An institution which provides its employees with health benefits can qualify for it, if its major purpose is to employ and serve co-religionists — like a church. That’s not enough for the Catholic Church, which says (though possibly not in these words) that it doesn’t want to subsidize the shameful non-procreative sexing of its employees at affiliated hospitals, charities and universities, whether they agree with the Church about birth control or not. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops are pushing for a far more expansive religious exemption.–Salon

Our small county of 135,000 people spread over 3,600 square miles supports three hospitals. Two are run by the Catholic Sisters of St. Joseph of Orange in Orange County.

The last secular hospital in the area is barely hanging on. Our hospital has waged an all out competitive war against the hospital so they can capture its market share. The last secular hospital in the area, Mad River Hospital, is located on the northern edge of the county and ill equipped to increase its volume substantially.

Other secular hospitals existed in the area in the past, but they were bought by the Catholic Church during last decades spending spree. The one to the south was bought in 1998. After the purchase, the Catholics closed the attached clinic for the sin of prescribing birth control. The threat to eliminate birth control options spurred enough controversy back then to beget a bill in the local assembly requiring the hospital to contract with another institution to provided the needed services. Unfortunately, the bill was voted down.

When new seismic safety standards forced St. Joseph Hospital to renovate in 2000, the Church bought the other secular hospital in the area. They needed a place to treat patients while their hospital was under construction. Now, the old hospital is relegated to offices and outpatient services like lab.

In the late 1990’s the Catholic Church bought and merged with quite a few hospitals, resulting in 611 Catholic Hospitals in 60 health care systems in America, caring for half a million patients—12% of the nation’s health care. Catholic Directives to these hospitals come down from local Bishops.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Cathleen Kaveny
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

A  hospital acquired by the Catholic Church can no longer provide contraception, abortion, sterilization, and in vitro fertilization. Only 28% of Catholic hospitals said they would provide women who had been raped or trafficked emergency contraception through their ER.

Old Men in Skirts and Womens HealthIn a poll, 68% of women were opposed to a Catholic Hospital merger if it meant reproductive services would be curtailed. That same poll indicated 75% of women were opposed to Catholic health care imposing these restrictions on women if they took tax payer money.

All hospitals are funded by tax payer money—largely Medicare and Medicaid. Yet, the Church specifically denies women reproductive rights regardless of who pays for the services or the religious beliefs of the woman in question. St. Joseph does not even allow its non-Catholic employees to purchase health insurance that covers birth control.

Only 20% of Humboldt county are practicing Catholicism. Most women facing these restrictions do not recognize the authority of the Bishop to make such a decision for them. In fact, 98% of Catholics in America use birth control. For many rural women, a Catholic hospital is the only one in the local area. For the poor, without adequate transportation, getting care from a distant secular hospital is impossible. The Bishop is preventing me, a non-Catholic, from preforming tubal ligation on other women who are not Catholic, because he is allowed to own the only operating room in town.

When St. Joseph ran short of funds to complete their seismic renovations, they asked the community to donate money. The community of Humboldt obliged, giving $12.5 million. Over half of the population in the county is women, but when the time comes to move into the new 100,000 square foot, 3 floor facility, the only major branch of the hospital that won’t be going will be Labor and Delivery.

When one of our nurses asked how the hospital could take community support from women, but then refuse to provide services for half of the members of the community, she was told by the CEO of the hospital, that Obstetrics was lucky to get room in the old building. The Board had considered closing Obstetrics all together, and using the space for rehabilitation.

Think about that for a second. Pharmaceutical companies can withhold life saving medications to drive up cost. The Catholic Church has the power to deny an entire county of women contraception AND the ability to deliver children in a safe environment. And they both have the will and the ability to use their power against my community. We are quite literally being held hostage by actors in the health care arena who are motivated by any thing but keeping people healthy. For insurance companies and Big Pharma it is profits. For Catholics it is control of women’s bodies.

The Sperm

Contraception by Jenny van SommersBeing female is a preexisting condition. Right now women are charged 15-30% more for health insurance then men. In addition, these policies actually excluded the benefits women specifically needed: contraception and obstetrics. During one survey of insurance, it was discovered that 90% of insurers covered Viagra and only 20% covered contraception. Even now, many insurance providers are telling women in my area they cover Intra Uterine Devices when the truth is they pay me less than it costs to purchase one, let alone insert it. They let me take the blame for not being able to afford to subsidize birth control for hundreds of women.

Women make up the majority on Medicare and Medicaid. They are more likely to be under insured or uninsured due to poor insurance in most jobs women do. These health care systems have a long history of being unfair to women. Medicare pays Gynecology about a third of what it pays Urology to do similar procedures on women than men.

Birth control itself has become a weapon in California. The state “insures” a enormous number of indigent women, telling them they have health insurance. In truth, the California program ONLY covers Pap smears and birth control. Women come to me for a number of complaints and I can only draw labs or work them up if they pay out of pocket. I have to explain that even if I think that huge mass on her face is cancer, her state “insurance” won’t pay for a biopsy. In essence, it is a state-run Eugenics program leveled against poor women.

There has been no controversy about Viagra—it is covered almost universally, including by Catholic institutions. For a while, Medicare even covered Viagra while denying prescriptions for vaginal estrogen cream.

The Republican run Congress has been incredibly misogynist on this issue. Their hearing on the matter was almost comedy. Exclusively run by men, and all but two of the witnesses testifying were male.

So what did Maloney have to say about the lack of uteri in the contraception hearings, just moments before she walked out of the proceedings with fellow awesome person Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton?

“What I want to know is, where are the women? I look at this panel, and I don’t see one single individual representing the tens of millions of women across the country who want and need insurance coverage for basic preventative health care services, including family planning.”–The Jane Dough

Really?

Not to be outdone by the laugh a minute Congress, women have mounted their own comedy campaign. A flurry of bills making it difficult to get Viagra and vasectomies have been purposed in various state legislatures. Even a bill to prevent a man from spilling sperm anywhere but inside a woman!

EVERY SPERM HAS A RIGHT (OKLAHOMA): To poke fun a “personhood” bill that give full rights to a zygote, state Sen. Constance Johnson (D) introduced an amendment that would also declare every sperm to be sacred. “However, any action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman’s vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child,” her amendment stated.

CHILDREN DENIED BIRTH BECAUSE OF VASECTOMIES (GEORGIA): State Rep. Yasmin Neal (D) introduced legislation that would limit vasectomies. “Thousands of children are deprived of birth in this state every year because of the lack of state regulation over vasectomies,” Neal explained. Her measure is in response to a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks on the grounds that a fetus can feel pain — a claim disputed by doctors.

MORE HOOPS TO CLEAR FOR VIAGRA (OHIO): In response toGOP Running Mate: The Pill! Ohio’s so-called Heartbeat Bill, which would prevent abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, state Sen. Nina Turner (D) will introduce a bill that would make men jump through hoops, like a psychological screening, before they could obtain Viagra and similar drugs for erectile dysfunction. “All across the country, including in Ohio, I thought since men are certainly paying great attention to women’s health that we should definitely return the favor,” Turner said.

RECTAL EXAMS FOR A VIAGRA PRESCRIPTIONS (VIRGINIA): To protest Virginia’s bill requiring women to receive an ultrasound before an abortion, state Sen. Janet Howell (D) attached an amendment to the bill that would have required men to receive a rectal exam and pass a cardiac stress test before doctors wrote them a prescription for erectile dysfunction medication. “We need some gender equity here,” Howell said. The Virginia Senate rejected her amendment, but both chambers passed the ultrasound requirement after clarifying that women would not be forced to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound.

KNOW THE SIDE EFFECTS OF VIAGRA (ILLINOIS): State Rep. Kelly Cassidy (D) decided to push back against GOP attacks on women’s health by offering an amendment that would require men to watch a “horrific video” about the side effects of Viagra before the received a prescription for the drug. His bill is in response to a measure requiring women to undergo an ultrasound before an abortion. “If we are going to do this, we need to do it in a way that is applied equally,” Cassidy said.

PROTECT ALL SPERM (DELAWARE): Mocking the “personhood” measures, the town council in Wilmington, Delaware approved a satirical resolution “that asks state legislatures and U.S. Congress to enact laws that forbid men from destroying their semen.” The resolution notes that if lawmakers think a female egg has full rights, then they should say the same thing about sperm.

Think Progress

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Bro-Choice
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

Republicans war on women - the female anatomy target zoneOnly in America could this happen. For decades, other countries have seen the error of allowing money and and markets to run their health care and they have moved away from that system. But not here in the US. We ignore all fact and reason, forcing our health care system into a state of permanent collapse. Now the government is on the verge of forcing women to purchase health insurance while allowing others to prevent women from obtaining health care services. How can we even dream of complying with that idea?

Many people have likened the Affordable Care Act to the Swiss Health Care system. That couldn’t be further from the truth. The Swiss do not allow their employers to pick health insurance for the employee, so the workers at St. Jo’s could get health insurance with birth control if they wanted. Though the Swiss system allows private insurance, the Swiss government laid down the law about what minimum benefits constitute “insurance” and defined what constitutes qualified health care. The Swiss also prevent insurers from making a profit on the basic health care plan (which is very extensive). The insurers can only make a profit on perks like guaranteeing a private room or providing coverage for alternative medicine. The American system shirks its responsibility to get tough with the powerful in the health care game, and only focuses on forcing the average citizen to purchase a product—a product that might or might not provide the real benefit of health care.

Republicans war on women – the female anatomy target zoneOur system is quite literally owned by people who have motives other than the health of the population and we are held hostage by those forces. Where else but in health care is it considered reasonable to provide necessary services for just half of the population based on sex? If the Catholic Health Care system is unable or unwilling to care for half of the population in the communities it serves, should it be allowed to continue these restrictions? Should we continue to be held hostage by insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and Religious dogma we do not even subscribe to?

I might point out here that Single Payer insurance alone would not cure this ill. The government must take the same hard line with the powerful that it has taken with the meek.

Or the meek could balk at the government edicts. I might also point out that true Socialized Medicine, the type they have in England, would fix this problem. Socialized Medicine is also how the Indian Health Service, the Veterans Administration and the Active Duty Military are run. Those systems are owned by the American people. They are paid for by our tax dollars. They are ours to control.

The next round of bills to force a real health care solution into our nation might do well to include an attempt to open those hospitals for a buy-in by the American public. Those system would get a welcome influx of cash and the American people could have access to a national system already in place with a decent health care package.

The Campaign

teaball contraceptionIt’s no wonder women approached Obama about shoring up the gross inequities in the system. Now, it appears, Obama might cave to the pressure of the Catholic Church and leave women out in the cold again.

I agree with the majority of women in America. If a health care service is taking government funds, it should provide service for everyone. If an institution is incapable or unwilling to do so, it should be forced to sell its health care assets to the local communities. These hospitals should be cooperatively run and federal funds should be set aside to aid in the transition. At the very least, these institutions should be forced to contract out the needed services.

Many of you laughed at our April Fool’s image of angry women throwing contraceptives at the feet of the President. Now, I want us to do just that. I propose the Pelt the President with the Pill Campaign. Save your, or a friend’s, spent birth control containers and send them to your Congressional leadership and the White House with this letter:

Date

Name

Address (with Zip Code)

Contraception is health care. We demand access to affordable birth control for everyone. Providers that can not provide for 50% of their patients, should not get federal funds.

Signature

If you don’t have any spent pill containers, don’t fret—send a condom. They are still available at the grocery store—at least at the time of this posting. The point is to send some contraceptive device. Why send a contraceptive? Because emails are ineffective at getting attention. Mere letters are also ignored. But sending some symbol of your discontent gets attention.

If you find yourself in Humboldt county, come by my office. We are forbidden from throwing outdated birth control in the trash because it contaminates ground water. Until now, I didn’t know what to do with all those pills.Think contraception

Find your Representative

Find your Senator

President Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

The Choice:

My husband greets me at the door with a chilled glass of white zin and a mushroom cheeseburger.

I smile and sip the wine. “Yeah, it was just that bad.”

“What did you find out?”

“We don’t know where the orders are coming from.”

“What’s the Gynecology Department doing about it?”

“Apparently, the winning game plan is to hope the bishop kicks the bucket soon.”

He snorts and takes a bite of his burger. “What are you going to do about it?”

“The bishop isn’t the only one with strong feelings on this issue.”

“So you’re going to move your surgeries?”

“I already told them my cases are going to Mad River.”

“What did they say to that?”

“They were angry..afraid. They want me to keep my mouth shut about the tubal decision.”

“Powerful people seem to want you to keep your mouth shut all the time. You gonna do it this time?”

I push corn around on my plate.

“I see,” he says. “Your stunt with the TSA cost over three thousand. What’s this going to cost us?”

I look up from my plate. “If I have to leave St. Jo, at least Mad River is closer to the home.”

“Mad River isn’t very big, hardly more than a super clinic. Some of your patients won’t go.”

My bravado has fooled no one. “I know.”

He locks eyes with me. My shoulders tense and I prepare for the Principle over Practicality argument…again. A storm gathers in the silence between us, ready to hails down angry words we will both regret.

His hand extends across the table, palm open.

Stunned, I place my hand in his. His warmth soaks my fingers, draining away my tension.

“That’s my girl,” he whispers.

 

Every Sperm is Sacred

Emergency Alert-OWS Occupies the US. Congress

By: T. P. Alexanders Sunday April 1, 2012 3:48 pm

In an unprecedented move, we are delaying the publication of our regular Anti-capitalist meet-up diary to bring you a special report. Four hours ago, several hundred US citizens and residents, reportedly members of OWS (Occupy Wall Street), occupied both chambers of the United States Congress.

Corporate media sources have refused to report the event until control can be reestablished by authorities. However, according to Al Gazeera, who just started running a live stream an hour ago, the occupiers entered both houses and forced the Senate into the House of Representatives Chamber for a joint session. We can only speculate whether the occupiers used guns to force the Senators into the Chamber or simply took over using the force of their numbers. We understand they dismantled the microphones in the chamber and began a General Assembly using the human microphone.
We are monitoring the demands as the occupiers make them and will report them to you as they come in. At this time, the major demand being discussed is ending the Afghanistan war within thirty days, bringing all the troops home from Iraq, dismantling the US embassy in Iraq and ending sanctions on Iran.

A new demand (or perhaps a friendly amendment) has just been made, asking the group to specify how savings from military appropriations, (47% of the U.S. budget) should be spent. Of the people weighing in on the stack, the greatest number are for Single Payer Healthcare with Universal Childcare, promoted by a small but aggressive group of women. Some people are calling for Reparations for African Americans for slavery. Another group has called for reparations for all past unpaid childcare. It looked like there was going to be a heated exchange until an African American women yelled out,”We need them both.” The person running the stack told her she had to wait her turn and couldn’t just yell things out.

The Single Payer Health Care vs. Childcare discussion resumed. One speaker pointed out, Healthcare takes 17.5 % of our budget and Universal Childcare would take about 20%. With the troops home from the Middle East, we could afford them both with some left over. A graduate from the Harvard School of Business who had recently joined OWS noted universal child-care and universal health care might actually raise the GDP and growth rate with the new jobs it would create. Business efficiency would increase by reducing the stress on parental workers who would use fewer sick days. This speaker was chastised by another speaker for using a capitalist frame to justify a moral societal position.

Entelechy

By: T. P. Alexanders Sunday January 1, 2012 3:39 pm

entelechy
en-TEL-uh-kee\ , noun;
1. A realization or actuality as opposed to a potentiality.
2. In vitalist philosophy, a vital agent or force directing growth and life.

My husband pecks my cheek and heads off through the cacophony of clanging metal, buzzers, and ringing bells that is his playground. We are on the road, and have forgotten to get cash for lunch. It would be an easy crisis to remedy, but it gives him an opportunity to show off his talent. I stand at the edge of the action, unable to banish my ill ease at seeing the money in our pockets put at risk so he can exercises his inexplicable power.

He cruises up and down the rows of noisy machines, looking from side to side. Other patrons sit with their backs to him, focused on their own trials with fate. A Native American woman offers him a drink, but he declines. Instead, he tilts his head, like a spaniel listening to a whistle pitched too high for the human ear. He turns away from her, and takes a seat in front of a one armed bandit. In five pulls, the machine gives up its bounty with the loud clang of coins dropping into the metal tray below the spinning symbols of fruit. He scoops up the riches and stalks another machine. Eight pulls later he has enough for both our meals at the best restaurant in the casino.

The first time he did this, the logical one in the family informed him that he was playing into the casino’s evil plan by deluding himself that he had some sort of gift. The house plays the odds, which clearly can not be altered. He might win here and there, but, over time, they have the better odds, and will always get more money than they give. Now, I have seen him do it so many times, I no longer try to make my case.

As it turned out, science weighed in on the talents of gamblers and handed the logical one her ass in the process. Not only is my husband right to believe that he can sense a gambling machine about to pay out, but part of his talent is probably altering the odds that it will pay with nothing more than the power of his resolve.

So shove that testy white rabbit out of the way, and follow the girl with the apron down the hole. On this day of resolutions, I am taking you on a walk through the Wonderland of science. Today, we peer into the power of intent.

The Gambler:

“We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.”–Howard Phillips Lovecraft, 1926

Reclaiming Our Democracy (Part 2 of 2): Nullification

By: T. P. Alexanders Sunday January 1, 2012 2:38 pm

“Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty.”

– Thomas Jefferson

 

 

 

 

 

What is Government?

Why do we submit to the law?

We can’t run very fast. We have no sharp teeth or claws. Long ago it became obvious that it was in humanity’s self interest to ban together for our mutual security. We each give up a small amount of personal freedom, for the greater good of the whole. That is the basis of the social contract.

As citizens, our responsibility is to uphold the laws of government. The government, in turn, also has obligations. The bare minimum of those obligations are to protect the majority of people from enemies both foreign and domestic. What enemies do we wish to protect ourselves from? At the very least hunger, disease, invasion by hostile forces (external security), and threats to our self-governance (internal security).

So how are we doing in that respect? Lousy.

We all but wiped out hunger in the US shortly after the Kennedy administration (ended 1963), but the government intentionally reintroduced it in the Reagan administration to drive down worker wages. What is left of our health care system is sowing the seeds of its own destruction. Foreign NGO’s have been invited by the Supreme Court to financially manipulate campaigns and thus our government. Internal threats to self-governance are too numerous to recount here, and in any case the Supreme Court has abandoned all pretense that this was a democracy and officially ruled the US a plutocracy.

We are in essence living in a failed state. Just because I am writing about the US, don’t think your country is doing any better. Most of the Western world is in the same boat.

Other articles have detailed the complex road we took to get here. That is not the purpose of this series. This series discusses how we get out.

Specifically, how to tell our government “No!”

 

Is This the Government You had in Mind?

No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.–.Eleanor Roosevelt, ‘This Is My Story,’ 1937

At 5:00 am, on a cold April morning, armed state troopers and U. S. Marshals amass outside Rainbow Acres Farm, Pennsylvania. It is the culmination of a year long sting operation involving undercover agents purchasing contraband from the owner, Dan Allgyer. The payments were mailed to him or left at a drop-off point in Ziploc bags. Mr. Allgyer had the temerity to deliver the illegal substance to the agents across state lines in nearby Maryland, not once, but twenty-three times. Before the day is over, the authorities confiscate Mr. Allgyer’s product and shut down his operation.

In conservative Wisconsin, they take a dim view of such crime. Not only is this substance confiscated but one of the perpetrators is prosecuted for withholding information about his customers.

On the other side of the continent, four law enforcement officers draw their weapons. They burst into an unlocked facility in Venice, California to find seventeen coolers stuffed with contraband. The operation is coordinated with a raid of nearby repeat offender, Sharon Plamer. Twenty agents swarm Palmer’s facility for the third time in eighteen months, confiscating her black-market merchandise.

“I still can’t believe they took our yogurt,” a Rawsome volunteer told the L.A. Times. “There’s a medical-marijuana shop a couple miles away, and they’re raiding us because we’re selling raw dairy products?”

Yes, you read that right…milk. Dan Allgyer is an Amish farmer running community supported agriculture that produces fresh, whole, unpasteurized milk. Some of his customers travel over a hundred miles just to get this product. Sharon Palmer runs a CSA producing raw goat cheese.

The FDA is acting under a new law that provides “farm to table” control of food safety. It allows detentions, access to farm records, mandatory recall authority, and enforcement actions that don’t involve a pesky judge or courtroom. They argue they are protecting us from contaminated foods. This seems rather hard to swallow, given the year spent investigating an Amish farmer saw billions of contaminated eggs, peanut butter and beef consumed in this country with 9 deaths and 22,500 illnesses. Names implemented in the outbreaks included Cargill and Nestles.

Mike Adams with Natural News points out, “The real reason why the FDA opposes raw milk is because Big Dairy opposes raw milk. Just like Big Pharma, Big Dairy has worked very hard behind the scenes to steer FDA policy in its favor. And according to some recent reports, Big Dairy is one of the primary forces trying to eliminate raw milk because it threatens the commercial milk business.”–Dan Vogelsong

The last outbreak from milk was in 1985. The milk in question was pasteurized and approved by the FDA. Critics of the government’s behavior think they are wasting tax payer money conducting sting operations, raids and prosecutions on small farmers making a product that knowledgeable adults want to buy. I agree. So do 10 other state legislatures, that have made it legal to buy and sell raw milk, Pennsylvania and California among them. The FDA sights federal law supremacy in raids on producers in those states.

Is this the federal government you bargained for? Do you feel safer knowing your tax dollars went to raid an Amish farmer? Finding coop members who drink raw milk? When did minor agencies of the federal government get the power to overturn the will of The People of an entire state? Should the federal government be allowed to override the state laws and dictate what people put in their bodies? Would you feel differently if the product I was talking about was marijuana?

 

Checks and Balances:

 

The Tenth Amendment of the Constitution:

The powers not 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.–Wiki

The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.–Wiki

In the Federalist Papers, Madison and Hamilton both argue that the Supremacy Clause was necessary to unite the states and make the government whole. They argue that states carried as much independence as they could give them, without making them sovereign nations onto themselves. The federal government was only “supreme” as it pursued the Constitution and its Amendments, thus striking a balance between these two seemingly conflicting statements.

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the
 federal government are few and defined. Those which are to
 remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."
 -- James Madison, the Federalist Papers, No. 4

The Supreme Court declared for itself the right to interpret the Constitution. In case after case, the Supreme Court, part of the federal government, has favored the Supremacy Clause over the Tenth Amendment.

It is not shocking that given the right to decide which law reigns supreme, the federal government favors its own law over the states on all occasions. But if the federal government (Supreme Court) gets to decided in each instance who gets the balance of power between the state and the federal government, there is no real balance of power. If the state can never say “no,” than neither can the people of that state via referendum. The Supreme Court has interpreted this check and balance out of existence.

Since its invention, the federal government has been claimed more power for itself than the Constitution permits. Lately, this includes regulation of intrastate commerce (Marijuana and Dairy Laws), when and where the Bill of Rights gets enforced (Occupy Wall Street raids, TSA, arrest and detentions, indefinite detention without due process by the President). Even the right to murder an American citizen in an extrajudicial execution. None of these are federal “powers” guaranteed by the Constitution. In fact most of these are expressly forbidden by the Constitution.

No!” in the Constitution:

“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.”– Thomas Jefferson

The Founders of the Constitution did foresee a day when the government was no longer responsive to the majority of its people. They actually wrote legislation to try and guide us out of this dilemma.

The only legitimate course left to reestablish our self-governance at the federal level is to amend the Constitution. This can be done in two ways—both of them doomed to failure.

  1. Congress passes an amendment by a 2/3 vote.
    1. This is unlikely to occur because the vast majority sitting in Congress are there due to campaign contributions from corporations and the rich. We would be asking them to kill the goose that has laid their golden egg.
  1. A Constitutional Convention:
    1. This requires 2/3 of State Legislatures (34 states) to pass a resolution to call for a Convention.
    2. Congress is then forced to call a Convention. There is little guidance about how the citizens who attend such a Convention are chosen. This is the first way a Convention could be undone.
    3. Second, ¾ of states (38) must agree for an Amendment to be passed at the Convention.
    4. Finally, Congress gets their last chance to stop democracy. They do not get to vote on any Amendment the Convention proposes, but they do get to choose how the states are counted. Congress gets to choose between the delegates at the Convention or the State legislatures. State legislatures have been just as corrupted by money as the federal government.
    5. By the way, a Convention has never successfully been called in the United States under the Constitution. It is a risky process. Our initial government was completely rewritten by such a Convention when the delegates were only supposed to fix a few minor issues. A Convention could easily get out of control if it could get any traction at all.

Financial corruption runs the government, making Congress completely unaccountable to the people it governs. This negates our ability to regain power over our government, or even to decline to accept its authority, through federal law. We find ourselves in this peculiar Catch-22: We have lost our self-governance, but are unable to legitimately regain our self-governance without access to any self-governance.

There is no way for The People to veto the federal government. If federal law is allowed to override state law, it also overrides popularly elected law. It overrides The People and democracy. That is so easy to see in Arizona where a popular campaign finance resolution, passed by the majority of people, was overruled in favor of the rich by 5 Supreme Court Justices, who declared that money was free speech.

Bringing the law back under the control of the state, brings it back under the control of the referendum. It allows a veto power by The People. It also allows The Majority to create law.

In short, successful and desirable change to the Constitution that reinstates our self-governance is unlikely to happen in our current situation. If we are to claim the power of self-governance for ourselves once again, we will have to do one of two things:

    • Violent, bloody revolution. (Not my favorite idea.)
    • Think outside the box, and use the power of the many to rewrite the law. (A better alternative from my point of view.)

The Tenth Amendment, Then:

“…the several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government”–Thomas Jefferson,  Principles of 1798

The war between federal and state power started the second the Constitution was drafted. In the “Principles of ’98” Jefferson and Madison reacted to federal overreach by the Alien and Sedition Acts. This act made it a crime to publish “false, scandalous, and malicious writing” against the government or certain officials. The two statesmen argued that the law was a clear violation of the First Amendment and need not be heeded by the states. Nullification of this law passed in both the states where it was argued.

Jefferson argued that the Tenth Amendment was the superior law.

“the Government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.”

Jefferson argued vehemently that states had the right and the duty not to obey unconstitutional law, even if passed by the federal government.

“whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force”

He further argued that if the federal government was to decide the limits of its own power, no limits would ever be discovered and the government would grow increasingly powerful.

The Tenth Amendment, Now:

"Who will govern the governors? There is only one force in the
 nation that can be depended upon to keep the government pure
 and the governors honest, and that is the people themselves.
 They alone, if well informed, are capable of preventing the
 corruption of power, and of restoring the nation to its
 rightful course if it should go astray. They alone are the
 safest depository of the ultimate powers of government"
 -- Thomas Jefferson

With no realistic way to change the law of the land due to control by monied forces, can we actually claim to be a self governing people? If the way to change our government is blocked by the government, a self governing people would simply scoff and change the rules. A people mentally harness into the belief that they must obey, even if what they obey is not in their self interest, can not claim to be self governing in reality.

What I am discussing here is a tool. A sharp knife can be used to prepare dinner, or to murder a person. It just depends on the purpose of the user. Like a sharp knife, states rights should be used as necessary and for the greater good. The tool itself is morally neutral.

If Nullification became common place, detractors argue, the law of the country would lack uniformity. States would be free to make foolish and abusive choices.

All true. That is the problem with democracy. It gives you the freedom to make your own mistakes. But if The People are prevented from making their own mistakes, it does not mean the rule of law will automatically be smart and just. Rule by the rich is likely to be more flawed than rule by the majority.

“The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.” — Thomas Jefferson

States rights are always associated with slavery and the South battling against civil rights. The Tenth Amendment has been used for as many staunchly conservative ideas as progressive ones. One of the first to use the States Rights argument were the abolitionists who argued that they could nullify the Supreme Court’s decision to force escaped slaves to be returned to their owners as property. That story is almost never told in the history books.

Now, people of color face more economic hardship, unemployment, and prison time than whites. Jim Crow laws are coming back to suppress the black vote. The single most reliable indicator of whether a person will get the death penalty is if he is black and the victim is white. At the point where you can prove the state is taking a man’s life because of skin color, I think you can safely say protecting civil rights at the federal level has failed. Fearing states rights because they might lead to civil rights abuse does not seem rational under the circumstances.

States that make their own decisions are also be free to experience the consequences of those choices.

In “Alabama agriculture officials are stumped over how to keep farms operating now that the state’s draconian new immigration law chased away all of the low paid (however illegal) labor.”–AP

If the states wrest back their power, the US would become fifty separate experiments in democracy. The citizens of various states would be allowed to look at the variety of experiences and pressure their legislatures or write referendums to adopt what worked and abandon what did not. If the right is correct, the blue states will prosper. If progressives are right about how the world actually works, people will rally to bring our ideas to their states.

In the last post, I talked about a form of self-governance that mirrors the lowly millet seed: The same bill downloaded from a website, and run in state referendums simultaneously to achieve what we cannot accomplish at the national level.

The Tenthers are waging such a campaign. So far fourteen states have passed their nonbinding resolution. Six states have introduced legally binding State Sovereignty Bills: “The constitutional amendment to establish state grand juries, one called the Federal Action Review Commission, to hear citizen complaints about the constitutionality of the actions of federal officials or agents, and if it finds them unconstitutional, to authorize and direct non-cooperation with such actions by state officials, agents, and contractors; and the second kind to investigate official misconduct and public administration.”

10th Amendment Resolution

The following is a sample 10th Amendment House Concurrent Resolution approved by the Tenth Amendment Center. Activists, we encourage you to send this to your state senators and representatives – and ask them to introduce this resolution in your state.

A RESOLUTION affirming the sovereignty of the People of the State of _________.

WHEREAS, in the American system, sovereignty is defined as final authority, and the People, not government, are sovereign; and

WHEREAS, the people of the State of __________ are not united with the People of the other forty-nine states that comprise the United States of America on a principle of unlimited submission to their federal government; and

WHEREAS, all power not delegated by the people to government is retained; and

WHEREAS, the People of the several States comprising the United States of America created the federal government to be their agent for certain enumerated purposes only; and

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: “The powers not 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”; and

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people to the federal government in the Constitution of the United States, and also that which is necessary and proper to carry into execution those enumerated powers; with the rest being left to state governments or the people themselves; and

WHEREAS, powers, too numerous to list for the purposes of this resolution, have been exercised, past and present, by federal administrations, under the leadership of both Democrats and Republicans, which infringe on the sovereignty of the people of this state, and may further violate the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, when powers are assumed by the federal government which have not been delegated to it by the People, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy; that without this remedy, the People of this State would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whoever might exercise this right of judgment for them.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE  _____ OF THE _______ GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ______, WITH THE SENATE CONCURRING, that we hereby affirm the sovereignty of the People of the State of _______ under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise delegated to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and, be it further

RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall serve as a Notice and Demand to the federal government to cease and desist any and all activities outside the scope of their constitutionally-delegated powers; and, it be further

RESOLVED, that a committee of conference be appointed by this legislature, which shall have as its charge to recommend and propose legislation which would have the effect of nullifying specific federal laws and regulations which are outside the scope of the powers delegated by the People to the federal government in the Constitution; and, be it further

RESOLVED, that a committee of correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship as currently exists;  that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly those enumerated in the Constitution of the United States, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States; and, be it further

RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker and the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, and to each member of this State’s Congressional delegation with the request that this resolution be officially entered in the Congressional Record as a memorial to the Congress of the United States of America.

 

Your Turn:

I know you’re itching to comment on this one, so go ahead. Tell me how you would rewrite the bill to make it better. Or tell me why it won’t work at all. Tell me your idea to recapture our ability to self-govern.

I also know this post was heavy with US law and history. Other Western nations are similarly constructed and parallels can be drawn. I welcome commentary from those with knowledge of other nation’s law about this subject.

Reclaiming Our Democracy (Part I of II): Miliary Democracy

By: T. P. Alexanders Sunday December 18, 2011 9:39 pm

“Duck House”:

I sit on the floor of the Duck House with thirty others, brainstorming for the January action. Neither men nor women dominate the group. We are young, and surprisingly old. Counter-culture and conservatively clad. We question whether it is nobler to seek permits or just show up unannounced. We speak of banners, flyers and street theater—anything to educate the public about our goal.

Even when I still lived in Arizona, I had heard of this place. Democracy Unlimited Humboldt County (DUHC) or “Duck” was on the forefront of the war against corporate power. In 1998, they helped pass a ballot initiative establishing the Democracy and Corporations standing committee in Arcata’s city council here in California.

The Committee’s primary functions are: to research and present to the Council options for controlling the growth of “pattern restaurants” in the community; to cooperate with other communities working on socially responsible investing and procurement policies; to make recommendations to the Council, and/or with the Council’s approval, provide educational opportunities to promote “fair trade”; to inform citizens of corporations with negative social and environmental impact; and to provide advice on ways to foster sustained locally-owned businesses, publicly or locally owned services and worker-owned cooperatives and collectives.–City of Arcata

The committee was hailed by Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, and Jim Hightower. Ralph Nader commented, “I look forward to Arcata being a luminous star in the rising crescendo of democracy in our country.”

Embolden by this success, they passed Measure T in 2004. It forbid nonlocal corporations from contributing to local political campaigns. Two corporations immediately challenged the initiative as unconstitutional. Before the case could be decided by the courts, Humboldt’s Board of Supervisors succumbed to corporate pressure and declared this popularly elected law nullified.

DUHC learned from this experience. They won’t be going it alone, this time. They are but one small seed of democracy, but they are amassing with others to change the political landscape in America. They have joined Move to Amend in a miliary campaign, and this time their aim is not a city ordinance in some far off town on the edge of America, but changing the highest law in the land.

Millet Seeds:

The small, replicated, have overwhelming power.

Consider the humble millet seed: small and bland looking. Completely outclassed by the avocado or mango pit, or even the none-too-flashy pumpkin seed. Toss a few in an open field and, over time, they take over with sheer proliferative force. Even an avocado sapling must tremble before the power of the lowly millet seed.

Marijuana advocates, and same-sex marriage organizations recognize this power. Regardless how you feel about these hot button issues, you can’t help notice the changes in our political climate. Organizations seeking change to our economic and political world could learn a thing or two from their slow, plodding, but relentless progress. Their advocates could not have achieved such success with the more direct route of lobbying Congress. Instead, their proponents utilized the concepts of miliary democracy. They took their issue to The People in state initiatives. Once one state said yes, another and then another was enlisted. Slowly, these smaller laws are turning a national tide, despite long odds.

Why Does it Work Against Consolidated Power?

The powerful in our world are very organized and hierarchical. This has served them well, particularly with the masses divided by nation-states, race, religion, political beliefs, etc. But there is a downside to such organization. It is incapable of coping with unconnected groups organized around a single issue. WikiLeaks, Anonymous and modern terrorists exploit this weakness. There is essentially no heart or head to these organizations for the powerful to strike. Destroy one nidus of activity, and the rest are unaffected. Disallow a site on one server and it pops up on others. Capture one person and others move to take that person’s place. Governments are unable to attack all points at once with “shock and awe”. The attempt is like attacking a body of water with a sword.

Miliary campaigns have similar advantages. Strike down one state law, and laws in other states are unaffected. In the state where the law was struck down, another referendum can be run next election cycle. Relentless in their pursuit, they slowly change the political scene in the US. The dogma of the central government is challenged. People learn about these subjects and see them in a new light.

A Successful Miliary Campaign:

Congress, the White House and the Supreme Court have consolidated American power to the federal level. Right now, the three branches of the federal government are willing to betray the majority of Americans for a powerful minority. The fact that most of us don’t want corporations to be “people”, campaigns to be financed by those with the most money, or bank bailouts for the few with austerity for the many does not matter to the Federal Government. If The People are so openly ignored, how can we make our voice heard?

Advocates for marijuana and same sex marriage faced a similar problem. They were universally denigrated and no legal body took them seriously. To overcome such long odds against establishing legitimacy, they set their goals on a far horizon.

The first referendums were for education. Advocates with a sympathetic and articulate voice addressed the media. It is hard to watch the police arrest an obviously ill person in a wheelchair and feel that justice had been served. The video of these events touched a diverse group of people.

Marijuana advocates realized that the far left and the far right have many of the same desires, but different methods for achieving them. Their success in speaking to both sides of the aisle was illustrated recently when Barney Frank and Ron Paul cosigned a marijuana bill.

A successful miliary campaign, therefore, should have a message that is sympathetic to a large group of people. It should unite the masses instead of divide them.

It should first seek to educate and drive sympathy for the cause. It should utilize already existent and diverse groups. These groups can be networked around the issue at hand, but if one group does not achieve success, it should not effect the other groups. They must work independently.

A single website should serve as the glue between the groups. A broad based bill available for download needs to be available on the site. Important areas of such a bill can be left blank or have drop down menus so the bill can be personalized to a state, county, city. This allows local groups to make the bill their own, while providing a baseline direction for the campaign.

The website should also provide instructions for getting a referendum or initiative on the ballot. Educational materials should be easily downloaded from the site. The better sites also provide podcasts, or video webinars that keep groups connected and informed about the progress the issue is making. A forum for organizers to support each others efforts, brainstorm and solve problems should also be included.

Initiatives should be run in as many states (counties, cities) as possible in the same election cycle. This splits the efforts of opposing forces. The opposition cannot be all places at once. Each successfully passed referendum should support other similar laws in other states and provide some support for campaigns in states where the bill has yet to pass. This provides a network of connection and makes the law stronger with each bill that becomes law.

Possible Uses for Miliary Bills:

Health Care Bill

I have the most experience with this example, because I actually wrote a miliary health care bill. I wrote the bill to be used at the county level after discovering that states are forbidden from forming voluntary health care insurance. However, the bill could easily be converted to a state level.

The bill sets up a commission to administer nonprofit, county-run health care to be purchased voluntarily. The county would be free to use all cost containment methods at its disposal, and would not need to advertise. The bill is a mail merge Word document to make it easy for anyone to use. A person downloading the document only needs to fill in the blanks. Any counties passing this bill would be networked with other counties passing the bill to form a national health care system.

You can read a short overview of the bill here. Unfortunately, working alone, I was unable to get the bill to go anywhere.

Creating Cooperative Friendly States

We have talked extensively in this discussion group about the advantages of a cooperative employment. Creating a coop friendly environment in the US might include tax breaks, state loans, or small business advice and assistance. Enlisting the education system to teach cooperative concepts in community college or even demanding that cooperativism be taught in high school econ classes. These could all be written into a miliary bill and spread through the US.

Creating a State Run Bank

Most states rely on property taxes. As property values dropped, the states were starved of revenue. Education, roads, and all the things that states do for their citizens went begging for funds.

North Dakota is weathering the financial crisis fairly well. They have low unemployment and a stable economy. No one in North Dakota is talking austerity, partially because they have their own bank.

The citizens of North Dakota put their savings in their state bank, and the state uses it to capitalize new businesses. The state bank loans money to its citizens and the interest pays for education and roads. (Long time readers of this blog are probably having a sense of déjà vu. Sounds like a coopertive bank doesn’t it?)

What if all fifty states had a bank? What if they had one by next election cycle? What if the bank was mandated to create jobs? What if the mandate was to create a stable economy or an egalitarian economy? We have already seen that giving a bank a mission other than greed can create outstanding and surprising results.

Undoing Corporate Personhood

Move to Amend started their campaign shortly after the Supreme Court decided in Citizens United that corporations could spend as much as they liked on campaign contributions. The Court felt corporations were people, just like you and me, and treating them as less than human was prejudice. Since some corporations have vast resources, much larger than any human person could amass, this gives large multinationals the ability to purchase our government.

Move to Amend lobbied Congress to change the Constitution and revoke corporate “personhood”. They were met with blank stares from the very people who were getting financially fat from multinational contributions to their campaigns.

So Move to Amend took their campaign to the streets. They are mounting a miliary campaign to pass as many city and county ordinances against corporate personhood as possible, to educate the public and put pressure on Congress. [Click the link for an example of their resolution.] Their website is exemplary of the sort of organization needed to run such a campaign.

They are launching their campaign with Occupy the Court on January 20th, the second anniversary of the Citizens United decision. This action will take place across the country in order to educate local citizens about the issue of corporate money corrupting our democracy. All district courts and the Supreme Court will be “occupied”.

Constitutional Conventions

Though I applaud Move to Amend’s efforts and their creativity, I doubt they will succeed. They are asking the very people making huge sums of money off corporate corruption to kill the goose laying the golden eggs. Another, less well known, group is trying a more direct approach. Call a Convention is going directly to the states and The People to amend the Constitution.

The Convention they wish to call is the same as the one that originally drafted the Constitution. This is one of the two methods for changing the Constitution actually outlined in the Constitution. Each state sends representatives to the Convention. The Convention can amend the Constitution in any way they agree upon.

While I agree that the Constitution needs a serious overhaul, calling a Convention is risky business. Once the Convention is in place, they can literally do anything they want to change the government of the United States. There are no prohibitions on corrupting such a Convention with money.

If they are successful, another miliary bill might be useful at setting parameters for such an endeavor, and giving the members of a Convention hard instruction about what the people will and will not accept.

Mutiny

In truth, the hurdles to convincing Congress to change the Constitution or calling a Constitutional Convention are so high it is unlikely to occur in our current situation. Congress has the ability to quash any decision made by a Convention and even if it is the overwhelming will of The People, Congress has proven disinterested in the will of The People.

Two can play that game. The People can send a clear message that Congress and the Supreme Court can also be ignored.

Mutiny has a negative connotation, but understand that mutiny is a about refusing to take orders from a higher authority. In the military, where hierarchy is critical to getting young people to waste their lives for the powerful, mutiny is frowned upon. But if you live in a society that claims to be self-governing, mutiny is a completely rational and acceptable course of action, when you are ordered to do something obviously against your self-interest.

The Supreme Court has declared the United States a plutocracy (one dollar=one vote). A mutiny bill puts democracy (one person=one vote) back into clear focus in the state where it passes. It asks, should the majority be subservient to any minority—even Congress or the Supreme Court?

Currently courts use the Fourteenth Amendment to declare corporations are people. The problem is that corporations end up with more power than actual people. Human people,who vote to restrain a corporation, find that the federal government will prevent them from doing so. If a community votes to disallow gas-fracking or sludge dumping in its neighborhood, a judge will explain that they have no right to collectively make that decision because the Fourteenth Amendments does not allow the interests of one group (humans) to override the interests of another (corporate “people”).

The men who drafted the Constitution never intended the federal government or corporations to reign supreme within the state. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments guaranteed the rights of the state and the people.

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.–Wiki

The powers not 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.–Wiki

The Supreme Court overturned the Bill of Rights by reading a different clause of the Constitution as evidence that federal law always trumps state law, removing this check and balance from our legal system. The political right has mainly owned this issue but the Tenth Amendment Center is a non partisan group working to restore the rights of the state.

A Right to Self Governance Bill would declare any measure passed by 66% of the people would supersede any federal law or judicial decision. The governor would be instructed to enforce the state measure OVER the federal law. A Governor refusing to do so, would face a mandated re-election in 30 days.

Once your state has declared that its citizens have free will, limits to free will magically disappear. Corporations can be declared non-persons within your state. This allows human people to place restrictions upon them.

More on this important concept in Part II of this series on December 18th.

Dismantling the Totalitarian State

The Bush administration’s surveillance without oversight laws were strengthened by President Obama. If you don’t want to have the government with a right to tap your phone, or look into your Google searches without court supervision, then give your state the power to imprison or heavily fine those caught doing it. That might not completely stop the federal government, but it would make Google and AT&T think twice before they cooperated.

Similar laws could make it illegal to arrest people or transport a person across state lines without due process, making it harder to disappear people into indefinite detention. Many bills are before states now declare the state will not cooperate with federal agents to enforce The Patriot Act, The Real ID Act, intrastate commerce regulations or immigration laws that the state sees as unjust laws.

Printing State Currency

The Federal Government is financially starving the states. This disempowers the states to the point they cannot help their citizens. Education and roads go begging while Exxon and banks get tax bailouts and the military gulps down an ever increasing proportion of our GDP.

What if your state printed money? State money could be accepted to pay state taxes. (currently illegal under federal law.) A state could set up its own bank and distribute wealth to industries as it saw fit—like creating more cooperatives, making the state’s real economy more resilient.

Tax Revolt

Here is a truly radical idea that should marry the far left to the far right. Most of us do not want our money going to endless war, banks that are gambling with the money and welfare for oil companies that poison our water. But what recourse do we have? If you do not pay your personal income tax, you risk huge fines and imprisonment. This makes it impossible for a single person to have any say in where their tax dollars are spent.

But what if you, personally, were not at risk. What if the entire state of California decided to collect personal income tax from its citizens and then keep the percentage usually allotted to the state (Federal incentives and assistance, etc) while passing on the rest to the federal government in one lump sum. For one thing, that would be a more efficient system than sending money from every person in every paycheck to the federal government, just so they could send a portion of it back to the state.

In this system, withholding income tax could actually mean something. California could vote to keep the amount usually spent on a war. Or its percentage of the amount loaned to big banks in the bail out. Or the tax incentives and write-offs allotted to Exxon and Shell. Sends shivers down your back, doesn’t it?

Your Turn

This is by no means an exhaustive list. I would love to hear your ideas about what we could achieve with this tool.

Join a Miliary Campaign:

Move to Amend

Democracy Unlimited Humboldt County

Reclaim Democracy

Tenth Amendment Center

POCLAD

Help with Your Campaign:

What kind of referendum can you run in your state?

Passing a Local Referendum

Tips to Get it Passed

Creating Spin