WHAT? THE 28TH AMENDMENT?
Jon Christian Ryter
December 9, 2009
There's something new floating around the Internet that caught my eye. Of course, there's always something new floating around the Internet that catches my eye. In this case, it was the 28th Amendment. My first reaction was: Huh? There is no 28th Amendment. That's not to say there haven't been several proposed 28th Amendments since the 27th was ratified on May 7, 1992. But none of them struck a chord with the American people like the latest one. I don't know who wrote it, but we should hire him (or her) to write all of our amendments. This one really has class, and if it was ratified, you can bet that every Congressman and Senator would read every bill they voted on because they would directly impact them. And, its a safe bet that they would write fewer bills and enact even less of them.
The proposed 28th Amendment reads as follows: "Congress shall make no laws that apply to all Citizens of the United States that do not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and Congress shall make no laws that apply to the Senators and Representatives that do not apply equally to all Citizens of the United States."
Once the American people—who have never paid enough attention to what the bipartisan thieves and communist economic rapists in the nation's Capitol are doing—realize that if the political whores they elected but failed to keep on a leash successfully enact a national healthcare system that forces all Americans to participate, all the politicians and the world's wealthiest individuals will be exempt. That should give any American cause for concern. When healthcare is rationed or simply denied to America's seniors and those with AIDS or other catastrophic illnesses who have no hope of complete recovery but who aren't quite ready to roll over and die, the nation's elite—young or old—will move to the front of the waiting line and not only will they receive the best healthcare in the world, but they will receive it quickly and without any wait.
The latest citizen-proposed 28th Amendment might get about 2 dozen to 3 dozen votes in the House of Representatives (all from conservative or libertarian Republicans) and maybe 7 Senators. But, if the people of the United States were voting on it, 100% of the voters in both major parties, and 100% of all the voters in all of the minor parties would vote to ratify it. I don't think anyone can tell you who authored this. I searched a ton a Internet references searching for Resolution-Zero, but couldn't find it. The earliest date I found was Nov. 5. I expect this one was birthed in an email and as bloggers began talking about it, their readers sent it cascading down the information superhighway. However, since most sites update to today's date daily, what appears under today's date may actually have been written three months ago or more.
People need to understand that while the US House of Representatives and the United States Senate would not pass this constitutional resolution if their political lives depended on it—oops, it may. That's why the Founding Fathers provided two ways to amend the Constitution. The first way is through a Congressional resolution passed by 2/3rds of both houses—separately. (In other words, there are 435 Congressmen. That means 290 Representatives must vote "yea." In the Senate, 67 of the 100 Senators must vote "yea" to send an Amendment Resolution to the States. They can't have 300 Congressmen and 57 Senators or 289 Congressmen and 68 Senators voting "yea," and send the resolution to the States for ratification. Then, 3/4th of the States must ratify it.
The people's representatives (the House) and the States' representatives (the Senate) must each concur separately. Of course, suggesting that the Senate represents the States today is a joke since the fraudulent ratification of the 17th Amendment robbed the States of their voice in the national government. The Senate specifically represents the special interest groups on K Street in Washington, DC whose clients are Corporate America and a ton of government-funded communist leaning environmentalist groups who receive government grants—our tax dollars—which are then used by those anti-American ecoalarmists to destroy the economy of this country through green schemes like global warming that have now been proven to be an outright fraud on the part of ecoalarmists like former Clinton vice president Al Gore, Jr. and several communist globalists who fabricated data to make it appear that man was responsible for spiking temperatures that would soon melt the polar caps when in fact we are entering a major cooling phase. The Earth is actually cooler today than it was in 1300 A.D. when the population of the world was only a fraction of what it is today.
The "People" (who are generally dumber than two mimes without hands) are too inept to wisely vote their own best interests. The communist-left spinmeisters positioned Barack Obama as a celebrity (wise move since he certainly isn't an intellect), and the village idiots lined up in droves to vote for him. What votes they did not possess to actually elect him came from ACORN and MoveOn.org. When asked, they insisted they voted for "change." Any change, they said, was better than what they had.
Let's face it. As America is quickly learning, its beyond stupid to spend all your money on "Door Two" when you haven't got a clue what's behind it. Nobody thought to ask Barack Obama just what kind of change he had in mind. Had they been listening, he spent a whole year telling them. His best line in the campaign was this one: "We live in the greatest country in the world. Help me change it." And, of course, the far left did just that. The financial crisis that drove the Republicans from power was contrived by the Fed. (Gee, this sounds like 1929 all over again.) The Fed issued a directive called "Mark to Market" to every bank and mortgage company in the United States ordering them to reappraise the value of the collateral on all home mortgage loans by reducing the value of the collateral to the current market value of the homes they had financed. Once the banks complied, on paper, their asset-to-debt ratios were so out of whack that the Fed declared many of them were insolvent. Of course, they were not. It was a paper trick to fabricate a crisis that would allow the globalists to enact legislation to provide the money Corporate America needed to bail out the banks and corporations funding the economic development of the emerging nations.
That said, I often wonder if the people can be trusted with the power to amend the Constitution. Frankly, I don't think the people have the collective strength or the common sense to call a Convention of the States to propose and enact a Constitutional amendment and not have the convention taken over by the money barons who have their own agenda which has nothing to do with giving the People equal rights. That was clearly evidenced when the JP Morgan-Rockefeller bankers engineered the Bank Panic of 1906 in order to create a financial crisis severe enough to force the passage and ratification of three Constitutional amendments, and then when the States were removed from the equation of power in Washington, legislate a central bank that would be owned by the bankers themselves and not the People of the United States. The three amendments that were proposed by Congress in 1907 were: an amendment to create a federal income tax; an amendment to take the election of US Senators away from the State legislatures and place that task in the hands of citizen voters who always vote for Door Two; and finally, what would have been the 18th Amendment if the bankers could have pushed it through Congress—an amendment to remove our currency from the gold standard.
Efforts to form a Convention of the States were proposed by various groups (all of them initiated by the money barons—through politicians owned by them—under the guise of limiting the size and scope of government) but none succeeded because, for once, the American people were smart enough to realize that they would convert it into a Constitutional Convention and radically rewrite the Constitution of the United States to [a] allow sitting Congressmen and Senators be part of the President's cabinet as they are in Europe) and [b] deftly exchange our Bill of Rights for the UN's Covenant on Human Rights which the federal courts have been surreptitiously implementing by incorporating international court decisions into the US Code to change inherent rights into gratuities of the State. Articles 13 and 14 of the UN Covenant on Human Rights have now replaced sections one and two of the First Amendment.
Over the decades since the founding of this nation, the politicians we elect have increasingly convinced themselves that, by election, they should be endowed with a special status in society at the expense of the taxpayers. If the Congressmen and Senators in his day comported themselves in the same manner as today's Senators and Congressmen, President Andy Jackson would likely have challenged every anti-American far left liberal in Congress to a duel at Foggy Bottom along the Potomac.
What makes the United States the most unique government in the world is that its Constitution makes all of its citizens equal. The poorest man on Skid Row is inherently as equal in the eyes of the law as the most powerful Senator on Capitol Hill. Yet, the man on the street has said nothing as politicians abused the public trust by voting upon themselves one gratuity after another, from pay raises that made part-time jobs for citizen legislators into lifetime careers to perks that would be investigated by the Justice Department if they were endowed by the Boards of publicly-owned corporations on themselves.
Then, in unparalleled arrogance, with 32 million Americans losing their jobs because of the political misdeeds on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, Congress graciously received their automatic $4,700 cost-of-living [COLA] raise (bringing their incomes to $174 thousand as the taxpayers vexed over how to meet their monthly obligations. Not only was there not going to be a raise for them this year, all of them worried about losing their job as Barack Obama delivered on his promise to change America. None of them realized the change behind Door Two was to be transported through time back to the Great Depression.
From 1789 to 1855, citizen members of Congress were paid a $6 per diem while Congress was in session. If Congress was in session for 200 days, they would be reimbursed $1,200 for the year except during the War of 1812 when they were paid an annual stipend of $1,500. In 1855 Congress voted themselves a permanent income of $3,000. From 1855 to 1968 Congress voted themselves raises 22 times. By 1968 when Richard Nixon was elected, Congressmen earned $30 thousand and presidents earned $100 thousand. Today, Congressmen earn $174 thousand and presidents earn $400 thousand. Wouldn't it be nice if you could simply stick your hand in your neighbor's pockets and take whatever you want when you needed a raise? Yes, the proposed 28th Amendment makes sense.
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
The question is, can the people pressure two-thirds of the State legislatures to vote on precisely the same proposed 28th Amendment: "Congress shall make no laws that apply to all Citizens of the United States that do not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and Congress shall make no laws that apply to the Senators and Representatives that do not apply equally to all Citizens of the United States." And then convince 34 States to enact that resolution, word-for-word, without change in wording or punctuation, and submit it to the Secretary of State to resubmit to all 50 States without a Constitutional Convention? And, finally, can enough voters exert enough pressure their State legislators to ratify it? If so, then the People have to power and the means to repeal both the 16th and 17th Amendments. Think about that as you forward this article to your email lists.