Dedicated to the
Sovereignty of
Missourians

- Click here for our audio downloadpage.
Click here for the vaccine issue page.
Click here for PDFs of the MO 1875 Con Con

SAPA (Second Amendment Preservation Act)
Veto Override Resource Page (click here)

  Live interactive database of all ballot initiatives.

Governor Nixon's Veto of the Second Amendment Preservation Act
Profanes the Independence Day Holiday

.T

Missouri First Home

July 9 12, 2013

Ironically, Governor Nixon chose July 5th to veto the Missouri Second Amendment Preservation Act (HB 436).

The day after we celebrated the 237th anniversary of our Declaration to King George III that the People are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”, the governor became an obstacle to the General Assembly, who are living up to their OATH to defend those rights – the same oath the Governor took.

The Declaration of Independence was precipitated, among other things, by the king's effort to disarm the Colonists. The “shot heard around the world” was fired by – or at – British troops sent to confiscate the arms stored at Concord.

After several grueling years of war, the newly declared sovereign states beat back one tyrant, but they were afraid that the new federal government they were creating might some day also try to disarm and subjugate the People. Some states refused to ratify the proposed constitution without clear, unambiguous statements securing their unalienable rights and limiting the power of the federal government – they demanded a Bill of Rights in addition to language that limited that government to a small set of defined powers.

The full meaning of the Second and Tenth Amendments in the Bill of Rights have been ignored too long. A proper understanding supports the General Assembly's decision to pass the Second Amendment Preservation Act.

Here are the plain and simple facts that politicians, lawyers and judges have been obfuscating – facts the People need to take back if there's any hope of restoring the Founder's dream:

  1. The federal government possesses only the powers specifically granted it in the Constitution and nowhere does the Constitution delegate power to Congress to regulate gun ownership in the states.
  2. The Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights was aimed directly at the federal government, and it explicitly prohibits the federal government from infringing on the right to keep and bear arms.
  3. As sort of a punctuation mark to the new Constitution, the Tenth Amendment topped off the Bill of Rights, making it clear, in no uncertain terms, that the States or the People have ALL powers not delegated to the feds.

“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.” (10th Amendment)

In the spirit and authority of both the Declaration and the Constitution, the Second Amendment Preservation Act is the State of Missouri asserting the powers “reserved” to the States and the People. The Act does not attempt to tell other states what they should do, but is does avow that Missourians' rights will be defended in their home state.

By passing the Act, our state legislators were doing what the Missouri Constitution calls “the principal office of government”, that is, defending the liberty of the People – in this case, from unconstitutional federal edicts. For the state to do less, Article I, Section 2 says, is to “fail in its chief design”.

Governor Nixon's administration's release of the private information of 163,000 CCW holders to the Social Security Administration is reason to believe he is hostile to the People's Second Amendment Rights. Now his veto of the Second Amendment Preservation Act fuels those concerns.

The Governor's claim that the Act violates the Supremacy Clause (U.S. Const. Art. VI) rings hollow and an examination of that clause, and what the Founders said about it, defies his claim.

The Supremacy Clause, as the text says itself, only applies when a federal law is made “in pursuance” of the Constitution. As Alexander Hamilton explained at New York’s ratifying convention, “the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding”. In Federalist 33, referring to “laws” NOT made “in pursuance” of the Constitution, Hamilton said, “These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such.”

The governor seems committed to the preposterous notion that only the federal government, itself, can determine when an edict of Congress is “in pursuance” of the Constitution, but that would leave the federal government free to determine the extent of its own power and the states that created the federal government with no say. That's a dangerous doctrine, fit for the subjects of despots, but not free citizens.

Grounded in the principles of the Declaration, the doctrines of interposition and nullification as legal and political tools to fight unconstitutional acts of government is part of the heritage of a free people. The colonists successfully used it against the king's illegal and oppressive edicts, like the Navigation Acts and the Stamp Act.

And the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798 & 1799 saved an unknown number of newspaper editors in those two states from fines and prison when they nullified the the unconstitutional federal Sedition Act, which outlawed criticizing the federal government. Besides protecting newspaper men, one happy effect of the Kentucky Resolution was the election of its author, Thomas Jefferson, to president in 1800.

Later, in an era when the U.S. Supreme Court said in the Dred Scott Opinion that it was legal to relegate black men, women and children to sub-human status, several states defended the liberty of accused run-a-way slaves by nullifying the unconstitutional Fugitive Slave Act. In fact, their nullification of the Fugitive Slave Act was so effective that South Carolina listed it in their "declaration of causes" for seceding from the Union.

“An increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them.”

In increasing numbers, Americans are dusting off the pre-revisionist history books and are waking up to an understanding of the heritage that's been stolen from them. A May 13, 2013 Rasmussen Poll found that a majority of “mainstream voters” now support the use of nullification against unconstitutional federal acts.

The People are once again understanding the meaning of the Missouri Constitution's Article I, Section 1, which says, “That all political power is vested in and derived from the people; that all government of right originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.”

Fortunately for the People, the General Assembly will likely override Governor Nixon's veto. Unfortunately for the governor, he will go down in history as one who missed the opportunity to prove his campaign claims that he supports gun rights. It's too bad he didn't follow the lead of the governor's of Kansas and Alaska, who both recently signed similar legislation.

###

Good Resources

Nullification for Lawyers. More in depth on Marbury.
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/03/24/nullification-for-lawyers/

In depth look at Fugitive Slave Act nullification
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/03/06/personal-liberty-laws-a-nullification-history-lesson/

This links highlights some of the folks charged under the Sedition Act. Names and brief synopsis,
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/madison/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Sedition_Act_cases.pdf

The Supremacy Clause

“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” (emphasis added) (U.S. Constitution, Article VI)


Hamilton on the Supremacy Clause

“I maintain that the word supreme imports no more than this — that the Constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, cannot be controlled or defeated by any other law. The acts of the United States, therefore, will be absolutely obligatory as to all the proper objects and powers of the general govennment...but the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding(emphasis added) (Alexander Hamilton, at New York’s ratifying convention).

 

 



2013 MO Legislative Session
U
nfinished Business

It has been a good session for liberty,
but there's still more work to do the last week of session...

Missouri First Home

May 12, 2013,

Here are the most important bills to watch and act on this last week of session:

SJR 14: Constitutional Amendment greatly strengthening the right to keep and bear arms. This is actually the most important gun bill of the session.

Status: Waiting for the House General Laws Committee to report the bill out (Has been voted "do pass" by that committee.) This measure only needs one more vote by the House to be placed on the ballot for voters to approve. We don't want any amendments, otherwise it will have to be voted on by the Senate again, and that will probably kill it.

Action: Call your state representative and ask them to tell House leadership that this bill is a must-pass. Bring it to the floor for a vote without ANY amendments.

 

SB 210: Requires the Dept. of Education to hold public meetings to answer questions about the intrusive Common Core Standards. If fully implemented, the Common Core Standards program will track hundreds of pieces of personal information about public school children in a national database.

Status: Hearing scheduled for Monday

Committee: Elementary and Secondary Education
Chair: Cookson, Steve - (Rep-153)
Vice Chair: Barnes, Jay-(Rep-60)
Date: Monday, May 13, 2013
Time: 12:00 PM
Location: House Hearing Room 6
Note:
Executive session may be held on any matter referred to the committee.

Public Hearings will be conducted for the following bills:
SS SCS SB 210 -- NO TITLE
Sponsor: Lamping, John T (Sen-24)
Requires the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to hold public meetings in each congressional district on the Common Core State Standards

Action: Attend hearing, if you can, fill out a witness form if you can't make it. (See the message about Common Core Standards from former state Rep. Melissa Leach at the end of this column.)

Witness Form - We will hand deliver your witness form and also make your testimony available online for the committee to read. Please be sure to make some brief comments..

Generic Witness Form

 

SB 252: Reins in the Department of Revenue; Protects personal data; Moves CCW permitting process to Sheriffs.:

Status: House calendar Senate Bills for 3rd Reading; Has passed the Senate, but has also been amended in the House, so it needs a vote in the House and then another in the Senate; May still be amended on the House floor before passage.;

Action: This bill does a lot to address the Department of Revenue scandal, but still lacks an important provision to hold directors of state agencies accountable. Ask your state representative to support an amendment to put HB 886 on SB 252. That will give the legislature the power to remove directors and deputy directors of state agencies, like the DoR, with a process similar to impeachment.

 

HB 787: This is the House version of SB 252. It also reins in the Department of Revenue; Protects personal data; Moves CCW permitting process to Sheriffs.:

Status: This bill is not quite as far along as SB 252. It has been voted "do pass" in the senate committee, but has not been placed on the calendar.

Action: This bill also does a lot to address the Department of Revenue scandal, but still lacks an important provision to hold directors of state agencies accountable. Ask your state senator to support an amendment to put HB 886 on HB 787. That will give the legislature the power to remove directors and deputy directors of state agencies, like the DoR, with a process similar to impeachment.

As always, thanks for taking your stand for liberty!

For liberty,

- Ron

An Important Message About Common Core Standards From Former Rep. Melissa Leach

Dear Patriot Friend,
 
Senate Bill 210 needs your immediate action!
 
Fill out and submit this online witness form TODAY to show your support of SB210!
 
 
SB 210 requires Commissioner of Education Chris Nicastro to hold public meetings in all 8 congressional districts.  She will be required to report ALL costs to the state and school districts and report facts about the data collection associated with implementing Common Core State Standards.
 
Fill out and submit this online witness form TODAY to show your support of SB210!
 
 
Sample Testimony language:
 

This is to support SB 210 which holds DESE accountable by reporting to the public:  the costs to the state and to school districts for the implementation of Common Core State Standards in MO; and, describe any data that shall be collected as a result of the implementation of the Common Core State Standards, and any governmental entity, quasi-governmental entity, or consortium that collects data or receives data as a result of the implementation of the Common Core State Standards.

Commissioner Nicastro and the State Board of Education are public servants who should provide transparent information for the public before fundamentally transforming public education with standards copyrighted to private, Washington-based, trade organizations (the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers), and joining an assessment consortium that, in effect, diminishes state sovereignty by reducing control of Missouri's student testing to one vote in a collective of over 25 states.

I also support that no additional amendments will be made to SB210 either in committee or on the floor of the House during debate.

You don’t need to write this extensively about it in the Testimony section, but you should write something even if it’s just, “I support SB210 without House committee or floor amendments.”
 
 
DESE IS USING YOUR TAX DOLLARS TO WORK AGAINST YOU!
 

Below (in italics) is an e-mail that the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education sent out on Friday, May 10, to people on its TAXPAYER FUNDED OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS LIST and sent it from its mo.gov address encouraging recipients to sign a petition in support of the Common Core State Standards – that is, against Senate Bill 210.

From: DESE Communications <communications@dese.mo.gov>
Date: May 10, 2013, 3:01:17 PM CDT
To: "'
dese-bulletin@lists.mo.gov'" <dese-bulletin@lists.mo.gov>
Subject: Petition to Support the Common Core State Standard

On Monday, May 13, the House Education Committee will discuss the Common Core State Standards in a hearing. We need to accurately express the support for these Standards in Missouri.

Please show your support of the Common Core State Standards in Missouri by signing this online petition:
<http://www.change.org/petitions/state-of-missouri-support-the-common-core-state-standards-2>

Feel free to pass along this link to other supporters of the Standards.

Thank you,

Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Communications | 573.751.3469 | dese.mo.gov
 
The Department communications system should not be used for political purposes, that is, it should not be used as a lever against those who do not agree with the Department’s actions.
 
DESE's ABUSE OF INFLUENCE and YOUR TAX DOLLARS makes it all the more important for YOU to complete a witness form BEFORE 8 AM on MONDAY, May 13, when the House Education Committee meets consider SB 210.
 
The goal is 1,000 witness forms!
 
You can access the witness form and submit it online at:
Help keep YOUR state government accountable to its citizens.

p.s. The Republican National Committee has passed an official resolution opposing Common Core

 

 

Witness forms needed for SB 210 (Common Core) by Monday morning!

Witness Form - SB 210 will force the Dept. of Education to disclose the real effects of the new Common Core Standards program they intend to have fully implemented in the fall of 2014. That information will empower the legislature to act accordingly next spring.

Generic Witness Form:

 

 

 

The Supremacy Clause

“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” (emphasis added) (U.S. Constitution, Article VI)


Hamilton on the Supremacy Clause

“I maintain that the word supreme imports no more than this — that the Constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, cannot be controlled or defeated by any other law. The acts of the United States, therefore, will be absolutely obligatory as to all the proper objects and powers of the general govennment...but the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding(emphasis added) (Alexander Hamilton, at New York’s ratifying convention).

 

 


 

UPDATE! On the evening of May 8, the Missouri House finally agreed to and passed the Missouri Second Amendment Preservation Act by a vote of 116 to 39.

The next step is the Governor's signature. More details later, but for now thanks for everyone who helped!!

 

Second Amendment Preservation Act
Passes the full Senate 28 to 4!

Hopefully one more step -- the Senate added two amendments,
so the last step is for the House to vote to accept those changes.

Missouri First Home


May 2, 2013,

There's more to this story than we can go into right now, but suffice it to say that the most difficult part of this process, getting a passing vote from the Senate, is behind us.

Technically, the next step is for the Senate to formally ask the House to accept their version of the bill. If the House does, and we're confident they will, the House needs to take one more vote to accept the finished product. The last time they voted on this bill it passed 115 to 41.

Three things happened to the bill while the Senate had it:

An amendment added to the original HB 436 by the House which imposed mandatory penalties was removed. Here's the removed amendment.

Two amendments were added on the Senate floor.

The first was offered by Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal as follows:

(9) The General Assembly of the state of Missouri strongly promotes responsible gun ownership, including parental supervision of minors in the proper use, storage, and ownership of all firearms, the prompt reporting of stolen firearms, and the proper enforcement of all state gun laws;
(10) The General Assembly of the state of Missouri hereby condemns any unlawful transfer of firearms and the use of any firearm in any criminal or unlawful activity.”

The other amendment was offered by Senator Brad Lager. It reads:

“571.067. No county, municipality, or other governmental body, or an agent of a county, municipality, or other governmental body, may participate in any program in which individuals are given a thing of value in exchange for surrendering a firearm to the county, municipality, or other governmental body unless:
(1) The county, municipality, or governmental body has adopted a resolution, ordinance, or rule authorizing the participation of the county, municipality, or governmental body, or participation by an agent of the county, municipality, or governmental body, in such a program; and
(2) The resolution, ordinance, or rule enacted pursuant to this section provides that any firearm received shall be offered for sale or trade to a licensed firearms dealer. The proceeds from any sale or gains from trade shall be the property of the county, municipality, or governmental body. Any proceeds collected under this subdivision shall be deposited with the municipality, county, or governmental body unless the proceeds are collected by a sheriff, in which case the proceeds shall be deposited in the county sheriff ’s revolving fund under section 50.535. Any firearm remaining in the possession of the county, municipality, or governmental body after the firearm has been offered for sale or trade to at least two licensed firearms dealers may be destroyed.”;

As you can see, the Senate changes do no harm to the underlying bill.

Please stay tuned...

For liberty,

- Ron

Meet the Sponsors

HB 436
Doug Fuburk
Rep. Doug Funderburk

SB 325
Brian Nieves
Sen. Brian Nieves

The Supremacy Clause

“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” (emphasis added) (U.S. Constitution, Article VI)


Hamilton on the Supremacy Clause

“I maintain that the word supreme imports no more than this — that the Constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, cannot be controlled or defeated by any other law. The acts of the United States, therefore, will be absolutely obligatory as to all the proper objects and powers of the general govennment...but the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding(emphasis added) (Alexander Hamilton, at New York’s ratifying convention).

 

 



Second Amendment Preservation Act
Passes the Senate Committee Vote 4 yes to 1 no

The next step is for Sen. Tom Dempsey (pro tem of the Senate)
to place it on the calendar.

Missouri First Home

April 25, 2013,

Thank you to all who filled out a witness form for the Senate hearing.  Your participation is truly making a difference!

General Laws chairman, Sen. Brian Nieves, scheduled this special hearing and expedited the process by holding an executive session on the bill at the same hearing.

They voted to pass the bill on to the full Senate by a vote of 4 to 1 (a couple of senators were not present).

The next step for this bill is to be placed on the Senate calendar by president pro tem of the Senate, Tom Dempsey.   Sen. Dempsey was quick to assign it to the General Laws committee, so we expect him to do the same for the next step.

Once on the calendar, it will be up to majority floor leader, Sen. Ron Richard, to bring it to the floor for debate and "perfection" by the whole senate.  After that, the senate will have one more up or down vote.  Sen. Richard will need to allow it enough time to overcome opposition and potential filibuster.

The last step will be hammering out any differences between the language in the bill as it passed the House versus what the Senate passed.

For liberty,

- Ron

Meet the Sponsors

HB 436
Doug Fuburk
Rep. Doug Funderburk

SB 325
Brian Nieves
Sen. Brian Nieves

The Supremacy Clause

“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” (emphasis added) (U.S. Constitution, Article VI)


Hamilton on the Supremacy Clause

“I maintain that the word supreme imports no more than this — that the Constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, cannot be controlled or defeated by any other law. The acts of the United States, therefore, will be absolutely obligatory as to all the proper objects and powers of the general government...but the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding(emphasis added) (Alexander Hamilton, at New York’s ratifying convention).

 

 


Second Amendment Preservation Act
Senate Hearing Scheduled
Wednesday, April 24 at 2:00 pm

Fill out Witness Forms Now!

HB 436 passed the House 115 to 41.
Sponsor: Rep. Doug Funderburk

Missouri First Home

April 23, 2013

Witnesses / Witness Forms needed for Senate Hearing

Having passed the House of Representative with a resounding veto-proof majority of 115 to 41, HB 436 now goes to the Senate.

Good Video report on passage of HB 436.

After being assigned to committee, the next step is another public hearing. That hearing is now scheduled. As we did in the House, we need to make a loud and unmistakable statement about the People's desire to pass this bill asap!

This hearing is a special hearing called by the committee chair, Sen. Brian Nieves. There will be very little time for testimony, but just being at the hearing makes a strong statement.

If you can't make it to the hearing, please fill out a witness form.

Witness Form - I will hand deliver your witness form and also make your testimony available online for the committee to read.

Generic Witness Form: Witness form link for HB 436

 

Details about HB 436 & SB 325

Since the 10th Amendment makes it clear that all powers not granted to the federal government are reserved to the states and the People, the regulation of the ownership of arms is a state, not a federal matter.

That applies to ALL such regulation.

We must demand from our legislators no less than the strongest, most principled stand they can take to defend our right to keep and bear arms!

Rep. Doug Funderburk and Sen. Brian Nieves' "Second Amendment Preservation Act" is the strongest and most principled protection of the right to keep and bear arms in the nation!.

Notice that it utilizes the words of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison to explain Missouri's authority to nullify unconstitutional federal edicts within her borders. Including this language is essential to the success of the bill. It also specifically lists the types of things we will not put up with, and that's what gives state officials the "cover" they need to enforce the bill.

The New American article about HB 436.

For Liberty,

- Ron

Meet the Sponsors

HB 436
Doug Fuburk
Rep. Doug Funderburk

SB 325
Brian Nieves
Sen. Brian Nieves

The Supremacy Clause

“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” (emphasis added) (U.S. Constitution, Article VI)


Hamilton on the Supremacy Clause

“I maintain that the word supreme imports no more than this — that the Constitution, and laws made in pursuance thereof, cannot be controlled or defeated by any other law. The acts of the United States, therefore, will be absolutely obligatory as to all the proper objects and powers of the general government...but the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain sphere, and when they depart from this sphere, they are no longer supreme or binding(emphasis added) (Alexander Hamilton, at New York’s ratifying convention).

 

 



Missouri Second Amendment Preservation Act
"perfected" in the House!


HB 436 is the strongest protection of the
right to keep and bear arms in the entire nation, and
received the first of two approvals required in the House!

VOTE 117 to 39

Sponsor: Rep. Doug Funderburk

Missouri First Home

April 3, 2013

For any bill to become law, it must first receive a "perfection" vote and then a "3rd read" vote in both the House and the Senate -- 4 votes total.* HB 436, the Missouri Second Amendment Preservation Act, has passed the first of those four tests by a vote of 117 to 39.

The next step, probably Thursday, will send the bill to the Senate, where it needs a hearing and committee vote before going to the full Senate.

The Senate will be a tougher fight, so we need to stay vigilant!

GUN RIGHTS RALLY THURSDAY, APRIL 18 -- 10:00 a.m. to Noon

Come to the rally at the Missouri Capitol and you will probably get to watch the House pass HB 436!

Listen to great speakers and pass out the I Support Missouri's Second Amendment Preservation Act posters!

For liberty,

- Ron

* There are also committee votes and there could be more vote by the full House and Senate, if the bill receives more amendments.

Download and Post this sign everywhere!

HB 436 & SB 325
SAPA Poster
2nd Amendment Preservation Act
signs in jpg & pdf


Meet the Sponsor

HB 436
Rep. Funderburk
Rep. Doug Funderburk

 



Bill Empowers Legislature to
Remove Department Heads

Fill out Witness Forms Now!

HB 886 allows the legislature to fire department heads
when they break the law or otherwise undermine
the liberty of the People!

Sponsor: Rep. Kurt Bahr

Missouri First Home

April 12, 2013

By now, you probably know quite a bit about Missouri government agencies playing loose and free with your personal information – including firearms related data. As the Senate investigation proceeds, the situation seems to be going from bad to worse.

Previously, we learned that the Department of Revenue was illegally complying with the intrusive federal REAL ID Act and installing new equipment that would upload your personal data to a 3rd party which is being monitored by Homeland Security when you get your driver's or CCW license.

Now the Senate has discovered that at least twice the Missouri Highway Patrol has sent the entire list of CCW holders names and addresses to a federal agency, breaking more than one Missouri law in the process.

The deputy director of the Missouri Department of Public Safety, under which the Highway Patrol functions, denies any wrongdoing and says they would do it again.

Here are a couple of the latest stories:

http://www.missourinet.com/2013/04/12/dps-official-nothing-illegal-about-releasing-ccw-permit-list/

http://www.semissourian.com/story/1958457.html

Both the House and Senate are livid. Sen. Kurt Schaefer will be conducting hearings around the state to get citizen input and Speaker Tim Jones is planning a fly-around the state to raise awareness of the situation.

Additionally, legislation is advancing that will make it clear in no uncertain terms that state departments must protect our personal data.

There's one huge problem, though. The General Assembly has very little recourse when rogue department directors refuse to follow the law. The Governor is the only one who can fire them.

Simply threatening to cut budgets is not enough.

That's where HB 886 (Rep. Kurt Bahr) comes in.

This bill empowers the legislature to remove agency directors and deputy-directors who they feel are misusing their power. Similar to the traditional impeachment process, a removal under HB 886 originates in the House and requires the Senate to agree that it's in the best interest of the People to remove the Governor's appointee.

This process is both constitutional and in keeping with the foundational principles of checks and balances. Article VII Sec. 4 provides the authority for HB 866:

“Except as provided in this constitution, all officers not subject to impeachment shall be subject to removal from office in the manner and for the causes provided by law.”

HB 866 is the “law” that will provide for such removal, and that's good news for anyone concerned about their Second Amendment rights or the security of their personal data.

Even better news is the fact that both House and Senate leadership have made it clear that HB 886 is high priority. Even though this bill was filed right before the cutoff date, it has been fast-tracked and will get a hearing this Monday.

That's where you come in. Please either plan to attend the hearing, or fill out a witness form for us to print and deliver to the committee on your behalf. Please be sure to leave comments on the form – we are providing an easy way for legislators to read them.

This bill is on the fast track now, and your input will help keep it that way!

For liberty,

- Ron
 

Committee: Government Oversight and Accountability
Chair: Barnes, Jay - (Rep-60)
Vice Chair: Parkinson, Mark-(Rep-105)
Date: Monday, April 15, 2013
Time: 12:00 PM
Location: House Hearing Room 7
Note:
Executive session may be held on any matter referred to the committee.

Public Hearings will be conducted for the following bills:
HB 886 -- NOTITLE
Sponsor: Bahr, Kurt (Rep-102)
Authorizes the General Assembly to remove any department director or deputy director if it determines that the removal is necessary for the betterment of the public service
-

Witness Form - I will hand deliver your witness form and also make your testimony available online for the committee to read.

Generic Witness Form: Witness form link for HB 886

Hearing at Noon Monday

Witness Form Link

For HB 886 - Removal of Public Officers

Generic Witness Form:
Witness form link for HB 886

 

MO Const.
Article VII Sec. 4

“Except as provided in this constitution, all officers not subject to impeachment shall be subject to removal from office in the manner and for the causes provided by law.”

 

 

Meet the Sponsor

HJR 19
Rep. Kurt Bahr
Rep. Kurt Bahr

 

 

 


Missouri Senate Passes SJR 14!
On to the House...

Missouri First Home

April 4, 2013

Missouri Senate senator Kurt Schaefer continues to lead the way where defending the right to keep and bear arms is concerned.

Thursday SJR 14 was passed by the entire senate with a vote of 29 to 2 (3 were absent).

Here's the vote:

YEAS—Senators
Brown Cunningham Curls Dempsey Dixon Emery Holsman Kehoe Kraus Lager Lamping LeVota Libla Munzlinger Nasheed Nieves Parson Pearce Richard Romine Rupp Sater Schaaf Schaefer
Schmitt Sifton Silvey Wallingford Wasson — 29 total

NAYS—Senators
Chappelle-Nadal Keaveny — 2 total

Absent—Senators
Justus Walsh — 2 total

Absent with leave—Senator
McKenna — 1 total

SJR 14 has also been "first read" in the House, so the next step is for it to be second read and assigned to a committee which will hold another public hearing, vote on it and, hopefully, report it to the whole House, which in turn has to vote on it twice.  Then it bypasses the governor and goes straight to the ballot for voter's approval.

Although the Missouri Senate has been doing a good job advancing gun rights bills, the House has been painfully slow getting anything done.  Hopefully, they will not let SJR 14 bogg down like HB 436 has.

Recall that Second Amendment Preservation Act (HB 436 and its companion in the Senate, SB 325) is the key to defending us against federal infringement of our gun rights.  SJR 14 is, in trun, key to defending the Second Amendment Preservation Act.

We must continue to press for all three of these acts.  Please don't let up!

For Liberty,

- Ron

 


Kurt Schaefer
Sen. Kurt Schaefer

 

 

HB 436 & SB 325
SAPA Poster
2nd Amendment Preservation Act
poster in jpg & pdf

Missouri Senate Subpoenas
MO Dept. of Revenue
Over REAL-ID

Missouri First Home

March 26, 2013

The Missouri Senate, particularly, Sen. Kurt Schaefer, is not going to settle for the evasive answers given by the Director and Deputy Director of the Missouri Dept. of Revenue at an earlier hearing.

At that hearing, Sen. Schaefer caught the DoR in a lie about their acceptance of grants from the federal Department of Homeland Security.  Listen to this 5 minute exchange he had with the directors.  YouTube Audio

Going far beyond a Freedom of Information Request, the Senate has now subpoenaed the department, demanding detailed documentation under the force of law.   Here's the subpoena

Legislators have no greater responsibility than to protect our core liberties!

For Liberty,

- Ron

 


Kurt Schaefer
Sen. Kurt Schaefer


It's time for a full-blown push to pass
real Second Amendment protections!

Missouri First Home

The Missouri General Assembly is back in session Monday, March 25 after a week long spring break.
Are you ready to rumble?

March 16, 2013

Reality Check...

There are only 2 months left in the Missouri General Assembly's legislative session. Every passing day decreases the chances any bill has to pass and our state legislature is on vacation this week. We must work while they are on break!.

The new attacks on our right to keep and bear arms are moving faster in Congress than the protection bills are moving in the Missouri legislature. The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee has passed bills to require universal background checks AND an assault weapon ban. Pundits say those bills won't pass the full Senate or the House, but federal and state agencies are implementing programs that are eroding the right to keep and bear arms piece by piece. The actions of the Veterans Administration and the Missouri Dept. of Revenue's collaboration with the Dept. of Homeland Security are prime examples.

Meanwhile, the only thing even through the committee process in Missouri is SJR 14, which is good, but only part of the solution.

If we don't step up our effort we will lose!

Our goal MUST be to pass either HB 436 or SB 325 and put it on the governor's desk within the next 30 days. Why 30 days? Missouri law requires the governor to either sign, veto, or let a bill become law without his signature within 15 days of receiving it from the legislature if there are more than 15 days left in the session. If he vetoes it, the legislature can, then, override the veto during the remainder of the session.

If legislators won't commit to this time-table we must seriously question their commitment to protecting our Right to Keep and Bear Arms! Waiting any longer may very well kill our opportunity!

Here are three things you can do RIGHT NOW:

  1. Download, print and post the "I support Missouri's Second Amendment Preservation Act" poster. (Right sidebar) Especially post it where your state rep and senator will see it, like political gatherings and meeting. Do it this week, while they are back home in their district.

  2. Send or hand deliver both your rep and senator a copy of the poster and ask them to post it in their office. Tell them that you expect them to deliver either HB 436 or SB 325 to the governor by April 17th, or you will lose all confidence in their commitment to protect our right to Keep and Bear Arms. Tell them you want results, not just effort, and if they can't produce results to get out of the way and let others who will protect our rights take their office.

  3. Do everything you can to publicize the controversy over the MO Dept.of Revenue collaboration with the Dept. of Homeland Security to steal our privacy, including reporting your concealed carry license status and biometric facial recognition data.

    Missouri legislators are rightly upset about this and they view it as an attack on the 2nd Amendment. We need to keep it a top priority issue.

    For more on this issue:
    - Lawsuit filed in Stoddard County & Article about that case
    - Audio YouTube of the interrogation of the MO Dept.of Revenue
    - Bill Hennesy on why we should be mad at the Dept. of Revenue
    - Missouri Family Network explanation of the issue
    - DHS Feb. 2012 REAL ID Progress Report
    - DHS Aug. 2012 Report to Congress

    Write letters to your local paper, expressing your concern and dismay that the MO DoR would be pursuing REAL ID thus breaking the law, compromising our privacy, and playing into the hands of the radical gun control agenda.

    Also, call or write your state rep and senator, demanding that they act on this right away. They can punish the DoR with budget reductions if they don't back down; they can pass laws to protect us while the legality of what DoR is doing is going through the legal process; and they can pass new laws to protect our privacy if the old ones aren't strong enough.

Please act on this. We can't lose this one!

For liberty,

- Ron

Tenth Amendment Center article about SB 325 & HB 436.

Download and Post this sign everywhere!

HB 436 & SB 325
SAPA Poster
2nd Amendment Preservation Act
signs in jpg & pdf


About Nullification

Interview With A Zombie (8 min. YouTube featuring Prof. Thomas Woods and The Zombie talking about nullification.)

Professor John Eidsmoe Explains "Interposition" (In support of Alabama Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore's nullification of a federal order to remove the Ten Commandment Monument from the state Supreme Court building.

Professor Thomas Woods explains nullification at the Kansas City Nullify Now conference last summer. (39 min. YouTube)

Joshua Glover's Story: Nullification and Resistance to Slavery in 1850s America

Nullification: Answering the Objections by Thomas Woods

The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

Virginia Resolution of 1798

James Madison's Report of 1800 -- a defense of the Virginia Resolution


UPDATE! Another great hearing. We turned in well over 800 witness forms and had great in-person testimony. The next step is for Senator Nieves to schedule an executive session so his committee can pass the bill to the whole Senate.

March 8, 2013

Now we're moving!

The Second Amendment Preservation Act is moving on a parallel course in both the Missouri House and Senate.  That will speed up the process considerably.   HB 436 is expected to be voted "do pass" by the House General Laws Committee next week.

And the hearing for SB 325 is Tuesday afternoon at 3:00.

This is a new hearing in front of a new committee, so we need a new witness form from you.  (PLEASE!  Only fill out one per bill.)

Why are these witness forms important?  There are literally hundreds of bills under consideration at the Capitol in Jefferson City.  Leadership in the House and Senate have to choose which ones get some of the limited time they have, and a large public outcry for a bill elevates its importance.

I'll guarantee that it get's their attention when you plop 1000+ witness forms on the table at a hearing!
 

Committee: General Laws, Senator Brian Nieves, Chairman
Date:  Tuesday, March 12
Time:  3:00 p.m.
Room:  SCR 1
SB 325 - Nieves
Declares the General Assembly's position on the authority of the federal government, declares as invalid certain federal gun laws, and prohibits the enforcement of such laws

 

Witness Form - I will hand deliver your witness form and also make your testimony available online for the committee to read.

Generic Witness Form:(hearing completed)

 

Details about HB 436 & SB 325

Since the 10th Amendment makes it clear that all powers not granted to the federal government are reserved to the states and the People, the regulation of the ownership of arms is a state, not a federal matter.

That applies to ALL such regulation.

We must demand from our legislators no less than the strongest, most principled stand they can take to defend our right to keep and bear arms!

Rep. Doug Funderburk and Sen. Brian Nieves' "Second Amendment Preservation Act" is the strongest and most principled protection of the right to keep and bear arms in the nation!.

Notice that it utilizes the words of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison to explain Missouri's authority to nullify unconstitutional federal edicts within her borders. Including this language is essential to the success of the bill. It also specifically lists the types of things we will not put up with, and that's what gives state officials the "cover" they need to enforce the bill.

Tenth Amendment Center article about SB 325 & HB 436.

 

Meet the Sponsors

HB 436
Doug Funderburk
Rep. Doug Funderburk

SB 325
Brian Nieves
Sen. Brian Nieves

About Nullification

Interview With A Zombie (8 min. YouTube featuring Prof. Thomas Woods and The Zombie talking about nullification.)

Professor John Eidsmoe Explains "Interposition" (In support of Alabama Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore's nullification of a federal order to remove the Ten Commandment Monument from the state Supreme Court building.

Professor Thomas Woods explains nullification at the Kansas City Nullify Now conference last summer. (39 min. YouTube)

Joshua Glover's Story: Nullification and Resistance to Slavery in 1850s America

Nullification: Answering the Objections by Thomas Woods

The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

Virginia Resolution of 1798

James Madison's Report of 1800 -- a defense of the Virginia Resolution


UPDATE! We had a great hearing. We gave the committee over 1230 witness forms -- they were impressed. There were several witnesses testifying in person in favor of HB 436 and ZERO against.!

Second Amendment Preservation Act -- Hearing Now Scheduled for 5:00 pm Wednesday

Committee:
General Laws

Chair: Jones, Caleb - (Rep-50) Vice Chair: Richardson, Todd-(Rep-152)
Date: Wednesday, March 06, 2013
Time:
5 PM
Location: House Hearing Room 4
Note:
Executive session may be held on any matter referred to the committee.

HB 436 -- SECOND AMENDMENT PRESERVATION ACT
Sponsor: Funderburk, Doug (Rep-103)
Co-Sponsor: Jones, Timothy (Rep-110)
Establishes the Second Amendment Preservation Act which rejects all federal acts that infringe on a Missouri citizens' rights under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution

 

This hearing will be in addition to the regularly scheduled Tuesday hearing. If you haven't done so already, fill out your witness form for HB 436.

New Threat to CCW rights and privacy! The Missouri Department of Revenue is using new equipment that will "share" your personal information -- probably including information about people with conceal carry permits -- with Homeland Security.


March 4, 2013

Have you seen the latest reason we need the Second Amendment Preservation Act?

The Federal Government Wants to Know Who Owns Guns

Once again we're learning that Congress doesn't have to pass a new law and the president doesn't even have to sign an executive order to undermine your 2nd Amendment rights.

Using the existing Federal Real ID Act, the federal government has begun collecting information on gun owners. The "enhanced driver's license" the Real ID Act calls for includes technology like Radio Frequency ID chips (RFID), that can be read when the holder is merely in the proximity of the scanner. Also included is a Machine Readable Zone (MRZ), which looks like a speckled barcode, but can hold tremendous amounts of information. (Take a look at your current driver's license.)

Reports are that the Missouri Department of Revenue has taken a grant to set up the new technology in local license offices across the state.


Law Suit Filed Against MODOR Today
Temporary Restraining Order Signed

A legal petition requesting a temporary restraining order on the implementation was filed today in Stoddard County and Judge Rob Mayer promptly signed it.

Click here to read the legal petition.

This petition is the first step to quashing the DOR's new privacy destroying plan. There's no doubt that the case will work its way up the legal system. We must insist that the courts respect Missouri's sovereign right to protect her people's privacy and right to keep and bear arms.


2009 Missouri Law Protects Us From Real ID

The basis of the lawsuit and subsequent restraining order includes a 2009 law in which Missouri nullified the intrusive federal Real ID Act. Judge Mayer understands the purpose of that law because he was in the General Assembly when it was passed.

A few lawmakers back in 2009 had the foresight to protect us from Real ID, and we need legislators to likewise step up to the plate and protect us from the new federal efforts that infringe on our 2nd Amendment rights!

There's only one reason the feds want to know who owns guns -- so they can take them away with the time is "right".

In Missouri, HB 436 and it's companion Senate bill, SB 325, are the only bills that will fully protect us from federal gun grabs.

What you can do:

  1. Right NOW, call your state Rep and Senator. Tell them you've heard about the Department of Revenue's plan to undermine your privacy and it's effect on the right to keep and bear arms. Tell them to withhold funds from the department until they retract the plan. House Member List -- Senate Member List
  2. While you're on the phone with them, tell your Rep and Senator that you expect them to support HB 436 & SB325 -- the bills that totally forbids the enforcement of federal gun control in Missouri.
  3. HB 436 will eventually get a hearing -- please fill out the online witness form if you haven't already. We'll let you know when the hearing is scheduled.
  4. Pass on this email or another with the generic witness form link to as many liberty loving people as you can.

 

 

 

Details about HB 436 & SB 325

Since the 10th Amendment makes it clear that all powers not granted to the federal government are reserved to the states and the People, the regulation of the ownership of arms is a state, not a federal matter.

That applies to ALL such regulation.

We must demand from our legislators no less than the strongest, most principled stand they can take to defend our right to keep and bear arms!

Rep. Doug Funderburk and Sen. Brian Nieves' "Second Amendment Preservation Act" is the strongest and most principled protection of the right to keep and bear arms in the nation!.

Notice that it utilizes the words of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison to explain Missouri's authority to nullify unconstitutional federal edicts within her borders. Including this language is essential to the success of the bill. It also specifically lists the types of things we will not put up with, and that's what gives state officials the "cover" they need to enforce the bill.

Tenth Amendment Center article about HB 436.

For Liberty,

- Ron

Meet the Sponsors

HB 436
Doug Funderburk
Rep. Doug Funderburk

SB 325
Brian Nieves
Sen. Brian Nieves

About Nullification

Interview With A Zombie (8 min. YouTube featuring Prof. Thomas Woods and The Zombie talking about nullification.)

Professor John Eidsmoe Explains "Interposition" (In support of Alabama Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore's nullification of a federal order to remove the Ten Commandment Monument from the state Supreme Court building.

Professor Thomas Woods explains nullification at the Kansas City Nullify Now conference last summer. (39 min. YouTube)

Joshua Glover's Story: Nullification and Resistance to Slavery in 1850s America

Nullification: Answering the Objections by Thomas Woods

The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

Virginia Resolution of 1798

James Madison's Report of 1800 -- a defense of the Virginia Resolution


February 23, 2013

Have you seen the latest reason we need the Second Amendment Preservation Act?

Veterans Receive Letters From VA Prohibiting
Ownership or Purchase of Firearms

Enable Images to view

Congress doesn't have to pass a new law. The president doesn't even have to sign an executive order. Under existing law the Veteran's Administration can make a policy change that triggers a clause already in the Brady gun control act and strip veterans of their right to keep and bear arms. Read this story and this one.

It's clearer than ever, they won't be satisfied to just ban "assault rifles", they won't stop until every citizen has been disarmed! The states must each rise to the defense of their people. Some Missouri Reps and Senators are doing just that -- and you can help.

In Missouri, HB 436 and it's companion Senate bill, SB 325, are the only bills that will protect our veterans from the sort of infringements described above.

Either this coming Tuesday or the following Tuesday HB 436, the Second Amendment Preservation Act, will have a public hearing in the House General Laws Committee. This committee is predisposed to support this bill, but we need to send a message of strong support that will resonate throughout the Capitol.

 

 

Details about HB 436 & SB 325

Since the 10th Amendment makes it clear that all powers not granted to the federal government are reserved to the states and the People, the regulation of the ownership of arms is a state, not a federal matter.

That applies to ALL such regulation.

We must demand from our legislators no less than the strongest, most principled stand they can take to defend our right to keep and bear arms!

Rep. Doug Funderburk and Sen. Brian Nieves' "Second Amendment Preservation Act" is the strongest and most principled protection of the right to keep and bear arms in the nation!.

Notice that it utilizes the words of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison to explain Missouri's authority to nullify unconstitutional federal edicts within her borders. Including this language is essential to the success of the bill. It also specifically lists the types of things we will not put up with, and that's what gives state officials the "cover" they need to enforce the bill.

Tenth Amendment Center article about HB 436.

What you can do:

  1. Right NOW, either plan to attend the hearing for HB 436 (time to be announced), or fill out the online witness form..
  2. Pass on this email or another with the generic witness form link to as many liberty loving people as you can.
  3. If you have any personal contact with your rep or senator ask them to commit to supporting these bills.

 

About Nullification

Interview With A Zombie (8 min. YouTube featuring Prof. Thomas Woods and The Zombie talking about nullification.)

Professor John Eidsmoe Explains "Interposition" (In support of Alabama Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore's nullification of a federal order to remove the Ten Commandment Monument from the state Supreme Court building.

Professor Thomas Woods explains nullification at the Kansas City Nullify Now conference last summer. (39 min. YouTube)

Joshua Glover's Story: Nullification and Resistance to Slavery in 1850s America

Nullification: Answering the Objections by Thomas Woods

The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

Virginia Resolution of 1798

James Madison's Report of 1800 -- a defense of the Virginia Resolution


February 15, 2013

The statists are getting a lot of media attention with their liberty-stealing, gun control bills, but the only legislation actually moving in the Missouri General Assembly will protect your right to keep and bear arms.

Two types of measures are moving at the state house:

  1. A constitutional amendment designed to create legal tension between a state-defined "inalienable" constitutional right and mere federal statutes which undermine that right. SJR 14 will put that amendment on the ballot for the People to vote on. (More details below.)

  2. The Second Amendment Preservation Act, which follows the example of Jefferson and Madison when they fought the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. HB 436 and SB 325 have been filed in the House and Senate, respectively. Based on sound constitutional principles, this bill completely nullifies all federal gun control measures, leaving the regulation of weapons within Missouri's borders to Missourians.

HB 436 and SB 325 will get hearings as early as February 28th, but a public hearing is already scheduled for SJR 14 NEXT WEEK.

Please plan to attend the hearing or fill out an online witness form, which we will print and hand deliver with hundreds of others to the Senate General Laws committee.

Witness Form Link for SJR 14 (Constitutional Amendment)

Generic Witness Form: Click for Witness Form

Hearing for SJR 14
Committee: General Laws, Senator Brian Nieves, Chairman
Date:  Tuesday, February 19
Time:  3:00 P.M.
Room:  SCR 1 (First Floor)
SJR 14 - Schaefer
Modifies constitutional provisions regarding the right to keep and bear arms

Details about SJR 14

As a constitutional amendment to the Missouri Constitution's existing Article I, Sec. 23, SJR 14 does three things:

  1. Elevates the right to keep and bear arms to "inalienable rights" status. While you and I would and should maintain that a "right is a right", the courts don't look at it that way. The courts give more weight to some constitutional rights than others. Government actions infringing on what they consider lesser rights are not scrutinized as closely as the "weightier" rights.

    For example, when a citizen claims his rights are being violated by some law, the courts can "test" the law against two basic standards of review. The least strict standard is often referred to as the "Rational Basis Test", and the tougher standard -- the one that best protects your rights -- is the "Compelling State Interest Test".

    Listen to this explanation of the Rational Basis Test from the Institute for Justice. It explains that the Rational Basis Test is usually just a rubber stamp for government infringement of your rights.

    By making the right to keep and bear arms an "Inalienable Right", SJR 14 demands stricter scrutiny of gun control laws.

  2. The Second thing SJR 14 does is "obligate" the state to protect our right to keep and bear arms from all infringements -- including those from the federal government. Coupled with the "inalienable" provision, this clause will also help to defend any bills we pass to nullify unconstitutional federal gun control laws if those bills are challenged in state courts.

    This is an important provision that helps to empower state nullification of unconstitutional federal edicts.

  3. The final thing SJR 14 does is eliminate some confusing text from the Constitution, thus making the right to conceal carry more secure.

Details about HB 436 & SB 325

Since the 10th Amendment makes it clear that all powers not granted to the federal government are reserved to the states and the People, the regulation of the ownership of arms is a state, not a federal matter.

That applies to ALL such regulation.

We must demand from our legislators no less than the strongest, most principled stand they can take to defend our right to keep and bear arms!

Rep. Doug Funderburk and Sen. Brian Nieves' "Second Amendment Preservation Act" is the strongest and most principled protection of the right to keep and bear arms in Missouri!.

Notice that it utilizes the words of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison to explain Missouri's authority to nullify unconstitutional federal edicts within her borders. Including this language is essential to the success of the bill. It also specifically lists the types of things we will not put up with, and that's what gives state officials the "cover" they need to enforce the bill. More on these bills later...

Tenth Amendment Center article about HB 426.

What you can do:

  1. Right NOW, either plan to attend the hearing for SJR 14 on Tuesday, or fill out the online witness form..
  2. Pass on this email or another with the generic witness form link to as many liberty loving people as you can.
  3. Stay tuned and watch for announcements for the hearing for HB 436 and SB 325.

 

 

Meet the Sponsors

SJR 14
Kurt Schaefer
Sen. Kurt Schaefer

HB 436
Doug Funderburk
Rep. Doug Funderburk

SB 325
Brian Nieves
Sen. Brian Nieves

About Nullification

Interview With A Zombie (8 min. YouTube featuring Prof. Thomas Woods and The Zombie talking about nullification.)

Professor John Eidsmoe Explains "Interposition" (In support of Alabama Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore's nullification of a federal order to remove the Ten Commandment Monument from the state Supreme Court building.

Professor Thomas Woods explains nullification at the Kansas City Nullify Now conference last summer. (39 min. YouTube)

Joshua Glover's Story: Nullification and Resistance to Slavery in 1850s America

Nullification: Answering the Objections by Thomas Woods

The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

Virginia Resolution of 1798

James Madison's Report of 1800 -- a defense of the Virginia Resolution

 

 


UPDATE! This bill has been filed as HB 436

2nd Amendment Preservation Act

Bill to Completely Nullify Unconstitutional
Federal Gun Control To Be Filed in
Missouri House of Representatives!
Sponsor: Rep. Doug Funderburk

January 31, 2013

The anti-gun contingent is not hiding their agenda -- they want to systematically and completely disarm all Americans. There has never been a stronger push for gun control.

Between President Obama's executive orders and Congress' dismal record of defending the Constitution, it's clear that Missourians must throw up their own uncompromising line of defense of their God-given right to keep and bear arms.

To that end, Rep. Doug Funderburk is about to file the bill with the strongest and most principled stand against unconstitutional federal gun control.

The bill is currently in "blue back" form as he gathers cosponsors. Here's the text of the bill.

Notice that it utilizes the words of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison to explain Missouri's authority to nullify unconstitutional federal edicts within her borders. Including this language is essential to the success of the bill. It also specifically lists the types of things we will not put up with, and that's what gives state officials the "cover" they need to enforce the bill.

There are other 2nd Amendment bills being considered by the Missouri legislature, and while their sponsors are to be commended for their efforts, those bills leave huge loopholes that will render them ineffective.

What you can do: Call your Missouri state representative and ask him to cosponsor Rep. Doug Funderburk's 2nd Amendment Preservation Act by Tuesday morning.

Directory of Representatives

Doug Funderburk's contact info.

 


Rep. Doug Funderburk

Learn More About The Bill

Here's the text of the bill.

.

Interview With A Zombie (8 min. YouTube featuring Prof. Thomas Woods and The Zombie talking about nullification.)

Professor John Eidsmoe Explains "Interposition" (In support of Alabama Supreme Court Judge Roy Moore's nullification of a federal order to remove the Ten Commandment Monument from the state Supreme Court building.

Professor Thomas Woods explains nullification at the Kansas City Nullify Now conference last summer. (39 min. YouTube)

Joshua Glover's Story: Nullification and Resistance to Slavery in 1850s America

Nullification: Answering the Objections by Thomas Woods

The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798

Virginia Resolution of 1798

James Madison's Report of 1800 -- a defense of the Virginia Resolution

 

 


HOT! Prescription Drug Monitoring Government Database bill
being filibustered Thursday night!

UPDATE (Final)

The fillibuster was a success! A deal cut that saves face for the supporters, but effectively kills the database this session. Look out next year, though. Some of the senators who took a stand this time around will no longer be in the Senate.

UPDATE (9:30)

There's a deal being considered by both sides... A favorable resolution may be at hand. More in a little while.

Your help needed now!

May 3, 2012

There are two bills that would set up a statewide government computer database to track everyone who buys certain prescription drugs.

The House version of that bill, HB 1193  (Frederick), has passed the House and will receive it's final debate -- and maybe passage -- before the entire Senate this afternoon.

One of the reasons we don't like Obamacare is the database of our personal medical records it would establish. Can you believe that some members of the Missouri General Assembly want to do the same thing here in our state?

Sen. Kevin Engler will be trying to pass HB 1193 on the senate floor and Senator Rob Schaaf will filibuster this bill, with the help of several liberty-minded senators who are listed below.

Two Parts to our Plans of Action

There are two things you can do to help:

1) Please email the senators listed below and tell them you fully support them and "have their back"!  (Don't call unless you have a special relationship with them -- there's no need to tie up their phones.) 

Ask them to take as long as it takes to kill HB 1193 -- the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Act.

2) Throughout the filibuster, send emails to molibertytools@gmail.com. While senators are filibustering, they will read these emails on the senate floor.  (You can listen to the live debate by clicking HERE.)

The filibuster may go all night long and into the morning, so check in occasionally and keep the emails coming!

We will try to provide updates on various Facebook pages and at www.mofirst.org.

This is an important battle -- please pass this on and stay tuned!

 

Jason 

Crowell 

jcrowell@senate.mo.gov 

573-751-2459 

Jane 

Cunningham 

jane.cunningham@senate.mo.gov

573-751-1186 

William 

Kraus 

Will.Kraus@mail.senate.mo.gov

573-751-1464 

Brad 

Lager 

brad.lager@senate.mo.gov 

573-751-1415 

James 

Lembke 

jim.lembke@senate.mo.gov

573-751-2315 

Brian 

Nieves 

Brian.Nieves@senate.mo.gov

573-751-3678 

Charles 

Purgason 

chuck.purgason@senate.mo.gov

573-751-1882 

Luann 

Ridgeway 

luann.ridgeway@senate.mo.gov

573-751-2547 

Kurt 

Schaefer 

kurt.schaefer@mail.senate.mo.gov

573-751-3931 


Please also call your own senator and make sure he or she knows you don't want more "Big Brother" government intrusion!

 

Other News

Health Care Freedom Act

HJR 64 (Curtman) advanced another step in the House Thursday morning. It's poised for debate on the House floor while the Senate version is ready to debate on the Senate floor.

 

Senate Hearing on Bill to Nullify Obamacare Next Tuesday

HJR 64 (Curtman) advanced another step in the House Thursday morning. It's poised for debate on the House floor while the Senate version is ready to debate on the Senate floor.

 

 


UPDATE: The Senate Liberty Team got the $50M stripped from the budget!

Missouri Senate puts $50 million Federal Funding For Obamacare Exchange Back In Budget
(April 23, 2012)

It was exactly 2 months ago we reported that House Budget Committee chairman Ryan Silvey rejected the $50 federal grant to set up a computer system that would facilitate the Obamacare Insurance Exchange.

Missouri's budget bill has passed the House without the $50M and is now working it's way through the Senate.

But now the same $50 million grant for a new Medicaid enrollment system has been placed back in the bill by the chairman of the Senate Budget committee, Kurt Schaefer.

This money is coming from a grant that is specifically designated for creating the Obamacare Exchanges.  

We need to let Senator Schaefer know that the 71% of the voters rejected Obamacare don't want Missouri to take the bait -- we don't want anything to do with Obamacare!

PLEASE CALL OR EMAIL Senator Schaefer and tell him to remove the $50 million Medicaid Enrollment System grant from the budget.

Sen. Kurt Schaefer
201 W Capitol Ave., Rm. 420
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101
(573) 751-3931
FAX: (573) 751-4320
kurt.schaefer@mail.senate.mo.gov

This is URGENT -- The Senate will be working on this bill right away this week!

We need the Senate to follow the lead from the House and defend Missouri liberty by passing the Obamacare nullification bill, HB 1534, instead of helping establish Obamacare with the grant money.

House Votes 108 to 44 to Nullify Obamacare.  Read more.


$50 million Federal Funding For Obamacare Exchange Out of Budget - For Now...
(February 22, 2012)

In a Budget Comittee meeting, after grilling representatives from the Department of Social Services and receiving pitiful responses, Rep. Ryan Silvey declaired that the $50 M federal grant that clearly could be used to set up an Obamacare Exchange WILL NOT be in the Budget he takes to the full House.
<MORE>

 


Missouri Leadership Project Takes on House Hubris
(February 21, 2012)

Press Release
Call to Action

 


Missouri Movement to Nullify Obamacare Under Way
(January 16, 2012)

Tandem measures to be introduced by Rep. Kurt Bahr:

  • Constitutional Amendment to Missouri's Bill of Rights which secures the right to self-determination relating to lawful health care decisions

  • Act specifically declaring the the federal "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" null and void in Missouri, including specific constitutional rationale.

More and more people are becoming wise to the ploys of those who use government's power for personal gain. Some are obvious -- eminent domain used on behalf of a private developer, for instance. Tax credits and other subsidies to private industry are also clearly a form of "crony capitalism" or mercantilism.

The grand-daddy mercantilistic scheme in recent history has got to be Obamacare, though!

Like other forms of mercantilism, Obamacare not only results in special favor to well-connected private parties, but it also grows government's power and influence over our every day lives -- in this case it's the federal government.

Patriots across Missouri are rising up on the heals of the tremendous (71%) Prop C vote in August of 2010 to demand that Missouri legislators take the next strep to protect them from this unconstitutional federal intrusion. Rep. Bahr's measures are the logical next steps. For the text, see the right side bar.

Efforts to implement Obamacare are under way by Governor Nixon and his agencies. See the this link for the Missouri Health Insurance Pool's resolution to set up an Obamacare Health Inurance Exchange in an end-run around the state legislature and the vote of the people.

Text of Obamacare Nullification Measures

Health Care Freedom Amendment to Missouri Constitution - Promo Flier

Act to Nullify Obamaare

Note: These measures have not been filed as bills yet because cosponsors are still signing on.

MHIP Obamacare Exchange Resolution -

What is Mercantilism?

“Mercantilism, which reached its height in the Europe of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, was a system of statism which employed economic fallacy to build up a structure of imperial state power, as well as special subsidy and monopolistic privilege to individuals or groups favored by the state.”

From “Conceived In Liberty” -- Murray N. Rothbard


We've been sold a bill of goods. If you weren't already upset over the passage of MOSIRA, you will be after reading this.

MOSIRA Made Eas(ier)
(Prepared 0/28/2011 by Missouri First, Inc.)

What is MOSIRA?

  • "Missouri Science and Innovation Reinvestment Act"

  • SB 7 of the 2011 First Extraordinary Session of the Missouri General Assembly

  • COMMENT: This bill escaped some scrutiny due to the attention paid to the China Hub bill. Most of the concerns raised about government's role in the market, including constitutional issues, apply to both bills, however.

Summary

  • COMMENT: MOSIRA is a classic example of mercantilism. It uses public resources derived from state and federal sources to supply special privilege to some private parties. MOSIRA interferes with the free market which typically results in misallocation of resources. It also empowers the state, agents of the state, and their friends. Thus, it promotes statism.

  • "Leaders" who led the General Assembly down the path to passage of MOSIRA are not leaders at all. They have squandered their responsibility and should find other jobs outside the public sector.

Click through to see the answers to the following questions:

<Read More>

What is Mercantilism?

“Mercantilism, which reached its height in the Europe of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, was a system of statism which employed economic fallacy to build up a structure of imperial state power, as well as special subsidy and monopolistic privilege to individuals or groups favored by the state.”

From “Conceived In Liberty” -- Murray N. Rothbard

For More Information About the China Hub

Read this Show-Me Institute Study

 

More From
Frédéric Bastiat
http://bastiat.org

Free Audio Downloads
Bastiat, Locke, Rothbard, and more

Missouri needs economic development through economic freedom, not mercantilism!!


An Open Letter to Missouri Legislators

Jefferson City, MO – July 28, 2011

Economic Development Bill?

Government does not “develop” the economy; it is only a drain on the economy. Sometimes the “drain” is a worthwhile investment, as in providing roads and keeping the peace, but usually government actually “undevelops” the economy.

Mostly that's because government does not create private sector jobs or produce goods and services -- businesses do while government places regulatory impediments in the way of productivity and drains resources through taxation. It's that simple.

That's why the the Missouri Constitution says that the “principle office” of government is to protect the liberty of the People to pursue economic opportunities (Art. I § 2) and do so without conferring favored treatment. Art III § 39(5), Art. X § 3.

The China Hub legislation and other special subsidies violate those constitutional principles. Additionally, they produce unseen consequences to the economy, the extent of which we may never know.

LEARN FROM BASTIAT

Frédéric Bastiat illustrated this point in a cogent and entertaining way in his essays about, “That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen”. You owe it to yourself – and your constituents – to at least read the “Parable of the Broken Window”. Go to http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html

Speaker Pro-Tem Schoeller gave each House member a copy of Bastiat's “The Law” last spring. In this 1850 essay the author shows how French law was perverted into a tool for special interests to “plunder” the people. He pointed to America, which had thrown off the mercantilism of England, as an example of the power of liberty and a true free market economy. Sadly, Bastiat would be disappointed in us today, since we have in many ways returned to the very mercantilism that once enslaved the Colonists under the hand of King George III.

Before the Special Session, before you consider legislation that will “tinker” with what's supposed to be a free market, please read “The Law”. (Or download a free audio mp3 version by following the link at the top of this page.)

LAW – A TOOL TO PLUNDER OR A TOOL FOR LIBERTY?

Here's how Bastiat concludes “The Law”:

This must be said: There are too many "great" men in the world — legislators, organizers, do-gooders, leaders of the people, fathers of nations, and so on, and so on. Too many persons place themselves above mankind; they make a career of organizing it, patronizing it, and ruling it.

Now someone will say: "You yourself are doing this very thing." True. But it must be admitted that I act in an entirely different sense; if I have joined the ranks of the reformers, it is solely for the purpose of persuading them to leave people alone. I do not look upon people as Vancauson looked upon his automaton. Rather, just as the physiologist accepts the human body as it is, so do I accept people as they are. I desire only to study and admire.

My attitude toward all other persons is well illustrated by this story from a celebrated traveler: He arrived one day in the midst of a tribe of savages, where a child had just been born. A crowd of soothsayers, magicians, and quacks — armed with rings, hooks, and cords — surrounded it. One said: "This child will never smell the perfume of a peace-pipe unless I stretch his nostrils." Another said: "He will never be able to hear unless I draw his ear-lobes down to his shoulders." A third said: "He will never see the sunshine unless I slant his eyes." Another said: "He will never stand upright unless I bend his legs." A fifth said: "He will never learn to think unless I flatten his skull."

"Stop," cried the traveler. "What God does is well done. Do not claim to know more than He. God has given organs to this frail creature; let them develop and grow strong by exercise, use, experience, and liberty."

God has given to men all that is necessary for them to accomplish their destinies. He has provided a social form as well as a human form. And these social organs of persons are so constituted that they will develop themselves harmoniously in the clean air of liberty. Away, then, with quacks and organizers! A way with their rings, chains, hooks, and pincers! Away with their artificial systems! Away with the whims of governmental administrators, their socialized projects, their centralization, their tariffs, their government schools, their state religions, their free credit, their bank monopolies, their regulations, their restrictions, their equalization by taxation, and their pious moralizations!

And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works.
Frédéric Bastiat, "The Law"

In the Special Session, vote “No!” to government picking winners and losers. Vote “No!” on subsidizing Chinese manufacturers. End the tax credits, don't create more! Let's get government out of the way and let businesses compete in the fresh air of a fair and open market.

Missouri needs economic development through economic freedom, not mercantilism!!

 

What is Mercantilism?

“Mercantilism, which reached its height in the Europe of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, was a system of statism which employed economic fallacy to build up a structure of imperial state power, as well as special subsidy and monopolistic privilege to individuals or groups favored by the state.”

From “Conceived In Liberty” -- Murray N. Rothbard

For More Information About the China Hub

Read this Show-Me Institute Study

 

More From
Frédéric Bastiat
http://bastiat.org

Free Audio Downloads
Bastiat, Locke, Rothbard, and more

 



Missouri Firearms Freedom Act
Nullifies Unconstitutional Gun Control Laws

UPDATE: The session ended and the senate failed to take up this bill.

UPDATE May 12, 2011: Please fill out this Online Letter Form. to show your support for state sovereignty and the Missouri Firearms Freedom Act. We will print it and deliver it to senate leadership!

UPDATE May 5, 2011: 411 witness forms were turned in and the General Laws committee voted to "do pass" the bill. It is now on the Senate calendar waiting for an opportunity for debate on the floor.

May 1, 2011

HB 361 (Mike Leara)

Principles Applied By This Bill

  • “Compact” or contract theory of the relationship between the several states and between the states and the federal government.

  • Sovereignty (9th & 10th Amendment & natural law)

  • Nullification

  • Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Effects Of The Bill

  • Rectifies, in part, misapplications of the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. This bill is a good start at setting straight the proper use of the interstate commerce clause in many areas.

  • Asserts state sovereignty

  • Nullifies, in part, federal gun control laws

  • Protects from federal infringement Missourians' right to manufacture, own and use firearms and accessories which are made within, and remain within, the state. (Federal gun laws won't apply to such arms and accessories.)

Action Needed

  • Encourage the leadership, especially Sens. Mayer and Dempsey, of the Senate to allow this bill the floor time it will take to get a vote. Send a polite letter now:
    Sen. Rob Mayer
    Sen. Tom Dempsey

  • We know of no resistance, other than the typical anti-gun resistance, our main challenge is the calendar. Session is over May 13th and the are major issues, including the budget and redistricting, vying for floor time.
  • Do not make phone calls or send emails at this time. Please understand that there's no indication that Senate leadership is opposed to this bill, so be understanding about the tight schedule of these last two weeks of session and how hard it is to fit all the important pending legislation in.

Status Of The Bill

  • Passed out of the House on March 17, 2011 - AYES: 118 NOES: 37

  • Reported to the Senate Marchi 28, 2011

  • Hearing in senate General Laws & Voted “do pass” April 20, 2011 – AYES: 4 NOES: 2

  • Currently (05/01/2011) on Senate Calendar – House Bills for Third Reading

Negative Aspects Of The Bill

  • Application of the constitutional principles are limited to firearms and accessories.

  • Certain types of firearms are exempted from the application of the constitutional principles arbitrarily.

  • Phrase “particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law” weakens the application of the principles.

Chances of Passing

  • Good

Commentary

This appears to be the only nullification bill with a chance of passing and the chances are relatively good, if we work at it.

Even though the bill is not perfect (few are), it is a major advancement in the Principles of 98 (nullification) and the proper application of the interstate commerce clause. That clause is, perhaps the excuse for more unconstitutional intrusion into the live of the People than any other.

The synergy between gun rights activists and proponents of sovereignty add vigor to this bill.

HB 361

Gadsden_Flag

We must choose
which flag to fly!

FW_Patriot_Flag

 

 

"For God has not given us a spirit of timidity, but of power and love and discipline." 2Ti 1:7



Click Here For Online Witness Form Against HB 974

April 18, 2011

Tomorrow morning (4/19/2011), the House Elections committee will hear HB 974 -- it will gut the electoral college if it comes to fruition.

Fill out this online...

The net effect would be to eliminate most of the influence Missouri has on the selection of the US president.

UPDATE - We truned in over 200 witness form from all over the state. The bill is dead and won't likely stand a chance with the House Elections Committee in the foreseeable future. Good job!


Free Market Solution to Puppy Mills

April 11, 2011

I've been watching the debate over Prop B, the “Puppy Mill Initiative”, and have concluded that everyone's afraid to say what really needs to be said. That is, that domestic animals are property, and animals DO NOT have rights!

There, I said it.

To claim otherwise is to diminish mankind's station. People have inalienable rights from the Creator, but that same Creator gave man dominion over animals. He gave animals to man for food, companions and as beasts of burden – animals are not coequal inhabitants of His creation.

God, however, also prescribed proper treatment for animals. Not muzzling an ox while he is treading, or unequally yoking two beasts of burden, are examples. From these instructions about treatment of animals we see that the moral thing to do is treat animals humanely.

The question becomes, then, what do you do about people who behave immorally and don't treat their property humanely? <more>

What to do about the unconstitutional
Prop B

 

 


Candidate Outlines a U.S. Senator's Role in States'
Nullification of Unconstitutional Federal Edicts

March 31, 2011
In a world where most U.S. Senators think their main job is to channel "largess" -- earmarks and the like -- back to their home state, it is refreshing to see one candidate properly define the job he hopes the People hire him for.

The following is a circular letter to the leaders of the Missouri General Assembly from Ed Martin. The former chief of staff to Governor Matt Blunt and near-miss challenger to U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan makes a commitment to the states legislators - he will do his part to protect the state if the legislature has the gumption to nullify unconstitutional federal edicts. Read his letter...


Education Reform -- Constitutional Principles Must be Considered

Since securing liberty is the principle office of government (MO Const. Art. I § 2) and since government's role in education is declared to be for the purpose of promoting liberty (MO Const. Art. IX § 1a) , it behooves us to make sure the no part of education reform undermines liberty in the process.

The Constitutional Approach to Education Reform

January 18, 2011

Education is NOT the state's #1 priority – Securing Liberty Is

While it's true that an entire article of the Missouri Constitution is devoted to education, and that article requires that a minimum of 25% of state revenue be spent on education, education is not state government's number one priority.

The first and foremost priority of Missouri government is clearly spelled out in Article I § 2 of the constitution:

"In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim the principles on which our government is founded, we declare:

"That all constitutional government is intended to promote the general welfare of the people; that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry; that all persons are created equal and are entitled to equal rights and opportunity under the law; that to give security to these things is the principal office of government, and that when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design." (Art. I § 2)

Furthermore, even the constitutional rationale for free public education is based on the preservation of liberty:

"A general diffusion of knowledge and intelligence being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, the general assembly shall establish and maintain free public schools for the gratuitous instruction of all persons in this state within ages not in excess of twenty-one years as prescribed by law." (Art. IX § 1a)

FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLE: Missouri's education policy must be crafted in a way that respects and does not diminish the liberty of the people. Otherwise, Missouri government will "fail in its chief design".

<MORE>

Three Guiding Principles of Missouri Education Policy

  • Respect Parents' Rights
  • Infuse Free Market Principles
  • Decentralize

An Open Letter to Missouri Legislators

In all of Missouri history there have only been 28 statute changes placed on the ballot by the initiative petition process. Of the 12 that passed, Proposition B had the narrowest margins. A shift of only 8/10 of 1% would have changed the outcome.

Some of the provision of Prop B are blatently infringements on the rights of some Missourians. What should be done?

Lawmakers Have a Constitutional Obligation to Repeal Prop B

Jefferson City -- January 11, 2011

The Missouri General Assembly has an obligation to repeal at least part of Proposition B in spite of the fact that it was just passed by the voters. Each legislator has a constitutional responsibility to support such repeal regardless of how his district voted on the proposition last November. To do less would be a violation of his oath of office.

Admittedly, that's a bold claim. After all, the people have spoken and we should respect their collective will, shouldn't we?

<MORE>

###

Missouri Ballot Initiative History

There have been 372 initiatives on the Missouri ballot since 1910.

Prop B passed with the lowest margins in Missouri History - 1.6%

Click here for a live interactive database of Missouri Ballot Initiative history.


Law-makers Have No Choice – They Are Obligated to Repeal Prop B

On November 2, 2010 the people of Missouri spoke.

In the narrowest voter approval of a statute change ever, 51.6% of those Missourian voting approved a law described by a prejudice ballot title.

Missouri – November 11, 2010

The Missouri General Assembly has an obligation to repeal at least part of Proposition B in spite of the fact that it was just passed by the voters. The courts have a similar obligation.

That might sound like an odd position from someone who may very well be Missouri's most outspoken proponent of the citizen's right to the initiative petition process. After all, the people have spoken and we should respect their collective will, shouldn't we?

Our state constitution says “The people reserve power to propose and enact or reject laws and amendments to the constitution by the initiative, independent of the general assembly.” (Art. III § 49) This incredibly important provision is designed to afford the people a “check” on the power of government -- a way to override or bypass officials who have been oppressive or unresponsive to the will of the people.

The initiative petition process is an important constitutional “tool” among the others which are designed to preserve Missouri's system of government and the liberty of her people. It fortifies the first great characteristic of our constitutional republic, which is the premise that “all political power is vested in and derived from the people ”. (See Mo. Const. Art I § 1)

There is, however, another great characteristic of a constitutional republic – we are governed by the Rule of Law. That means that there are some laws that not even a majority of the people have authority to enact. Those would be laws which diminish God-given and constitutionally protected rights.

So on one hand an American Constitutional Republic protects the people from the tyranny of a few by ensuring that all political power remains vested in the people and on the other hand it protects the individual from the tyranny of the majority through the principles of the Rule of Law.

Prop B's limit of 50 breeding dogs is tyranny of the majority. It violates basic constitutional principles which override even the right of the people to use the initiative process. Put another way, the people lack jurisdiction to limit a breeder to 50 breeding dogs because such limits amount to a limitation on one's right to earn a living – “the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry”. (Mo. Const. Art I § 2)

If one takes the arguable position that the state has an interest in the well-being of the property (dogs) of individual citizens, and if there were something special about the number 50, then there might be some state interest that would temper the individual rights mentioned. But 50 is an arbitrary number with no meaning what-so-ever. 51 or 60 or 200 breeding dogs can be kept in equally healthy and humane conditions as 5 or 10 or 50.

There is no relationship between the number of animals a breeder can have and the well-being of those animals.

Now, a limit on how many dogs you could have per handler, or how much living space must be afforded each dog would affect their well-being, and some might claim the state has an interest in those “per dog” conditions, but as long as each individual animal is afforded an adequate living arrangement, why should the number of dogs matter?

So the 50 dog limit is blatantly unconstitutional; but what obligates the state's law-makers to repeal it? What obligates the courts to over-turn the law?

It is the same constitutional clause that protects the right to the “pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of our own industry” – Article I Section 2. The end of that very clause says “that to give security to these things is the principal office of government, and that when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design.”

Each of our legislators and each judge has sworn an oath to support and defend the constitution. They have obligated themselves to secure the rights of the people of Missouri – including those who want to earn a living with more than 50 dogs. It is their job to interpose on behalf of the victims of the tyranny of the majority. To do less is a violation of their oath of office. They must repeal the unconstitutional portions of Prop B.

###

Live interactive database of all ballot initiatives

The two main characteristics of an American Constitutional Republic:

1) All political power is derived from and vested in the people.

2) We are governed by the Rule of Law, therefore even a majority of voters have no jurisdiction to destroy the constitutional rights of individuals.

The Republic's "checks" on tyranny:

1) The citizen's ballot initiative is one of the checks on the Tyranny of the Few.

2) The Rule of Law (e.g. the constitution) is a check on the Tyranny of the Majority.

The constitution trumps the voter's approval of a statute change which infringes on individual constitutional rights.

The primary role of government is to protect the rights of the people:

Mo Const. Article I, Section 2.
" That all constitutional government is intended to promote the general welfare of the people; that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry; that all persons are created equal and are entitled to equal rights and opportunity under the law; that to give security to these things is the principal office of government, and that when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design."

State legislators took an oath to uphold Article I, Sec. 2, therefore they are obligated to repeal the unconstitutional provisions of Prop B -- they have no choice, no matter how their constituents voted on the ballot measure.


What!? A year in prison for filing horse's teeth?
Liberty-Minded Missouri Lawyers Defends Victim of Mercantilism

St. Louis – October 28, 2010
Attorneys Dave & Jennifer Roland have been fighting for Missouri liberty since they moved to back to her home state and began work at the Show-Me Institute in 2007. Their experience fighting eminent domain abuse at the Institute for Justice has been put to good use in the property rights fight here.

Now they enter a new and exciting phase of service with their new Freedom Center of Missouri where they will be legal advocates for liberty. And, boy, do we need them! Read about their first case here.


Paul Jacob Maintains the Republic By Empowering Citizens

Oklahoma – October 27, 2010 -- Update: The radio ads worked and the measure passed!

Fight for the Citizens Voice in Oklahoma
Likely to Have Spill-over
Effect in Missouri

Oklahoma has a hostile environment for citizens seeking to use the petition process to deal with a legislature which is either oppressive or unresponsive to the people. The people are given only 90 days to collect almost twice the number of signatures per capita as here in Missouri.

What's more, the Oklahoma AG tried to send three petition activists to prison over trumped up charges based on a law that has since been found unconstitutional. Paul Jacob, of Citizens in Charge, was one of the "Oklahoma Three". We're glad he's not in the pokey because he's out there every day fighting for the liberty of Americans all across the nation.

Paul is probably the one guy most responsible for bringing term limits to the many states now fortunate enough to enjoy them -- including Missouri. Citizens in Charge is focused on bringing the citizens initiative petition process to states not yet blessed with it, and defending it where it already exists.

The current opportunity in Oklahoma blends both term limits and the petition process. Tools that help to maintain a republican form of government - that is, one in which the people are still in charge.

A ballot measure to create term limits for the state-wide office holders there is very popular. A new ad campaign will tie that issue with another ballot measure to make the almost impossible petition process there more reasonable.

Paul needs to raise about $15,000 in the next couple of days to finish up his media buys for a radio spot. That's not much if we all will pitch in a little.

What's in for Missourians?

Besides helping out a guy whose done so much for our state, passage of those two ballot measures in OK next week will set a good example for the Missouri legislature to follow. We need term limits on all our state-wide officials AND we need to fix our petition process, too, so it's not just available to the well-heeled interests.

Can you donate a few dollars to help someone who has helped us so much?

More on the ballot issues.

Donate to Citizens in Charge

Listen to the Radio Ad

Icon

Update: The radio ads worked and the measure passed!

Many Thanks to all who helped!!


Governor's Tax Credit Commission Seeks Reform, But Should Eliminate Tax Credits Instead

Jefferson City – September 10, 2010

Tax Credit Review Commission (Click to email memebers or for hearing info)

Co-chairs
Steve Stogel - President of DFC Group in St. Louis
Chuck Gross - Director of administration for St. Charles County

Missouri taxpayers footing the bill for well over half a billion dollars in tax credits each year. Most of those credits are nothing more than corporate welfare - mercantilism.

Missouri State Auditor, Susan Montee, determined that the state's tax credit system is not producing a reasonable return on the taxpayers investment. Her analysis was only of that which can be observed and measured, but there are many unseen effects from such tinkering with markets. If the "unseen" effects could be measured, the results would be even more disastrous.

Tax Credit Review Commission
Hearing Schedule
Email Commissioners

 

April 2010 audit of Missouri's 61 tax credit programs.

SLU Report on Historic Tax Credits

 



Video: What is an American Constitutional Republic?

Ron Calzone explains what a "constitutional republic" is at the Day of Discovery in Hanibal, MO May 8, 2010.

Eminent Domain - also at the Day of Discovery in Hanibal, MO May 8, 2010.

Conclusion and efforts to preserve the people's reserved power to the petition process.

Video courtesy of ConservativeTVonline.com
Support their effort to provide a family friendly source of conservative information.

 


- Missouri Ballot Initiative Facts -

Is it a good idea to require a super-majority to amend the Missouri Constitution? Here is are some facts and historical data to help you decide...

Live interactive database of all ballot initiatives from 1910 to 2010 (click here):

  • Lists all the ballot measure between 1910 and 2008.
  • Create data sets from query criteria you select with a few clicks of the mouse.
  • How did measures proposed by the General Assembly fare against those placed on the ballot by petitions?
  • Which would have passed or failed if various super-majorities were required?

Read about the importance of the petition process to a healthy constitutional republic.

2010 Petitions...

  • Over 100 petitions were submitted to the SOS for her approval to circulate.
  • Only about 24 were actually approved for circulation.
  • Of that 24, there are only 14 distinct proponents - only about 15 petitions of the 24 were ever candidates for circulation.
  • Only 4 petitions were filed with the SOS on May 2nd!

 


So-Called "Ethics Bill" Leads to a Call For The End of The Rules Committee

Jefferson City – May 12, 2010

Missouri's legislative process is broken.

While that might be comforting to liberty loving citizens who cringe every time they hear a new law has been passed, make no mistake about it, the broken process is not gridlock that prevents freedom-stealing laws from being passed – in fact, the process often promotes them.

Common Ground, Not Compromise

It is a misconception to believe that the legislative process should be about "compromise". Compromise too often includes a surrendering of principles or capitulation to a more powerful force. In a civilized society – one in which the people have many more shared values then divergent ones – the goal of governance should be to find common ground, not force compromise.

Common ground governance maximizes liberty, harmony, and fraternity. <more>

www.mofirst.org

" Partisan hacks on both sides line up like medieval armies and charge one another with swinging swords and clubs. The people – common citizens - are caught in the middle.

More often than not, their liberty suffers."


May 6, 2010 -- General Assembly Attack on Citizen Lobbying!

Missouri House votes to make non-registered citizen lobbyists felons!

Download the short eval HERE.

Missouri First eval of SB844 HERE.

ALink to the bill: SB844!

 

 

Download:

Missouri First eval of SB844 HERE.

Download a PDF of SB844 with notes: HERE


The Petition Rights Protection Act Submitted to SOS!

Q. How long do you wait for the General Assembly to fix the problems with Missouri's petition process?

A. Not one more moment!

SB 818 seems hopelessly mired in politics. Although there are some fine statesmen, like Sen. Jim Lembke, there aren't enough to overcome the apathy or hostility toward the people's constitutional right to the petition process.

That's why the Committee to Protect Petition Rights is seeking a solution "independent of the legislature", as Article III, Section 49 of the Missouri Constitution says. Their petition seeks to change the statutes in three primary ways:

1) Make respect for the voters the primary consideration in the petition processing procedure.
2) Addresses fraudulent practices in the petition process.
3) Streamline Ballot Title litigation, limiting it to 3 1/2 months.

The deadline for collecting almost 100,000 valid signatures is May, 2012.

Downloads:

Submission Letter

Example of the petition


Your Right to Petition for a Redress of Grievances Under Attack!

End of Session Update: All the anti-citizen's initiatives died in the senate! Rep. Parson is running for the state senate, though, and if he is elected will probably push for the same restrictions from that side of the building.

Update to Update: Rep. Parson won is bid for state senate. He will likely be in the senate for at least 4 years. Will he continue his attack on the petition process?

There a handful of bills attacking your right to petition, but the ones that are moving through the legislative process are sponsored by Rep. Mike Parson.

HB 1788 has passed the House and will have a hearing in the Senate elections committee on Monday, May 3rd!

HB1788: Although the supporters of this bill claim that it is designed to keep out of state interests from coming to Missouri and changing our laws, it actually does nothing to that end. Instead, it hinders the right of Missourians to place an issue before the voters so they can decide. The bill arrogantly pre-supposes that voters can't be trusted.

Here's what the bill does:

  • Prohibits out of state petition circulators
  • Prohibits paying circulators based on performance
  • Prohibits circulating more than one petition at a time

Prohibits out of state petition circulators
Petition circulators are "agents" of the petition proponent, just like a printer or radio announcer who helps a politician get his campaign message out. Ask the very politicians seeking to restrict your rights to hire such an agent if they would accept the same limitations on their campaign and they'll say no every time.

Prohibits paying circulators based on performance
The bill's prohibition against pay based on the number of signatures collected is really a prohibition against performance based pay. It could even be interpreted in such a way as to to prevent the firing a petition circulator paid by the hour but wasn't collecting any signatures at all. Until the courts rule on some test cases it will be anyone's guess how this provision will be interpreted. Who wants to be the first to collect hundreds of thousands of signatures only to find out the government won't recognize them?

Prohibits circulating more than one petition at a time
Finally, if the politicians are going to prohibit the people from collecting signatures on more than one petition at a time, perhaps they should also prohibit themselves from filing more than one bill at at time! This is the most blatantly unconstitutional provision of them all.

The first two provisions have been repeatedly found unconstitutional when other states tried them and no other state has been arrogant enough to even try the last! This bill is clearly unconstitutional and designed to effectively end the petition process, not clean it up. Shame on you, Rep, Parson! What happened to your oath to support and defend the constitution?

ACTION ITEM: Download the witness form in the right column and email it in so we can present it to the committee hearing on May 3.

Rep. Mike Parson has also sponsored HJR 63 a constitutional amendment that will greatly increase the number of signatures required to place a question on the ballot. The increase difficulty and expense will take the petition process out of the reach of grass-roots efforts. This measure will get it's final passing vote in the House any day and then be sent to the Senate.

Click here to read about the importance of the petition process to a healthy constitutional republic.

Missouri Constitution Article III Section 49:

" The people reserve power to propose and enact or reject laws and amendments to the constitution by the initiative, independent of the general assembly, and also reserve power to approve or reject by referendum any act of the general assembly, except as hereinafter provided."


Email

 


National, Socialized Medicine

Upon the completion of the Constitution, Benjamin Franklin said:

"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the Republic."


Today he would say....

"When the people find they can vote themselves insurance coverage, that will herald the end of the republic."

Listen to the following interview in which Judge Napolitano explains why ObamaCare is unconstitutional and gives real solutions to this massive federal takeover of our personal liberty.

(Due to YouTube limitations, it is broken into 5 segments.)

Judge Andrew Napolitano Speaks Out Against  'Obamacare' Law on The Alex Jones Show 2/5

 

 

Lest we forget...

In 2000, President Bush announced his prescription drug plan. It paved the way for ObamaCare.

President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 paved the way for President Obama's Race to the Top.

 


Petition reform bill in Senate and House

End of Session Update: SB818 was allowed a little more time on the sentate floor near the end of the legislative session, but majority floor leader, Sen. Kevin Engler, would not allow the bill enough time to move. Engler is a vocal opponent of the people's right to initiative petitions.

April 27, 2010:

SB 818 was given a meager 45 minutes of floor debate time, where some of the Republicans - namely Sen. Tom Dempsey and Sen. Kevin Engler - were more of a problem than the Democrats. Dempsey offered an amendment without the courtesy of first asking the bill sponsor. It simply muddied the water and wasted precious floor time. Engler made Lemble lay the bill over
.

It is hard to tell if the bill will receive more floor time before the end of session.

In the mean time, bills that would effectively strip Missourians of their constitutional right to the initiative process are advancing in the House. HB1788 has passed and is due for a hearing in the Senate elections committee and HJR 63 was perfected and is about to pass the House.

 

PDF summary of
Senate Committee Substitute for HB228

 

Senator Jim Lembke

Senator Jim Lembke
(Sponsor of the good I&R bill, SB818.)

Thank you, Senator Lembke!

 


Get your "Concealed Weapons Encouraged" sign here.

Missouri, February 2009:
Missouri First is proud to announce the release of a sign designed to encourage concealed carry users and discourage criminals
. More importantly, it allows property owners to make a statement. We all need to remember that the point of the second amendment is not to protect hunting rights or to make our communities safer, although it does have that effect. The real point of keeping the populace armed is to deter the government from oppressing the people.

A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Please print and distribute freely!

Concealed Weapon Sign

Click here to download!


Missouri Senator Wants to Protect Economic Freedom!

End of Session Update: This resolution was given a brief hearing, but most of the General Laws committee left the hearing room before it came up. No further action was taken. There doesn't seem to be much interest among SOME senators in preserving economic freedom.

Missouri, January 2010:
Economic Freedom resolution filed by Missouri state senator Lembke.

Article I, Section 2 of the Missouri Constitution defines the primary role of Missouri government as that of protecting our property rights - including life, liberty and estates. Senator Lembke's constitutional amendment would make it clear that those protections include our economic freedom, which, of course, is the bulwark of our other liberties.

Here's the amendment (the new language is in bold):

Article I, Section 2. That all constitutional government is intended to promote the general welfare of the people; that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness; that all persons have a natural right to economic freedom and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry; that all persons are created equal and are entitled to equal rights and opportunity under the law; that to give security to these things is the principal office of government, and that when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design.


See SJR 42

Jim Lembke

Senator Jim Lembke



What is Mercantilism?

“The economic policy dominant in the Europe of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and christened "mercantilism" by later writers, at bottom assumed that detailed intervention in economic affairs was a proper function of government. Government was to control, regulate, subsidize, and penalize commerce and production.

What the content of these regulations should be depended on what groups managed to control the state apparatus. Such control is particularly rewarding when much is at stake, and a great deal is at stake when government is "strong" and interventionist. In contrast, when government powers are minimal, the question of who runs the state becomes relatively trivial. But when government is strong and the power struggle keen, groups in control of the state can and do constantly shift, coalesce, or fall out over the spoils.

While the ouster of one tyrannical ruling group might mean the virtual end of tyranny, it often means simply its replacement by another ruling group employing other forms of despotism. In the seventeenth century the regulating groups were, broadly, feudal landlords and privileged merchants, with a royal bureaucracy pursuing as a superfeudal overlord the interest of the Crown. “

From “Conceived In Liberty” -- Volume I A New Land, A New People: The American Colonies In The Seventeenth Century by Murray N. Rothbard

Is mercantilism America's greatest threat?

Mercantilism is also known as:
"Corporate welfare"
"Rent Seeking"
"Fascism"
"Corporatism"

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.”
–Benito Mussolini
m


Property Rights – Powers of the State
(What's wrong with using eminent domain to clear blight.)

Missouri, 01/16/2006:

One of the most distinctive features of the American system of governance is our commitment to two basic concepts: First, as the Declaration of Independence says, man's rights are “endowed by their Creator, not the state, and second, that all governmental power is derived from the people themselves.

More than just feel-good sayings, these principles are codified in state constitutions, like Missouri's own. As a matter of fact, in the very first section after the Preamble's statement of “profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe”, the Bill of Rights lays the foundation for the rest of the document:

That all political power is vested in and derived from the people; that all government of right originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. (Art. I § 1)

The very next section of the Missouri Bill of Rights makes it clear that the “principle purposeof government is to make sure these seminal principles are always honored.

The Evil of Concentrated Power
When Missouri drafted its constitution, it was just following the example of the original 13 states. As each of them formed their government, and as they established a federal union, they built hedges around these principles through the very structure of their governments. They recognized that the greatest threat to freedom was the concentration of power in too few hands; they spent countless hours researching and debating and the result was a social compact, or system of governance, which resulted in the greatest country the world has ever known. (more)

Current eminent domain policy violates the basic concepts of the separation of powers.

Unfortunately, most of the proposed solutions continue to violate those same principles.


The four civil powers are,
1) Taxation
2) Police Powers
3) Eminent Domain
4) Escheat

Mixing them up results in all sorts of problems!


Property Rights – The Core Issue

Missouri, 12/09/2005:

An understanding of the heritage of the American concept of property rights is necessary before we can properly deal with that issue. Equipped with that understanding, our concerns will go far beyond any individual neighborhood or development – we will be concerned about the very integrity of our system of constitutional governance. Any social compact that permits the stronger, more powerful to forcefully take the property of the weaker members of society will eventually allow similar takings of “property” of a more personal nature, like life and liberty.

MERCANTILISM vs CAPITALISM
History bears out time and time again the fact that economic freedom marches at the head of our other liberties. Suppression of economic freedom is as pervasive as an occupying army – that's the way the founding fathers looked at it in the 1700's. (more)



 


Missouri Resolution to put Constitution Change on November Ballot
Let The Senate Try Impeachment Cases – Like it Used To!

Can you believe it? Our state is the only one with a bicameral legislature that allows the Supreme Court to hold impeachment trials! All other states, but Nebraska, which is unicameral, and Oregon, which has recalls rather than impeachment, allow one legislative branch to impeach and the other, usually the senate, to hold impeachment trials. Of course, the U.S. Constitution also provides for senate impeachment trials.

All of these other states recognize the wisdom of the founding fathers and the need to employ “checks and balances” into our system of government. As it is now, our state constitution allows the judicial branch to police itself! If that sounds like the fox guarding the chicken coop, that's because it IS!

Missouri has not always been this out of touch with reality – until the changes in our state constitution in 1945, our house was also responsible for impeachment and our senate held the trials. (Note: Impeachment is only an accusation, similar to a grand jury indictment. The trial determines guilt or lack thereof.)

Now Rep. Ed Emery has sponsored a resolution to put a constitutional change before the voters on the November ballot. The change will simply roll back our constitution to it's pre-1945 condition with respect to impeachment trials and put us into conformity with the rest of the country.


See Rep. Emery's resolution

HJR 47




On this page:

U.S. Constitution Acknowledges Jesus!
Impeachment Facts
Missouri Laws and Constitution on Impeachment
Missouri Impeachment History

State university flies the United Nations flag!
Join Missouri First - help us in our fight for constitutional government!

News
Feb 28, 2005 Jeff City, MO: God Acknowledged By Plaque Dedication in Missouri House Chamber
Jan. 25, 2005 Jeff City, MO: Missouri First gets Judge Roy Moore and state legislators together
Nov. 22, 2003 Jeff City, MO: Hundreds speak out against judicial activism

U.S. Constitution Acknowledges God!

We live in a time when a government agency or public school is very likely to face a constitutional challenge if it acknowledges God, so you might be surprised to find out that the United States Constitution itself acknowledges God.

In fact, the constitution doesn't simply make an ambiguous reference to a generic “supreme being” – it honors Jesus Christ Himself, and submits the nation it defined to Him!

Where?”, you ask, “I've read the entire constitution and never noticed it.” It's there in unabridged copies and we'll take a look at it, but first a quick lesson in reckoning time.

Practically every civilization has reckoned time relative to the the king in power during the referenced period. The Bible is replete with examples:

...in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord.” (1Kings 6:1)

Then work on the house of God in Jerusalem ceased, and it was stopped until the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia.” (Ezra 4:24)

This practice continues even today in many parts of the world. Until the post WWII Japanese constitution, the emperor was considered a sovereign, divine ruler. Although Emperor Hirohito was prompted by MacArthor to renounce that status, the practice of reckoning time by the current monarch continues. For instance, the year 2005 is officially year 17 of the Heisei Era of the Emperor Akihito. Until 2002, the Japanese Patent Office still used this system.

It was no different right before the founding of the United States. The 1774 “Declarations and Resolves” by the Continental Congress complained of long running injustices from the mother country since “thirty-fifth year of the reign of King Henry the Eighth”.

By April 19, 1775, however, the jaded colonists were distancing themselves from the current monarch, King George - that was the day of the “shot heard 'round the world” in Lexington, Massachusetts. In the town square that morning the King's Major Pitcairn was being faced down by about 70 colonists. He shouted, "Disperse, ye villains Lay down your arms in the name of George the Sovereign King of England". He was met with the response "We recognize no Sovereign but God and no King but Jesus!".

The clarion call of the Revolution became “No King but Jesus!”

The forthcoming Declaration of Independence hammered this point home by making it clear that man's rights did not come from an earthly king, but that they were “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights” and that “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”.

The Founders did not claim to be totally free from a king – just free from an earthly king!

It was no coincidence that twelve years later the document that defined the new relationship between the states and defined the role of their general government would culminate with an acknowledgment that Jesus was their King!

Article VII, known as the “subscription clause”, says the drafting of the Constitution was “done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven”.

In other words, 1787 years into Christ's reign (since His birth) the Constitution was drafted. (Note: The Articles of Confederation, which preceded the Constitution, used the same terms.)

Some will claim that “that's just the way people talked in those days”. They are right, in part, because it was more socially acceptable to honor God back then, but a look at other documents from that era proves that spelling out “the year of our Lord” was not routine. Virginia's constitution, for instance, fixed it's inception “on Monday the sixth day of May, one thousand seven hundred and seventy six”.

How can anyone who understands American history claim that it is unconstitutional for the state to acknowledge God when that same Constitution declares His Son King of the Land!

By: Ron Calzone
ron@mofirst.org


Resources For Missouri Impeachment

Learn About Impeachment Here

What is impeachment?
Why is it important?
Who can impeach a judge in Missouri?
Why does the power to impeach rest with the house of representatives alone?
What happens once articles of impeachment have been approved by the house?
What are the possible penalties if found guilty?
For what reasons can a judge be impeached?
Has Judge Ohmer committed an impeachable offense?

What is impeachment?

Impeachment is the constitutional process used by the legislature to ensure that the other two branches of government do not overstep their authority.

Impeachment is the first of two steps used to remove an official who has subverted his office in some way. Being impeached is not being found guilty; it is not really even a trial, but only an effort to determine if a trial is called for, similar to a grand jury indictment. (More on the trial later.)

Why is it important?

First, understand that government derives it's power from the governed. The structure of American government is designed to make sure the people maintain ultimate control. Missouri government, like the federal government, is divided into three branches – the administrative, legislative, and judicial. Each branch is limited by the constitution to specific tasks, and each branch serves as a “check and balance” to the other two branches in order to ensure that no branch usurps the liberty of the citizens.

Simply put, impeachment is the constitutional “weapon” the legislature uses to protect the liberty of the citizens and maintain it's own share of power among the three branches.

Who can impeach a judge in Missouri?

Missouri Constitution Article VII Section 2.The house of representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment.”

In addition to impeachment, the Missouri constitution provides for disciplining judges by the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges (Article V, Section 24). The commission's purpose is to maintain the integrity of the courts, but not to maintain the balance of power among the three branches of government, so it is not the proper venue to deal with a judge who usurps the power of the legislature.

Why does the power to impeach rest with the house of representatives alone?

The legislature's power is divided among a much larger number of individuals, so the likelihood of despotic rule from that branch is relatively small – it is the body that is closest to the people. On the other hand, the power of the administrative and judicial branches resides with but a few men who are less accessible to the common man.

Our representatives, like judges, have sworn to defend and uphold the constitution. Impeachment is a solemn responsibility neither to be shirked nor abused.

What happens once articles of impeachment have been approved by the house?

In Missouri, after the resolution passes the house, a trial ensues in one of two venues: 1) If a lower court judge is impeached, his trial is held before the state Supreme Court; 2) When the governor or a Supreme Court justice is impeached, the state senate selects a commission of seven jurists to hear the trial. The defendant can only be found guilty upon the concurrence of five sevenths of ether the court or commission. (MO Constitution, Article VII, Section 2)

A judge is disqualified from acting as a judicial officer while articles of impeachment are being considered, but still receives his salary. (MO Constitution, Article V, Section 24.4)

What are the possible penalties if found guilty?

Missouri Constitution, Article VII, Section 3:Judgment of impeachment shall not extend beyond removal from office, but shall not prevent punishment of such officer by the courts on charges growing out of the same matter.”

James Wilson, an original justice of the U.S. Supreme court and signer of both the Declaration of independence and the U.S. Constitution said, “impeachments are confined to political characters, to political crimes and misdemeanors, and to political punishments.”

Impeachment is neither a criminal procedure nor intended primarily for criminal offenses, so penalties are limited to removal from office.

Judges removed from office also lose certain retirement benefits. (RSMo 476.480) (RSMo 476.560) (Entire Chapter 476)

For what reasons can a judge be impeached?

Missouri Constitution, Article VII, Section 1: “All elective executive officials of the state, and judges of the supreme court, courts of appeals and circuit courts shall be liable to impeachment for crimes, misconduct, habitual drunkenness, willful neglect of duty, corruption in office, incompetency, or any offense involving moral turpitude or oppression in office.”

A court decision which is clearly in opposition to the plain meaning of the constitution made in favor of personal opinion or in deference to political allies is “corruption in office”. A decision like that is in violation of the judge's oath to defend the constitution and strikes at the seminal principles of “separation of powers”.

If a the judge's motives are not malicious, but he simply misunderstands the clear dictates of the constitution, then he is guilty of “incompetency”.

MO Const. Article VII, Section 11: “Before taking office, all civil and military officers in this state shall take and subscribe an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution of the United States and of this state, and to demean themselves faithfully in office.”
MO Const. Article II, Section 15
"Every senator or representative elect, before entering upon the duties of his office, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: I d
o solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will support the Constitution of the United States and of the state of Missouri, and faithfully perform the duties of my office, and that I will not knowingly receive, directly or indirectly, any money or other valuable thing for the performance or nonperformance of any act or duty pertaining to my office, other than the compensation allowed by law."

References:

Missouri Constitution search

Missouri Constitution

Missouri Revised Statutes Search

Missouri Revised Statutes

  • Removal and Impeachment of Public Officials (RSMo 106)

Directory of Missouri Representatives


Order “Restraining an Overactive Judiciary” by David Barton From Wall Builders (It's about 60 pages and only $6.95) This is an excellent, easy to read book that uses a lot of quotes from the founding fathers to explain the importance of “separation of powers” and the role impeachment has played in maintaining that separation.


Missouri Impeachment History Summary

  1. 1825 Circuit Judge Richard S. Thomas, Jackson, MO
    Accused of bribery in order to secure a clerk position for his son.
    Removed

  2. 1843 Judge John Leland, 2nd Judicial Circuit
    Accused of deficiency in legal knowledge, negligence, tardiness, inattentiveness
    Outcome unknown

  3. 1859 Circuit Judge Albert Jackson, Butler County
    Accused of oppression in office, (28 articles)
    Acquitted

  4. 1867 Circuit Judge Walter King, Platte County
    Accused of finding no bills of indictment against Confederate soldiers, refusing to give or take the loyalty oath required by the constitution, etc.
    Removed

  5. 1867 Circuit Judge James C Moody, St. Louis Circuit
    Accused of uttering false erroneous, and dangerous decisions and opinions, subversive of the valid and binding provisions of the constitution, and for intentionally neglecting to require loyalty oaths by jurors.
    Outcome unknown

  1. 1872 Circuit Judge Philander Lucus, Platte County
    Charged with “allowing indictments to create costs” by granting mileage allowances to jurors.
    Charge dropped

  2. 1931 State Treasurer Larry Brunk
    Accused of mishandling state money
    Aquitted

    (Note: The 1945 constitution transferred impeachment trials from the senate to the Supreme Court, except when a SC judge or Governor is impeached.)

  3. 1962 Circuit Judge Virgil A Poelker, St. Louis County
    Accused of mishandling money
    Resigned before trial

  4. 1968 Circuit Judge John D. Hasler, St. Louis County
    Accused of personal involvement with a woman seeking a divorce in his court and improperly advising her.
    Resigned before trial

  5. 1994 Secretary of State Judith Moriarty
    Accused of back dating her son's filing for an election
    Removed


Can you believe it? The Missouri constitution can be amended with a simple majority vote of an uninformed electorate! Maybe the next amendment to our state's supreme law should require a 2/3 vote for changes to this seminal document.





UN Flag Flying Over Missouri University!

Yes, that's it, right between the U.S. flag and Missouri's flag. Viewing from this direction, preeminence is indicated by the left most position. What is the university trying to tell us?

This Land Is Your Land?
Not at the University of Missouri, Columbia it isn't!
United Nations influence over our institutions of higher learning is evidenced by the flying of the UN flag over Jesse Hall, the main administration building.

The Problem With the UN Flag
Words mean something, and so do flags. A flag is more than just a piece of colored cloth, it's a symbol representing values and ideals. Flags are used in many ways; they denote possession of a territory, rule, victory, pride, loyalty, honor and submission.

In days past, when a new territory was discovered, the explorers claimed that territory by raising a flag. When an invading army conquers a city, they announce their victory, claim rule, and demand submission by flying their flag above the most prominent building. Loyalists fly the flag or banner of their hero, whether it be a baseball team or a nation. One of the first things Neil Armstrong did upon landing on the Moon was plant an American flag!

Considering the importance and significance of flags, we must ask,
"Is it right to fly the flag of the United Nations over the most eminent university of our great state?".   more.


Why Do We Need Sovereignty for Missourians?
What's happening to America? You don't have to be very old to remember when things were different. It wasn't long ago when 'unspeakable' things weren't spoken! Now it is hard to escape the decadence.

In the eyes of many Americans, the distinction between right and wrong has been blurred; our culture is changing faster than it ever has. Why is this, and what will be its end?

THE SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM
Cultures foreign to the American way now permeate our society - this is the natural result of unbridled immigration and humanism's step-child, multiculturalism. This doctrine declares that all cultures are equally acceptable, but you need go no farther than the court dockets to learn otherwise. more.


Join us in our effort to secure Missouri Values. There are things you can do!






About Missouri First

Why Join Missouri First? Membership is Free!



"Our citizens have wisely formed themselves into one nation as to others and several States as among themselves. To the united nation belong our external and mutual relations; to each State, severally, the care of our persons, our property, our reputation and religious freedom." -- Thomas Jefferson: To Rhode Island Assembly, 1801

More Jefferson Quotes

Benjamin Franklin wrote in 1787:

 "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."




Copyright 2010 Missouri First, Inc.

Home - - Charter - - Essays - - Projects - - MO History - - MF News -
- Messages - - Links - - Search - - Contacts - - Join - - Contribute