/" /> Reclaiming The Republic

Skip to: Site menu | Main content

There is no greater issue facing our Republic today then Federal Tyranny. If we work together we can save our individual liberties and sovereignty, the sovereignty for each State and the Republic (all the States collectively), and most importantly save our Constitution!

The States must take back the roles, responsibilities, and powers that were reserved to them and were not expressly delegated to the general government. The process to do this is simple. It only takes one State to initiate an audit and then call upon their fellow States to join in a Convention to audit the Constitution we refer to as a Convention for Republic Review.

The concept of Republic Review (Executive Summary)

THE IRREFUTABLE ARGUMENT FOR REPUBLIC REVIEW
 Background:
 After writing three books on Constitutional subject matter (two of which have been published and may be found at: http://mobiusstrippress.com/store.html).   I have engaged several different groups in my work and travels, speaking with them on the Constitutionality of Republic Review.  I am frequently asked to provide a summary and having done this orally a few times, I have decided to provide a formal document for promulgation and your delectation. If one would like the 15 second pitch it would be this: “Eighty percent of what is spent by the Federal government is unconstitutional and Republic Review is the only process that will stop this and place the Federal government back within the framework and scope of the Constitution.”

If you are looking for a solution that can quickly fix our out-of-control general (i.e. Federal) government, then I assert that this can only be done through “Republic Review.” If the 15 second pitch did not pique your interest, then I simply ask you to take 5 minutes to consider the following Executive Summary. If you are ready to dive deeper into the details, then I will  gladly go into them , but I would tell you that reading my books will give you almost all the answers as to what, why, where, and how. If you want to schedule a presentation for an event or a group, then let me know.

Executive Summary:
The Constitution is a contract between the State governments, written by the State governments, and for their mutual benefit.   As the framers state numerous times, the Constitution (i.e. compact) authorizes the creation of a general government and specifies limited and defined powers, which are “enumerated” in the Constitution. These powers are “enumerated” in Article I, Section VIII of the Constitution with carefully selected and precise language.  The roles, responsibilities, and powers (RRPs) not enumerated in the Constitution or its ratified Amendments, are reserved to the States, both separately and collectively. This doctrine of limited authority and scope is reinforced by the 10th Amendment and the Ratification Debates.  This places the States’ authority and power above the general government in all things except for those specific RRPs which the States reluctantly delegated to the general government within the confines of the contract (i.e. Constitution).  Furthermore, the Constitution sets the parameters as to who and how many are required to “buy” into the stock of this new compact in order to make it a legitimate contract in Article VII; this unequivocally establishes who the owners of this contract are.

Inherent in fundamental contract law is the ability for the principle stakeholders (i.e. owners) to audit their contract at any time, especially when the potential violations committed by the subordinate (i.e. the Federal government) have been acknowledged.  This fundamental basis of auditing with contract law was even inherent at the time of the drafting and ratifying of the Constitution in 1787.  Therefore the States possess the unconditional authority and power as the stakeholders of the Constitution to audit and revoke any and all RRP’s and laws promulgated by the general government which violates the specified and defined limits within the Constitution.  To be clear, the States do not need to submit to a subordinate court system regarding the violations of RRPs reserved to the States, or violation of limits on authorities which have not been delegated to the general government per the Article V process.  The States possess unbridled authority and oversight as defined by the specified limitations placed upon the general government by delegating enumerated powers instead of an ambiguous granting of powers.  The unlimited and undefined powers which the States retained were demanded by each of the States in the Ratification process and were the genesis to the 10th Amendment. 

The Constitution was not passed in a binary fashion (i.e. a simple vote of yes or no).  Each State required the clarification of the Constitution by their delegates who attended the Constitutional Convention.  This is why each ratification debate possesses a significant role in the interpretation of the Constitution, as a contract.  These clarifications and elucidations provided by these delegates/authors were essential in the “selling” of the Constitution to the States and must be considered as legal appendages to the Constitution.  This is because these arguments and definitions during the ratification debates were defining and explaining the terms of contract to the State Ratification Conventions and many were done line by line.  In addition, some States used the Federalist Papers for further information, which were promulgated to the Newspapers within the States that had not ratified the Constitution. Bear in mind that the definitions given and accepted in the Ratification Debates are “amendments” to the contract.  It is fortunate that the due diligence of the founders (i.e. States) captured these testimonies and definitions for each and all of the stakeholders today.  Furthermore, these clarifications and definitions in the Ratification Debates are congruent, resonate, and align with the principles that the States are superior in all things not delegated to the general government.  This was precisely why many of the States ratified the Constitution with the caveat that the Constitution required immediate amendments and a call for the insertion of the Bill of Rights, which created negative powers upon the general government.  As a point of reference, bear in mind that it took less time to ratify the Bill of Rights then it did the Constitution.

Consequently, Madison and Jefferson as well as the other framers were well aware of the oversight powers possessed by the States.  Republic Review a modern term to identify the process by which the States exert their collective power to audit the Constitution. Any one State can initiate an audit of the Constitution by itself at any time (just as Madison and Jefferson did in 1798) and then call for its fellow States to coalesce in a Convention for Republic Review. This Convention is strictly the aforementioned process of auditing the Constitution.  The Convention for Republic Review and its process grants no powers to amend or rewrite the Constitution, or to generate a new Constitution. For further clarification on this, Republic Review is not a vehicle to these later conventions identified to change or replace the Constitution.  Each of these other Conventions has disparate processes for commencing. Again, Republic Review is simply an exertion of authority and oversight that is inherent to the States as the stakeholders of the compact (i.e. the Constitution), to review and revoke assumed and usurped RRPs that are being exercised by the general government.

Madison and the framers stated a plethora of times during the Constitutional Convention, within the Federalist Papers, and during the Ratification Debates of the Constitution, that the States are superior in all things not enumerated/delegated to the general government in the Constitution.  Madison also stated that the States possessed “the advantage” in dealing with the general government regarding these forms of encroachments upon the powers of the States.  The sad reality is that the States failed to maintain vigilance in their understanding and oversight, due to the nefarious intents and treacherous opinions of John Marshall and other self-acclaimed authorities of the Constitution.  As a point in fact, only the States possess this authority per Article V, the Ratification Debates, and the Tenth Amendment.  There are several quotes from the Federalist Papers in the section below this that also contains the landmark rulings by Marshall who perverted the Constitution and laid the foundation for future usurpations.  Federalist Paper Article #49, can be found here http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed49.asp .  This is where Madison makes the salient point of using administrative conventions to audit and redress encroachments when one branch of the general government impinges upon another branch’s powers. Additional proof and evidence that supports this can be found in the Ratification Debates. 

Once you read a few of Madison’s arguments regarding State superiority and the strict limitations placed on the general government by the enumerated powers in the Constitution, you will realize the wisdom and accuracy of my 15 second pitch.  Over 80% of the powers being exercised by the general government are unconstitutional. If further elucidations to this are needed, I suggest you study Madison’s veto of the “Internal Improvements” Bill (March 3, 1817) to conclude that the general government may not use the Supremacy, Necessary and Proper, Commerce, or General Welfare clauses to assume a new role, responsibility, or power (RRP). Madison clearly states that the general government MUST amend the Constitution by following the Article V process in the Constitution.  Madison’s 1817 admonishment to Congress can be found in its entirety here: http://www.constitution.org/jm/18170303_veto.htm.  Ironically, this Bill was Congresses first laying the ground work for creating a Department of Transportation.  Once Madison left office Congress tried again with President Monroe to usurp this RRP, who also vetoed the Bill with his instructions that they needed to amend the Constitution to take on this RRP.  Congress never being satisfied, they attempted another time to create a Department of Transportation later with President Jackson who also informed them that they had to amend the Constitution to exercise this RRP.

James Monroe’s Veto message can be found here:  http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=66322.
Andrew Jackson’s Veto message can be found here:  https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/may-27-1830-veto-message-regarding-funding-infrastructure.

Consequently, in accordance with the Constitution and the associated founding documents the following executive departments are not authorized by the Constitution and are an on-going usurpation of States RRPs, because the general government did not follow the Article V process in establishing these departments:
 1. Justice
 2. Interior
 3. Agriculture
 4. Commerce
 5. Labor
 6. Health and Human Services
 7. Housing and Urban Development
 8. Transportation
 9. Energy
 10. Education
 11. Veterans Affairs
 12. Homeland Security

Suffice it to say that only the States have the authority to delegate these powers and nowhere in the Constitution or in the Ratification Debates did the States allow or accept a statute of limitations on challenging violations, nor has the Constitution been amended to allow any branch of the general government to adopt any new RRPs that they want to assume.  They MUST follow the Article V process per the contract.  Furthermore, the Constitution has not been amended to allow any branch of the general government or the entire general government to “collectively assume” any new RRP.  Again, the only way the general government can obtain a new RRP or change an existing RRP is through the Article V process, which requires three-fourths (currently 38) of the States to approve the new or changed RRP. There has yet to be an Amendment to the Constitution to grant the general government the ability to assume any RRP that they may please. Therefore, as Jefferson said in the Kentucky Resolution:

“That the several States composing, the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes — delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force: that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral part, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.”

The full texts of the Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions can be found here:  http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jeffken.asp and here:  http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/kenres.asp.

The full text of the Madison’s Virginia Resolution is here: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/virres.asp.
Consequently, the only solution is precisely what Madison and Jefferson attempted in response to “The Alien and Sedition Acts” of 1798. Who would know better than an author and “father” of the Constitution?

If one examines these resolutions, Madison and Jefferson did not request to convene an Article V Convention. This is because there is no requirement to fix a contract when it is being palpably violated. The solution is enforcement and compliance, which is why they first responded as a unified body of Legislators within the States of Kentucky and Virginia, calling out the violations.  With the text of these Resolutions it is clear that they were not seeking to amend the Constitution.  In essence, they challenged and exerted their authority over the general government and audited the unlawful Acts against the Constitution. Their finding was simple; the general government does not possess the authority to institute arbitrary laws such as these without the States delegating powers in kind per the Article V process.  Consequently, these two States first audited, judged and nullified these Acts in their individual Resolutions.  They then appealed to the other States to join them in auditing, judging, and nullifying these laws, and then they sought to collectively admonish and correct the general government with the authority of the Republic.  Unfortunately, the other States did not perceive the danger in these violations and failed to valiantly defend and fulfill their obligation to protect their citizens from Federal tyranny.

Can the States do this? If one has read the Federalist Papers and the Ratification Debates one would understand that they not only can do this, according to Madison in the Virginia Resolution of 1798 the States are duty bound to protect their citizens from Federal tyranny.  Again, all powers not delegated to the general government are reserved to the States, individually and collectively, as a Republic.  To pose the question differently, what RRPs are authorized to the States within the Constitution?  Answer: all RRPs that have not been formally delegated to the general government within the Constitution.  In other words the powers left to the States and the Republic are enumerable and it would be folly to attempt to list them.

This audit, or Republic Review process, where the States exercise their authority of oversight over the Constitution, is the most important tool the Republic possesses at their disposal in restraining and returning the general government back into the framework and scope of the Constitution and to constrain the general government in the future.  There are more mechanics and parameters to this process, but suffice it to say that once one State begins the audit process and shares their findings with the other States in the Union, the sooner the other States will begin to coalesce enough States to constitutionally revoke and remove the unconstitutional RRPs being exercised by the general government today, as Madison asserted in Federalist Paper #49.

This is the only Constitutional and contractual process that can save our Republic and our Constitution. Following articles will explain in detail why other conventions are either impotent or too dangerous to exercise at this time.  Additional articles will be forth coming as well to explain how to get one State into the process as well as getting all States into the Convention for Republic Review.

Allowing unconstitutional government or Federal tyranny to exist and continue to grow will be the demise of this Republic. NOW is the time to get informed and involved in our efforts to initiate Republic Review.  When the day comes for the President or the general government to collectively suspend and discard the Constitution, we must ensure that our founding document is cloaked in the armor of Republic Review.

May God Bless the Republic!

 

 B/R
 G. R. Mobley

The academic citations from the Federalist Papers that support Republic Review

•Note 1 Limited and Defined

"In the first place it is to be remembered that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any." Federalist No. 14 James Madison

•Note 2 Limited and Defined

"We have seen that in the new government, as in the old, the general powers are limited; and that the States, in all unenumerated cases, are left in the enjoyment of their sovereign and independent jurisdiction." Federalist No. 40 James Madison

•Note 3 Limited and Defined

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State." Federalist No. 45 James Madison

•Note 4 Encroachments/Convention

"Were it admitted, however, that the Federal government may feel an equal disposition with the State governments to extend its power beyond the due limits, the latter (i.e. the States) would still have the advantage in the means of defeating such encroachments." Federalist No. 46 James Madison

•Note 5 Encroachments/Convention

"But ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority of the State governments, would not excite the opposition of a single State, or of a few States only. They would be signals of general alarm. Every government would espouse the common cause. A correspondence would be opened. Plans of resistance would be concerted. One spirit would animate and conduct the whole." Federalist No. 46 James Madison

•Note 6 Encroachments/Convention

"The separate governments in a confederacy may aptly be compared with the feudal baronies; with this advantage in their favor, that from the reasons already explained, they will generally possess the confidence and good-will of the people, and with so important a support, will be able effectually to oppose all encroachments of the national government." Federalist No. 17 Alexander Hamilton

•Note 7 Encroachments

"Independent of parties in the national legislature itself, as often as the period of discussion arrived, the State legislatures, who will always be not only vigilant but suspicious and jealous guardians of the rights of the citizens against encroachments from the federal government, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if any thing improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people, and not only to be the VOICE, but, if necessary, the ARM of their discontent." Federalist No. 26 Alexander Hamilton

•Note 8 Encroachments

"As in republics strength is always on the side of the people, and as there are weighty reasons to induce a belief that the State governments will commonly possess most influence over them… there is greater probability of encroachments by the members upon the federal head, than by the federal head upon the members… the safest course to lay them altogether aside, and to confine our attention wholly to the nature and extent of the powers as they are delineated in the Constitution."  Federalist No. 31 Alexander Hamilton

•Note 9 State Advantage

"The State government will have the advantage of the Federal government, whether we compare them in respect to the immediate dependence of the one on the other; to the weight of personal influence which each side will possess; to the powers respectively vested in them; to the predilection and probable support of the people; to the disposition and faculty of resisting and frustrating the measures of each other."  Federalist No. 45 James Madison

•Note 10 Encroachments

"The conclusion which I am warranted in drawing from these observations is, that a mere demarcation on parchment of the constitutional limits of the several departments, is not a sufficient guard against those encroachments which lead to a tyrannical concentration of all the powers of government in the same hands." Federalist No. 48 James Madison

•Note 11 State Advantage

Article 49 Title: Method of Guarding Against the Encroachments of Any One Department of Government by Appealing to the People Through a Convention Federalist No. 49 James Madison. This is not speaking of an Article V Convention Commonly referred to as a Convention of States; this is an example of an administrative Convention that would audit the Constitution or “Republic Review”

•Note 12 Encroachments

"If, then, the courts of justice are to be considered as the bulwarks of a limited Constitution against legislative encroachments, this consideration will afford a strong argument for the permanent tenure of judicial offices, since nothing will contribute so much as this to that independent spirit in the judges which must be essential to the faithful performance of so arduous a duty." Federalist No. 78 Alexander Hamilton

•Note 14 Encroachments

"We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority. If the foregoing argument is a fallacy, certain it is that I am myself deceived by it, for it is, in my conception, one of those rare instances in which a political truth can be brought to the test of a mathematical demonstration."  Federalist No. 85 Alexander Hamilton

•Note 15 The Constitution is a Contract

"A compact between independent sovereigns, founded on ordinary acts of legislative authority, can pretend to no higher validity than a league or treaty between the parties. It is an established doctrine on the subject of treaties, that all the articles are mutually conditions of each other; that a breach of any one article is a breach of the whole treaty; and that a breach, committed by either of the parties, absolves the others, and authorizes them, if they please, to pronounce the compact violated and void." Federalist No. 43 James Madison

•Contractual Point 1

"Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations; but, on a candid examination of history, we shall find that turbulence, violence, and abuse of power, by the majority trampling on the rights of the minority, have produced factions and commotions, which, in republics, have, more frequently than any other cause, produced despotism. If we go over the whole history of ancient and modern republics, we shall find their destruction to have generally resulted from those causes."  Virginia Ratification Debate James Madison

•Contractual Point 2

"the powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its jurisdiction."  Virginia Ratification Debate James Madison

•Contractual Point 3

"That this Assembly… views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them."  Virginia Resolution James Madison

•Contractual Point 4

"That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes… delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force;" Kentucky Resolution Thomas Jefferson

•Contractual Point 5

"This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government." George Washington 1796

•Contractual Point 6

"If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed." George Washington 1796

•Contractual Point 7

"having maturely considered the answers of sundry states in the Union, to their resolutions passed at the last session, respecting certain unconstitutional laws of Congress, commonly called the alien and sedition laws… the legislatures of our sister states…all unauthorized acts done under colour of that instrument, is the rightful remedy: That this commonwealth does upon the most deliberate reconsideration declare, that the said alien and sedition laws, are in their opinion, palpable violations of the said constitution;"  Thomas Jefferson 1799

•Contractual Point 8

"seeing that such a power is not expressly given by the Constitution, and believing that it can not be deduced from any part of it without an inadmissible latitude of construction and a reliance on insufficient precedents; believing also that the permanent success of the Constitution depends on a definite partition of powers between the General and the State Governments, and that no adequate landmarks would be left by the constructive extension of the powers of Congress as proposed in the bill, I have no option but to withhold my signature from it, and to cherishing the hope that its beneficial objects may be attained by a resort for the necessary powers to the same wisdom and virtue in the nation which established the Constitution in its actual form and providently marked out in the instrument itself a safe and practicable mode of improving it as experience might suggest." James Madison 1817

Note.
This is the most powerful condemning document one can read that refutes Federal Supremacy and supports State Supremacy over all things not specifically delegated to the Federal government!

•Contractual Point 9

"Having at the commencement of my service in this high trust considered it a duty to express the opinion that the United States do not possess the power in question, and to suggest for the consideration of Congress the propriety of recommending to the States an amendment to the Constitution to vest the power in the United States." James Monroe 1822

•Contractual Point 10

"To avoid these evils it appears to me that the most safe, just, and federal disposition which could be made of the surplus revenue would be its apportionment among the several States according to their ratio of representation, and should this measure not be found warranted by the Constitution that it would be expedient to propose to the States an amendment authorizing it." Andrew Jackson 1830

•Contractual Point 11

Bill of Rights
included 12 Amendments in 1791
The 11th Amendment in 1795
The 12th Amendment in 1801
Amendments and the Article V process is the precedence or the established Standard under our Constitution!

More points to come...

Should the Republic Just Convene An Article V Convention - or - Convention of States

Ther arguement between the Conventionites and Anti-Conventionites is coming

What more do you need to get involoved?