Reagan 2020 - New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union
asp
Home
Subscribe FREE
About Reagan 2020
The Speech
Candidate's Statement
Executive Order on
Federalism
New Federalist Platform
Reagan Speeches
Reagan Tributes
Reagan Eulogies
Remembering Reagan
Reagan Record
Reagan Biography
Photo Gallery
Historic Documents
Links
Contact
Search Reagan 2020
The Patriot Post
Patriot Shop
Patriot Petitions
The Patriot Shop
1 of 6
http://reagan2020.us/platform/a_more_perfect_union.
New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union
The defining conservative platform for this American Century.
1. Preamble
2. Honoring Our Founding
3. A More Perfect Union
4. Establishing Justice
5. Ensuring Domestic Tranquility
6. The Common Defense
7. The General Welfare
8. Secure Blessings of Liberty.
A More Perfect Union
The Constitution provides that our government possesses a federal
structure, in order to serve the objective of self-government through
republican representation. As the Declaration of Independence makes
clear, governments are instituted in order to secure the rights of individual
citizens, and governments derive their just powers solely from the consent
of the governed. We New Federalists believe that our nation has currently
strayed from this understanding that the only valid purpose of government
is as guarantor of individual citizens' rights, substituting in its place
various purposes and intentions that, whether designed for good or ill,
have abridged and infringed those rights. And because the nation has lost
this perspective on the legitimate objectives of government, the federal
structure outlined with detail and specificity in the Constitution is no
longer honored. This straying from constitutional boundaries is worrisome
in and of itself, both because it calls into question the legitimacy of the
government and because it inhibits the government from carrying out
those legitimate functions authorized by the Constitution. Further, though,
a government that has lost focus on its only valid purpose will embark
inexorably on a course of systematic violations -- and ultimate destruction
-- of its citizens' rights. Coupled with the observation that the twentieth
century has seen governments kill tens of millions of their own citizens,
this is cause for deep concern.
The Declaration of Independence asserts plainly "that these United
Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states." This
was the basis of our nation's founding, and this remains the cornerstone
that should guide understanding of the respective powers, duties and
responsibilities for guaranteeing rights of citizens of the United States,
under that "more perfect union" envisioned by the nation's Founders.
The Constitution limits the powers of government by division of those
powers into separate branches and levels of government. At the national
level, the central governing powers are divided into the coequal legislative,
executive and judicial branches, so as to offer checks and balances on the
unbridled exercise of ruling authority over the states and individual
citizens. Moreover, the Constitution is explicit in listing the few and
restricted powers that are assigned to the United States, together with the
powers that are prohibited to the several states. As the 10th Amendment
makes clear, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
2/4/2010 1:35 PM
Reagan 2020 - New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union http://reagan2020.us/platform/a_more_perfect_union.asp

respectively, or to the people." This means that only those powers,

responsibilities and duties the Constitution explicitly authorizes are
legitimate for the national government, and all that is not so authorized is
forbidden.

We believe that the Constitutional Authorization Report, as described

elsewhere in this Platform, would assist in returning the existing
overgrowth of government power to the narrow channels of
constitutionally limited federalism -- if honestly and faithfully followed by
Congress and the state legislatures. However, more is certainly necessary
to overturn the violations of federalist principles existing in this 21st
century, in such an orderly way as to avoid wrenching dislocations of civic
and governmental functions.

The major sources of such violations of federalism involving the separation

of powers have arisen through executive and judicial usurpations of
legislative functions appropriately exercised only by Congress. These
usurpations have, in turn, served to centralize power within the national
government, violating the federalist principle of preserving states' rights
and powers. As additional measures to restore a more perfect union to our
country, as envisioned by our nation's Founding Documents, we propose
the following.

Restoration of Congressional Powers Act

Congress should adopt legislation restoring to direct congressional

jurisdiction and purview all the powers, duties and responsibilities explicitly
entrusted to Congress under Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution,
whether by this action Congress outright abolishes or merely transfers
away from the executive branch any departments, regulatory agencies or
federal bureaucracies, or whether by this action Congress rescinds any
existing treaties or agreements with international and private agencies or
organizations. Congress should further state that none of the agencies
under its jurisdiction shall be empowered to promulgate any regulations,
orders, statements or advisories that have the force of law, as the
Constitution vests legislative powers only with Congress, and these
legislative powers may not permissibly be transferred away to any other
entity.

For example, the constitutional provision that "Congress shall have power
to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises" in no way permits
Congress to reassign this power to a tax collection agency such as the
Internal Revenue Service, which currently exercises that power beyond the
direct jurisdiction of Congress. Similarly, the constitutional provision that
"Congress shall have power ... to regulate commerce with foreign nations"
yields Congress no authorization to transfer this power away from itself
and to an international body such as the World Trade Organization. And
likewise, the constitutional provision that "Congress shall have power ... to
establish an uniform rule of naturalization" does not properly allow an
executive department bureaucracy like the Immigration and Naturalization
Service to wrest exercise of this power from Congress.

Furthermore, we urge Congress, once having jurisdiction over such

agencies as persist under its purview, to follow the guidelines for returning
powers and responsibilities to the states that were laid down by President
Ronald Reagan in Executive Order 12612, from October 26, 1987.

Restoration of Executive Boundaries

Much of the mischievous violation of federalism has resulted from the

profligate use of presidential orders (executive orders, presidential
proclamations and presidential directives) exceeding the powers and
responsibilities vested in the executive branch of government. Correctly

2 of 6 2/4/2010 1:35 PM
Reagan 2020 - New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union http://reagan2020.us/platform/a_more_perfect_union.asp

viewed through constitutional authorization, presidential orders are limited

in application and effect solely to the executive branch. We New
Federalists therefore support actions of Congress to restore the separation
of powers between the Congress and the President.

For example, we support as a minimal gesture legislation expressing the

sense of the Congress that any executive order that infringes on the
powers and duties of the Congress under Article I, Section 8, of the
Constitution, or that would require the expenditure of federal funds not
specifically appropriated for the purpose of the executive order, is advisory
only and has no force or effect unless enacted as law (such as 1999's H.
Con. Res. 30).

More importantly, though, we urge effective measures to restore the

separation of powers between Congress and the executive branch. Such
measures include repeal of the War Powers Act, termination of states of
emergency, termination of presidential or executive authority to declare
states of emergency, and requirement that each presidential order include
a statement of the specific constitutional or statutory provision granting
authority for the proposed action (as in 1999's H. R. 2655).

We also encourage efforts to bring challenges to presidential orders in

appropriate United States courts by Congress and its Members, by state
and local governments, and by aggrieved individual citizens whose liberty
and property rights have been adversely affected by presidential orders.

Moreover, a New Federalist President should reimplement President Ronald

Reagan's Executive Order 12612, from October 26, 1987, directing all
executive branch officers and agencies to operate according to federalist
strictures limiting the role of the national government to solely its
enumerated and authorized powers.

Restoration of Judicial Boundaries

The Constitution's Article III, Section 1, vests judicial power of the United
States in the Supreme Court and "such inferior courts as the Congress may
from time to time ordain and establish." Article III, Section 2, of the
Constitution specifies the very limited extent of cases subject to judicial
power. According to The Federalist Papers, the constitutionally authorized
role of the judiciary in dealing with the Constitution and its impact upon
the laws passed by Congress was certainly not to ascertain "the spirit of
the Constitution," but rather it was to examine the words within the
Constitution as "the standard of construction for the laws, and that
wherever there is an evident opposition, the laws ought to give place to
the Constitution."

Assuredly, our present-day federal courts have far exceeded the authority
of their offices. Among other lines of faulty justification contrary to
constitutional authorization, the federal judiciary in recent times has cited
the 14th Amendment in striking down state laws, in the process creating a
single, centralized superstate unlike any national government projected by
this nation's Founding Documents. This era of judicial activism, to date the
most arrogant violation of the Constitution, can be traced to 1936, when in
a U.S. Supreme Court decision, Justice Hugo Black penned the words, "We
must attempt to ascertain the spirit of the Constitution to interpret it."
That flawed statement, in contravention of the restrictions placed on the
federal judiciary by the Constitution, upset the delicate system of checks
and balances among the three branches of government designed under the
Constitution's model of government.

We New Federalists thus support congressional actions intended to return

the federal judiciary to the limited role described in precise terms in Article
III of the Constitution. In particular, the Constitution's statement that

3 of 6 2/4/2010 1:35 PM
Reagan 2020 - New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union http://reagan2020.us/platform/a_more_perfect_union.asp

Congress "may from time to time ordain and establish" inferior federal
courts surely implies that Congress may restrict the time during which
such courts are ordained and established. We recommend Congress adopt
a five-year sunset on authorization for each such federal court inferior to
the Supreme Court, together with the five-year review of all judges
assigned to such courts, to ascertain whether those judges have exhibited
the "good behavior" of adherence to their oaths of office to support the
Constitution, as described elsewhere in this Platform. This process of
reconstituting the federal courts, in rotation every five years, should
facilitate removal from office of judges not demonstrating this
understanding of "good behavior" prior to being once again being properly
authorized by Congress.

Moreover, though, occasional unconstitutional lapses of the courts may

necessitate immediate remedy, by actions of Congress, the President, or
perhaps even both. We urge these other federal branches of government
to be ever vigilant to excesses of the courts. We urge Congress to override
any extra-constitutional decisions of the judiciary, by enacting legislation
removing from judicial purview any matters in which the federal courts
overstep permissible boundaries. We also urge the President, under Article
II, Section 2, of the Constitution, to exercise the "power to grant reprieves
and pardons for offenses" incorrectly decided by the Supreme Court or
inferior federal courts and in contravention of the Constitution's plain
meaning.

Restoration of States' Rights and Powers

The surest guarantee of states' rights is a federal government that restricts

its operations only to the enumerated powers specifically listed in the
Constitution, as part of honoring the 10th Amendment. Absent a
self-limiting national government, the states have little recourse for
restoration of their rights and powers, beyond developing parallel
programs solely within their respective jurisdictions and refusing
participation in national mandates.

Nevertheless, we suggest states develop 10th Amendment strategies to

reclaim their rights and powers, whether by bringing court cases or by
lobbying Congress, and we urge the states to stand ready to reassume
their proper constitutionally specified roles once federalism is
reimplemented throughout the nation.

However, there are two constitutional amendments, both dating from

1913, which have had supremely deleterious effects on the balance of
power between the states and the national government, and both of which
should be repealed. We thus urge action to amend the Constitution by
repeal of the 16th and 17th Amendments.

Repeal of the 16th Amendment

The 16th Amendment to the Constitution introduced direct taxation of

incomes from United States citizens, replacing the indirect levies that had
previously been used to fund the national government. In fact, this
amendment overturned the Constitution's statement (Article I, Section 9)
that "no capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to
the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

We New Federalists would favor returning to the Constitution's original

plan for funding the national government. We further support
simultaneously repealing the 16th Amendment, in the process abolishing
the Internal Revenue Service, and replacing this onerous, burdensome
direct tax on incomes with an alternative levy, preferably in the form of a
tax collected by the states on behalf of the national government and held

4 of 6 2/4/2010 1:35 PM
Reagan 2020 - New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union http://reagan2020.us/platform/a_more_perfect_union.asp

within the jurisdiction of the states until Congress authorizes spending

funds in the respective states on constitutionally authorized matters in
adherence to federalist principles. We believe this change would
substantially alter the skewed balance of power between the states and the
national level of government, by no longer automatically amassing large
funds to Washington, D.C., for subsequent redispersal to the states. (Only
those few monies needed to fund the direct operations of the national
government, such as congressional allowances and funding for operations
of Congress, would be sent from the states' accounts to the nation's
capital.)

One such alternate source of funding would be a flat-rate income tax

collected by the states on behalf of the central government. This
replacement revenue source would have the benefit of gradualism in
implementation, especially for those states whose residents are already
subject to taxation of their incomes.

However, a national sales tax can be considered greatly preferable to a flat

tax on incomes, because we believe such direct taxes necessarily are in
violation of the 4th Amendment's guarantees of "the right of the people to
be secure in their ... houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable
searches and seizures." We believe that the IRS has now amassed such a
large collection of centralized information about individual American
citizens, that the 4th Amendment cannot be realistically viewed as still
having any force or effect in regard to personal, private financial dealings.
And merely devolving maintenance of such intrusive records by the states
in data bases linked to the central government conveys no return of
constitutional guarantees. Only destruction of existing collected records
and replacement of such corollary information collection by an entirely
different system will restore the full complement of individual rights
acknowledged under the 4th Amendment.

Repeal of the 17th Amendment

The 17th Amendment to the Constitution brought election of Senators by

direct voting of citizens in each state, replacing the previous method of
election of Senators, as given in Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution,
providing that Senators be chosen by each state's legislature. We New
Federalists believe that this amendment has had severely deleterious
effects, both in reducing the relative power of states with respect to the
national government and, ironically, in decreasing the level of "democratic"
representation of citizens by their Senators. We thus support repeal of the
17th Amendment.

We view this proposal as seriously needed to return to a more appropriate

balance between the states and the national government, as well as
restoring a more appropriate balance between the two chambers of
Congress. In the Constitution's original, thoughtful design, the House of
Representatives was the only body whose Members were directly elected
by citizens, the term of office was purposely short at two years, and those
actions of government of greatest effect on citizens were assigned to this
chamber of Congress. By contrast, the Senate was designed as a more
deliberative body, with Members providing a bridge between
responsiveness to their respective state legislatures and the national level
of government, and serving six-year terms of office. However, with the
advent of modern telecommunications and the growing expense of
statewide campaigns, Senators now find themselves more responsive to
monied "special" interest groups, which can provide campaign donations,
thus less responsive to the concerns of their respective state legislatures,
and so by extension, less responsive to direct appeal by their state's
constituents.

5 of 6 2/4/2010 1:35 PM
Reagan 2020 - New Federalist Platform - A More Perfect Union http://reagan2020.us/platform/a_more_perfect_union.asp

Restoration of Representative Republican Elections

In order to restore the faith and confidence of the American people in the
representativeness and trustworthiness of elections, we New Federalists
favor restoration of an electoral process controlled at the state and local
level rather than by national-level judges and bureaucrats. All matters
relevant to district boundaries, electoral procedures, and campaign
activities are the proper province of the states and the people. We support
abolishing The Federal Election Campaign Act, together with its 1974
amendments, and we favor disbanding the Federal Election Commission.

The Electoral College was created in accordance with Article II, Section I of
the Constitution, which provides, "Each state shall appoint, in such manner
as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the
whole number of senators and representatives to which the state may be
entitled in the Congress: but no senator or representative, or person
holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be
appointed an elector." Although the Constitution does not specify methods
for electing these electors or how they cast their votes, its wording
suggests that prominent individuals from each congressional district, and
from the state at large, should be elected or appointed as electors that
represent that district. We favor returning to this arrangement, in which
voters could vote for three individuals, one to represent the voter's district
and two "at large" representatives to represent the voter's state.

We do not support voting by Internet, nor do we favor continuing any

system of machine-readable ballots that are not simultaneously readily
readable by visual scanning. We support a return to the use of paper
ballots by all state and local election officials, together with an evidentiary
chain of physical custody of ballots, which permits recourse to a manual
counting process of ballots overseen by, and accountable to, voters of each
respective precinct, should any challenge be lodged to the announced
election results.

English As Official Language

We New Federalists also support actions to declare English the official

language of the United States and all states forming our union. We do not
favor this proposal to denigrate any culture or national origin of citizens of
this Republic, nor is this proposal intended to discourage citizens from
learning and using other languages. We favor declaring English the official
language of all levels of government in this country in order to promote
greater understanding and to strengthen the bonds of commonality and
community necessary for all citizens to understand each other and the
laws and documents that in fact bind us together as a citizenry.

Section 4: Establishing Justice

Home | Subscribe FREE | About Reagan 2020 | Candidate's Statement | Executive Order on
Federalism | New Federalist Platform | Major Party Platforms | Reagan Speeches | Reagan Tributes |
Reagan Record | Reagan Biography | Photo Gallery | Historic Documents | Links | Contact | Search
Reagan 2020 | The Patriot Post | Patriot Shop | Patriot Petitions

Reagan 2020 is a Patriot Post Sponsored Site

Copyright © 1981-2006 Publius Press, Inc.

6 of 6 2/4/2010 1:35 PM