The Path to Freedom: Interposition for Liberty
17. Aug, 2009 
20 Comments
by Ray McBerry – 2010 Candidate for Governor in Georgia
Today Georgians panic at the thought of being removed from federal government dependency, having forgotten that life did exist before the current level of intrusion, and life existed abundantly. Though we assert that the civil government spawns waste, bureaucracy and tyranny, we waffle at the sea of uncertainty as to how best proceed toward liberty.
The path to freedom is achievable but it is not easy. It is not easy because it depends on the political will of the people, a people who have been indoctrinated through government school systems to be owned by their government rather than to own their government.
Our founding fathers were gripped by a similar situation, but worse since they were attempting to invigorate a people toward freedom who had never known it, and could not look back in the annals of history to find it. Less than half of the American colonists wanted to assert life and liberty apart from Britain. About 3% became the revolutionaries risking wealth, family, friends, jobs, and life to embrace the risky business of freedom.
It was in this way, and thanks to this handful of colonists, that our nation was brought into the ideology of individual life and liberty. Known as The Great Experiment abroad, it was the first time in history where a people asserted their right to themselves, their property, their liberties, and their life as granted by God, and established a civil government to protect that which God granted.
The odds against them were immense and parallel the challenge that we are taking up and wrestling with today.
The current usurpation of power now centralized in the federal civil government has become the most powerful empire in the world. The interests of the empire are advancing while the interests of individual life and liberty are all but dead. The individual is forced into a position of powerlessness over his personal property, wealth and freedom. Having come so far away from individual life and liberty, how do we reclaim self-government and control?
The only way to restrain an out of control federal government is through the interposition of state authority to stand in defense of individual life and liberty. Those sound like nice words, but what does this mean precisely in application?
It means stepping out on our own two feet as a state. It means telling the federal government “No!” while asserting our legal authority in the contract amongst the states to do exactly that. It means equipping Georgians with the knowledge and the power to understand what is happening and how to engage in the process of change. It means having a Governor with the gumption to stand firm in the face of the storm of uncertainty, and one prepared to wield the lawful and Constitutional tools at his disposal to bring a unified independence to fruition in our great state.
We are unveiling a legislative course of action in order to lawfully, peacefully, and securely proceed in the advance of states’ rights as well as individual life and liberty for our Georgians.
Every week for the next two months, a new piece of legislation will be presented and explained in this strategic initiative. This is being undertaken with the goal that more Georgians will become more aware, more interested and more involved with the process of controlling their government all with an eye to the restoration of their own individual liberties as espoused in our country’s foundational documents. Just such an endeavor is long overdue.
The State Authority and Federal Tax Funds Act
Currently the federal government is directly taxing our Georgia citizens through a graduated income tax, one of the more important pillars of the Communist Manifesto, in addition to a myriad of other taxes. The State Authority and Federal Tax Funds Act would require that all federal taxes come first to the Georgia Department of Revenue. A panel of legislators would assay the Constitutional appropriateness of the Federal Budget, and then forward to the federal government a percentage of the federal tax dollars that are delineated as legal and Constitutionally justified. The remainder of those dollars would be assigned to budgetary items that are currently funded through federal allocations and grants or returned to the people.
As we assert our sovereignty, we can expect that we will have our federal funding cut off, money that originally belongs to the people of Georgia anyway. Georgia is currently known as a donor state, because the amount of tax dollars surrendered to the federal government is greater than the amount of federal tax dollars returned to the state. This theft would cease under the State Authority and Federal Tax Funds Act.
We must proceed wisely and prudently, passing the necessary legislation in proper compliment and tandem in order to insure that the tools needed for interposition by our Governor are in play and to be wielded when Ray McBerry becomes Georgia’s first states’ rights Governor.
We own our government, and it is to us our legislators must swear their allegiance, in preserving and protecting individual life and liberty, and in redeeming the value and integrity of our great Constitution.
We the people must govern our government. Only then, will we truly be free.
Ray McBerry [send him email] is running in the Republican primary in 2010 for Governor of Georgia. Visit his website at http://www.georgiafirst.org
If you enjoyed this post:
Click Here to Get the Free Tenth Amendment Center Newsletter,
Ray McBerry says: “The State Authority and Federal Tax Funds Act would require that all federal taxes come first to the Georgia Department of Revenue.”
Now THIS is what I find very interesting!
Hopefully, Mr. McBerry can offer a few words as a follow-up. I see an issue here, but regardless, I FAVOR this kind of ACTION.
First, the Constitution allows the federal government to tax the people of the states directly. A person who does not remit the federal tax to the federal government is in violation of federal law and subject to the penalties associated with such violation.
Second, the proposed State Authority and Federal Tax Funds Act would require the people of the state to remit their federal taxes to the state government. Thus, they would be in jeopardy due to violating the federal laws.
By what means will the state of Georgia be able to alleviate the fears and concerns of the citizens who are directed by two different laws to remit the SAME tax dollars to two DIFFERENT governments? Sort-of a “damned if you do; damned if you don’t” scenario.
If such a state law was to pass, there will be an immediate and rather forceful response from the federal government.
Jeff, it sure makes the whole thing more “interesting” to say the least. I don’t know if people are ready for this aggressive of a move…yet. But, at some point down the line, I can see this as being a needed step. The question, of course, is…when?
We’ve been in touch with McBerry’s staff – hoping to have him on the podcast in the near future.
I see this as the perfect angle to take with voters.
If I tell you that you receive less then you pay for. What is the typical response that can be expected? and how can one justify continuing to give in spite of knowingly being short changed?
We have been groomed from childhood to pay attention to what we get versus what we pay for, we are bombarded every single day with television ads making this an issue, and we as consumers are very savvy to it.
Georgia simply sells it’s plan based on this premise. Why send your money to Washington and get LESS.. when you can keep your dollars in Georgia and get MORE?
I see no argument that can counter such a fundamental issue, by people who use the exact same principles to make decisions and spend their money.
I see this as a way for States to proclaim we “out perform” the feds based on value and service.
Michael is right though.. the question is “when”.. when will this even be offered up as an alternative?
It would be interesting to hear how a progressive would argue the case for the Feds, afterall, they do have a remarkable track record of efficiancy and service.
YES!!! Georgia has a Statesman with a SPINE!
Jeff, by the Constitution, the State Laws trump the Federal. The Federal (aka Lower) Gov’t has been twisting the meaning and usurping individual rights for about 100 years. It’s time to put it to a stop.
Darkwolfe, teh 16th Amendment says, “
Oops…
Darkwolfe, the 16th Amendment says, “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”
Nowehere does the Constitution say the State’s laws trump this. In fact, it says the opposite.
Article VI says, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
Thus, the proposed Georgia law does not comply with the Constitution. It would, indeed, be one of those state’s extra-Constitutional remedies I have been saying should be justified based upon extra-Constitutional acts by the federal government.
While I am all in favor of restoring States’ rights to the extent envisioned under our Constitution, I think we ought to look with wary askance at proposals such as Mr Berry suggests. In the first place, the Constitution rather clearly (in Article I, Section 8, clause one) lists as an enumerated power of Congress the ability to lay and collect taxes. It does not require the Congress to seek the approval of a panel of Georgian legislators in so doing. I would submit there is no point in trampling the Constitution while claiming to seek to restore the balance between State and Federal government. In the second place, the solution to our current grievances with an out of control Federal government is readily at hand. The Legislatures of the several States have the authority, acting in concert, to dictate to the Federal government through the Amendment process. Interpositioning is a fine idea, one I hope to see all the States embrace in pursuit of protecting the liberties of themselves and their citizens. Lets all hope that when the States do so elect to interpose themselves between the citizens and an abusive Federal government, they do so in accordance with the Constitution and not in accordance with a fit of pique or passing whimsy.
Indeed, Lawmage. Taxes are enumerated, though the current Federal income tax system is regarded by many as outside of what was enumerated.
Perhaps the proper procedure to establish the 10th Amendment rights of a state may lie somewhere between the viewpoints of Ray McBerry and Lawmage.
The authority of the federal government to collect its income tax depends upon the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the federal income tax amendment, which was allegedly ratified in 1913. After a year of extensive research, tax attorney Bill Benson discovered that the 16th Amendment was not ratified by the required 3/4 of the states, but nevertheless Secretary of State Philander Knox fraudulently announced ratification. Yet another illegal act by our employees. While it occurred quite awhile ago, it nevertheless lends credence to the founders concern over an out of control federal government. The only difference between then and now, is with tyranny firmly in place, lead by a de-facto president, we are losing our nation daily, instead of over decades, it what amounts to a one party system. Checks and balances are gone, with the power firmly in the hands of the people to stand up, turn this around and implicate the multitude of traitors criminally ensconced as our employees.
Lawmage says, “I would submit there is no point in trampling the Constitution while claiming to seek to restore the balance between State and Federal government. In the second place, the solution to our current grievances with an out of control Federal government is readily at hand. The Legislatures of the several States have the authority, acting in concert, to dictate to the Federal government through the Amendment process.”
Therein lies the BIG problem. There are certain rights that we consider SHALL NOT be violated, despite whatever a majority in a democracy desires. For example, the right to bear arms is supposedly an inviolate right that a majority cannot trample. The same goes for free speech.
So, by analogy, the limitations on the federal government are set out in the Constitution. Not even a democracy, by majority, is permitted to trample the protections against federal usurpation.
So, you tell me…. Why should it take 3/4’s of the states’ legislatures to pass amendments to restrain the federal government from exceeding its authority?
It is not supposed to work that way. Therefore, I submit, as I always have consistently, as long as you try to place the limits of the Constitutional process upon YOURSELF, when the other side who is usurping its authority sees no need to do so at all, you are under FAR MORE constraint than was ever envisioned.
For example, the federal government is not permitted to take your private property without just compensation. What if it starts taking people’s private property without compensation and the US Supreme Court says, “That’s okay.”? Do we REALLY have to amend the Constitution? What would you amend? It’s already in there.
We should not be required to garner the support of 3/4 of the states to protect my state’s rights against federal usurpation by a simple Congressional majority. My state’s rights do NOT depend on the will of the other states to preserve theirs. We should not require any votes at all.
Jeff, we are on the same side here. I did not mean to suggest an Amendment was required to rein in the Federal government’s abuses of the States’ rights. I meant rather to suggest that the Amendment process could be used to more tightly restrict the actions of the Federal government rather than what Mr Berry suggests (federal taxes under the control of Georgia). For instance, on the topic of taxation and Federal abuse thereof, we might consider an amendment that gets rid of the 16th Amendment and with it Federal income taxation. Such an Amendment might specify that the 16th Amendment is invalid, dictate that the Federal government no longer has the power to tax individual or corporate incomes, and impose other necessary and proper restraints on the the taxation power granted to Congress under Article I, section 8. Quite frankly, I think the best way for us (as in We The People) to restrain or constrain the Federal government is to eliminate the funding that allows it to carry out its tyrannical abuses and to coerce or co-opt the States into assisting it in those abuses.
Amen!
Bryce Shonka wrote:
Taxes are enumerated, though the current Federal income tax system is regarded by many as outside of what was enumerated.
Well, let’s look at it like this: They had to amend the constitution in order to … constitutionalize collecting federal taxes on the income of individuals. So, yes, a federal income tax is most definitely outside the scope of what was (originally) enumerated.
Also, the sixteenth amendment (may it burn in effigy!) contains that dreaded phrase that we see so often in constitutional amendments — “The [U.S.] Congress shall have power to” … whatever. Any time you see a version of that phrase in any amendment to the constitution, you can rest assured that it is not an enumerated power or in any way derived from an enumerated power.
[# Al Says:
August 17th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
The authority of the federal government to collect its income tax depends upon the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the federal income tax amendment, which was allegedly ratified in 1913. After a year of extensive research, tax attorney Bill Benson discovered that the 16th Amendment was not ratified by the required 3/4 of the states, but nevertheless Secretary of State Philander Knox fraudulently announced ratification. Yet another illegal act by our employees. While it occurred quite awhile ago, it nevertheless lends credence to the founders concern over an out of control federal government. The only difference between then and now, is with tyranny firmly in place, lead by a de-facto president, we are losing our nation daily, instead of over decades, it what amounts to a one party system. Checks and balances are gone, with the power firmly in the hands of the people to stand up, turn this around and implicate the multitude of traitors criminally ensconced as our employees.]
I am not a Georgian, but I am in total agreement with Al. I could only hope for such a man to run against our wimpy governor of Arkansas. We had a Tenth Amendment Resolution up for vote twice and it was voted down by a Democrat majority that we have. Their excuse is that it would do no good anyway. Our federal government is operating above the law and usurping the powers that belong to the States. They have broken the contract of the Constitution, and it is up to the people NOW to do something about it!
Pro-interposition site; check us out, pls; comment.
John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com
Recovering Republican
JLof@aol.com
John: Thanks for stopping by. We hope to hear more from you soon!
I agree with some of your cautious posters that, having allowed the 16th and 17th ammendments to be ratified, we will have a harder time nullifying them, but as I recall, the original constitution specifically forbade an income tax, and meant for the federal government to be funded bytaxes on goods (tariffs).
Leaving aside the arguments against taxing international trade for a moment, I’d like to say that I completely agree with Mr McBerry’s proposal to collect taxes locally, and forward only a portion to the Feds.
I believe that it will take a majority of states, and possibly a constitutional convention to truly stuff the Federal genie back into its bottle, but I have a proposal of my own along the same lines as Ray:
Let the states collect the taxes and manage their local programs, and levy a charge upon the states for maintenance of those enumerated federal functions, BASED UPON A PERCENTAGE OF STATE BUDGETS – shazzam! the most frugal states will pay least to the Feds – what a way to stimulate creativity!
So the question here is: If the 16th amendment contradicts the 10th amendment which one is valid?
This is an excellent idea for STEP 2 of the repossession of our government by “We the people”. The essential step precedent to resolving the problem is one far easier for our State to take to protect us from the federal government; it is for our State to Repeal the 17th Amendment. It is the 17th that permits the federals to tax incomes. Before that amendment passed, incidentally also disturbing the fundamental check created by the state’s selection of its Senators by the legislatures and eliminating the State’s from any direct control of the excesses of the federal government, the feds were limited to collecting TARIFFS [NO WORLD ORDER] and FEES.
The States right to repeal any infraction of original rights cannot be impaired. Hence, with a Supreme Court stressing arguments based on “original principles” where the federal government has no right to lay a tax, there can be no adverse consuences under law.
Then we do not need the artifice of the proposed tax collecting procedure; we can merely pass our own tax laws to generate whatever income the citizens of Georgia need — including support for our aging population presently dependent on the “social non-security of the federal government”. With that tax system and its ability to cover our own needs for medical, etc. and our desire we can limit access to our money for any group not lawfully in this State.
THINK ABOUT IT. LOOK AT THE 17TH AMENDMENT WEB SITE AND GET THE FACTS AND GET ON BOARD. HOW LONG DO YOU THINK IT WILL BE BEFORE ALL THE STATES REPEAL THE 17TH.
A GEORGIA PATRIOT.