Congressman Rob Wittman's Weekly Updates

As the summer goes on, I’m continuing to fight for our furloughed federal civilian employees. This week, I heard from so many of you that are losing 20% of your income until September 30, as federal government employee furloughs continue. On Tuesday, the Department of Defense (DoD) officials came to brief members of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) on the furlough situation as a whole. As Chairman of HASC’s Readiness Subcommittee, I requested this briefing because I remain concerned that furloughs are both unnecessary and detrimental to our military’s readiness. The brave citizens who have been tasked with defending this nation, whether in or out of uniform, deserve answers and solutions. It seems to me that Congress continues to duck and dodge from addressing one of the most important issues: sequestration. However, I was pleased to vote for legislation this week that would prohibit furloughs by the DoD for the next fiscal year, which begins on October 1, 2013. Political gamesmanship and indiscriminate furloughs have no place in governance. I believe Congress has an opportunity and an obligation to do the right thing and truly address out-of-control spending in a responsible way - not on the backs of dedicated patriots working for the DoD or any federal government agency.

Also during the month of July, the House acted to delay several burdensome provisions of Obamacare. I feel strongly that health care in this country must be reformed, but I will continue to oppose Obamacare and its harmful provisions. I was proud to support the Authority for Mandate Act (H.R. 2667), which delays the requirement that businesses with over 50 full-time employees provide minimum essential health care coverage to employees or face a fine. The rush to implement something like this will have nothing but negative consequences for individuals, families, and the small businesses that employ so many of our neighbors. A second bill, the Fairness for American Families Act (H.R. 2668), would in turn suspend the provision known as the individual mandate, which requires that all citizens purchase health coverage or pay a penalty tax. I am also a cosponsor of H.R. 2682, the Defund Obamacare Act of 2013. I have long argued that the goal of any health care reform must be to drive costs down so that quality health care coverage is affordable and accessible to every American. Since the health care overhaul was signed into law, costs have gone up, and folks continue to lose coverage due to the regulations within this law. I continue to support responsible, commonsense reforms that target the true factors driving up health care costs for individuals. Any reforms must ensure that doctors and patients, not insurance companies or government bureaucrats, are the ones making important health care decisions. I will continue to work with my constituents and press Congress to pursue true solutions to address our nation’s rising health care costs.

As we move closer to the August district work period, while I always look forward to spending more time with you and the good folks in the district, I continue to urge my colleagues to stay in Washington to ensure the nation’s business is finished. I believe Congress should not leave during the month of August, but should remain in Washington to get the job done and will oppose adjourning just as I did last August. It is important to connect with constituents, and I am fortunate to be able to drive home each night and stay connected with reality. However, unfinished business should be addressed. Congress has a job to do and should not leave until the job is done.

The main streets of Virginia’s First District are full of ideas to get our economy back on track, and your feedback is critically important to me as I serve you. I can be reached by telephone at (202) 225-4261, through my website (www.wittman.house.gov), on Facebook (www.facebook.com/reprobwittman), and via Twitter (www.twitter.com/robwittman).

Our Notes:  Universal health care is neither a Constitutional right nor privilege.  To force this down everyone's throats in the US is dictatorship and tyranny.  Violations of the Oaths of Office.  Throw the bums out.  Tar and feather them?  That is what would have been done in the past.  We need a serious return to our Constitutional past and forget these reforms of communism.   Uncle Sam Wants His Country Back!

Related articles

• Congressman confronts Camp Lejeune mental health furloughs
• High-ranking military Congressman Buck McKeon: Job cuts, not furloughs, most efficient in sequestration
• White House Responds to Obamacare Criticism by Challenging Economic Claims
• Ted Yoho hosting town hall focusing on DoD furloughs
• House Approves 1.8 Percent Military Pay Raise
• White House takes aim at Obamacare opposition's economic claims

Gloucester, VA To Get Illegal Middle School? Part 2

From what we showed in yesterday's part one post, it looks to us like we are in the midst of a real conspiracy.  In our view we have been able to show intent, implied contracts, what Virginia Code states and what the final intentions of Gloucester officials really are despite what the citizenry wants.

http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com/2013/07/gloucester-va-to-get-illegal-middle.html  This is a link back to yesterday's story, part one, in case you may have missed it.

What we see is Gloucester officials going through the steps to try and keep everything looking legal and them telling everyone what they are doing is legal, but the evidence would seem to strongly suggest otherwise.  The selling of a bond has not even been approved yet to raise the money to construct a new school.  But Gloucester officials have already actively sought bids for the new construction.  According to Virginia state code, Gloucester officials can not place an order for work, even implied order which is what w see they have already done, without having the funds already in place.

  The Virginia codes are posted in part one of this story.  How many times have we shown on this site that Gloucester officials do not follow the rules?  How many times?

Oath of Office;

We gave everyone the tools to fight back from this holdup.  It's the Oath of Office that each government official must take before they are allowed to conduct even one piece of business.  If the Oath of Office is in violation, then each official can be held accountable for their actions outside of government protection.  That means any and all financial costs and responsibilities fall on each individual official and they must pay those costs and damages out of their own pockets and do not qualify for government protection in the courts.

This also means that all contracts are null and void and can not fall back on the citizens of Gloucester County, but instead fall on each Gloucester official involved.  In yesterday's post we linked one of Gloucester's own videos, a propaganda piece in our view, that shows that Gloucester officials are growing local government at a very alarming rate.  This of course means higher taxes for everyone to support this growth.  It also shows their own double speak.  Re constructing one school they said we do not need all the while building another one they say we need.

Every area of that says higher taxes for each Gloucester citizen and it also says you have no voice in your own government.  It states government by the people for the government and special interests and to hell with the people.

It's a violation of everything America stands for and is more of what America is becoming, but only if you let it.  Every fight is important when it's a fight for what American idealism truly stands for.

Stop Government Waste, Fraud and Abuse - The Blue Print from Chuck Thompson

We have put the fight into a blue print form.  Now we know that the blue print form above is not one you would want to print out to use in a fight, so we have created a print version as well.

Stop Government Waste, Fraud and Abuse - The Blue Print - print version from Chuck Thompson

We have also created download links for both of these.

http://www.putlocker.com/file/9743E82CFB281548  Link to the blue print version

http://www.putlocker.com/file/94F2491D508E959E  Link to the print version of the blue print.

Now we are not attorney's and none of this should be considered legal advice, only a competent attorney can legally advice you on these matters.  We are simply presenting our own research and arguing against what we believe to be a conspiracy against the citizenry of Gloucester, Virginia.

What else can you do?  Show up at the public hearing on August 6th, 2013 at the Gloucester Courthouse and argue against the officials and their plans, armed with the right information.  You can also email all of the officials letting them know you are against this plan.

bgarton@gloucesterva.info
cborden@gloucesterva.info
ltheberg@gloucesterva.info
rorth@gloucesterva.info
achriscoe@gloucesterva.info
chutson@gloucesterva.info
jnorthstein@gloucesterva.info
ajames@gloucesterva.info
ewilmot@gloucesterva.info

You can also write to our Delegate, Keith Hodges and ask him to look at all of this.

keithhodges98@gmail.com 

All email links are active.

Holly B Smith is the Commonwealth Attorney for Gloucester, however, there is no available email link for her.

Kim Driscoll is one of the legal assistants for Holly B Smith, so you could always send Kim the complaint to be forwarded to Holly.

kdriscol@gloucesterva.info

The future belongs to all of us.  What legacy will we leave our children?

Gloucester Officials Violating Oath of Office? Legal Repercussions

The staff here had some great ideas and so went to work on looking up state laws regarding the oath of office each official must take before they are allowed to serve.  Here is what they have come up with so far.

49-1. Form of general oath required of officers.

Every person before entering upon the discharge of any function as an
officer of this Commonwealth shall take and subscribe the following oath: "I
do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the
United States, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that
I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent upon me
as .......... according to the best of my ability, (so help me God)."



§ 24.2-120. Oath of office.

The oath of office for the members of the electoral board, registrars, and officers of election shall be the oath stated in Article II, Section 7, of the Constitution. Each member of the electoral board, registrar, and officer of election shall take and sign the oath before performing the duties of his office.

Each member of an electoral board and general registrar shall file the original signed oath in the clerk's office of the circuit court of his county or city. The general registrar shall file a copy with the secretary of his electoral board.

The oath of office for assistant and substitute registrars, officers of election, and voting equipment custodians may be administered by a general registrar or a notary as well as by persons authorized to administer oaths under § 49-3.

The oath of office for officers of election may be administered by a member of the electoral board, the general registrar, an assistant or substitute registrar, as well as by notaries and persons authorized to administer oaths under §49-3.



Article 2

Section 7. Oath or affirmation.

All officers elected or appointed under or pursuant to this Constitution shall, before they enter on the performance of their public duties, severally take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent upon me as ...................., according to the best of my ability (so help me God)."

Section 8. Electoral boards; registrars and officers of election.

There shall be in each county and city an electoral board composed of three members, selected as provided by law. In the appointment of the electoral boards, representation, as far as practicable, shall be given to each of the two political parties which, at the general election next preceding their appointment, cast the highest and the next highest number of votes. The present members of such boards shall continue in office until the expiration of their respective terms; thereafter their successors shall be appointed for the term of three years. Any vacancy occurring in any board shall be filled by the same authority for the unexpired term.

Each electoral board shall appoint the officers of election and general registrar for its county or city. In appointing such officers of election, representation, as far as practicable, shall be given to each of the two political parties which, at the general election next preceding their appointment, cast the highest and next highest number of votes.

No person, nor the deputy of any person, who is employed by or holds any office or post of profit or emolument, or who holds any elective office of profit or trust, under the governments of the United States, the Commonwealth, or any county, city, or town, shall be appointed a member of the electoral board or general registrar. No person, nor the deputy or the employee of any person, who holds any elective office of profit or trust under the government of the United States, the Commonwealth, or any county, city, or town of the Commonwealth shall be appointed an assistant registrar or officer of election.

The amendment ratified November 4, 1986 and effective January 1, 1987—In paragraph two, after "officers", deleted the words "and registrars" and added "and general registrar" after "of election". In paragraph three, after "the electoral board or", added the word "general" before "registrar" and deleted a reference to officer of election, and added the last sentence: "No person, nor the deputy or the employee of any person . . .".

Now the questions arise, after oath of office by officials, officials who violate said oath, are they personally liable for damages they cause?  No longer protected by government matters as they were found outside of of their office in their actions?  

How does this apply?  Recently we reported and showed conclusively that the Board of Supervisors of Gloucester County voted on and passed new ordinances for Animal Control back in February of this year, 2013.  We have further shown that the county has not implemented these approved changes in full.  Both Twitching Ted (I'm not an attorney) Wilmot, so called county attorney have a legal obligation to ensure that the changes were correctly made, Brenda Garton, county administrator equally had a duty and responsibility to ensure the changes approved were properly implemented.  Both have failed in these duties.

With the Board of Supervisors having taken oath of office, each member of the Board had an equal responsibility to ensure that the voted on and approved changes were properly implemented.  All 7 failed in that duty.  We have shown to all 7 Board of Supervisors as well as the county administrator, Brenda Garton, where they are in violation of their own approved ordinances and still the violation is left standing.

So the question we are looking at is are all of these people in violation of the oath of office?  If so, are each person personally liable for any abuses in law that this violation may have caused?  Or in plain simple language, can each of these individuals be sued and not have any government protection because they acted outside of their own offices?  

Let's look at a fictitious, but possible example.  If Animal Control has prosecuted anyone after February, 2013 under Animal Control ordinance section 3-15, anyone prosecuted under this ordinance since it is in violation of state law as it is in violation of what the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors did approve for what that ordinance must state word for word, then those who were prosecuted could claim malicious intent and sue each person on the Board of Supervisors, the county administrator and Twitching Ted, (I'm not an attorney) Wilmot, all outside of government protection for each of these individuals because the ordinance was not properly executed according to the counties own orders?

It's looking to us like the Oath of office is a valid issue and a serious problem for each of these individuals.  In even simpler language, an individual prosecuted under 3-15, Gloucester County Animal Control ordinance, has 9 people to potentially sue and those 9 people are not covered by government protection.

Now we are not attorney's and this is not meant as legal advice.  This is simply research we are conducting.  We are digging deeper into this matter and looking at case law as we believe we have found the underbelly of the beast.  As of Tuesday morning, July 23rd, 2013, the Gloucester County Animal Control laws section of the website has not been brought into compliance.  

http://www.gloucesterva.info/AnimalControl/AnimalLaws/tabid/671/Default.aspx

Link to Animal Control laws section of the website.

God help them if they are found in violation of the oath's of their offices.

On further notes, one has to ask, are the county officials anarchists?  They do not follow the law from what we see.  Why should anyone else?  No one should be prosecuted in Gloucester, Virginia for any reason when our own leaders can not follow the laws.