Anti Federalist Papers No. 48 – No Separation Of Departments Results In No Responsibility

In the new constitution for the future government of the thirteen United States of America, the President and Senate have all the executive and two thirds of the Legislative power.

This is a material deviation from those principles of the English constitution, for which they fought with us; and in all good governments it should be a fundamental maxim, that, to give a proper balance to the political system, the different branches of the legislature should be unconnected, and the legislative and executive powers should be separate. By the new constitution of America this union of the executive and legislative bodies operates in the most weighty matters of the state. They jointly make all treaties; they jointly appoint all officers civil and military; and, they jointly try all impeachments, either of their own members, or the officers appointed by themselves.

In this formidable combination of power, there is no responsibility. And where there is power without responsibility, how can there be liberty?

The president of the United States is elected for four years, and each of the thirteen states has one vote at his election; which vote is not of the people, but of electors two degrees from the people.

The senate is a body of six years duration; and as in the choice of presidents, the largest state has but one vote, so it is in the choice of senators. Now this shows, that responsibility is as little to be apprehended from amenability to constituents, as from the terror of impeachment; for to the members of the senate it is clear, that trial by impeachment is nothing but parade.

From such an union in governments, it requires no great depth of political knowledge to prophesy, that monarchy or aristocracy must be generated, and perhaps of the most grievous kind. The only check in favor of the democratic principle is the house of representatives; but its smallness of number, and great comparative disparity of power, render that house of little effect to promote good or restrain bad government.

The power given to this ill-constructed senate is, to judge of what may be for the general welfare; and such engagements, when made the acts of Congress, become the supreme laws of the land.

This is a power co-extensive with every possible object of human legislation. Yet there is no restraint, no charter of rights, no residuum of human privileges, not intended to be given up to society. The rights of conscience, the freedom of the press, and trial by jury, are at the mercy of this senate. Trial by jury has been already materially injured. The trial in criminal cases is not by twelve men of the vicinage, or of the county, but of the state; and the states are from fifty to seven hundred miles in extent! In criminal cases this new system says, the trial shall be by jury. On civil cases it is silent. There it is fair to infer, that as in criminal cases it has been materially impaired, in civil cases it may be altogether omitted. But it is in truth, strongly discountenanced in civil cases; for this new system gives the supreme court in matters of appeal, jurisdiction both of law and fact.

This being the beginning of American freedom, it is very clear the ending will be slavery, for it cannot be denied that this constitution is, in its first principles, highly and dangerously oligarchical; and it is every where agreed, that a government administered by a few, is, of all governments, the worst.

LEONIDAS

Learn More About American History;

Visit Jamestown, Yorktown, Colonial Williamsburg Living History

Museums in Virginia.

Related articles

• Federalist Papers No. 47. The Particular Structure of the New Government and the Distribution of Power Among Its Different Parts.
• Anti Federalist Papers No. 30-31 - A Virginia Anti-Federalist On The Issue Of Taxation
• Declaration of Colonial Rights
• Anti Federalist Papers No. 44 - What Congress Can Do; What A State Can Not
• Federalist Papers No. 39. The Conformity of the Plan to Republican Principles
• Official Declaration of Contempt of Constitution by The People of the United States of America

Constitutional Law Regarding Income Taxes, 1913

Here is an interesting look back in time about constitutional law and an early interpretation of the 16th Amendment.  Now the real question one has to ask, is the 16th Amendment itself legal?  According to earlier Amendments to the Bill of Rights, not in our opinion.

Here is a look at the 16th Amendment;

Amendment 16: Income taxes

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.

February 3, 1913.

Now let's look at the 9th Amendment:

Amendment IX:  Rights retained by the People

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

These two Amendments would seem to be in conflict with each other yet they have never been argued.  Now the legal arguments surrounding the 9th Amendment shows that it's so ambiguous as to not really be understood.  Well, who really understands the 16th Amendment?  Who gave Congress the power to create such a drastic Amendment?  What it really says is that Congress can take all of your money at any time and for any reason.  There is not one single control in there to stop a 100% confiscation of anyone's money.  

Now what is the definition of enumeration?  

Full Definition of ENUMERATE
transitive verb

1: to ascertain the number of :

2: to specify one after another :

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/enumerate

Link to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary.

In a Constitutional Republic Democracy, the will of the people, through elected representatives, is how laws and or rights are created and passed.  If you ever look up the history of the 16th Amendment, this process did NOT take place.  Instead what you will find, based on our own research, is that the 16th Amendment was railroaded through in violation to the US Constitution, against the will of the people.  

So complain all you want about billions of dollars to trillions of dollars going to bailouts or other countries for whatever reason, you allow it everyday by refusing to look at the reason why this is done and sitting back being entertained by; whatever.

Now here is a video that is over the top, but has a very good message.  We do not agree with many areas of it, but it makes very valid points in many areas.  You can't sit back and think that there is nothing you can do.  One person can and does make a difference.  Each person acting towards what is right and in the best interests of society as a whole can make a world of difference.  Anyone can argue who determines what is right.  Let them argue it.  Those people do nothing but argue points, and do nothing else with their lives, so ignore them.

  

Here is some information that you might want to check out but not follow.  The woman in this video eventually went to prison.  She had the wrong argument even though she was on the right trail.

As we said, here is the information about her going to prison.  Now do we recommend people not pay taxes?  Can you really afford not to?  In all honesty, we need someway to finance a fair and Constitutional government, we just need to fix the system.  We can't do that as long as we keep the same chumps in office term after term and chumps that are worse than the chumps already in have to stop running not giving anyone a choice.

  Get involved.

Related articles

• We Don't Need an Article V Convention to "Clarify" Our Constitution!
• The TRUTH About the 16th Amendment
• The Constitution and Our Military, By Sue M Long
• Undermining The Constitution A HISTORY OF LAWLESS GOVERNMENT (Part 1)
• Federalist Papers No. 44. Restrictions on the Authority of the Several States
• Official Declaration of Contempt of Constitution by The People of the United States of America

American Patriotism, Where Do You Stand?

If it be asked, What is the most sacred duty and the greatest source of our security in a Republic? The answer would be, An inviolable respect for the Constitution and Laws - the first growing out of the last. . . . A sacred respect for the constitutional law is the vital principle, the sustaining energy of a free government.

Alexander Hamilton:

The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virture to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.

Alexander Hamilton and James Madison.

It is certainly true that a popular government cannot flourish without virtue in the people.

Richard Henry Lee.

It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow.

Alexander Hamilton and James Madison.

(Sounds altogether familiar.)

Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?

Alexander Hamilton and James Madison.

In Europe, charters of liberty have been granted by power. America has set the example . . . of charters of power granted by liberty. This revolution in the practice of the world, may, with an honest praise, be pronounced the most triumphant epoch of its history, and the most consoling presage of its happiness.

James Madison.

Do you stand with the founding fathers or do you stand with today's socialist's the few dictating the control of the masses where liberty is only a buzz word with no real meaning?   Are you for the new Pledge of Allegiance?

Related articles

• James Madison's Advice: Block Federal Gun Control in the States
• 6 people who favor private ownership of firearms, and 6 people who did not .... hint: the 6 who "did not" hired thugs w/ guns to kill people who wanted to own weapons ....
• Federalist Papers No. 10 The Union as a Safeguard Against Faction and Insurrection
• Undermining The Constitution A HISTORY OF LAWLESS GOVERNMENT (Part 9)
• Federalist Papers No. 47. The Particular Structure of the New Government and the Distribution of Power Among Its Different Parts.
• Federalist Papers No. 48. These Departments Should Not Be So Far Separated as to Have No Constitutional Control Over Each Other

Gloucester, VA Note To The Board of Supervisors, August, 2014

Dear Board of Supervisors:

During the July 1, 2014 I spoke to you about things that needed to be fixed for all of the citizens. They are at the bottom as a reference.

I would like to focus on number 5 today:  “Bring County Ordinances into compliance with Virginia Code.  Mr. Wilmot can help you with this if not consider hiring a competent county attorney.”

It is a little known fact that the General Assembly and the Governor develop and pass new laws or codes, every year and they take affect on July 1, the start of the Virginia fiscal year.  The newspapers let “WE the People” know of these new codes or changes to existing laws in June so we are aware of the changes and will be in compliance on July 1^st.  Is the County Attorney aware that these changes take place or the County Administrator?  Since “WE the People” know and are required to be in compliance on July 1^st why are not the County Ordinances being updated and made available for a public hearing no later than the first August Board of Supervisor meeting so the county is in compliance?  In my opinion there should be a public hearing in the July meeting.

I have to wonder is the County Attorney and his assistant not capable of executing the requirements of their Jobs?  Are the responsibilities of the job too much for them? You would think ensuring the County is in compliance with United States Constitution and Federal Regulation; and Virginia Constitution and Codes would be number one on the list.  Mr. Thompson has even offered his services to assist the County Attorney in bringing County Ordinances into compliance and in response the County Attorney refuses to correspond with Mr. Thompson by email.  I have to wonder is the County Attorney still in Junior High School and not an adult?  Why do we have a number of County Ordinances that have never complied with Virginia Code, as pointed out by Mr. Thompson especially in regard to animal control?  Is there any connection with these illegal Ordinances and the stories Mr. Thompson is reporting on?

The next point does the County Administrator have over-site on what the County Attorney is doing?  In my opinion a reasonable person would believe the County Administrator’s Office would ensure the County Attorney’s office is aware that keeping County Ordinances in compliance with Virginia Codes may be important?  Are the responsibilities of the County Administrator’s Office too much for the current staff to handle?  Are the responsibilities of the job too much for them?

In my opinion maybe we need to replace the County Attorney and assistant; and the County Administrator and assistants; it appears the duties of their jobs are greater than they have the ability to accomplish with growing responsibilities of world we live in today.    In my opinion failing to execute their duties is a violation of their “Oath of Office” and grounds for removal but a competent Attorney may be needed to determine this.

Prior to the election all candidates for the Board of Supervisors got together at the Library to share what they would do if elected, Mr. Thompson has the audio on the web site.  The three new supervisors stated if they were told of County Ordinances that was not in compliance with Virginia Code they would fix it.  We are in violation of Virginia Code in many sections of our County Ordinances.  This needs to be fixed along with the underlying problems.  We expect you to keep your word.  Mr. Blake answered something to the effect that he is only one person.  I believe he did not become a supervisor.

Working on your next report card there is still time to improve your grade during this month recording period. 

Respectfully,

Wayne Crews

Gloucester Point District

P.S. “Here is what you to do:

1.  Integrity at the Board of Supervisors level.

Quit voting for things that benefit you over the county.

2.  Hold Department Heads and Supervisors to high standards and get rid of them when they break the rules.  You cannot hold lower level employees to high standards if they are not practiced at the higher levels.

3.  Fire employees on the spot if they use vehicles for personal business, except in the case of an emergency and the employee better contact the supervisors before the supervisor contacts them.  No shopping, banking, and fast food restaurants in county vehicles.  If trash is found in the vehicle from these places the employee needs to receive the same punishment.

4.  Quit wasting taxpayers money.  The Board of Supervisions and all county employees need to be good stewards of the resources.

5.  Bring County Ordinances into compliance with Virginia Code.  Mr. Wilmot can help you with this if not consider hiring a competent county attorney.” 

Related articles

• Gloucester, VA Board of Supervisors Meeting Video, August, 2014 With Notes
• Gloucester, VA Animal Control Breaking and Entering? What About "YOUR" Rights? (Part 2)
• Gloucester, VA Board of Supervisor's Meeting, Video and Notes, July, 2014
• Gloucester, VA Officials Violate Anti Trust Laws In Illegal Gun Fraud Scam?
• Ted Wilmot, Gloucester County Attorney Throws Board of Supervisor's Under The Bus?
• Gloucester, VA Board of Supervisors Consider Ordinance To Cheat The IRS?

Gloucester, VA Do You Need A License Plate On You Vehicle? Federal Law Says No. States Can Not Override?

Get to know these well!  Posted by;  Freewill.

Marbury V. Madison 5 U.S. 137 says the Constitution of the United States is the Supreme law of the land.

Shapiro V. Thompson 394 U.S. 618 says the right to travel is so basic that it shouldn't even be questioned.

Murdoch V. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 106 says no state may convert a secure liberty into a privilege and then issue a license and a fee for it.

Shuttlesworth V. Birmingham Alabama 373 U.S. 262 says I can ignore the license and engage in the right with impunity, that means you can’t punish me for it.

Norton V. Shelby County 118 U.S. 425 an unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights and poses no duties, affords no protections, and creates no office. It is in legal contemplation as inoperative though it had never been passed.

US V. Bishop 412 U.S. 346 Defines willfulness as an evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under law with immoral certainty. I am using the constitution and supreme court cases so I am not using evil motives or intents.

16th Andrews prudent second section 97 says that it shall be interpreted in my favor because I am the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary for the protection of my rights and property.

S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54
Government Is Foreclosed from Parity with Real People
– Supreme Court of the United States 1795

“Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of
the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary,
having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity
with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any
law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate,
artificial persons and the contracts between them.”
Supreme Court of the United States 1795
[--Not the "United States Supreme Court" –ed.]

CRUDEN v. NEALE 2N.C. (1796) 2 SE 70 “Every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent”

See link below for originating site.

http://www.nesaranetwork.com/2014/08/18/very-important-supreme-court-rulings/

Our Notes:  Do we recommend anyone test this?  Not really.  Anyone really want to try the system and at your own expense?  Though we agree with the above, we don't want to see people make numerous mistakes fighting the system.  Leave it to those who can afford it and know what they are doing.  Every type of trick will be used against you that you will not see coming and the court cases will go on forever.  It's better to fight them in the press and expose everything one can and let everyone see what the real deal is.  You have to love the people who are doing this as they are fighting for everyone's freedom and rights here in the US.

Related articles

• Official Declaration of Contempt of Constitution by The People of the United States of America
• Undermining The Constitution A HISTORY OF LAWLESS GOVERNMENT (Part 10)
• Of Equal Rights Before The Courts And The Government
• Federalist Papers No. 47. The Particular Structure of the New Government and the Distribution of Power Among Its Different Parts.
• Why did the Attorney General change the Commonwealth's legal position in Bostic v. Rainey?
• Undermining The Constitution A HISTORY OF LAWLESS GOVERNMENT (Part 11)

Governor McAuliffe Statement on Supreme Court’s Decision to Grant Stay in Same-Sex Marriage Case

Governor Terry McAuliffe released the following statement in reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to grant a stay that will delay same-sex marriages in Virginia until the court decides whether or not it will hear the case:

“Today’s decision is a temporary delay to the inevitable conclusion that Virginians who love each other should have the opportunity to marry regardless of their sexual orientation. Building a new Virginia economy means creating an environment that is open and welcoming to all, where world-class innovators and entrepreneurs can locate without fear of discrimination. That is why  my first act as Governor banned discrimination in the state workplace based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and why I support marriage equality in Virginia as a key ingredient of that economy of the future.

“I applaud Attorney General Mark Herring for his continued efforts to see this case concluded as quickly as possible, and I hope the Supreme Court takes immediate action to uphold the 4^thCircuit’s decision so that Virginia can finally take this next important step in our history. In the meantime, my administration will make the necessary preparations so that we are ready to implement this decision if the ruling is upheld.”

Our Notes:  Isn't this what our forefathers fought for?  So that there could be gay rights?  Wasn't that already added into the US Constitution?  97th Amendment, the right to be free and gay?  Now isn't it that in a republic this can be voted by the will of the people?  In a democracy, it's just forced onto the people.  Which one are we seeing in this state now?  If there is one upside to trampling all over the will of the people, it's that certain bloodlines should never reproduce.  We just got that wish the difficult way.

Related articles

• Governor McAuliffe Statement on Ruling in Bostic v. Rainey Case
• Governor McAuliffe Statement on Conflicting Federal Rulings on the Affordable Care Act
• McAuliffe Administration Has Restored Voting Rights to More than 2,500 Virginians
• Governor McAuliffe Signs Executive Order Establishing Inter-Agency Task Force on Worker Misclassification and Payroll Fraud
• Governor Terry McAuliffe Executive Order Number 1
• Governor McAuliffe and Virginia Legislators Celebrate Today's First Flight at the Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership

The New Atlantis or The Founding of Early America, Sir Francis Bacon

The New Atlantis, Sir Francis Bacon, Free eBook from Chuck Thompson

To understand the history of this nation and the history of the Constitution, one must look back in history to see what the real influences were.  Having read a number of history books, it has been stated in numerous books that the ideas, ideals and concepts for the Constitution were created in early America.  Well, this is only partially true.  One has to go back even further to see where the roots for the Constitution really came from.  Thomas Jefferson, one of the most influential founding fathers of this nation was highly influenced by the works of Sir Francis Bacon.

  A study of Sir Francis Bacon shows that the concepts for the governance of the new world were in fact formulated in the late 16th to early 17th century.  The above eBook will show how these concepts took shape in the development of the Constitution of the United States.  Even still, the ideas, ideals and concepts were not unique to Sir Francis Bacon as even he was taught many of the ideas he later wrote about and published.

  The above eBook can be downloaded for free from our Slideshare site.  You may have to become a member to access the free download, but signing up is free and the site is free to use.  We have well over 600 selections on offer and that number keeps growing, so you might find it worth your while.  Otherwise you can always read it right here on this site.  You can expand the eBook to full screen for better viewing.  What you may learn is that history is truly fascinating and not the least bit dull.  School was dull, history is fun.

Is a Constitutional Convention a Good Idea? By; Sue M Long

By:  Sue M Long

Federal overreach is of great concern—rightly so. What to do about it is of equal concern.

With the best of intentions, some citizens are calling for a constitutional convention to pass amendments to our U.S. Constitution for the purpose of reigning in federal power. The premise is that the states would control the convention—who the delegates would be, how they are chosen and how many per state; what amendments would be proposed and voted on, what the processes would be and any other matters the convention would take up.

But Article V of our Constitution states clearly the two ways to amend the Constitution:

1. Congress proposes amendments and presents them to the States for ratification; or

2. When 2/3 of the States apply for it, Congress calls a convention to propose amendments.

Our Constitution is clear: States are authorized to apply to Congress to call a convention. Beyond that they have no say.   

This is confirmed by an April, 2014 report by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the authoritative source Congress uses for accurate information. CRS states without exception that only Congress makes all the rules. It points to the ’70s and ’80s when there was considerable interest in an amendment convention. (And states then began rescinding applications.) Congress introduced 41 bills that included specific conditions as to the procedures for a convention including selection of delegates which would be, as opposed to “one state, one vote”, instead, a formula based on the Electoral  College, whereby Virginia would have 13 votes to California’s 55, etc. The report shows not only what Congress could do; it verifies what it has already done in preparation for a convention. Mark Meckler of Convent ion of States project (COS) has said that their “rules were not meant to bind the future convention. Rather, they provide starting points to facilitate”, admitting that they cannot control the process.

Control is in the hands of the Congress guilty of overreach in the first place!

• Who is financing what?  George Soros is pouring millions into organizations promoting a convention. The seed money to start the Convention of States in 2012 was $1,207,183 collected in donations, though COS had no paid solicitors. Most opposing a convention are paying out of pocket with their own non-tax deductible dollars.

• Promoters claim there is no concern about a runaway convention. History tells us otherwise. The 1787 convention was called for the purpose of adding amendments to the Articles of Confederation. Yet, it was scrapped altogether and a whole new constitution was produced. There is no ruling authority to prevent that from happening again. Present at the 1787 convention were statesmen like George Washington and James Madison. How many such do we have today?

• There is also a claim that 3/4 of the states would have to ratify any proposed amendment.  Once again, the 1787 convention set a precedent by changing the rules. They changed who ratifies from legislators to conventions and the required number for ratification from all the states to 3/4. What could happen today? Ratification by a simple majority of the states?  Or by Congress?  Or by no one?

• The claim that “The states would never ratify a bad amendment.” does nothing to quell concerns. The 16th and 17th amendments come to mind. 

Why take the risks? If convention supporters somehow accomplished state selection of delegates, who would they be?

Speaker William Howell appointed Virginia’s representatives to the “Assembly of State Legislatures” (Dec 7, 2013 and June 12, 2014):

Sen. Frank Ruff, who voted for the tax increase/ transportation bill (HB 2313) in 2013 and fought against the Boneta Farm bill; He did not show Dec. 7 nor June 12

Del. Scott Lingamfelter, who voted in the 2004 Virginia Assembly to rescind any application for a convention (that had been passed when Democrats controlled the Assembly) on this basis:“WHEREAS, the operations of a convention are unknown and the apportionment and selection of delegates, method of voting in convention, and other essential procedural details are not specified in Article V…the prudent course requires the General Assembly to rescind and withdraw all past applications for a convention to amend the Constitution of the United States …”

Then, Lingamfelter prefiled a motion to call FOR a constitutional convention in 2014.

Del. Jim LeMunyon, who voted for the tax increase/transportation bill (HB 2313) in 2013 and sponsored Homeowners’ Association bills opposed by Association dwellers

Del. David Albo, who voted for HB 2313 in the 2013 Assembly and voted against a convention in 2004, but for it in 2013.

Do these sound like people we trust to vote on making good changes to our Constitution?

• Changing the name to “Convention of States” or “Balanced Budget Amendment” (BBA) does not change what it is. It is still an Article V convention called by Congress for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution. States may convene all they wish; states meeting together is traditional. But for the states to make the call for a convention and/or decide its conditions would be completely unconstitutional.

• Are the amendments being proposed advisable? For example, a BBA would result in raising taxes to balance the budget if there was no agreement on cutting the spending. Also, the BBA would increase the power of the federal government. As it is, the government can only spend money on the enumerated powers listed in the body of the Constitution. The BBA would result in no constraints on spending other than the cost, bypassing the limitations of the enumerated powers.  

• Who besides well-meaning patriots support a convention? Globalist George Soros, liberal California Governor Jerry Brown, Richard Parker, a former member of the ’60s radicals known as Students for a Democratic Society and Harvard Professor Lawrence Lessig, a current Obama supporter and guest of the 2013 Bilderberger meeting who said, “Perhaps it is time to rewrite our Constitution.”

• Could we depend on the states to reign in federal overreach when it is the states that take federal grants, making them an accomplice to the overreach? 

• Since Congress disobeys the Constitution, is the solution to change it? If people don’t obey the 10 Commandments, should they be rewritten? When government officials don’t abide by the Constitution now, why trust they would obey an amended one?

   The solution? Obey the Constitution, not change it. For more information, contact the address below.

Groups/Individuals on record opposing a call for an Article V convention

Sheriff Richard Mack, Phyllis Schlafly, Larry Pratt, Devvy Kidd,

 Tom DeWeese, Martha Boneta, American Policy Center, Del. Bob Marshall, Sen. Dick Black, Larry Nordvig,

Chris Stearns, Shaun Kenney, Patriot Coalition, Kelleigh Nelson, Publius Huldah, Gun Owners of America,

Mid-Peninsula Tea Party (Gloucester/Mathews /Middlesex), Mathews County GOP Committee, VirginiaRight.com,

American Policy Center, Concerned Citizens of the Middle Peninsula, Virginia GOP Third Congressional District,

Danville Tea Party, Newport News GOP City Committee, Eagle Forum,  Daughters of the American Revolution,

Sons of the American Revolution, American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, AFL-CIO, 

National Rifle Association, United Republicans of California, California Democratic Party, The American Independent Party,

National Association to Keep and Bear Arms, The Constitution Party, American Pistol and Rifle Association, Pro-America,

John Birch Society, The Second Amendment Committee of Hanford, CA, Constitutionalists United Against a Constitutional Convention,

United Organizations of Taxpayers, Voters Against Conspiracy and Treason, and the Conservative Caucus...to name a few.

The Committee for Constitutional Government

PO Box 972  •  Gloucester VA  23061  •