Printing money does not recessions reverse. Can the President print enough paper money to make us all Trillionaires? It’s possible — at least on paper. Then we could all run around like a bunch of Lottery Winners — or Congressmen.
When government prints more money it devalues the rest of the paper in circulation. More paper money means the money in your pocket is worth less and less. More electronic money means the money in your electronic bank account is worth less and less. This is not a mystery. All fiat currencies eventually go up in smoke because too many people get the idea that they can be one of the insiders riding on the backs of the unwashed masses.
Self-preservation and self-development are common aspirations among all people. And if everyone enjoyed the unrestricted use of his faculties and the free disposition of the fruits of his labor, social progress would be ceaseless, uninterrupted, and unfailing.
But there is also another tendency that is common among people. When they can, they wish to live and prosper at the expense of others. This is no rash accusation. Nor does it come from a gloomy and uncharitable spirit. The annals of history bear witness to the truth of it: the incessant wars, mass migrations, religious persecutions, universal slavery, dishonesty in commerce, and monopolies. This fatal desire has its origin in the very nature of man — in that primitive, universal, and insuppressible instinct that impels him to satisfy his desires with the least possible pain. — Frédéric Bastiat
It remains to be seen whether George W. Bush is a cynical insider or completely unaware of the fundamentals of economics. Since his behavior patterns appear narcissistic I would tend to think he sees himself as a powerful insider. So I would give just a slight edge to narcissism over incompetence. It is a tough call. He seems possessed of both.
I can almost hear him saying, "How can the government run out of money when we can always print more — or enter new balances into our computer systems?" Isn’t that what he wants you to believe? When the big giveaway day comes he will probably appear on the Telescreen and try to make us all feel as though he is taking it out of his own pocket. Perhaps he will suggest we buy some cake with our windfall.
The dollar doesn’t fall all by itself — it has to be pushed.
Increasing the money supply is a de facto tax against all the other money in the world that is held in FRNs [Federal Reserve Notes — Commonly but Erroneously called Dollars]. Paper Money is unconstitutional for the United States according to Madison’s Notes on the Constitutional Convention and numerous other authorities.
A Constitutionally-minded president would be right behind Representative Ron Paul advocating for the Abolition of The Federal Reserve Banking System and the return to Lawful Money of Gold and Silver. He might also ask the Congress to replace the IRS with something that might be dubbed: "External Revenue Service."
The so-called dollar is sliding fast since it is losing its grip as the reserve currency for world oil markets. Gold and Silver "backing" of the currency is only a vague memory. The foreign policy of "Take our paper for your oil or we will bomb you back into the Stone Age," is losing its charm. The world is wising up to monetary science and some of them seem to be getting a bit weary of being shaken down. Mises is leaving his mark.
What a tremendous opportunity this represents for all of us! Now is the time to Reinstate the lawful monetary and foreign policy principles of the Founders and Framers that are being promoted by only one presidential candidate: The Honorable United States Representative Ron Paul of Texas. I am so thankful that the smirks of John McCain cannot distract Dr. Paul for one instant. He just keeps talking Liberty, Law and Constitution. Go Ron Paul!
How can we help speed up the renewal process? What actions can best effect a restoration of American prestige and credibility on the world stage? If those we have elected are not obeying the law and the Constitution they must be removed and replaced — and the sooner the better. This goes for every government servant from top to bottom.
Would having Impeachment proceedings on the docket curb the abuses or hubris of the current Administration? There is but one way to find out: Start the Impeachment Proceedings. Google the term "Impeach" to see what’s already in the Ether. People all over the Web are contemplating the absolute necessity of Impeachment. This includes our allies and our enemies as well as those nations who are wisely unaligned.
The Congress can probably Impeach based on indigestion if it so chooses. They have the uncontrollable Constitutional authority. The Smokescreen involving 400 or so "historians and scholars" who claimed Clinton could Not be Impeached over the Monica Lewinski Affair were engaging in sophomoric sophistry and proving their own lack of professionalism and ethics. Perhaps those same historians and scholars would advocate a Constitutional Amendment protecting illicit sex in the Oval Office? How could the Framers have been so shortsighted — so unscholarly?
Could Monica have been a Red Herring? Is there a test for that?
Are there better reasons to Impeach and Remove?
Clinton got plenty of people killed under suspicious circumstances — and especially at times when he was under political pressure at home. Only days after several cruise missile barrages the Arab Street was calling them the "Monica Missiles." The Clinton Impeachment should have been based on answering for the unlawful deaths of our service personnel and innocent civilians — and it may have risen to the level of Felony Murder. He should have been in the witness stand saying, "That depends on what the definition of u2018Murder’ is." Then Bubba could have perjured himself real good!
The important thing is to Impeach early and often — and for all the best Constitutional reasons. Our Impeachment skills are rusty because we haven’t exercised them as we should. Getting service personnel killed and maimed under false pretenses is serious business. Could it be a High Crime? It is certainly No Misdemeanor.
It is curious to me that these reasons did not seem to disgust us more than the Commander in Chief having his way with Monica in the Oval Office. Someone apparently knew what would titillate the National Enquirer readership just long enough.
Let’s consider the Constitutional Clauses on Impeachment:
The House of Representatives shall … have the sole Power of Impeachment. — Article I, Section 2, Clause 5
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present. — Article I Section 3, Clause 6
The Chief Justice presides but does not decide. The Senate decides by not less than the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of Honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law. — Article I, Section 3, Clause 7.
The Presidential Pardoning power cannot trump the Impeachment powers of the Congress:
The President shall … have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. — Article II, Section 2, Clause 1
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. — Article II, Section 4, Clause 1
Members of the House and Senate cannot be removed by Impeachment and Conviction — because the Legislature, being answerable to the People and the States, is lawfully Above the Executive and Judicial Branches in these matters — and We The People are Above them all.
There is No Jury for Impeachment — which also affirms the absolute nature of the Congressional prerogative:
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury. — Article III, Section 2, Clause 3
So, the House and the Senate together hold an uncontrollable monopoly on Impeachment powers under the Constitution. This means, that, if they use these powers unjustly, our ultimate recourse would be to vote them out — but only after the fact. There are no provisions for punishing the Congress for bad Impeachments — just as there are no provisions for punishing Juries for their verdicts when they rule according to their consciences and in the teeth of the law.
The Jury has a Negative on bad laws — and the Congress has a Negative on defective Presidents, Judges, and other Civil Officers of the United States.
Now if Washington DC were not under a Dark Cloud of Collusion this would mean the House and Senate would quickly rein in a Warmonger President or a pack of Constitution-Hating Supreme Court Justices. It would be unthinkable for the Congress to abrogate its authority to Declare War. In fact, the Congress cannot lawfully delegate any of its authorities to another Branch.
If the House will not oil and tune its Impeachment Machine and the Senate will not stand at the ready to Convict and Remove, we are stuck with a clogged toilet that will not flush. Criminals in all three branches of government will continue to have their way with our liberties. This main check on power has not been in working order for most of our history as a nation, e.g. Abraham Lincoln was a bloody tyrant who should have been Impeached and Removed long before he was assassinated.
Neither can we afford to ignore the complementary problem of Congressional Recidivism. Once elected the main goal becomes getting reelected. We have wandered a long way from the original vision of citizen/statesmen who would serve for a brief period with only modest compensation and then return to the ruling class: We The People.
This is still an Enforcement problem — and it is Never a good idea to make more laws when you can’t enforce the primary law that would have solved or prevented the problem. Enforcement problems occur when the People have lost their knowledge of political affairs and their political will.
Jefferson was frustrated by this problem during the early days of the Republic:
Having found from experience that impeachment is an impracticable thing, a mere scarecrow, [the Judiciary] consider themselves secure for life. — Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Ritchie, 1820. ME 15:297
I do not charge the judges with wilful and ill-intentioned error; but honest error must be arrested where its toleration leads to public ruin. As for the safety of society, we commit honest maniacs to Bedlam; so judges should be withdrawn from their bench whose erroneous biases are leading us to dissolution. It may, indeed, injure them in fame or in fortune; but it saves the republic, which is the first and supreme law. — Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:122
In his 1828 Elementary Catechism on the Constitution of the United States, Arthur J. Stansbury discussed the Stimulus Package for Presidential Scofflaws:
Q69: May ever the President of the United States be thus impeached and punished?
A69: Yes. In this free and happy country no man is so great as to be above the law. The laws are supreme; to them all persons, from the President of the United States to the poorest and the meanest beggar, must alike submit. This is our glory. Let every youthful American exult that he has no master but the law; let him mark the man who would change this happy state of things as an enemy of his country; and above all let him remember that as soon as he himself breaks the law, he becomes himself that enemy. Whoever violates the law helps to weaken its force, and, as far as he disobeys, does what in him lies to destroy it; but he who honors and obeys the law strengthens the law, and thereby helps to preserve the freedom and happiness of his country. In some governments it is held that “the king can do no wrong;” here we know no king but the law, no monarch but the constitution; we hold that every man may do wrong; the higher he is in office, the more reason there is that he be obliged to answer for his conduct; and a great officer, if treacherous, is a great criminal, so that he ought to be made to suffer a great and exemplary punishment.
While we may disagree with Stansbury based on finer points of jurisdiction, which is to say, the Laws of the United States are ultimately Under We The People [we have no king whatsoever] and Over our Government Servants who take an Oath to submit to such provisions as apply to their limited, delegated authorities, we can agree with him that the President of the United States should be an Exemplar of Obedience to the Letter of the Law and the Constitution, and, that, if he violates either, he becomes an Exemplary Criminal who should suffer extreme consequences and ignominy. If ever there were a Man Without A Country, it should be any president who violates his Oath of office and commits premeditated Felonies in the name of the People of the United States by using our armed services personnel as pawns to be spent like a Fiat Stimulus Package.
Tragically, most Americans are so ignorant of law and politics, not to mention economics, that they may never know they are the object of such unadulterated condescension. It may not be so much that they despise their Birthright. They just need to know more about their inheritance so they may be able to reclaim and hold on to it. They can and will be educated.
Take heart! The majority has never ruled for long. Those of us who support Ron Paul because he supports Liberty and the Rule of Law will continue to learn and teach — increasing the potential that more and more Americans will be qualified to choose the appropriate Stimulus Package for those who would waste and destroy our lives, our property, and our liberty.
I have little doubt that most of you reading this column are awake and alert to the present dangers. But we all need to be encouraged and reenergized. So I will once again quote Sam Adams, Father of the American Revolution:
It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.
If you think Ron Paul cannot make a difference; if you think puny little you and me cannot make a difference, please take a little time and read about Sam Adams, the man for whom friends had to purchase a decent suit so he could attend the Continental Congress.
If Sam would not despair we certainly have no such right. He was the tenth child of his parents — and one of only two to live past the age of three. His parents were Pro-Life and Sam was Pro-Liberty. He was later to be called "The Grand Incendiary." Apparently those brushfires got out of hand.
Please note: It has recently been determined by certain eminent scholars and historians that Samuel Adams never had a Broadband Internet connection.
Bill Huff [send him mail] is a Classical Libertarian and proprietor of LEXREX.com and JamTheCulture.com; a former public school music teacher turned home schooling advocate; a US Navy veteran, and host of WarIsARacket.com. He is available as a guest lecturer or for interviews on talk radio.