24 May 2006

The Royalty Quivers in the People's House

Here is a little something to think about from the Constitution Article I and sections listed:

Section 5 (in part) "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."

Section 6 (in part) "The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."
Bolding and italics mine.

Add in this little gem of thePublic Law 62-5 which fixes the size of the House of Representatives is codified under 2 USC 2 by 37 Stat 13: "Section, act Aug. 8, 1911, ch. 5, Secs. 1, 2, 37 Stat. 13, 14, fixed composition of House of Representatives at 435 Members, to be apportioned to the States therein enumerated. For provisions dealing with reapportionment of Representatives and manner of election, etc., see sections 2a and 2b of this title."

Now add in the following from USAToday (Hat tip: Instapundit):

GOP challenges FBI raid of Jefferson's office

Displaying bipartisanship for one of their own, House Republican leaders are expressing concern that the FBI's search of the Capitol office of Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson crossed the constitutional boundary between the White House and Congress. Tuesday, House Majority Leader John Boehner called the weekend raid "the Justice Department's invasion of the legislative branch" and predicted the issue would "end up across the street at the Supreme Court."
So, what part of investigating a felony does Representative Boehner not understand?

But beyond that consider what all of this ends up being. To conduct lawful business the Congress is given immunity from minor intrusions for misdemeanors and such in their offices. So one of them may hide out in the Halls of Congress to avoid frivolities and not be forced to attend such. Higher crimes, however, need to be investigated and the Constitution clearly states that such things are allowable. This insulates Congress from minor goings on and civil suits within their halls, something that is a privilege granted them via the Constitution.

Next up the House of Representatives has seen fit to set its own size under Section 5 and put a final number on representation. This has had the effect that Representatives districts have grown huge in the number of people each member represents, and has made the drawing of boundaries to create 'safe seats' for each Party by creating districts that are difficult to change via demographics shifts. Every 10 years the pie gets redrawn for that limited number of seats, and somehow the same individuals keep getting re-elected.

So we have a group that is in Power, immune from many minor problems with the Law and have sinecured their positions to the point where re-election is the NORMAL course of affairs. Actually mounting a challenge to one of these Titans in the House is something no mere mortal may even attempt to achieve.

Further, the Congress exempts itself regularly from laws regulating labor and use thereof. From needing to be responsive via the Freedom of Information Act. And, indeed, in many other instances where actually having to follow the Laws they set for the People would be too... cumbersome.

And now we have the Leader of the House complaining that they can, indeed, be searched during the course of gathering evidence for suspected felonious activity.

There is a concept that covers this. It is an ancient one, going back deep into history. It is one that We the People sought to END in this Nation.

It is called: A Landed Aristocracy.


By asserting that the Executive or, indeed, any State that is investigating a member of Congress for possible felonious wrongdoing should, somehow, be illegal, is asserting the right of Princes to be free of the Common Man.

The problem in politics today is NOT that there is too much money in it.

The problem is that there are too FEW politicians to make that money meaningless in its application.

That is why I support a Maximum House under the Constitution, with one adjustment to set the representation exactly AT 1 Representative for 30,000 People. And eliminate ALL personal staff and keep the current Committee staff size.

This era of Landed Nobility within the People's House must END and the tools of modern communication give that its full possibility. This is the era of the Internet and distributed production and management... so it should be the era of distributed representational government and do away with 19th century limits due to slow travel times. The United States is a bare fraction of a second across via electronic communications.

Make the House of Representatives a VIRTUAL body that is continually in session and its members at home, in their districts and held accountable by We the People who can drop in for a visit. Get them out of the Capitol for all but ceremonial reasons.

Return the House of Representatives back to We the People, so that We may have Our Say in Government.

And end this era of Princes in Sinecured Land Holdings seeking to be held accountable by NO ONE.


Jerry said...

For what it's worth, I've sent emails to my Representative and Senators on this. The text is up over at RustedSky.net - please feel free to crib it and send to yours, though I'd imagine you've already sent something more eloquent. (grin)


A Jacksonian said...

I am trying to ascertain what is the proper Title to go to my local Landed Noble, guaranteed a place in Government so long as they can redraw districts to suit their parties and never expand the representation of We the People. Is it 'Duke' or 'Earl'? Certainly not 'Prince' as that is reserved for upper Nobility in the Leadership. But this member over these lands is not new nor junior in their ranks, either, so there must be a proper mid-level Title to apply....

In truth I *still* need to calm down so I can properly address such. The more I look the more I realize that We the People in Our States must change this and asking for Our Nobles to do so is akin to asking such to become a mere Freeman.

Or just a Citizen who is *supposed* to Serve the Union.

I think I can begin ticking off States that would quickly sign on to a 1:30,000 proportionally set representation ratio. A broad swath from the eastern side of the coastal range, over the Rockies and to the Mississippi. North to South. Start counting up and find 37 States that could benefit from having power distributed more evenly and have more of their voices heard in the People's House.

The Senate would balk. It would mislike having the 'junior leagues' ripped asunder. The House as it stands would not want this, ever... but would have each and every member need to clearly and rationally explain why the People do not need accountable Representation that actually looks out for the interest of the People FIRST.

And the first election after either House or Senate or Both deny this, there would be a massive change-over. For they would be claiming their Priveleges over that of the People to be vested in them as a Class.

No, I am still very, very, very hot at this. I would vituperate and drip venom in my words. When addressing an individual I need a clear mind and conscience to politely say what needs be said.

And I have already clearly stated that NO incumbent from either party from any state in the House or Senate will *ever* get my vote for any elected office or, indeed anything, again. As individuals and a whole this Congress has proven not to understand the Powers they have and have abused their Priveleges and, in so doing, have endangered the Nation.

I abide by the Constitution and agree with it. We the People are responsible for this.

And only We the People can change it.

Daniel said...

I am trying to ascertain what is the proper Title to go to my local Landed Noble, guaranteed a place in Government so long as they can redraw districts to suit their parties and never expand the representation of We the People. Is it 'Duke' or 'Earl'?

How about Lord & Lady?


A Jacksonian said...

Daniel - My thanks!

It would seem that these Nobility do require different titles between the High Nobility of the Senate and the Lower Nobility of the House... but for those of us plebians being administered to, Lord and Lady would be appropriate as they are so far above such as We the People that nosebleeds are encountered in the looking up.