Beware of Global Currency

[Editors note: Below is an article that mainstream media would surely classify as compiracy theory by which they wild ideas lacking anything resembling reality. So why post it? One reasin is because I believe much less than half of what mainstream media aires or prints. Another reason is many, if not most, so-called conspiracy theories that I have been exposed to contain a lot of factual reality. The problem lies in those parts that are more hypothesis than fact and more reading between the lines as it were than verifiable reality. Consequently, like academic futurists, authors of conspiracy are not always exactly right about the future. Yet, the following is worth taking mental notes for future reference in order to remember when it comes to pass.]

Beware of Global Currency

By Jeff Putman

The good news is, finally, after all these decades, the corrupt, coercive, fraudulent, loan sharking central bank known as the Federal Reserve, will finally be abolished! The bad news is, it’s going to be replaced by a GLOBAL central bank! With all of the same evils as the Fed, plus more! (Since we call the Federal Reserve the Fed for short, perhaps we should call the global central bank the Glob for short.)

What’s wrong with a global currency can be seen in the history of the Federal Reserve, which is already far too much concentration of power. By controlling interest rates, the Fed controls the amount of currency circulating. In the 1930s the Fed raised interest rates and caused the Great Depression. In the 1970s the Fed kept rates low and caused high inflation. You can be sure that the Federal Reserve Board told their Wall Street pals ahead of time which way they were going to go so their pals could position themselves to profit from the coming shifts.

Also in the 1930s, many local governments started issuing local currencies so their local economy could keep functioning in spite of the shortage of money. The U.S. government responded by making it illegal for local governments to issue currency. They had created a Depression, and by God, they were going to make sure nobody is allowed to escape it!

Any global currency will work the same way, only worse. A global central bank will issue the currency, LOANING in into circulation, of course, just like the Fed. This will put everyone in the world in debt to the central bank, making every last human a slave in their global plantation. When they decide to have a Great Depression, nobody in the whole world will be allowed to escape it! No country, state, county, village, or anything will be allowed to create a local currency to enable any economic activity without the permission of the global central bank.

Free trade of multiple currencies on open markets is ESSENTIAL to world economic stability. When Japan started selling millions of cars in America, billions of dollars flowed to Japan. They piled up. Something had to be done with them. So, they were traded in currency markets. Dollars were exchanged for yen. Dollars were plentiful, so their value went down. Yen were scarce, so their value went up. This made the price of Japanese labor come up close to that of American labor, eliminating the price disparity that had caused so much havoc in the economy.

A global currency would completely eradicate this stabilizing mechanism in the world economy. When China floods the world with cheap products made by slave labor (the only kind of labor China uses) with a global currency, there will be no price adjustment made like there was with Japan. Instead of a free market in currency raising Japanese wages to Western standards, the one world currency will lock China’s price advantage in place and force the rest of the world down to match China’s draconian pay scale!

A global currency is even more inappropriate now that we have computers to make calculating exchange rates so easy. Never in the history of the world has it been easier to accomodate numerous currencies. You can already go
almost anywhere in the world, pay with a credit card, and automatically, the merchant is paid in his local currency and you receive your monthly statement in dollars. We DON’T need a global currency to facilitate trade! We’re
getting a global currency rammed down our throats at the time in history when there’s the LEAST use for it, and MOST reason it should be avoided!

Another candidate for a global currency is the SDR – Special Drawing Rights. It’s a basket of currencies (currently 44% dollars, 34% euros, 11% pounds, and 11% yen) offered by the International Monetary Fund to serve as a global currency. It’s been available for almost fifty years, but attracted very little interest.

Also being offered as a global currency is the WOCU – WOrld Currency Unit. It’s a basket of 20 currencies offered by the WDX Institute in London. It’s pretty new, but it’s also attracting little interest.

In both cases, it seems that international traders don’t want to bother exchanging their currency for a global currency and then exchanging that for the currency of the other country. In theory, the business people of both countries would agree to pay or be paid in SDRs or WOCUs because they know its value over time will fluctuate less than either of their currencies. But if ALL of the major currencies are inflated to try to pay the debt the politicians keep loading on us (as is happening now), then any currency based on a basket of those currencies will also lose its value.

To see the sources used for this article, go to http://www.cpnlive.com/forum/post/1431349.

Zero Tolerance Victory: School Officials Agree to Rescind Suspension of 7th Grade Honor Student Over Possession of Oregano

After being criticized by The Rutherford Institute for misapplying zero tolerance policies and suspending a seventh grade honor student over allegations that he was in possession of the Italian herb oregano, school officials at Hickory Middle School have agreed to rescind the 10-day suspension and the recommendation for expulsion for “possession of an imitation controlled substance.” School officials confirmed that Adam Grass, a candidate for the National Junior Honors Society, will not have a drug offense on his record. Grass will be permitted to return to school effective tomorrow.

“This is a victory for common sense and Adam Grass,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “Adam should not have been punished in the first place. At no time, did he violate the law or school policy. Hopefully, other schools will follow suit.”

According to Rachel Grass, Adam’s mother, one of Adam’s classmates brought a plastic baggy containing oregano to school and displayed it to fellow students during their lunch period, saying, “Haha, it looks like pot.” Adam immediately backed away. However, another student took possession of the oregano. Encountering Adam in the bathroom later, that student asked him to return the oregano to the classmate who had brought it to school in the first place. Adam initially agreed, only belatedly realizing that the owner was not in his next class. Adam then gave the oregano to someone who did have class with the owner. At no time, did Adam treat the so-called “substance” as anything other than oregano or intend to deceive anyone about it. Moreover, when school officials intervened and questioned Adam about the matter, he related exactly what happened, which was corroborated by the other students interviewed by administrators and school officers.

Despite the fact that Adam was unwittingly caught up in what Institute attorneys describe as nothing more than a schoolboy prank, he was shown “zero tolerance” by school officials. As a result, Adam and two other students were given 10-day suspensions pending expulsion for possession and distribution of an imitation controlled substance. In calling on the school to rectify what it termed a gross overreaction, attorneys for The Rutherford Institute pointed out that school officials were misapplying state law in this matter, in addition to violating Adam’s constitutional rights. Specifically, Institute attorneys argued that oregano does not meet the statutory definition of “imitation controlled substance” under Virginia law and Adam did not possess the requisite intent to “give, sell, or distribute” an imitation controlled substance as defined by the Chesapeake School Board in Article XIII of its “Expectation of Conduct and Sanctions for Violation.” Moreover, “Adam had no intent to violate school policy,” Whitehead wrote in his letter to school officials. “His intent was merely to convey a harmless bag of oregano back to its rightful owner.”

“We can not thank The Rutherford Institute enough for their assistance in this matter, but feel that zero tolerance policies still need to be addressed,” stated Rachel Grass. “Policies need to allow for some gray area to allow for some common sense to enter into the equation for the good of the kids. That is what everyone is here for anyway—the children.”

For more on the problems of zero tolerance, read John Whitehead’s commentary titled “Zero Tolerance Policies: Are the Schools Becoming Police States?“.

Gov. Kaisch’s State Budget: The Ugly, the Bad, and the Good

In my opinion, Gov. Kaisch is not the handsomest dude on the planet. I suspect his wife may have a different opinion.

What the governor lacks in appearance he makes up in statesmanship. His speech to the legislators on the budget was downright inspirational. Not only that but he even dared to praise the members of the opposing party for their work and accomplishments on a number of issues.

It almost made me cry.

I did say–almost!

Seriously, the budget itself is a mixed bag of missed opportunities (the bad) and a number of advancements for Ohioans and their economy (the good). Of course, it all depends on who you talk to, or, in this case, whose report you read.

According to the report by Matt Mayer, President of the Buckeye Institute, the governor’s budget missed some important opportunities. The bad news is the general revenue fund will be $1.26 billion greater for 2012 than in 2011 and $1.73 billion for 2013. That is a biennium increase of 12 percent. This is the second highest increase since 1990.

So how can the Governor increase spending with an $8 billion deficit? According to Mayer, the governor’s budget shows total revenues exceeding the deficit by $8 billion, which causes Mayer a lot of concern. It shows Gov. Kaisch has chosen to continue the same old policies of the past that eventually resulted in the present fiscal crisis.

Equally disturbing is the governor’s cuts to local governments. Instead of innovating new strategy to fund both state and local governance, the governor chose the slash-and-burn approach. This easy money strategy doesn’t reduce the size of state government and thus return local tax dollars back to local governments who must continue or fund new programs. Gov. Kaisch simply cuts funding to local governments to increase spending and balance the budget.

The $5 million budget deficit proposed by Xenia city and school officials may be nothing more than advanced notice of the state budget cuts. On the other hand, the budget deficit could be the typical 10% inflation budget estimates for contingency purposes; all institutions increase budget estimates for unforeseen costs. Budgets are based on previous year revenues, expenditures, known issues that will increase costs, plus 10% for unknown costs usually in addition to a contingency fund for emergencies.

Be that as it may, Mayer wishes Gov. Kaisch would have made the difficult choice of cut government employee compensation a little as well as cut the executive and legislative branch budgets. If he had cut the death tax, the bill making away through both houses, he would have as much money to spend, and many others will wish he had less money to throw at his program agendas.

Mayer did find some good in the Gov. Kaisch’s budget. The governor made noteworthy strides in such areas as prison reform, healthcare cost containment, and education funding. He included alternative sentencing approaches to non-violent offender that along with reforms nursing home service costs to Medicare will save taxpayers millions of dollars.

Some think his nursing home reforms are ugly and bad too.

Gov. Kaisch chalked up a few more good points with a number of his educational reforms. For example, his “support for Teach for America and doubling of EdChoice scholarships are vital lifelines to the most vulnerable and will inject more competition into our broken K-12 system.” Scraping the previous governor’s unfunded, evidenceless, one-size-fits-all Evidence Based School-Improvement Model will end the veiled attempt to increase dues-paying membership for unions. At the college level, the governor calls for professors to use fewer assistants for classroom instruction and a three-year degree. (Here, it is assumed that also means high schools will be required to ensure college-bound student meet the once first year prerequisites whether through coursework in high schools, college campuses, or virtual schools. That in itself would not only save a lot of money but would also be a systemic great achievement.)

Many of us may like Governor’s enthusiasm and business acumen, but analysts like Mayer give us reason to doubt his ability to help Ohio innovate its way to a better future and greater prosperity. If he cannot find innovative ways to fund government, can we expect he will achieve his inspiring goals for Ohio? Unless his goals are primary for big corporate concerns, maybe not.

To read Matt Mayer’s report on Governor Kaisch’s budget, visit the Buckeye Institute website: http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/reports.

Marriage and Unemployment : Some Advise on How to Cope

Even though financial expert claim the great recession is over, its effects on marriages and families still continues. One of those devastating outcomes is unemployment. Many marriages are strained to point of breaking as a result of job loss and as well as home foreclosures.

An article published by the online publication For Your Marriage addresses some of the problems many couples are experiencing as result of unemployment. Authored by Bill Dodds, the article titled “When Unemployment Hits Home: Seven Ways to Help Your Marriage” is written from the perspective of clinical health professional Sarah Griffin who provides counseling services at the Seattle Archdiocese’s Catholic Community Services in Everett, Washington.

“Unemployment can leave an individual—and a couple—feeling overwhelmed, powerless, frightened. In a word, crushed. Yes, the partner looking for work can follow all the recommended steps for landing that next job but in the meantime…the meantime can be a long time.”

The article continues by offering seven ways to for couples and individuals can cope as well as strengthen their marriage. Following is only one of the things a couple can do. The entire article can be read online at
For Your Marriage.

“6. They can notice and appreciate that, in the middle of all this turmoil, there may well be some positives. A formerly two-income family may not be able to afford day care anymore, but now the family doesn’t need day care. A dad may be surprised to discover he really enjoys being home with the kids. (Not that it’s easier than heading out every day to a job!) Now he gets to know them, and they get to know him, in ways that wouldn’t have happened without his unemployment. A couple that has talked about, and seriously considered, simplifying the family’s lifestyle can realize that now there’s both a perfect excuse to do just that–and little option to do otherwise.”

For Your Marriage is a publication of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Ohio Right to Life Applauds Gov. Kasich For Appointing Two Pro-Lifers to The State Board of Pharmacy

The two individuals, Kevin Mitchell (Marion County) and Michael A. Mone (Delaware County), come to the Board with extensive backgrounds in the pharmaceutical field.N

Mitchell first earned a Pharmacy Technology Degree through service the United States Air Force at the Community College of the Air Force and went on to receive his degree in Pharmacy from Ohio Northern in 1989. Mone studied at the University of Florida to receive his bachelor’s degree in pharmacy in 1981, and was awarded his juris doctorate in 1985.

Mitchell has since worked for Rite Aid of Ohio, where he has been a staff pharmacist, pharmacy manager, and pharmacy development manager and also served on the State Board of Pharmacy under Gov. Bob Taft. Mone was Executive Director of the Kentucky Board of Pharmacy and Assistant Attorney General for the state of Florida. He has also served as Vice President of Anti-Diversion & Senior Regulatory Counsel at Cardinal Health, Inc. since 2007. In addition to other pharmacy boards, both are members of the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy.

With these two appointments, our governor continues to pave the way for pro-life Ohioans to be heard and represented. With professionals such as Mitchell and Mone on the State Board of Pharmacy, Ohio takes one step closer to becoming a state where the right to life is respected and defended. On behalf of our entire statewide membership, the Ohio Right to Life Society thanks Governor Kasich for his steadfast support.

Note: Appointments of Mitch and Mone became official March 10, 2011.

Tax appeals, parks, libraries, weights & measures: Policy Matters finds erosion of basic state services

A new report from Policy Matters Ohio finds that Ohio has seen a decline in the capacity of state government to deliver basic public services in disparate areas ranging from tax appeals to policing the ethics of public officials. The state’s library and park systems have been eroded. Service to localities has suffered at the Division of Weights and Measures, while new cuts could imperil the Ohio Civil Rights Commission’s ability to handle discrimination complaints. The paper focuses on areas outside of human services and education, and it is not comprehensive, it is merely a review of several areas that have been cut in recent years, including:

Board of Tax Appeals: Homeowners and businesses that appeal property-tax valuations now have to wait more than two years for a hearing because of staff cuts and the rising volume of cases. Between Fiscal Years 2005 and 2010, cases nearly tripled, from 1,608 to 4,679, yet the state sliced funding by $815,847 or 41 percent in Fiscal 2010 from FY09. Funding for FY11 slipped another one percent, to $1,149,715. The board was forced to lay off 60 percent of staff in 2009, leaving just three examiners, compared to 10 three years ago. The last full year that the BTA kept up with its caseload was FY2006. In February 2011, the examiners were hearing cases filed more than two years earlier.

Division of Weights and Measures: This division ensures honest commerce by helping ensure that scales weigh items properly and that counties adequately monitor supermarket scanners, gas pumps and other measuring devices. Over the past five years, General Revenue Fund (GRF) funding for Weights and Measures in Ohio dropped precipitously by 81.4 percent, from $1.074 million to $200,000. Field services provided by the state have been slashed, and spot checks in some instances have replaced the previous regular inspections. Ohio and its counties share responsibility for these services, and the state’s retreat leaves hard-pressed counties struggling to pick up the responsibilities in the face of their own budget shortfalls.

Division of Parks and Recreation: Seventy-four state parks in 60 counties encompass 174,212 acres of land and water, attract more than 50 million visitors annually, and generate over a billion tourism dollars per year. According to the November 2010 budget request letter, the General Revenue Fund request for FY2012-13 matches the 1988 request. Over the last decade, funding for parks and recreation has declined in inflation-adjusted dollars by 23.5 percent. The parks have deferred maintenance projects, including EPA-mandated sewer and water upgrades. We’ve seen a 45 percent staffing reduction, a $556 million backlog in maintenance, and a decline in perceived safety by visitors. Ohio is considering selling Jefferson Lake State Park to Jefferson County for one dollar. The County would sell timber and drilling rights to pay for dam repair and campsite upgrades.

“Years of investment in a system of parks and recreational facilities could be lost, hurting tourism and removing affordable recreation options for Ohio families,” said Wendy Patton, report co-author and senior associate at Policy Matters Ohio.

Ohio Civil Rights Commission: In FY 2000, the Ohio Civil Rights Commission had 199 employees; there are now 94. GRF funding of $10.6 million in 2000 was hacked to $4.6 million in FY 2010, a decline of 54 percent. Flat or ten percent reduced funding is expected to result in the elimination of an additional 17 to 23 positions. A loss of 23 individuals would mean 1,600 fewer investigations per year, a 36% decline. More cuts could bring quality problems, negative press, even lawsuits, as in the mid-1990s, when a burst of activity and lack of capacity undermined service provision.

Ohio Ethics Commission: Ethics cases rose an average of 18 percent each year since 2000 and ethics filings are up 30 percent over the past 15 years, but the budget hasn’t kept up. In the Strickland administration’s first year, Ethics Commission funding rose by about 16 percent, inflation-adjusted. But by FY2010, GRF funding had fallen by 19 percent after inflation from the 2007 high. As a result, ethics education was reduced by 19 percent; staffing fell from 25 to 21; the operations budget was cut by 30 percent; and equipment has not been updated for three fiscal years.

Environmental Review Appeals Commission: GRF funding for Environmental Review Appeals Commission has fallen by 20 percent over the past decade after inflation. Staffing has fallen from 14 to 2 since the agency was founded in the mid 1970s. Length of time in investigations has caused legislation and litigation.

Public libraries: Historically, Ohio libraries have dominated the ranks of the nation’s top libraries. Over the past two years, state support for library funding has been chopped by nearly 23 percent. Overall, libraries received $347.9 million from the state Public Library Fund last calendar year, compared to $450 million in 2008, despite a successful grassroots effort that reduced the cuts. In response, libraries reduced hours, closed branches, reduced purchasing, cut programming and shed staff. Overall, Ohio public libraries cut hours by more than 10 percent in 2009. The slashed state support has meant a huge increase in proposed property-tax levies. According to a recent analysis by Driscoll & Fleeter, the 71 library levy proposals that appeared on the ballot across the state in 2010 were twice as many as in any previous year since 1980, except 2009. Greater dependence on local levies will result in disparity of service.

Recommendations include protecting taxpayer return on investment, restoring capacity to services eroded by inflation, and reducing dependence on fees to avoid politicization and disparities between communities. “Cuts to education and human services rightly get a lot of attention,” said Zach Schiller, report co-author and Research Director at Policy Matters. “This report shows that we also need to pay attention to some of the very basics. Ohio has slashed staffing and funding to ensure that your public library is open, your park’s sewage system is safe, your tax appeals are reviewed and your community’s employers are not discriminating. Such cuts threaten business, individuals and communities in Ohio.”

Policy Matters Ohio is nonprofit, nonpartisan research institute with offices in Cleveland and Columbus.

President Obama and DOMA: Why Obama’s Position is Unconstitutional

The Justice Department announced last month that it would no longer defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) because the president and Attorney General Eric Holder now believe the law is unconstitutional.
“After careful consideration, including review of a recommendation from me, the President of the United States has made the determination that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act…as applied to same-sex couples who are legally married under state law, violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment,” Holder wrote in a letter to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on February 23. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Obama believes DOMA is “unnecessary and unfair.”

But as CNSNews.com reported, critics of Obama’s decision said the president of the United States, who is sworn to faithfully execute the law, doesn’t get to pick and choose which laws to defend.

Three things should be noted about the President’s justification for considering DOMA unconstitutional.

First, the Fifth Amendment has no “equal under the law” clause, but the Fourteenth Amendment does.

Second, he claims implies state laws made after the passage of DOMA effectual negate it as law rather than prior law (DOMA) negating laws of states. On the face of it, the President’s action seems legitimate because federal law is supposed to conform to the limits of the Constitution, which leaves states their 10th Amendment right to determine on matters not addressed by the Supreme Law. Most marriage issues do apply here. But, again, the justification is based on the Fifth Amendment or maybe the Fourteenth.

Third, however, is the fact that marriage comes under the rubric of human sexual behavior. Men and women enter into marriage covenants long before the Constitution existed. It is a moral act of agreement in which men with women contract to much more than sexual activity, but the basis of the covenant relationship is nevertheless sexual.

As the basis of the Constitutional compact is, so is the basis of marriage. Natural law may be defined as what is self-evidently true to human nature on the basis of reason and revealed law. Critics may disagree with the last two words, but the founders who authored and accepted by vote America’s legal definition of nationhood would agree. Be that as it may, it extremely difficult to reason from human nature as it exists to acceptance of homosexual behavior or marriage of homosexuals as lawful behavior. Some medical scientists have pointed the biological and medical difficulties with it. Simply put, sex between males and females is obvious natural behavior with the benefit of keeping the human race from extinction–even atheistic evolutionists would have to agree. Homosexual behavior is at best an aberration of natural human behavior.

“Equality under the law clause of the 14th Amendment” does not provide protection for aberrant behaviors. It is supposed to guarantee the same protections against discrimination based on natural characteristics like skin color, sex, nationality, and the like. Those characteristics are inherent to human nature. It is supposed to guarantee that common laws are equally applied to all citizens, and in breaking those laws, the same equality is to be applied. That is except for the few exempted from those laws like foreign ambassadors, heads of state, Presidents, and some times the rich.

Let’s not forget, the gay community possess an average income significantly above average John and Jane American.

Even with all of their considerable buying power, the Democratic Party President cannot make the unnatural natural and unconstitutional constitutional.

DOMA Decision: Obama’s Constitutional Quandary

By Cameron Smith

On February 23, President Obama, in consultation with Attorney General Eric Holder, determined that the Justice Department would no longer defend Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which defines marriage as only between a man and a woman.

The DOMA decision has unleashed a seemingly endless cavalcade of commentary regarding the constitutionality of DOMA and the merits of the traditional definition of marriage. Once again, the culture wars seem to be back in full swing as part of American politics.

Unfortunately, the most concerning aspect of the President’s decision has been conspicuously absent from the public debate. Rather than providing clarity on the executive branch’s perspective on the constitutionality of DOMA, the President has muddied the waters and acted in a manner offensive to any reasonable interpretation of the Constitution.

The President derives executive authority from Article II of the U.S. Constitution and is required to “take care that the laws [of the United States] be faithfully executed.” Article I clearly outlines that “[a]ll legislative [p]owers…shall be vested in [the] Congress of the United States….” Powers of the judicial branch are found in Article III and further clarified by Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S.137 (1803) which established the power of the Court to review the constitutionality of laws. These clearly defined functions provide a unique separation of powers that has served our country well for over 200 hundred years.

On November 2, 1994, Assistant Attorney General Walter Dellinger issued a memorandum entitled “Presidential Authority to Decline to Execute Unconstitutional Statutes” (Dellinger Memorandum). Some have suggested the Dellinger Memorandum should be instructive when considering the President’s recent actions regarding DOMA.

The Dellinger Memorandum clearly and effectively articulates that the President has ample authority to decline enforcement of legislation that encroaches on the constitutional charge of the executive branch. A number of cases including Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926), INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983), and United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946) convincingly reinforce that assertion.

Unfortunately, the Dellinger Memorandum does not effectively speak to the President’s decision on DOMA. At no point has the President or the Attorney General argued that DOMA encroaches on the President’s Article II powers. Rather, the President has made a political decision that DOMA is unconstitutional according to his interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment which has been interpreted to apply to the federal government.

To make matters more confusing, President Obama has informed the Attorney General that the executive branch will continue to enforce the law even though it will not defend it in court. Essentially, this means that DOMA will be considered law but anyone challenging the constitutionality of DOMA in court will not find the U.S. Department of Justice opposing them.

This decision begs the question why the President who has sworn to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution” would continue to enforce that which he believes to be unconstitutional.

By declining to defend DOMA while continuing to “enforce” it, the President is trying to have his cake and eat it, too. The President is attempting to heavily prejudice the judicial branch’s constitutional disposition of DOMA without declaring the law unconstitutional from the White House.

If the President has the power to unilaterally declare a statute unconstitutional, then the office wields even more power than previously recognized, subject to the volatility of the election cycle. That power would radically shift the modern understanding of constitutional interpretation which has generally deferred to the Supreme Court as the arbiter of constitutionality in most cases. The President also recognizes that such a shift would mean many other potentially unconstitutional laws such as the individual mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act could be dispatched by subsequent administrations.

In any event, the President’s decision on DOMA rests on shaky constitutional ground regardless of the ultimate constitutionality of DOMA itself. If President Obama finds DOMA unconstitutional, then he is failing to execute his constitutional Oath of Office to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” On the other hand, if he continues to enforce the law, thereby supporting its constitutionality, he must also defend it to ensure that the law is faithfully executed.

While the President may have shrewdly made the most politically expedient decision, the responsibility to uphold the Constitution supercedes politics. President Obama should be called to account by Democrats and Republicans alike, regardless of their views on DOMA.

———————————————-

Cameron Smith is General Counsel and Legislative Liaison for the Alabama Policy Institute, a non-partisan, non-profit research and education organization dedicated to the preservation of free markets, limited government and strong families, which are indispensable to a prosperous society.

House of Representatives Will Defend Marriage Bill Abandoned by Obama

By Susan Jones

The U.S. House of Representatives says it will make sure the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act is decided by the courts – not by the president.

In a statement on Wednesday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said an advisory group of House leaders – including top-ranking Republicans and Democrats – has directed the House General Counsel “to initiate a legal defense” of the federal law, which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

The Bipartisan Leadership Advisory Group — a five-member panel consisting of the speaker, majority leader, majority whip, minority leader and minority whip — has the authority to instruct the General Counsel to take legal action on behalf of the House of Representatives.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) applauded the decision to involve the House in pending court cases challenging DOMA.

“President Obama’s decision to abdicate his executive branch responsibility to defend DOMA is a constitutional outrage,” King said. “President Obama’s decision to abandon the law is yet another example of his willingness to politicize the Department of Justice on behalf of favored interest groups.”

King also noted that the House will now incur legal expenses stemming from its defense of the law. Therefore, he said, “I intend to offer an amendment that will defund the Department of Justice by a comparable amount. The DOJ should not receive funding for work that it is refusing to do.”

The Justice Department announced last month that it would no longer defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) because the president and Attorney General Eric Holder now believe the law is unconstitutional.

“After careful consideration, including review of a recommendation from me, the President of the United States has made the determination that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act…as applied to same-sex couples who are legally married under state law, violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment,” Holder wrote in a letter to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on February 23.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Obama believes DOMA is “unnecessary and unfair.”

But as CNSNews.com reported, critics of Obama’s decision said the president of the United States, who is sworn to faithfully execute the law, doesn’t get to pick and choose which laws to defend.

First published by CNS News on March 10, 2011.

The Rutherford Institute Defends ‘Redneck Not Racist’ Kindergarten Bus Driver Fired for Displaying Confederate Flag on His Personal Vehicle

The Rutherford Institute has come to the defense of a 28-year-old kindergarten bus driver who was fired for displaying a Confederate flag on his personal vehicle. Kenneth Webber was fired on March 8, 2011, five days after being suspended for refusing to comply with an order that the flag be removed from his truck while it was parked in the employee parking lot. Webber has insisted that his display of the Confederate flag does not show him to be a racist but a “backyard redneck. I work for what I have. I support my family. It’s just who I am. I’m a redneck. It’s a way of life.” Institute attorneys have charged Webber’s supervisor at First Student Bus Transportation Services, a company providing services to the Phoenix-Talent School District # 4, with violating his First Amendment right to free expression, as well as his Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection.

“This is a clear case of political correctness run amok,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “Clearly, under the First Amendment, employment cannot be conditioned on forfeiting the right to the freedom of expression.”

Kenneth Webber, who has been employed by First Student Bus Transportation Services, a company providing services to the Phoenix-Talent School District # 4, for four years, began flying the Confederate flag in the bed of his pickup truck about a year ago. The 3-by-5-foot Confederate flag, which has the word “Redneck” emblazoned across it, was a birthday gift from Webber’s father in 2009. Webber drives his truck to work and parks it in the employee lot, which is leased from the school district, before reporting for his duties driving the kindergarten bus for Talent Elementary School.

On March 2, 2011, Webber was called into his supervisor’s office and ordered to remove the flag from his pickup or be suspended from his job. The demand to remove the flag was allegedly made after the school district superintendent visited First Student’s facility and saw the flag in Webber’s truck. The superintendent reportedly requested that Webber remove the flag because “some people find that symbol offensive,” justifying the request by pointing to the fact that the school district is “about 37 percent minority students,” and “we have a policy…about displaying symbols on school property that were racist, or had a potential to be seen as racist.”

Insisting on his right to free expression in his personal vehicle, Webber refused the demand, was suspended and was sent home for the day. The following day, Webber reported to work and was called to meet with two managers, who again demanded that he remove the flag or be suspended, this time for three days. Again, Webber refused and was suspended. On March 8, Webber was called into his manager’s office and was terminated after he again refused to remove the flag from his pickup. “My flag will fly,” said Webber. “No one here is gonna tell me what I can and can’t believe in.” Rutherford Institute attorneys have demanded that First Student restore Webber’s job, pointing to a 2002 victory in which the City of Topeka, Kansas, was found to have violated the First Amendment rights of a city employee by forbidding him from parking his vehicle with Confederate flag vanity license plates in the City’s employee parking lot.

Source: Rutherford Institute News, March 9, 2011.