Email letters, March 13, 2012
God’s laws have been corrupted by political laws
In the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson states that we are entitled to the laws of nature and to nature’s God. These laws are the basis for English Common Law and were “discovered” over the centuries since the Middle Ages by the exercise of scientific logic and the application of human morality. It is on these “discovered” laws and principles that our founding fathers developed our Constitution, and re-emphasized them with our Bill of Rights.
These concepts served our nation well until near the end of the 19th century when they were corrupted by the invasion of political (man made) laws of the theories of statism and progressivism, slowly replacing individual rights, liberty and free markets with wealth redistribution, group rights and government tyranny. Unfortunately, this essentially ended the search for God’s laws in our judicial system.
It took over 100 years and generations of corrupt politicians to build this immoral, freedom limiting, wealth redistributing monster that we now refer to as our government. It may take another 100 years for us to rediscover the brilliance of God’s laws and the understanding and appreciation that our founding fathers had for them. Only by these actions can we reclaim our republican form of government.
Carefully choose your political candidates during the coming election, and by your persistence and high expectations of integrity, return them to the realm of the laws of nature and God’s law, from tyranny to liberty.
“As a man is said to have a right to his property he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties or his possessions.” James Madison
Eliminating public trustees would streamline government
A bill to be introduced sponsored by Rep. Ray Scott would allow Colorado’s 10 largest counties to opt out of having a governor-appointed public trustee. Currently, the role of public trustee is performed by the elected county treasurer in 54 Colorado counties and that is working well. The other 10 counties have a governor-appointed trustee, purely a political appointment, and not always a well-qualified person.
Question: Can the county treasurer of Colorado’s 10 largest counties absorb the role of public trustee and supervise the public trustee office staff which performs almost all of the important work and processes of the public trustee’s office.”
Some will support this bill and others will oppose it including, perhaps, the 10 incumbent public trustees. But personal agendas aside, is it fiscally responsible to have an appointed public trustee with a separate salary and benefits?
I support this bill, but not because I have a have a desire to assume the duties of the public trustee as the county treasurer (although we could). Rather, I feel strongly that we all have the responsibility to seek greater efficiency in our government at all levels, as we strive to serve the best interests of our constituents.
Incumbent public trustees would serve through their current term, concurrent with the governor’s term. I wrote John Hickenlooper in November 2010 addressing this topic. I await his response.
Regardless of which political party occupies the governor’s offic,e I would vote every day of the week to save this unnecessary expense if given the opportunity. Supporters of this bill should be praised for seeking greater efficiency in government.
We need to remove politics from governing and have local accountability for Public Trustees.
Efficiency in government does not have to be an oxymoron. Rep. Scott’s bill may be one way of achieving greater efficiency.
ROBERT C. BALINK
El Paso County Treasurer
States existed before federal government
Obviously, letter writer D.D. Lewis knows little about the early history of this country, given the skewed history lesson he attempted to convey in his March 9 letter “Civil War established supremacy of federal law.”
The original states existed before the federal government.. The 10th Amendment makes the states sovereign to that government, but they did not protect their position.
The Civil War was fought over the policies of Abraham Lincoln and his election in 1860 ensured that the southern states would secede from the Union. Ever since the end of the Civil War, in 1865, to the present, an apathetic citizenry has allowed their elected representatives to gradually sell them out.
The citizens of this country have steadily lost rights and laws have been changed and enacted to facilitate the federal government takeover of every aspect of our lives.
A point in time has been reached under the current administration, presided over by a man who regards himself as a ruler rather than a president, with a Congress rife with greed and corruption, that “we the people” silently bear witness to the destruction of our Republic, seemingly powerless to stop the slid over the precipice.
One last item, we will never, “Get over it.”
JERRY A. HUNSINGER
We are on the verge of becoming a failed democracy
I may be out to lunch, but my understanding of the Constitution was that United States citizens were to be the ones to elect our government leaders. Yet, 20 states, and five provinces that have voting rights, have no voter ID requirements whatsoever. Anybody can walk in, give a name and address and be shown to a voting booth. Another 16 states have a “non-photo” requirement that in most states is simply a utility bill with a name and address so they can verify the district (Colorado is one of these). Another six states have such lenient laws that only require voters to sign an affidavit or, again, show a utility bill. Only eight states have strict photo ID laws (some just enacted) that require proof of citizenship. (Source: http://www.ncsl.org – “The National Conference of State Legistratures”)
There is an estimated 12 million illegal aliens in the United States that are getting free health care and free education for their children. With a name, address and utility bill, they can vote. Think they are going to vote for the party that wants to continue their lifestyle or those that want to hold them accountable for being in the country illegally?
Then there’s the government-funded organizations that bus people from inner cities to polling booths, who have every right to vote, but have lived off of the government for several generations and have no idea what is going on outside of their neighborhoods, what’s less in Sudan or Iran. Of course they are coached on the way on who to vote for. I know some will call this a discriminatory view, but wake up people. This is reality.
Our country is headed in a downward spiral. If we don’t soon stand up and get our stuff (being G rated) together, we will be the next failed democracy.
Upcoming Supreme Court decision is critical for health care
In a mere two weeks, the Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, more widely known as Obamacare. It is my personal opinion that this court decision will have long-term ramifications that will dwarf the significance of the upcoming presidential election. This decision will define this country’s fundamental nature, for better or worse. Are we to be a nation of individual liberty and responsibility or not?
At its heart, the recent dust-up between Rush Limbaugh and the Georgetown law student was not really about contraception. It was about a concerted effort to redefine health care. After all, if the federal government is in the business of mandating who pays for birth control, there is no part of life they will not be authorized to control, including food, exercise and weight, all under the penumbra of “health
The notion of individual liberty includes the acceptance of an individual’s right to make personal choices within their own sphere, based on their own unique understanding of their personal situation (which nobody can know better than oneself), in the best interest of themselves and their family. The key here is that this notion includes the right to make a bad choice. As Friedrich Hayek wrote, “Liberty is an opportunity for doing good, but this is so only when it also an opportunity for doing wrong.” If we as citizens are so afraid of the burden of individual responsibility that we are willing to cede personal decision-making to any government then we have already lost that precious gift. The only thing worse than having to make a difficult personal decision is not being allowed to make that decision in the first place.
I pray that the Supreme Court will make a wise decision.
JAMES K SCHROEDER