IS YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL IQ?
THE FOUNDING DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN EVISCERATED
Internet citizenship quiz that recently floated around resulted
in several friends being embarrassed with less than perfect
scores. Some inquired about the correct answers, since the
memories of their Constitutionally enumerated rights and
proper governmental structure had been lost. Now those individual
rights, republican structure and the rule of law for American
citizens are lost as well.
you haven’t taken that quiz it is included immediately,
then please follow on for the answers. Understanding one’s
rights, what is lawful and what is the proper institution
of Constitutional government is every bit as important today
as it was 200 plus years ago, maybe even more so.
1. Who elects the president of the United States?
many changes or amendments are there to the U.S. Constitution?
long is each term for a U.S. senator?
are the duties of the Supreme Court?
and explain laws
Congress and the President
becomes president if both the president and vice president
Justice of the Supreme Court
Pro-Tem of the Senate
of the House
is NOT a requirement to be president?
elected by the American people
a natural-born citizen
lived in the United States for at least 14 years
at least 35 years old.
nominates judges to serve as Supreme Court justices?
Justice of the Supreme Court
of the House
leaders of the two political parties
many Supreme Court justices are there?
was the main writer of the Declaration of Independence?
Who has the power to declare war?
president and Congress must declare war
In what year was the U.S. Constitution written?
What kind of government does the United States have?
#1 is the Electoral College.
the 2000 presidential election G. W. Bush did not receive
a majority of the nation wide voters. He received a majority
of the Electoral College votes from those states in which
he received a majority of those statewide voters. He was
the proper, constitutionally elected President and not the
"selected" president, as many Democrats say. The
founders of the country chose this feature to balance the
rights of individual states versus the simple majority of
people concentrated in cities. The famous red versus blue
2000 national election map proved that the Constitution
did not malfunction but worked as proscribed. However, the
hubris and hypocrisy of Bush-43 is boundless. After asserting
the legitimacy of his election based on what some would
call an antique and obsolete Constitutional detail, he proceeds
to disembowel the whole of it via Executive Orders, the
USA PATRIOT Act, an undeclared war of aggression and others
actions. These extra/un-Constitutional acts by Bush-43 are
irrefutable grounds for impeachment.
#2 is 27.
issues are raised when you read the Constitution with its
27 Amendments. Article V specifies the required criteria
for amending any part of the Constitution. For example,
Amendment 18 was passed establishing Prohibition and Amendment
21 was passed to repeal Amendment 18, both done as per Article
V. If it was necessary to amend the Constitution with respect
to alcohol, then why hasn't it been necessary to amend the
Constitution to render certain personal use drugs "illegal"
and prohibited? If the mandatory conditions under Article
V for modifying the Constitution are no longer in force,
when and how was Article V eliminated?
#3 is 6 years.
original method for Senators being elected was through the
bi-cameral legislatures of each state. The method of electing
was changed by the 17th Amendment not the 6-year term in
office. This was a pivotal mistake that greatly diminished
the power of the States to effect legislation in Washington,
D.C. The current Senator functions as a "Super-Representative"
while previous to the passage of the Amendment 17 Senators
functioned as a "Legislative Ambassador". They
could be recalled instantly when the Senator’s actions were
out of line with the interests of the state or when the
federal government was out of line. This immediate and direct
influence on the federal legislative process by the individual
states has been lost. Recently the Montana Congress took
up a bill calling for the repeal of the 17th Amendment and
returning to the earlier method of sending Senators to Washington,
D. C. Unfortunately this effort did not succeed on its first
pass, though that legislature but be bringing it up again.
#4 is to interpret and explain laws.
the 2000 election of Bush-43 the Supreme Court accurately
interpreted and explained the Constitution with the Electoral
College electing the President, not the nation wide national
majority. Liberal Democrats have wrongly castigated this
"Gang of Five" for "selecting and not electing"
Bush-43 as President. This example in affirming the States’
authority via the Electoral College to elect the President
is arguably the solitary example of the Supreme Court following
the strict intent of the Constitution for decades. The real
problem of the Supremes and the judiciary in general is
judicial legislation. Case in point would be Roe versus
Wade. Suspending momentarily whether one views abortion
as a right of the mother to remove an unviable tissue mass
based on her solitary whim or as the murder of an innocent,
the question of interpreting and explaining the law that
legalized abortion is worth considering. Is there a federal
law passed by the Congress and signed by a President legalizing
abortion? There has been no positive law passed legalizing
abortion. The dependence upon case law has resulted in a
multi-headed-hydra-of-Constitutional-confusion. The separation
of powers between all three branches is a complete muddle.
Congress writes overly broad law and then waits for the
Supremes to sort out what they think is Constitutional.
The recent McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance ruling is an
example. Oft times the Congress does not update previously
passed law reflecting the Supremes’ opinions, resulting
in no new Bill/Act - "positive law" being passed
into force. Judicial rulings are not necessarily law. The
term case law is largely oxymoronic.
state example of this judicially legislated tyranny is found
in Article 1, Section 18 of the current Texas State Constitution
from 1876, which simply says, "No person shall ever
be imprisoned for debt." One would think that this
particular eight-word sentence, identifying a Texas Citizen’s
right, was clearly understandable. The Texas Supreme Court
modified this Constitutional Right with a case ruling that
adds…."unless that person has the ability to pay".
The Texas Constitution was never modified to bring about
this change. Texas is a state with debtor’s prisons.
#5 is the Speaker of the House.
Speaker of the House is Denny Hastert from the state of
Illinois. He is next in the line of succession after the
Vice-President and the most powerful man in the Congress.
His decision alone allows or rejects any bill on to the
floor for consideration. I would like to ask him a few questions
and/or how did you subjugate the Congressional authority
to Declare War, Article 1 Section 8, to the President without
any Constitutional grounds?
does a Congressional Resolution supposedly authorize the
President under the War Powers Act? When was the War Powers
Act passed as a modification to the Constitution?
UN Resolution 1441 was used as the primary authority for
the Iraq attack, is the foreign policy of united States
of America subordinated to the authority of the UN? If so
how, when and why did the Constitution get modified allowing
that surrender of national sovereignty?
and why do Executive Orders supersede the authority of valid
Bills and/or the Constitution?
#6 is elected by the people.
it or not the President is chosen by the states and NOT
elected by the American people. The current federal government
tramples the states’ rights. The 9th and 10th Amendments
identify the limited power of the federal government. There
is no indication that these two Amendments are being followed?
Have any Article V qualified modifications to the Constitution
been passed that renders these two vital Amendments null
and void? No.
IX -The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,
shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained
by the people.
X - The powers not delegated to the united States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved
to the States respectively, or to the people.
# 7 is the President.
power of the Executive Branch cannot be underestimated.
A President’s judicial nominations and appointments are
"political finger prints" that last for decades.
If the opportunity to ask a Supreme Court Justice certain
questions came about, the same ones posed to Hastert in
#5 above would be asked plus the following:
supposed Constitutional Amendments have been irrefutably
shown to not have passed the Article V criteria (as is the
case with the 14th and 16th Amendments) and these Amendments
are being fraudulently declared as valid, then what is needed
for a citizen to declare this truth and remove himself from
these fictions? Doesn't the perpetration of fraud vitiate
all contracts and laws?
#8 is 9.
historical question comes to mind...."Which President,
issued arrest warrants for the whole Supreme Court because
they did not agree that the President had the ability to
suspend the habeas corpus rights of the citizens?"
The answer is Abraham Lincoln during the early stages of
the War of Northern Aggression. But wait a minute.... doesn’t
the USA PATRIOT Act passed by the Congress in late 2001
give the right to suspend habeas corpus to the President
and the Justice Department? The USA PATRIOT Act vaporizes
the Fourth Amendment, which enumerated your habeas corpus
rights among others. Why hasn’t any one of the current 9
Supreme Court Justices, either conservative or liberal,
said anything about USA PATRIOT Act being un-Constitutional?
#9 is Thomas Jefferson.
argue that the Constitutional Convention was intentionally
scheduled when Thomas Jefferson, the great champion of states
rights and main writer of the Declaration of Independence,
was away in Europe on diplomatic missions. Jefferson's writings
are very apropos for the current political train wreck.
See one of the many below:
Jefferson, Letter to Charles Hammond  - "When
all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great
things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all
power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one
government on another and will become as venal and oppressive
as the government from which we separated."
Franklin spoke clearly to the heart of liberty as well.
‘‘They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
#10 is Congress only.
any war in which the United States has fought since WWII
that was Constitutionally declared? There are none. Since
the Afghanistan and Iraq attacks are not declared wars,
do the protections of the Geneva Convention necessarily
apply to our nation's soldiers who have been fighting abroad
and captured? Are our captured soldiers illegal combatants
and subject to local law only or are they prisoners of war
under the Geneva Convention?
question has been raised before, "How can a President
decide to go to war if Article 1, Section 8 states that
the Congress only has the power to declare war?" Any
undeclared war is an unlawful and is un-Constitutional.
The Congress does not have the right or the privilege to
cede that responsibility to the President. If anyone says
that the War Powers Act gives the President the authority
to go to war then ask..."Where and when was the Constitution
properly modified instituting the War Powers Act (a simple
Bill passed by Congress) as an Amendment to the Constitution?"
#11 is 1787.
the most easily missed of all the questions but 1787 is
the birth date of the republic and not 1776. The nation
is a republic and not a democracy. Revisit the words to
the Pledge of Allegiance. The difference between these two
is the most misunderstood issue in the body politic today.
# 12 is Republic.
type of government do you hear Bush-43 say that our nation
has? Democracy is his answer. Bush-43 is either right or
wrong? The Founding Fathers chose a Republic intentionally
at the exclusion of a democracy. Bush-43 is wrong. Therefore,
he is ignorant to the point of gross negligence or he is
defrauding the nation? Either condition should automatically
disqualify him from continuing as President? A Republic
is limited government where citizens are the sovereigns
and not the state or government. In our Republic citizens
have inherent rights that cannot be lawfully stripped away
by the rule making of governmental goons. Democracy is the
rule of a simple majority (mob rule) either granting or
taking away privileges without explanation or cause.
Constitution is a contract between the states with the federal
government acting as the agent between those states. The
states are signatories to commonly agreed and contractually
binding conditions. It is not a smorgasbord of political
offerings for selective application or the fiat creation
of new conditions by the federal government/agent.
you have not read the Constitution at all or lately please
do so. It is a mind-expanding experience. If we are ever
to regain our lost rights then many more people must become
conversant with those lost rights and demand their return.
leaving the Constitutional Convention, Ben Franklin was
asked by a woman, "What sort of government have
we, Mr. Franklin," He replied, "A Republic
Madame, if you can keep it." His comments contained
no small measure of prophecy.
at Etherzone.com : republication allowed with this notice
and hyperlink intact."
lives in Dallas, Texas where he is an engineer. He is
a life long registered Republican and self employed. It
would jeopardize his career if his real name was used, hence
the pseudonym of Nathanael. He is a new columnist for Ether
can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org
in the May 20, 2003 issue of Ether Zone.
Copyright © 1997 - 2003 Ether Zone.