Connect with us

Everything

Federalist future: Why we need it and how we get it

Published

on

America needs Federalism. No, we don’t need the common perception of 18th-century Federalism that is often misconstrued as a push for complete centralization of government. That would be statism and neither the original Federalist Party nor our current manifestation supports this notion. Today, we need the small-government Federalism that the founders (both Federalists and anti-Federalists alike) wanted – a system of proper checks and balances between the states and federal governments that empowers the people and protects them from oppression regardless of which government entity brings it forth.

On the surface, the reasons we need it are quite clear. Washington DC has been accumulating power since the 19th century with a major spike started by FDR that has been in a constant state of expansion ever since. The heart of the 10th Amendment has been ripped to shreds; the concept of enumerated powers for Congress has been shoved beyond the wayside and into a ditch.

It isn’t just the legislature. The judiciary has been redefining their scope and utilizing unsound logic to justify the politicization of their rulings. As a whole, they’re less interested in keeping laws within the boundaries of the Constitution and more interested in determining how they can supersede it. There is a minority of judges who do their job properly, but their numbers are dwindling. Activism from the bench is alive and thriving in today’s America.

Then, there’s the executive branch. The powers of the President have been expanding for a century and a half, but that’s not even the biggest problem. A layer of bureaucracy has grown so thick we could operate the nation entirely with unelected “officials.” This more than anything else has exploded the direct and indirect reach of the executive branch while establishing a self-perpetuating expansion of overreach. Moreover, it’s forcing citizens and private organizations to work within constraints that are neither Constitutional nor practical. This is where the bulk of corruption is bred and harvested. It’s a governmental pestilence that has spread to nearly every facet of Americans’ lives.

It’s when we dig below the surface that we see the most disturbing trend happening in this nation. The vast majority of Americans accept the overreach as a fact of life. In fact, there are many who live their lives in accordance with the government to the point of dysfunction if ever DC was brought back to a state that fell properly within Constitutional boundaries. Too many are so dependent on government that it would cause chaos if any of a plethora of programs were eliminated.

This is, of course, by design. The push for social and support programs has nothing to do with the actual long-term welfare of the nation or its people. The artificial dependence that has exploded in recent decades is a direct result of election-based mentality among our representatives. The bulk of politicians have learned they need to promise more in order to get in and give more in order to stay in. They’ve dismissed fiscal responsibility so thoroughly that budgets (all of which are already way too high) have become mere recommendations rather than actual cutoff points for spending.

We need Federalism on multiple levels. We need it understood by the people so we can all start taking responsibility for our own lives again. We need it embraced by our representatives in order to stop the fiscal death spiral we’re in. We need it supported by the electorate so the hard but necessary choices can be made; supporting promise-too-much-and-punt-the-consequences politicians can no longer be an option.

It’s daunting, but it can happen. Here’s how…

Building a Federalist future

Over the next few weeks, I’ll be going into more details about the plans in place to put the Federalist Party on the map. We’ve seen great successes and unfortunate setbacks since we launched at the beginning of the year. Thankfully, the former has outnumbered the latter.

Today, we have three major challenges: the understanding gap, suspension of disbelief, and magnification of our voice to the national stage. There will be more challenges that arise as we grow in prominence, but we’ll prepare for and tackle those as they come. In the meantime, it’s imperative that we all work towards facing the initial challenges.

I’ve covered the understanding gap in the past. We called it the “knowledge gap” before, but that’s not necessarily the best way to look at it. There are those who are fully knowledgeable about Federalism or who have read the Federalist Papers but who still perceive us as a centralized-government party. We are the opposite of what some perceive. We want to decentralize the bulk of government power that has been accumulating in DC for decades. At our core is a requirement to localize as many decisions as we can whenever it makes sense to do so (which is most of the time). The easiest way people can help is to share articles such as this one with friends, family, and on social media.

Suspension of disbelief has been and will continue to be a need. There are millions of Americans who are sick of the two-party system, who’ve grown disenchanted with their current party, but who cannot imagine supporting a third party because they feel it would be futile or even counterproductive. Our strategy of starting with local elections and working our way to the national stage is one of the biggest differences between us and every other third party that has made a play since the middle of the 19th century. It’s imperative that those who are tired of what the status quo has yielded for them can put aside their bias against third parties and give us their support.

Lastly, we must expand our voice. This will come in the form of talking to more people, going to more events, and getting interviewed by more journalists. We’re building a nice bench of people who will help to spread the Federalist message (more on that coming soon!) and we’re ready to get them on the airwaves and into publications. If you know (or are) a journalist, it’s time to talk to me, Joel Kurtinitis, Pat Nicklaus, or any of our early-adopters who are ready and willing to let the world know who we are and why we’re here.

America needs a government that sees the Constitution as its boundary as well as its guide. We don’t need them continuing to come up with creative ways to circumvent it. True small-government Federalism is the answer. It’s time to educate the people, rally the grassroots, and bring our nation’s representatives to an understanding that they cannot continue down they path they’re taking us.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Democrats

Tell the migrants: AOC calls border detention centers ‘concentration camps’

Published

on

A warning to migrants AOC calls border detention centers concentration camps

Attention current and potential migrants from Central America intent on breaching our southern border: Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says if you cross the border, America will put you in concentration camps.

As much as I’d like to tackle the absurdity of the statements she made on Instagram last night, I’ve decided to run with her story as if it were based on facts. After all, Democrats have made a habit out of wild claims about migrant treatment at the border, yet they simultaneously impede every effort to make things better such as more beds, more border patrol agents, and a wall. They could change the laws for asylum seekers to dissuade migrants from making the dangerous trip with their cartel chaperones. There are so many things they can do instead of making wild claims, but they won’t do it.

So instead of calling them out, it’s time to embrace them. If AOC wants to spread the word that migrants are being held in concentration camps and forced to endure the whims of a “fascist” in charge, we should let her do it. Perhaps then they’d think twice about stealing our sovereignty by breaking our laws to achieve their goals.

The detention centers at the border are not concentration camps, of course. It’s almost certain AOC got her talking points from one of several articles written last week about Andrea Pitzer, author of One Long Night: A Global History of Concentration Camps, in which she makes the claims about what’s happening at the border. AOC’s talking points seemed to match Pitzer’s almost verbatim.

Heavy on whiny rhetoric but short on solutions to a clear problem, Ocasio-Cortez has once again used radical claims to foment outrage. But what if it can be used to establish fear? I’m not a fan of lying nor spreading fear, but if the Democrats want to establish the narrative that asylum-seekers are tossed into concentration camps once they cross the border, who am I to stop them?

The knee-jerk reaction to AOC’s lies would be to debunk them. But I’m not going to this time. If she can convince migrants they’ll be placed in concentration camps, maybe they’ll think twice about breaching our borders.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

General Jack Keans on Trump’s plan to send more troops to Middle East

Published

on

General Jack Keans on Trumps plan to send more troops to Middle East

As the Pentagon sends 1000 more troops to the Middle East to counter Iran’s latest round of aggressions, many Democrats and media talking heads are attacking the whole mess. They’re blaming the President for antagonizing the Iranians, first by pulling out of the nuclear deal and then by imposing harsh sanctions on them. But as General Jack Keans told Shannon Bream on Fox News last night, the Iranians have been the ones antagonizing the whole time.

Where did all the money go that the Obama administration sent them? Over $100 billion is apparently gone as the people continue to struggle to survive, yet nothing seems to have come from the generous gift.

If the sanctions were really the problem, why won’t Iran stop engaging in proxy wars, funding terrorism, and continuing their development of nuclear weapons? They were testing ballistic missiles even before the sanctions. They were engaged in Yemen before the sanctions. And yes, they never stopped funding terrorism. If they would stop these things, the sanctions could be lifted, but Iran refuses.

Keans is correct in asserting the President has made the right moves. The only question that remains is whether or not Iran will comply or if they’ll continue down the road to war.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

An open letter to Sen. Lindsey Graham on his two-state solution resolution

Published

on

An open letter to Sen Lindsey Graham on his two-state solution resolution

Dear Senator Graham,

It is being reported in the news that you are planning to introduce a nonbinding resolution in the Senate, together with Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), calling on President Trump to support a “two-state solution” between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. If true, it would be a tragic error.

As a longtime supporter of Israel, I am sure that you’re aware that the GOP removed the two-state solution from its platform in 2016. I’m sure that you also know that the president’s Middle East team has been discussing Israel’s right to retain parts of Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank). By supporting the two-state solution at this time, you are not only going against the growing sentiment in your party that opposes a Palestinian (Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad) state and the danger it would be to Israel’s survival, but you are also taking a stand against the obvious democratic wishes of the Israeli people. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has recently made it clear that he no longer supports such a path to resolving the conflict by announcing his intention to annex the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank).

In a recent interview with the McClatchy news service, you were quoted as saying “I don’t want to get in the way of Jared,” referring to Deal of the Century architect Jared Kushner, “but I can’t envision a one-state solution. It won’t work. I mean, you’d have to disenfranchise the Palestinians. That won’t work. If you let them vote as one state, they’ll overwhelm the Israelis. That won’t work. So, if you want to have a democratic, secure Jewish state, I think you have to have two states to make that work.”

Sen. Graham, with all due respect, you are echoing the common wisdom that has prevailed for the past forty years, but the facts on the ground have changed. Recent polling shows that Israelis understand the new reality, but the world is lagging beyond, with the very noticeable exception being the growing number of realists in the GOP. President Trump, as well, has expressed a remarkable willingness to explore “new ideas”, since the “land for peace” formula clearly hasn’t worked. This was proven by the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, which simply gave Iranian-backed Hamas the land from which they are now firing rockets at Israeli cities. Doing the same in Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem (which is the primary Palestinian demand) would be suicidal for Israel.

However, you have mentioned that a Palestinian state must be created, because of the demographic danger; that without creating a separate Palestinian state, Israel would be “overwhelmed” by the Palestinian vote. This presumes that in a one-state solution, all the Arab residents of Judea and Samaria would be given automatic citizenship. Yes, you and I seem to agree, granting such instant citizenship would be the definition of foolishness. No self-preserving country in its right mind would grant citizenship (and the right to vote in national elections) without a lengthy process of vetting such non-citizens, as is done in the United States and most free countries.

In my peace plan, which is pointedly called Peace for Peace (as opposed to the failed land for peace formula), I call for Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, alongside a path to loyal citizenship for the non-citizens, mostly Arabs (or Palestinians, if you prefer), now residing in the areas that Israel recaptured in the defensive Six Day War of 1967. Such a process would include a three-year comprehensive good citizenship course, followed by two-three years of national service, culminating with an oath of loyalty to the State of Israel.

Many non-citizens in Judea and Samaria, many of whom I know personally, would seize at the opportunity to become loyal Israeli citizens. Many others would refuse, thereby minimizing the demographic danger to Israel, but the truth be told, noted demographers such as Yoram Ettinger have shown that the Jewish birth rates in Judea, Samaria, and Jerusalem have been sky-rocketing for the past two decades, way beyond that of the Arabs. Israel is undergoing a social renaissance, in which the traditional family is having a resurgence and having large Jewish families is fashionable once again. Therefore, when we examine the current reality, we see that the demographic threat is greatly exaggerated by those who cling to the land for peace agenda.

Of course, I haven’t yet mentioned Israel’s historical rights to these areas, which I have documented extensively in my most recent book, “Trump and the Jews”, but you haven’t disputed those rights. I also haven’t mentioned that we can’t make peace with a Palestinian Authority that for years has been giving salary payments to each and every terrorist that has killed or wounded an Israeli. This includes the three Fatah terrorists who shot and wounded me and my then three-year-old son in December of 2001 and their salaries continue to this day.

Given the new, pragmatic approach of President Trump, I am strongly urging you to rethink the dual mantras of land for peace and the two-state solution. As Donald would say, it’s time for new ideas.

Bio: David Rubin, former Mayor of Shiloh Israel, is the author of the new book, “Trump and the Jews”. Rubin is the founder and president of Shiloh Israel Children’s Fund, established after he and his then three-year-old son were wounded in a terror attack. He can be found at www.DavidRubinIsrael.com or at www.ShilohIsraelChildren.org.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending