18620Impairing the Power of the People to Seek Redress
- Jul 25, 2011
Impairing the Power of the PeopleEllenCorbett's latest threat to democracy - SB168
to Seek Redress
Ron Branson Responds to the article;
Respecting the People's Initiative Process, Article II, Sec. 1 of our California Constitution, it is established in no uncertain terms, "All political power is inherent in the People. Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require."
It is therefore obvious from our Constitution that the Initiative Process is ONLY for the People and from the People. Government has no power nor jurisdiction whatsoever to meddle with this inherent power of the People, as it is exclusively a avenue of redress strictly in the hands of the People. This, of course, means that government is forbidden from altering the Initiative Process and from placing government propositions upon the California ballot.
Yet we see more than half of all propositions placed upon the California ballot every election cycle are placed there by the Legislature. Laws proposed by legislators are limited to the legislative process of proposed amendments, committee votes, readings and oppositions, and ultimately the subject of a potential veto by the governor, unlike every Initiative. By no means can it be argued that "All political power is inherent in the Legislature."
Further, what does the word "All" mean? If all political powers are inherent in the People, then what part of political powers are beyond the reach of the People to which the Legislature if free to overrule? The answer is obvious! We are a government of the People, by the People, and for the People, and not a government of the Legislature, by the Legislature, and for the Legislature! Do I hear an Amen on this?
As powerful a Congress is, it is strictly forbidden from legislation interfering with the People's right of redress. Proof, you ask. I thought you would never ask. Why it is the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, "Congress shall make no law respecting ... the right of the People... to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Ahh, but you say, we are here talking about the Legislature of the State of California, not Congress. Okay, so I will take the liberty of rephrasing the First Amendment. "The Legislature of the State of California shall make no law respecting ... the right of the People ... to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
But now you argue, we are not here talking about redress of grievances, but Initiatives. Now what do you call the inherent right of the People to alter or reform their forms of government? I can hardly think of better words to describe "Redress." And is this not the sole subject of our Declaration of Independence, "That to secure these rights, governments are established among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it..." If I understand our present form of government correctly, if government in any way seeks to tamper in the least with the People's right of redress, it is open season on the offender.
Now I wish to call to your attention the sternness in which our Founding Fathers preserved this protection to the People. It does not say, "Congress shall not enforce any law," but rather, "Congress shall make no law." Therefore, the offense is consummated in the mere "making" of such a law, let alone the question of enforcing such law.
Stay with me, folks! it is my contention that the mere discussion and proposal of legislation to lessening the right of the People's to redress of grievances is raw tyranny, and subjects the offender to the wrath of the People, whatever that may be, and such "legislation" is void the very moment it is "made."
Author: Judicial Accountability Initiative Law