Not too long ago, Anji and I, along with our children, stood in Independence Hall at 5th and Chestnut. That that was one of the most hallowed houses I have ever been in for that was the place where, “our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

For both Anji and I, they are more than just our Founding fathers, two of them are our grandfathers. I am descended from Benjamin Harrison of the Virginia delegation and Anji is descended from Samuel Adams of the Massachusetts delegation.

There, in those small halls, I felt a sense of great humility for those great founders who sat in those chairs – founders such as our grandfathers and George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson who ascribed their names and pledged their sacred honor to that inspired document that begins:

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. “

It was also in that room, that again our great founders ascribed their names to that inspired document that begins, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

For these freedoms countless numbers have lived, served and died. Next to life itself, the ability to choose how to live that life is the greatest of all of God’s gifts. I love our country and proclaim, along with the Prophet leader Moroni of old, that the spirit of God is the Spirit of Freedom. It is therefore a part of our religion to preserve and promote that freedom.

In the words of Abraham Lincoln, “It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

And for you and I, let this day refresh our recollections of these rights, and stir within us, an undiminished devotion to them.

Our Country was founded on four main principles of government:

1. The Will of the People
2. The Representation of the Individual States
3. An Independent Judiciary to protect individual rights and ensure the rule of law
4. A Chief Executive Representing the United States and the People of Them

Each of these have corresponding terms. They are:

1. The House of Representatives: Two Years
2. The Senate: 1/3 Elected every two years with 6 year terms
3. The Judiciary: Lifetime Appointment
4. The President: Four Years

Each of these terms was chosen deliberately. Despite what some would call the "Tyranny of the Judiciary" (as though it were some kind of un-American institution but rather a remnant of King George's 18th Century Great Britain), the lifetime appointment of these judges has been the greatest safeguard of consistent application of the rule of law. The rule of law is the essence of liberty when our laws are just. While I would agree that some errors have been made by the judiciary, I do love our system of law and do attribute some of its success to the lifetime appointment they are entitled to by the US Constitution. They can, and have been, removed by impeachment.

What I would like to propose is that perhaps there is something to be gained in longer terms. One of our many problems in Government today can be traced to the incredible media machine and the constant campaigning that it has created. 24 hour news media coverage leaves no room for our officials to make mistakes and not have it put on the front page of Yahoo!, a blog, or the scrolling news feed on CNN. It also has forced our officials to be on a permanent campaign. The next campaign begins the day after the old one ended. This campaigning is a problem. It makes our officials make choices to get votes rather than do what is right. This always happens to varying degrees, but now it seems to be the common practise - the only way.

In the words of columnist Joe Klein, "The pressure to 'win' the daily news cycle—to control the news—has overwhelmed the more reflective, statesmanlike aspects of the office."

Because of the permanent campaign they are constantly pleasing every interest group that threatens to get them out of office, fund every single project, spend more and more time away from Washington back at fundraising dinners, and answering every single question they get with either "I don't recall" or with words that mean nothing. We can't get to know our officials anymore and we don't know what they really stand for. As a result, we elect, and then re-elect politicians who would rather make a career out of something that should be a sacrifice. We elect, and then re-elect politicians who actually are destroying our country because of their continual campaigning. The permanent campaign is distructive of the People's liberties as it imposes unjust laws written and signed into law with the campaign in mind rather than the principles of Freedom that the country should stand for.

I suggest to you that limits of terms may indeed be a problem, but that just as big is the length of the term. We need to consider making a change to the duration of these terms for the good of the nation and give our Representatives room to breath and space to act in good conscience without fear that every special interest group will wage war on them and win. We need to give them time to prove themselves and to make decisions they know are best and not just to get re-elected - decisions that can be made with enough time to weather the storm of special interest opinions and fury.

Certainly we do not want to trust Congress with more power. However, we need to create a better system wherein they can more responsibly use their entrusted powers.

If one were to take a satisfaction survey of Congress, the President and the Judiciary, which one do you think would come out on top? I propose the judiciary would. I suggest that we have something to learn from that. It is directly related to:

1. They are appointed and don't have to campaign
2. Their term is for life

These two elements create a situation wherein they can best fulfill their duty. I don't propose a life term for our representatives, but that the duration of their terms be reassessed to determine if the people might be better served by longer terms and limiting the number of them.

Similar to many other work facilities, the building where I work has a security system where you have to swipe in before the door will open for your entrance or exit. Today, that system was down for a few moments and it happened to be down when I was leaving.

One additional area I would focus on if I were the leader of this Nation at this important time would be a return to the virtues of Freedom and Accountability. Across this Globe the word "America" is synonyms with "Freedom." America is, or should be, Freedom. I would remind the citizens of our great land that America was founded by men and women who craved for personal responsibility. They craved the opportunity to be able to enjoy the fruits of their labors because they had been deprived of them by a Colonial Empire. They craved the opportunity to succeed - even if in the attempt they would fail. I would remind our people that this country was founded to reduce government - not to embolden it. I would tell the leaders of business and industry that the very bedrock of America is not the government but the Freedom the government is to sustain and that Freedom cannot exist without Accountability. They are two sides of the same coin. Once cannot exist without the other.

I received some feedback from a good friend of mine. This is what he said:

"I think rather than initiating a 4th branch, that the other three branches should just get out of the way of economic management. Its not their job to manage the economy. It's their job to make sure people are honest and don't commit fraud. Simple policing."

I agree very much that it is not their job to manage the economy. However, regardless of whether we think it is their job, they have made it their job and will forever make it their job under the current setup. The sad reality of our world is that the government is and will be involved. The Great Depression changed that forever. Nobody wants to be known as the next Herbert Hoover and politicians have put themselves up as the economic saviors of the world. Not only have they put themselves up as that, that is what the people expect of them. The number one issue on voter's minds is the economy. It is political suicide to not acknowledge that.

Here are some articles that show my point:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/01/news/economy/election_issue_poll/index.htm
http://www.kirkdorffer.com/ontheroadto2008/2007/12/economy-number-one-issue.shtml

I agree that the ideal role of government is to stay out of the economy and to let the chips fall where they may. However, our economically uneducated politicians can't afford to take that approach. They have to answer their constituent's requests and we can't blame them. Because our people have turned to their government for economic salvation, the government should be altered to meet that need and it should be altered in a manner that economically intelligent and educated persons are able to be placed in the situation to make those recommendations and decisions. Many economists would vote to not have this much government involvement in the economy.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/10/02
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977460238
http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/john.cochrane/research/Papers/mortgage_protest.htm
By taking this approach, those who know the economy best would choose to meddle the least. Therefore, the only way to get government truly out of the economy, is to get the government more involved by placing within it the people who know best and are capable of actually making sound economic policies. That cannot be done, in my opinion, in the current system. Therefore, a change of some kind has to happen.

Again, as I see it we have two choices: move ever closer to a dictatorial Executive Branch due to our representative's inability to act forcing our constitution to be null and void or amend our constitution so that we can act - by the people and for the people - for the good of America and for the good of all mankind.

"Let us include in our Constitution for its revision at stated periods. And it is for the peace and good of mankind that a solemn opportunity of doing this every nineteen or twenty years should be provided by constitution, so that it may be handed on with periodical repairs from generation to generation to the end of time, if anything human can so long endure." Thomas Jefferson 1816

Not only should we be grateful for the government our founders gave us, but we should continue their work.

All great architects first envision before they draft. So was it with the great architects of our nation - they envisioned and then drafted. None of them however envisioned what is happening today. What would Madison, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin and Washington say about our world as it is today with globalization, technology, the media, terrorism and the lust for power among the nation's elite? They would say that designing a government for this world would require that they remain true to their core principles of liberty and creative with the design of the government.

They changed the government according to their world and left a way for us to do the same. It is my belief that all of them would be mortified to know that we have been so slow to adapt our government to our changing world. Among many other things, they would be amazed to see the ultra sensitive Legislative & Executive branches of government - whose many members are almost entirely uneducated on economics and totally un-insulated from the media and the winds of public opinion - drafting the largest economic reform bills in the world's history. They would say it is time we use that seldom used but powerful tool called the "amendment" to revise our constitution.

Keeping in line with their thoughts on the balance of powers, the principles of liberty and the proper role of government, here is what I propose:

An Executive Branch with limited authority as per the Constitution currently.

A Legislative Branch made up of two houses - House and Senate. The Legislative Branch would have all of the same powers they possess now with the exception of regulating Interstate Commerce and overseeing financial policies.

A Judicial Branch made up of two houses called the Administrative Branch and the Judiciary. The Judiciary would be constructed as it is currently. The Administrative Branch would include all of the administrative services such as Social Security, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Department of Transportation, etc. All administrative agencies that also have an appendant administrative court to enforce their guidelines would be included in this branch. The heads of these agencies would be appointed by the Executive and ratified by the Legislative Branch.

A new, fourth branch called the Economic & Commerce Branch made up of two houses: a House & Senate. The house would be elected directly by the people. The Senate would be made up of the several state Treasurers which are elected directly by the people and the Vice President as the President of the Senate.

The Chairman of the Federal Reserve would report to this branch of government rather than the legislative branch.


I am amazed to see the most complicated issues of our time being debated by people who are up for re-election in a few weeks and who have very little true knowledge on what is best for our society - economically speaking. It is essentially Chairman Bernanke and Secretary Paulson running the country as congress can only add minor modifications to their proposals due to their lack of knowledge. Paulson and Bernanke are incredibly intelligent but they need help and our current system is not capable of helping them. The legislative branch is too ignorant to give proper oversight and too ignorant to add value on economic policy. It is time that changed. Electing economists to our current legislative branch would cripple our country in all of its other important areas such as national defense, social and domestic policy as well as foreign policy. Creating a fourth branch of government designed for this purpose would attract the best and brightest in the area of economics. Through that collection of bright minds we would see our country evolve and grow in areas never touched and once again lead the world in this revolution of self government.

We have two choices: move ever closer to a dictatorial Executive Branch due to our representative's inability to act forcing our constitution to be null and void or amend our constitution so that we can act - by the people and for the people.

Our founders started the revolution. It didn't end though with their passing. That revolution - the belief in self government and that by self government the people would be better served - started in the hearts of all true Americans and has spread to us today. Just the same as they cast off their government not once, but twice (the Monarchy and the Articles of Confederation) - so too would they urge us to amend our constitution so that our crippled nation can heal itself and move very capably forward into the future.

Not only should we be grateful for the government our founders gave us, but we should continue their work. I urge you to consider this proposal. If you don't like my proposal - that is fine - but somehow our government needs a renovation.

Albert Camus suggested that it is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.

What does this mean? Let's think about it.

First off, I will define "executioner" as not only the one who deprives someone of their life, but also deprives them of their property or liberty. I am not sure how Camus defined it, but that is how I define it.

During the American Revolution, why was there all of this talk about natural rights, rule of law, due process, and liberty and justice for all? It was because of the threat of injustice, the threat of total disregard for life, liberty and happiness, and the total assumption of power as judge, juror and executioner by certain people in power including the King of England. In truth, all mankind was in danger of some kind without the protection of the rights enshrined in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

However, even with these rights stated in our founding document, there have been times when even we as a country, as a people, have not followed them and have been on the side of the executioners. Do you believe that or do you believe that everything ever done in the name of America has been because it was the right thing to do?

One obvious time when we have been on the side of the executioner was the western expansion of our country. Although the 20th century saw the creation of the term genocide, it certainly was not the first time it occurred. Previously is was called the Manifest Destiny. Regardless of the romantic picture we have of the old west, it was a time of great atrocities on both sides resulting in the complete defeat of the Native American people. America and/or many of its citizens stole their lands, confiscated their property, killed literally hundreds of thousands of their people, and took the survivors from the forests and brought them to the western deserts.

You would have thought that it would have ended there - in a less civil time. It is also not my intent to judge our past by today's standards - only today's actions by today's understanding.

Such action however did not end in a time gone by and people today are not much different than they were before. Such is the case with all wars, with all crimes, with all aggression - trying to take that which is not ours - in times past, times present and times surely to come. We still want more and will still do almost anything to get what we want unless we are guided by principles and held in check by the great laws of our land.

It appears as though Barrick gold, now a multi-billion dollar speculator (as opposed to the small gold speculators of yester-year), wishes to continue the base behavior that was an injustice to so many millions from the preceding centuries and take away the land of the Shoshone people in a quest for gold today. This is a case of a multi-national company taking the land from a small Indian tribe for their own interest and the government supporting them in their action. This is not right. You can read more here:

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/dec2007/2007-12-06-01.asp

http://www.sacredland.org/endangered_sites_pages/mt_tenabo.html

http://www.foei.org/en/publications/pdfs/Barrick_final_sml.pdf

These are our brothers and sisters - we need them more than we need gold. What side should we be on? The side of the right - in all cases - and the right is not always in a suit and tie, in a robe sitting on a court bench, or an innocent person with a job. The right is that moral compass that always points true - within our hearts. The right is the golden rule which the Master uttered, "Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them."

Do we truly believe in liberty and Justice for all? I know I do. I hope you do as well. Please write your Representatives in Congress and inform them of this injustice. For a link to find your representative, click here.

Did you ever think that the maybe the Confederates & south, in the Civil War, weren't the rebels but that maybe the rebels were really in the North? I was sitting down tonight pondering over some excellent history that I had recently read as well as the moral groundlessness upon which slavery was built.

At the time of the Declaration of Independence, 25% of the Continental United States was made up of slaves. I do not have the figure, but there was also a large number of Indentured Servants in the colonies at that time. To be conservative, I will say it was only 8%. Combined, 0ne third of our country was in servitude to a master and had nearly no rights - even that basic right of protecting their own lives in many cases. Women were in a similar state with no right to hold property or to have a voice in their government. Out of this situation emerged for the first time a document, penned by a Representative of the People and assented to unanimously by the Continental Congress of the United States of America, alleging certain unalienable rights - those of Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness.

Sadly, those rights initially were only granted to land holding white men since not even a free black or Indian could enjoy those rights. For all of the rest, the world wasn't ready for the realization of what the enjoyment of those rights for all meant and thus it was written into law - even within our own constitution when it deemed all other non-free persons to be only three-fifths of a person. At that time, this notion of the master and the servant was deeply entrenched in our culture and stemmed all the way to Jamestown & the first colonists.

However, something changed - the North. They began to move away from this notion of servant and master, oppressor and oppressed. They heard the pleas of their fellow humans and organized the abolitionist movement as well as Women’s Suffrage. The people in the North began to rebel against the old order and to form a new one founded on the principles penned and ascribed to decades earlier. They began to rebel against the old order of States Rights and the Confederation under the old Articles. They began to truly form a more perfect Union.

This change, this rebellion against the old order & the way things were, finally encroached too much on the South who were determined not to change but to keep the status quo. When the Northern rebellion against the status quo became so powerful that America elected a president from the abolitionist Republican Party – it was time to fight back and to defend that which was their own – their history, their heritage, what they viewed to be their property and their way of life.

No, the south didn’t rebel and sadly that was the problem. The North did and thank God they did so that in very deed the blessings of our more perfect union and the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness could be more fully enjoyed by more of God’s children.

I believe in freedom and in its boundaries. When another person's freedom infringes on the freedom and rights of others, they have exercised their freedom in an unjust fashion. Such an exercise becomes a crime.

Regarding the boundaries of free exercise, I would like you to consider part of the original draft of the Bill of Rights for Pennsylvania's first Constitution. In that first draft it read:

"An enormous proportion of property vested in a few individuals is dangerous to the rights, and destructive of the common happiness, of mankind; and therefore every free state hath a right by its laws to discourage the possession of such property."

Is that true? Does the holding of an enormous proportion of property vested in a few individuals create a danger and destroy the common happiness of mankind? This isn't a question you should answer with your knee jerk as you may be inclined to do.

As I look in my minds eye at the vast expanse of humanity around the world, and knowing that the majority of wealth is owned by a minority of the earth's population, and knowing that wars are generally waged over wealth (i.e., gold, land, resources) and to get more of it either because the poor don't have it or the rich want more of it, and whereas wars cause so much misery to the people involved, and knowing that the lack of opportunities afforded to so many around the world is a factor in crime, social ills, disease and death, I can see the danger and destruction that the incredibly disproportionate distribution of wealth can create.

Does therefore the endless accumulation of wealth infringe on the rights of others? It may. It may cause people to be pressed into war who have no true interest in it. It may push others into poverty. It may keep people from basic services. It may cause so many of the ills we see and hear around us and in our world.

The endless accumulation of wealth was never meant to be the American Dream as so many think it is. The American Dream was about Freedom, Liberty, Justice, & the protection of Natural Rights. Let us never forget what our country was and should be really about - Liberty & Justice for all. We as a Nation have never been perfect at that but we have gotten better as we have looked to our foundation - the principles the founders aspired to. That foundation has continued to transform the way we have built & changed our society since 1776.

May Liberty and Justice for all continue to form how we look at the true American Dream versus the fraud so that our American home, and therefore our world home, can be one of freedom, justice and protection of natural rights for all mankind. And may each one of us consider again the question "Does the holding of an enormous proportion of property vested in a few individuals create a danger and destroy the common happiness of mankind?" and then live and act accordingly.

Long has the Star Spangled banner waived over the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Its stars shine forth in the night, giving light and guidance to the mariners on the see of adversity. It waves to them. It calls to them.

Its stripes remind us of the blood and purity of the brave and tells us with not only those stripes, but the stripes of One other, we are healed and made free.

This land, this new nation, has transformed our world in a way that no other has since the beginning of time. Our Constitution is more than just a document that preserves ours rights as Americans. It is a document that has set the standard for the preservation of human rights across the world.

No matter the stain of current politics - the principles of Freedom that shine forth as the stars of the night call and set the standard of a higher humanity for all the world to see and for all the world to be guided by. America calls to the world. It calls to loose the bonds of slavery. It calls to end the bonds of ignorance. It calls to end the false hegemony of high birth. It calls to bring all to the level of human brotherhood. It calls to the soul to worship their Divine Creator how, where and when they may. It calls to individual to reach out, to look higher, and to lift up. This is America to me. This is my County - the United States.

Thank God for this land of Liberty - for by it, all of mankind is or will be blessed by it. Freedom and human conscience create a foundation of happiness. This freedom which was established first here will go forth across all the world - not by aggression but by progression. It truly has begun a Novus Ordo Seclorum - a New Order for the Ages. Thank God for that Order.

Thank you for reading.