💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › parks.txt captured on 2022-04-29 at 00:18:16.
⬅️ Previous capture (2020-10-31)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
FEDERAL PARKS
This had been a very long winter and spring for the
entire family. Our reservations to spend a month sight-
seeing in Egypt have been confirmed since last October.
We often talked about special sites we wanted to visit.
Would we see the Great Pyramid at Cheops or the Aswan Dam?
Maybe we would go farther down the Nile to visit some of the
lesser known pyramids at Karnack. We've had discussions on
what it will be like to ride on a camel. We'd heard that
camels smell badly and wondered about that. And we were
looking forward to finding out if Egypt was all sand.
This trip was the talk of the school which my two
children attended. Not only were their classmates inter-
ested, their teachers had became involved.
One day, my son asked if we were going to visit King
Tut's Tomb. I replied, "Yes, it's on our list."
"What about the curse of his tomb? Will we be cursed?"
"I doubt it Billy." I answered. "That was only a
story."
"No it's not!" retorted Susie. "Miss Slone brought a
special book of Egypt from the library. She read us the
part about when they opened the tomb and all the people who
died strangely."
"I don't believe it." I replied. "People were much
more superstitious in those days. It was probably a
coincidence that they all died so soon after they opened the
tomb."
"I wouldn't be too sure of that." my wife joined in.
"Do you remember when the artifacts from his tomb were
displayed in Los Angeles? I saw one of the curators on TV.
When asked that very question, he said they didn't know if
the curse was the reason they died."
"Weird!" said Billy as he looked at his sister. "Do
you think it will hurt us if we go in there?"
Susie shivered a bit as she said, "Wow, I hope not."
During the past few months, strange happenings began to
make the headlines. Terrorists shot and killed people at a
couple of airports we would be going through . . . planes
had been hijacked . . . hostages were taken. Would it be
safe for my family to make the trip?
We finally decided the curse of King Tut didn't scare
us but the possibility of running into terrorists did bother
us. We cancelled our trip and decided to visit a national
park in the northwestern United States. After all, these
were run by our government so we could feel safe there.
Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite National Park,
Grand Canyon National Park, millions of acres of public
range land, national sea shores, and on and on and on . . .
Beautiful parks, scenery, wildlife, hiking trails,
camping sites . . . Just look at all the beautiful places
our federal government is giving to the people. An ideal
place to spend an extended summer vacation with the family.
Let's set the record right now . . . The United States
government is breaking the law. They have NO power to own
those lands. It's illegal as hell!
The ONLY permission for the national government to own
land is spelled out in Art I, Sect 8, cl 17. It specific-
ally limits ownership to 10 square miles for the seat of the
government (Washington, D.C.) and . . .
". . . over all places purchased by the consent of the
legislatures of the state in which the same shall be, for
the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and
other needful buildings."
That's it. Not one word about range land, national
parks, presidential or other official hideaways.
The only other place in our Constitution where the word
property appears is in Article IV, Section 3, clause 2.
This permission to "dispose of and make all needful rules
and regulations respecting the territory or other property
belonging to the United States; . . . "
This gives them the right to sell property which
lawfully belongs to the government. It allows them to
exercise control over territories which may be awarded to
the national government as a result of peace treaties, etc.
Not a word about public lands or parks. In 1891, they
passed the first act establishing National Forests. This
came about because people were careless when they went into
forested areas. They cut down trees and then vacated the
areas. No attempt was made to plant new trees and rain
runoff was ruining the lands. Commendable? No argument.
By act of Congress dated Aug. 25, 1916, they es-
tablished The National Park Service as a bureau of the
United States Department of Interior. Purpose was to
"promote and regulate the use of the federal areas known as
national parks, monuments, and reservations . . . by such
means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of
said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to
conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects
and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment
of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave
them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."
(Encyclopedia Americana) This was a laudable undertaking on
the part of the Congress. Makes no matter, it's without
authority in the Constitution.
Ownership by the individual states involved, if
permitted by the state constitution concerned, would be
another story. For the federales to assume such an
undertaking without specific permission from or by an amend-
ment to our Constitution is unlawful.
Back to the naughty word again . . . Deficits! All
monies spent operating the National Park Service is illegal.
Some are really disastrous. They will admit that all the
money collected from overnight lodging does not pay the cost
of maintaining the buildings. Another chunk to move the
figures into the red. After all, it's not their money, it's
YOUR MONEY!
Reports are that the United States government owns half
the territory west of the Mississippi. How come? The
Constitution is specific on land ownership, ". . . for the
erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other
needful buildings." Nothing else!
Alaska has been in a running battle with Congress over
the past decade to decide who owns the property in the
state. How can Congress tell the people of Alaska the
federal government owns anything other than a military base
or dockyard, etc.? Even then, the legislature of Alaska is
mandated to give their permission to purchase the property.
And to compound the problem, you are subject to jail if
you go on the property without permission. The charge is
trespassing. What kind of garbage is this?
The Founding Fathers knew they couldn't foresee the
future. They had no idea what problems would arise, so we
know they included the amendment process. We should never
look the other way when the government assumes a power for
which we have not specifically given our permission. It's
that simple.
The powers we agreed to convey for government are
spelled out in no uncertain terms. The way for the govern-
ment to receive new powers from we the people is also plain.
We have to make them use the proper and legal means to
receive justification for any act they intend to undertake.
Parks, wildlife and historical preserves are desirable.
They are places of beauty and fun to visit. Many serve the
purpose of sustaining the heritage of our country. Yet
allowing politicians to seize power which we have specifi-
cally denied them is far more dangerous to the survival of
our country.
If we are so foolish to allow even the slightest step
past what we have allowed, the next step is simple. Without
looking too intently, we can see the result of permitting
the first step to go unchallenged.
This is an old and favorite trick of the politicos.
When they are hell bent on accomplishing a specified goal,
they take at least two steps toward the goal. If they are
earnestly challenged, they will take one step backwards to
disarm the dispute. Then they are one step ahead in
achieving their intended goal.
The scenario goes this: "When we passed the National
Forest Act, we convinced the people it was for their own
good. They were happy we took the initiative. No one
checked the constitution or challenged us. Now we can do
whatever we want. And as long as we convince them it's for
their own good, they'll thank us." Easy, isn't it?
As George Washington pointed out, ". . . the constitu-
tion which at any time exists till changed by an explicit
and authentic act of the whole people is sacredly obligatory
upon all."
Again it is pointed out that we demanded every official
of government take an oath or affirmation to support the
supremacy of the Constitution. They cannot exceed what we
have allowed. We all must obey the Constitution and this
includes all who work for government at any level!
A thorough search of The Federalist Papers, shows only
No. 43 by James Madison speaking of the ownership of
property by the federal government. One section deals with
the ownership of the property for the seat of the national
government.
Madison says: "The necessity of a like authority over
forts, magazines, etc., established by the general govern-
ment, is not less evident. The public money expended on
such places, and the public property deposited in them,
require that they should be exempt from the authority of the
particular State. Nor would it be proper for the places on
which the security of the entire Union may depend to be in
any degree dependent on a particular member of it. All
objections and scruples are here also obviated by requiring
the concurrence of the States concerned in every such
establishment."
That's certainly clear enough. We did not say it was
okay to own any property other than what was specified.
Now I'm certain many will say the last clause of Art I,
Sect 8 conveys special jurisdiction to the government. They
can own any property they feel necessary, whatever its
classification. This clause is called the "necessary and
proper" clause.
This argument runs into a stone wall immediately. Two
facts in our Constitution kill that reasoning. One is the
supremacy clause.
The other is the "necessary and proper" clause only
authorizes the exercise of listed powers. This includes
other powers vested by this Constitution in the government
of the United States. The document has to show the power.
NOT whatever THEY think necessary and proper.
The ownership of property is specific and limited.
Nowhere in our Constitution can anyone point to as permis-
sion for ownership of other types of property. This
includes Camp David and a high official hideout on Jekyll
Island off the coast of Georgia.
Have you ever checked to see what these clowns are
required to pay for a stay at Jekyll Island? There are many
others, some set aside in 'public parks', exclusive for high
ranking bureaucrats, members of congress and the justices of
the Supreme Court. Though they might think otherwise, there
are no kings or potentiates in our government. They are
responsible to you and me.
The Federalist Papers are crystal clear on this aspect.
In paper No. 34, Hamilton is emphatic that the necessary and
proper clause pertains only to powers specifically granted.
He addresses the points in particular we are making.
"If the federal government should overpass the just
bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its
powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the
standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress
the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may
suggest and prudence justify. The propriety of a law, in a
constitutional light, must always be determined by the
nature of the powers upon which it is founded."
Madison in paper No. 44 puts it this way: "If it be
asked what is to be the consequence, in case the Congress
shall misconstrue this part of the Constitution and exercise
powers not warranted by its true meaning, I answer the same
as if they should misconstrue or enlarge any other power
vested in them; as if the general power had been reduced to
particulars, and any one of these were to be violated; the
same, in short, as if the State legislatures should violate
their respective constitutional authorities. In the first
instance, the success of the usurpation will depend on the
executive and judiciary departments, which are to expound
and give effect to the legislative acts; and in the last
resort a remedy must be obtained from the people, who can,
by the election of more faithful representatives, annul the
acts of the usurpers."
Usurpers are those who seize and hold a power or
position without a legal right. This is exactly what we are
facing in our country today. And how could this occur
except with the acquiescence and, as Madison said, collusion
between the executive and judicial branches?
Remember the Tenth Amendment absolutely prohibits the
federal government from assuming ANY power which we did not
delegate. There are no exceptions.
So how do we straighten out this mess? James Madison
had the answer when he said the remedy must come from the
people.
Hamilton also pointed out the people must take whatever
measures necessary to redress the injury to the Constitu-
tion. Call the local office of your Senator or Congressman.
Ask where they find the authorization to own property beyond
what is specified in our Constitution.
A couple more questions would be pertinent. One, have
you taken an oath to support our Constitution? Second, ask
where Congress finds the specific justification to establish
the National Park Service.
Do not to take their answer at face value. Check their
answer against the Constitution. Ask them for specifics.
Point out the two areas in the Constitution which have to do
with property. You will hear a lot of silence at the other
end of the phone. They have never had a question before
like you're asking them now.
Tell them you are unhappy with the government spending
money on items which are beyond the lawmaking and spending
powers of Congress. Ask further what he/she expects to do
about the problem. Then ask your friends to do the same.
Letters to the Editor of your local newspapers would alert
other people of your area.
Another way to stir the pot would be to send members of
Congress who represent you a "Petition For Redress of
Grievances." To refresh our memory, this was a right
included in the 1st Amendment. It is NOT a privilege as the
hot shots in government keep insisting.
The colonists had a great deal of trouble with the King
of England. They filed these petitions to ask the King to
correct the wrongs and injustices which had occurred. This
was the main reason they included this right in the First
Amendment.
I strongly suggest you write out the complaint in your
own words. It shouldn't sound as though you are following
something out of a book. You don't need a degree in english
to make your demand understood. Write it as though you were
talking to a member of your family and those in Congress
will understand it also.
There has been no form prescribed for a petition for
redress. Nor did our Founding Fathers specify which branch
of government these petitions were restricted to. Any
branch can be petitioned and I recommend ALL branches
receive these petitions! This right has fallen into nearly
complete disuse over the past years. There is an ASCII file
at the end of this book containing a Petition for Redress of
Grievances. It can be printed on any printer, filled out
and mailed.
A wise man once said, "The more corrupt the state, the
more numerous the laws." (Cornelius Tacitus, Roman senator
and historian. A.D. c.56-c.115) It's our sacred duty to
curb this illegal abuse of our Constitution. We must make
the government again responsible to WE THE PEOPLE.
They are making fools of you and me.
PLEASE READ THE 'SALES PITCH' CHAPTER.
REGISTER WITH THE AUTHOR.