The Path

The De-Constituting of America & Where We The People Are Being Led

Thursday, September 29, 2005

Turning Citizens into Criminals--EZ As 1-2-3

Silly Laws Turn Entrepreneurs Into Crooks
by Trent England and Claire Wendt
September 27, 2005
From: The Heritage Foundation

Many states require about 1,700 hours of training to become a licensed paramedic, six weeks of training to be a firefighter, and 10 weeks of training to become a police officer. So a job requiring 3,200 hours of training must be even more complicated or dangerous, right?

Actually, that’s what some states require to become a licensed hair braider.

And that’s just one example of the many ridiculous obstacles faced every day by American entrepreneurs. Worst of all, accidentally violating such regulations can turn well-meaning small-business owners into criminals.

Legislators may believe they are protecting their constituents when they write these laws, but often, they do so only after being prodded by special-interest groups intent on stifling competition from startup businesses. Many business licensing laws, in practice, do nothing to protect consumers and actually raise prices and reduce quality. And in most states, failing to navigate the licensing bureaucracy is a criminal offense. Business owners who don’t comply, even accidentally, can be bankrupted with fines or even thrown in jail.

In Utah, the Pleasant Grove City Police arrested eight people for “soliciting without a license.” Soliciting what? Drugs? Prostitution? No. They were soliciting for customers to buy vacuum cleaners. Police rounded up the otherwise law-abiding door-to-door salesmen for violating a city code requiring them to provide fingerprints and post a $1,000 bond. All that just to sell vacuums. They sued the city, arguing that the licensing regime violates their rights to freedom of speech and to earn a living.


In July, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit agreed with the salesmen. The city claimed that the law was not about harassing and discouraging businesspeople, but was intended only to prevent fraud and burglaries. During a hearing, however, a Pleasant Grove City police captain admitted that the fingerprints required for a license never had been used -- not to prosecute a crime or for anything else. In reality, the fingerprinting and expensive bond were just ways to interfere with a legitimate business by creating time-consuming and complicated procedures with criminal penalties for intentional or even accidental non-compliance.

Is it really a good idea to use scarce criminal-justice resources to go after well-meaning and productive citizens? Small-business entrepreneurs certainly don’t think so, and some of them are fighting back. For many urban women, particularly immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean, hair braiding is a great way to earn a living. It requires almost no initial investment, can pay a relatively high hourly wage and allows a flexible schedule. As is often the case, some established businesses are less than enthusiastic about the upstart competition. In fact, established full-service salons have pressured some state regulators to go after hair braiders for failing to secure a cosmetology license -- despite the fact that hair braiders don’t use chemicals, razors or any of the other potentially hazardous tools used in a regular salon.

In Mississippi, the law required 3,200 hours of coursework just to apply for a license. Any violation was considered a crime. Hair braiders challenged the law in court in 2004 and won, requiring the law to be rewritten with more freedom and less economic protectionism. California law required at least nine months of full-time study at a cosmetology school, which could cost more than $5,000. A court in California found that the licensing requirement was irrational as applied to hair braiding and struck it down.

The Louisiana legislature has taken silly and abusive regulations even further. Want to open a flower shop in the Bayou State? First you’ll need a state-issued florist license. And to get the license, you must pass the state florist test, which just happens to be graded by established florists. It is no surprise that the exam is totally subjective and the pass rate is lower than the Louisiana state bar exam.

The justification for economic regulation is always the “public good,” but in many cases it is clear that lawmakers are simply protecting established businesses from competition. No one should be branded a criminal for practicing floristry without a license. Salesmen should not be treated like felons in the course of trying to earn an honest living for their families. Women who want to braid hair for a living deserve the freedom to do so without being crushed by senseless regulation.

Instead, governments should celebrate the distinctly American entrepreneurial spirit and encourage the creation of new businesses. There certainly are occupations that call for high training standards and regulatory oversight, although criminal law never should be used for accidental violations. But hair braiders and vacuum cleaner salesmen are not paramedics or pilots. When it comes to everyday Americans trying to do everyday jobs -- like, say, floristry -- government should “let 1,000 flowers bloom.”

Trent England is a legal policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation. Claire Wendt is a law student at Pepperdine University and was the H.N. and Frances C. Berger Foundation intern at Heritage (heritage.org).
Distributed nationally on the Knight-Ridder Tribune Wire

Read Full Post...

Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Letter to Our Son's 1st Grade Teacher

Dear Mrs. 1st Grade Teacher:
On Friday, September 17, 2005, following your class discussion of Constitution Day, our son, brought home an eight page paper discussing the Constitution. We greatly appreciate the class introduction into one of the most important documents ever written. We also understand the need to use age appropriate materials about this topic for first-graders.

However, given the excellent overall education quality in the City School District, we were shocked that such a basic presentation contained many gross inaccuracies about one of the most simply stated, yet most powerful guarantees of common citizen rights, while restraining government action in history—The United States Constitution.

In this letter, we want to draw your attention to these errors and provide our understanding of the Constitution.

As our first president, George Washington stated, “Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force. And, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”

As a result, it was inconceivable to find the first sentence on page one of the hand-out that “The Constitution is a set of rules that need to be followed by citizens who live in the USA.” The citizens who enumerated, or established, the rights and duties in the Constitution covered two primary topics:
1. Specific duties, responsibilities & procedures the people grant to the three separate, but equal, parts of the common government.
2. And, the permanent rights reserved by the people which the common government cannot infringe upon.

Patrick Henry countered this “set of rules for citizens” error best when he said, “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”


The Constitution is a set of rules for citizens to follow? Not likely. However, it does specify rules that government must follow and cannot take from citizens.

On hand-out page four, “The men & women who run the courts deal with citizens who break the laws” is the second misleading statement. The citizen suspected of breaking a federal law is not guilty until evidence is presented and a jury of her peers finds her guilty. The wording of the statement makes it seem that anyone in court has broken a law and by intimation is guilty. This is just not correct.

Other yet more egregious errors are found on page six. Of the seven “Bill of Rights” listed, only three of them are found in the Constitution’s first ten amendments commonly referred to as “The Bill of Rights,” ratified on December 15, 1791.

The four mistakenly listed amendments are far removed from the correct Bill of Rights, as they are typically understood, in both ratification dates & subject matter.
1. “Freedom from slavery”—is the 13th Amendment; Ratified on December 18, 1865, 74 years after the initial ten amendments.
2. “The Right to be a United States Citizen”—14th Amendment; Ratified on July 28, 1868; 77 years later…
3. “The Right of Citizens to vote at age 18”—26th Amendment; Ratified on July 5, 1971; 180 years later…
4. “The Right to Tax Citizens in order to “pay” for important things”—16th Amendment; Ratified on February 25, 1913; 122 years after the original ten Bill of Rights.

We know activities & information are typically taken from a textbook, but wouldn’t it have been simpler, and more accurate, to include a few more of the original ten amendments? “Right to Trial by Jury” and “Powers not given to the United States are kept by the People” are two examples of accurate, yet not used, rights listed in The Bill of Rights.

As Citizens, it is confusing to find such errors in our son’s education about the founding documents of our country. As concerned parents and teachers, we always try to provide correct information and when we make a mistake, we correct it and try to prevent it from happening in the future. As a result, we would like to inquire:
1. What review process did this information receive before being presented to the students?
2. If this was simply an oversight & has already been corrected, when & how did the students receive a more accurate lesson on our Constitution?

Sincerely,

Two Constitutional Parents


Read Full Post...

Sunday, September 25, 2005

The Southwest-izing of America

You want a good ol' flashback to how a truly free, capitalist (uh, there's a dirty PC word) United States used to work? The best way may be to take two roundtrip flights: the first on one of the "major" airlines (you know, the ones that are usually in bankruptcy, merging, demerging or otherwise hiding their true financial picture) & the other flight, on Southwest Airlines.

No, I don't own stock in Southwest, nor any other airline, but the business differences & flight experiences are as clear as night & day.


With Southwest, the experience is one of true free & independent choice...care how much you pay for your ticket: it's not based so much on when you book your flight (unless the flight is full), if you want schedule flexibility, pay a bit more; want the rock bottom cheap price, meet a few specific requirements; care where you sit: check in early & trade some time for that aisle, window or exit row seat. There are no special perks for flying them, frequent flyers get treated the same as everyone else (other than earning the usual free tickets).

Other airlines from the time you book your ticket to the time you get off the plane, groups, classifies & otherwise segregates its' passengers. Now boarding row 35 vs. row 5; 1st class vs. coach; Grand Puba Gold Plated Frequent Flyer with a personal monogram's seat vs. Family with Four kids just happy to sit together; on & on...the passengers' experience & the company's bottomline show the effect of the classification.

With Southwest, passengers (and employees) have camaraderie, laughter, enjoyment. With the others, people can't stand to even look at each other, as they are worried that someone will "jump" in front of them or get something that should be theirs.

The Southwest pleasure comes from having identical opportunities & choices. The results, although varied, do NOT create envy because EVERY person had similar chances, choices & decisions. As a result, Southwest is one of only a few airlines to make money & grow each and every year.

The other airlines don't pay attention to customers, fly where people don't need to be, make them wait until enough cattle (er, passengers) are funneled into a plane to make it "economic" to take off....they also receive HUGE federal, state & local subsidies, file for bankruptcy, default on loans, pensions & other obligations....When their bad, outdated & unsustainable business models finally collapse, the government sweeps in guaranteeing more grants, subsidies, etc. to "help" the employees, customers with whatever it takes to keep the bubble from bursting. Anyone think that government support might have caused the bubble to blow bigger?

Dependency breeds weakness. It does in business. It does in personal lives.

Division breeds anger, animosity & jealousy. Who is promoting & actually doing the dividing? Do We the People benefit? Not likely.

WE THE PEOPLE established a Constitution that guaranteed independence, unity & minimal interference in economic, family & society decisions. Anything that directly affected WE THE PEOPLE was designed to be decided at the State or Local level, ensuring great accountability for the decision & it's results.

Could you imagine an entire nation running, like Southwest Airlines, on freely independent choices? Our country once did & the ability to make those choices are what made us great...The Constitution provided the business plan.

What business model are we following now? How far off might our bankruptcy be?

Read Full Post...

Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Chuckle....


Read Full Post...

Tuesday, September 13, 2005

"Emergency" Continues to Spread

The GOLD RUSH is on. While HURRICANE KATRINA may have come & gone, the "Katrina Emergency" continues to spread.

In addition to our private (free will) donations of goods, time & money, We the People stand ready willing and able to allow politicians to provide "direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program."

So far, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, & West Virginia have all had "EMERGENCIES" declared due to Hurricane Katrina's aftermath. The number of States in need of "immediate Federal assistance" are increasing, but odds are these are only the fastest ones to stake their claims (Section 5191. Procedure for declaration) and others will soon be joining the GOLD RUSH to Washington....


Couple of random thoughts...


  1. Do you think anyone reviews the true nature of the state needs at the Federal level?
  2. Is the need for Federal "Funds" truly due to "evacuees" or just an opportunitistic way to get more money to fund state/local level activities?
  3. If we, as Citizens, had more "disposable"(extra) income, could we freely chose to give more money, time & goods to help SPECIFIC people as opposed to the current "general" help the gov't is rushing in?
  4. Would we have used our "extra" income this way, or are we happy to let our delegates choose a Path for us?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the FEDERAL REGISTER on September 13th, 2005....Federal Emergency Management Agency section.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of an emergency for the State of West Virginia (FEMA-3221-EM), dated September 5, 2005, and related determinations.[[Page 54068]]EFFECTIVE DATE: September 5, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated September 5, 2005, the President declared an emergency declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act), as follows:


I have determined that the emergency conditions in the State of West Virginia resulting from the influx of evacuees from states impacted by Hurricane Katrina beginning on August 29, 2005, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant an emergency declaration under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5206 (the Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such an emergency exists in the State of West Virginia. You are authorized to provide appropriate assistance for required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the Stafford Act to save lives and protect public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in the designated areas. Specifically, you are authorized to provide emergency protective measures (Category B), including direct Federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program, at 100 percent Federal funding. This assistance excludes regular time costs for subgrantees' regular employees. In addition, you are authorized to provide such other forms of assistance under Title V of the Stafford Act as you may deem appropriate.
In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such amounts as you find necessary for Federal emergency assistance and administrative expenses. Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of Homeland Security, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Patricia G. Arcuri, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this declared emergency.
I do hereby determine the following areas of the State of West Virginia to have been affected adversely by this declared emergency: All 55 counties in the State of West Virginia for Public Assistance Category B (emergency protective measures), including direct Federal assistance, at 100 percent Federal funding. (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 Individuals and Households Program-Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)
Michael D. Brown,
Under Secretary,
Emergency Preparedness and Response,
Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 05-18104 Filed 9-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P


Read Full Post...

Monday, September 12, 2005

The Price Gouging Paul Harvey (aka, the Rest of the Story)

Price Gouging? Non-American? How do you like these apples? In response to my article MAKE SURE TO GET THE PAUL HARVEY....

The specific conditions that have helped Oil Company growth in revenues & profits over recent years are too numerous to get into here. However, the current public & political claims of opportunistic "PRICE GOUGING" and "the need for government intervention to "save consumers," are flat-out wrong & telling us only one sentence out of a 500 page novel. If WE THE PEOPLE allow our politicians, media & other pundits to read the book to us as they continue to lull us to sleep, how many sentences, pages and full chapters do you think have & will continue to skip??


My view of the Oil Companies based on a just little research (& no, I don't own ANY oil stocks)....

According to Yahoo! Finance, Exxon-Mobil, BP & Total SA are the current top 3 oil companies in terms of Market Capitalization. At the end of 2004, continuing their recent annual revenue & profit growth, these three companies had combined income statements of:

Total Revenue of $750.5 billion
Total Earnings BEFORE Interest & Taxes of $90.1 billion (or $0.12 of every
Revenue dollar)
Total Net Income of $52.2 billion ($0.07 of every Revenue dollar)

And here's the Paul Harvey....

Of the $750.5 billion of Total Revenue...the government's take,
Corporate Income Tax of $36.1 billion
Shareholder Dividend Tax (if single & in the 30% tax bracket)

of $15.7 billion (based on the net income available for distribution to shareholders)

The Total Government cut...$51.8 billion vs. $36.5 billion for the Actual Shareholders. As a result the government truly OWNS 58% of the companies, while the private shareholders, who risk their own personal capital (& future) by investing in the companies only have 42%.

Conversely, China (communist by name) is believed to own 70% stakes in most of their country's businesses. If you take the 58% current share (from the oil company example above), add in the additional taxes that our American government collects from the economy, but are hidden within a company's income statement under Labor Expense, Freight Expense, etc. Some of these taxes would include Payroll Taxes--Income/Social Security/Medicare/Etc.; Excise (Fuel Taxes); Property Taxes; Etc. I would hazard a guess that our government's share of, not only oil companies, but EVERY single business in the U.S. SIGNIFICANTLY EXCEEDS 70%.

No wonder we don't publicly call China "communist" anymore...they are MORE American than WE THE PEOPLE are, or perhaps I should say, than we've allowed our elected representatives to make us.

How you them apples?




Read Full Post...

Three Major Oil Company Revenues by Year















Click to enlarge graph....

Read Full Post...

Oil Company Income Tax Expenses

Click graph to enlarge....this shows the "corporate" tax paid. However, remember only a Citizen(you & I) can pay a tax (ANY tax). The company pays for the accountants to pay the government timely, legally & accurately...those "system" costs (& all resulting taxes paid are true COSTS to a company's income statement) increase the company's EXPENSE and they have to AT A MINIMUM offset that expense with REVENUE of an equal or greater amount.

Who gives anybody REVENUE or INCOME?? Whether it's the I GOTTA GO--gas company, CHIP OFF THE OL' BLOCK--potato chip company, MIKE SMOKES GRASS--the local Lawn Cutter, SALLY'S ON THE BALD--hair dresser), WE THE PEOPLE as consumers decide daily, what is MORE VALUABLE to us.....invest our PROPERTY (cash) in a buying a particular product (gas or potato chips) or service (grass or hair clippings) or invest our TIME & RESOURCES to go make or do it for ourselves.


Read Full Post...

Friday, September 09, 2005

Make Sure to Get the Paul Harvey

US should tax excess oil company profits -senator
07 Sep 2005 17:50:29 GMT

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON, Sept 7 (Reuters) - With crude oil and gasoline prices surging to record highs after Hurricane Katrina, a U.S. senator on Wednesday introduced legislation to tax some of the extra profits big oil companies are earning.

Profits earned by the major oil companies on crude oil above $40 a barrel would be subject to a 50 percent excise tax under the bill proposed by Sen. Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat. The revenue would be rebated back to consumers.

Oil traded on Wednesday has high as $66.50 a barrel at the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Dorgan said major oil companies were reaping record profits "off the backs of consumers," and their earnings will keep increasing from higher crude oil prices and pump costs that jumped above $3 a gallon nationwide following the disruption in petroleum supplies caused by Katrina.


"Everyone expects American businesses to make a profit and I don't begrudge them that. But the big oil companies are now reaping an unbelievable windfall, and it's time for Congress to help consumers," Dorgan said.

Under Dorgan's proposal, the tax would be in place for three years, and companies would be exempt if they used excess profits to explore for oil, build a refinery or invest in renewable energy sources.

"If, in fact, they're using it to buy back their stock, buy jet airplanes, buy other companies, do a range of things that are now occurring in the oil industry, then they would have to pay the windfall profits tax," Dorgan said.

The rebates would go to all taxpayers, not just to individuals who own vehicles, according to Dorgan.

"The price of gasoline and oil is not just what we run through our carburetors or our fuel injectors. Virtually every day in every way that which we purchase has a consequence as a result of what's happening to the price of energy," he said.


From: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N07538599.htm

Read Full Post...

Thursday, September 01, 2005

Same Old, Same Old

What would you do if you found your window broken and a window installation company's business card tied to a brick laying on the floor? Would you call the company listed to fix your window or the police?

So, why do We The People always call in the window breaker to fix the problems that created the situation in the first place?

Through the Corps of Engineers (34,600 Civilians & 650 Military employees) We The People paid for the government to enable population & property to increase in a SWAMP below sea level through intricate levees, pumps & canals...the economic, property & lives lost in New Orleans will probably equal at least half of the $105.5 billion spent by the Army Corps of Engineers across the ENTIRE country over the LAST 30 years. What will the true cost be to rebuild a devastated city & instead of asking can we do it, perhaps we should ask SHOULD we do it?

We're just going to be told that we didn't spend ENOUGH money..."it was only designed for a Category 3, not a Category 5 to allow for "cost-effective" construction for the American taxpayer." I've heard it already in an interview by ex-Corps leaders....


Who do you think is paying for the rescue, will pay for the on-going re-construction, levee expansions, insurance claims, etc.? We The People, er I mean, Taxpayers...that's all we've become...no longer can people stand on their own with their community, just look at what has happened to the "community" in New Orleans.

SO, in the name of security, safety & speed, our trusty old government is going to come in and save everyone. I'm going to go out on a limb here and posit a rhetorical...Are most of those looters & the environment that is allowing them to thrive, creating the ultimate need for a "savior," actually products of specific government programs over the past forty years? Those programs, like the levees, were designed to "help" too.



Read Full Post...