CC2009: Day Eight Recap

Summary by Richard Church, Wi Delegate

OK, we knew today was going to be our most busy day. I knew this from the moment we passed the rules requiring extensive delays in dealing with the issues. However, I don't think any of the delegates expected that we would have to remain in session until 1:30 in the morning, and then still not deal with all of the reports.

There was only one presentation today, which I chose not to attend in the interests of sleep. The speaker was Red Beckman. I did get to hear Mr. Beckman for about a half hour as he was asked to finish his presentation and answer questions after we reconvened in the main room. He spoke on basic principles of government. Based on what I heard I will definitely try to find more information by this well-spoken man.

We passed a large number of reports today, and I am unable to list them all for you, but I'll hit the high spots. We did pass the resolution that I authored regarding the General Welfare Clause. I was given the opportunity to read the resolution, which I tried to do in a persuasive manner. It must have worked because there was a lot of applause even as I read, and then there was very little amendment to it. Unfortunately, one amendment did manage to get in which actually weakened the clarity of the resolution, but that's the way these things work.

Rudy Eckert also participated in presenting a reading of a resolution by the Public Debt Committee. Rudy actually didn't like the way the resolution was worded, since additional language had been added after he thought it had already been completed. A notable feature of the resolution was that it called for a repudiation of the public debt, a principle on which I remain undecided. The report was adopted with very little amendment.

A bit of bad news is that the Continental Congress voted down two resolutions opposing abortion. My estimate is that the majority of the delegates here are pro-life, but some did not like the fact that the resolution mentions God and others thought it was too divisive of an issue. Frankly, this was an act of cowardice on the part of the delegates. As much as we have spoken of liberty, tyranny and individual rights over the last seven days, it is a complete and utter contradiction that we failed to take a stand for the most vulnerable of our society, the unborn, whose lives are intentionally unprotected by the government. This refusal to make a statement on this issue calls in question the commitment of the delegates to the most basic of individual rights, namely the right to life.

On the first full day, I moved, and the Continental Congress adopted, a rule which forbids motions that propose amendments to the Constitution. Today proved the wisdom of that rule. Many have opposed the Continental Congress on the grounds that it might lead to a call for an Article V Constitutional Convention. Since the stated purpose of this Congress was "to defend, not amend" the Constitution, it was only fitting that such a rule be adopted.

On a resolution from the Constitutional Governance Committee, I raised the question of whether one of its proposals would require a Constitutional amendment. It calls for a joint congressional committee to approve the Constitutionality of all bills passed by Congress before they are sent to the President. Essentially, this committee is given veto power under the proposal. This would violate Article II of the Constitution and could only be implemented through Constitutional amendment. I tried to make a motion that would have reworded the proposal to fix the problem, but the question was called and the resolution adopted before I had a chance. All that needed modification was to have this committee review bills before they are passed, rather than after, but it was passed as originally written.

The rule against Constitutional amendments was also invoked in a resolution that asked citizens to lobby their legislators to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment. The chair ruled it out of order and, when the decision of the chair was appealed, the body voted that it was, indeed, out of order according to our rules.

It became obvious through the course of the day that we were not going to finish our business before dinner, so we reconvened after eating. However, we only had use of the room we were in until 10:00pm. When we were still not finished at that point, we moved to the amphitheater which we have been using for the daily presentations. The amphitheater is not as easy to work in, since there are no tables on which to spread out our papers. But we got by OK, I think.

The day's fireworks came near the very end of our session. There was a small group of people who had asked the President to appoint them as a committee on the Fourteenth Amendment. This group had been trying very hard to have their report taken up by the body. In fact, Mr. Badnarik required a vote before he would even let them read their report.

The members of this committee seem to be a part of what is almost a Fourteenth Amendment cult. These people believe that the nullification of the Fourteenth Amendment is the silver bullet, and that without the Fourteenth Amendment there would be no violations of individual rights and we could all live happily ever after. While I have questions about the proper ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, and I recognize that the Fourteenth Amendment is often invoked as an expansion of government power, to place the importance on it alone that this group does is simply a case of "patriot myth."

Their report was not really a resolution, but more of a statement of their legal theory. From the moment this report was read, there were strong emotions about it. In fact, one delegate interrupted the proceedings to move adjournment, which was voted down.

Finally, a motion was made to postpone the matter. Previously, we had passed a proposal to allow the President to reconvene this Continental Congress after our last day on November 22. The motion was to postpone this matter until that time, if it ever occurs (which is unlikely in my opinion). Essentially this would kill the report.

Note: There is a way to fund all CC's and defend all Citizens from unconstitutional aggressions. Contact someguy if interested.

When it came time to vote on the postponement, a delegate from Illinois raised a point of order. While the majority of Illinois's delegation wanted to vote in favor of postponement, their voting delegate was a member of the committee and was not voting in accordance with their wishes. Even though each state has three delegates, each state gets only one vote. The delegate who received the most votes in the election is the voting delegate, but he must cast the vote according to the wishes of a majority of the delegation.

The President directed the Illinois voting delegate to vote according to his delegations wishes and that if he did not, he would be ruled out of order and removed from the assembly by the Sergeant-at-Arms. The delegate refused to vote, but allowed another member of his delegation to cast the vote. The voting delegate from Ohio also had to be instructed to vote in accordance with his delegation or be removed. The motion to postpone passed, killing the report, and angering at least two members so greatly that they stormed out of the room and I don't expect them to return.

I know that some delegates and staff were greatly discouraged by this event, with some even questioning whether they will continue here until Saturday. But I would remind all that, despite the tempers, the system actually worked in this case. A poorly presented report of dubious credibility was essentially struck down by the Continental Congress. These kinds of problems always arise when people come to something like this to only press one pet issue. With the attitudes of these members, the body is better off without their participation.

Even though there was more business to conduct, we decided to change the agenda to allow ourselves four extra hours in the morning to finish up the remaining reports. I would have like to limit it to 2 hours, but hopefully we can finish the few remaining items without taking the whole morning. (Maybe I should change the word "hopefully" in that last sentence to "wishfully." I expect that with this group, the debate will expand to fill whatever space we give it.)

The original agenda item for the morning was the Articles of Association. This is the document that we will be taking home to collect as many signatures as possible. In my opinion, the Articles of Association is the single most important document to be produced by this Continental Congress. This is why Bob Schulz wanted to dedicate all of the last three days to it exclusively. We have taken four hours away from that important work, but I am still confident that we will be able to produce something of great quality and importance.
More freedom at:www.givemeliberty.org