Thank you for all the pressure you've applied to the legislature through your emails, letters, and phone calls. We have built a lot of momentum for freedom of choice in midwifery for Idahoans and we have good reason to be optimistic.
Representative Pete Nielsen is finalizing the legislation to save traditional midwifery and he announced this morning that he will introduce it in the House State Affairs Committee instead of the Health & Welfare Committee.
H & W has too many bills and with their time constraints, it probably wouldn't happen this session. Rep. Nielsen said “I think we have every bit as good and maybe a better chance of getting this through committee in State Affairs.”
Bonus: The statewide pressure we have already put on the 16 members of the H & W Committee - almost 25% of the House - significantly helps our overall battle.
2. We also need to email our own legislators again in both the House and Senate, encouraging them to save traditional midwifery. Every email counts!
** Husbands and wives, please send separate emails from your own email accounts.
** Always include your name and address so they know you are their constituent.
You can find out who your three legislators are and contact them by following the links below:
Boise, ID – Democrats voted unanimously against the Idaho Health Freedom Act as it was passed by the Idaho House today. The Sovereign Idaho Coalition had invited all parties to support legislation that would nullify any unconstitutional federal health care law. Instead, Idaho Democrats aligned themselves with the efforts of Democrats in Washington to nationalize health care.
Few in Idaho want more federal government control of their lives. The Idaho Health Freedom Act would protect Idahoans from being forced into in any national health care plan.
Chris Stevens is co-director of Sovereign Idaho and state coordinator of Campaign for Liberty. He said, “It's disappointing Democrats took their stand for ObamaCare instead of standing up for the freedom of Idahoans. This was partisan politics at its worst.”
Republicans and Democrats worked together in 2007 and 2008 when Idaho was one of 25 states that passed resolutions and binding laws denouncing and refusing to implement the federal Real ID Act, the implementation of which has been delayed numerous times in response to this massive state resistance, and in practice, is virtually null and void.
Dozens of states are working on legislative action to halt the surrender of state sovereignty to an increasingly aggressive federal government. In addition to health freedom, Idaho will also be considering legislation for sound money and firearms freedom.
The Sovereign Idaho Coalition converged on the capitol on January 18th to raise awareness about the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and how states can stop federal encroachments. Several hundred representatives of groups from all over the state gathered on the steps of the capitol and heard seven State Representatives announce legislation that included the Idaho Health Freedom Act.
Mark Balzer, co-director of Sovereign Idaho, was excited about today's House action. He said, “I think it's a wonderful first step and I hope the Senate will follow through. I hope everyone contacts their Senator and asks them to pass this important legislation.”
Learn about Sound Money - The resources you'll find here include books (many of which link to free online versions) and articles, as well as audio and video available online and for free download.
Statement Introducing the Free Competition in Currency Act
Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Competition in Currency Act of 2009. Currency, or money, is what allows civilization to flourish. In the absence of money, barter is the name of the game; if the farmer needs shoes, he must trade his eggs and milk to the cobbler and hope that the cobbler needs eggs and milk. Money makes the transaction process far easier. Rather than having to search for someone with reciprocal wants, the farmer can exchange his milk and eggs for an agreed-upon medium of exchange with which he can then purchase shoes.
This medium of exchange should satisfy certain properties: it should be durable, that is to say, it does not wear out easily; it should be portable, that is, easily carried; it should be divisible into units usable for every-day transactions; it should be recognizable and uniform, so that one unit of money has the same properties as every other unit; it should be scarce, in the economic sense, so that the extant supply does not satisfy the wants of everyone demanding it; it should be stable, so that the value of its purchasing power does not fluctuate wildly; and it should be reproducible, so that enough units of money can be created to satisfy the needs of exchange.
Over millennia of human history, gold and silver have been the two metals that have most often satisfied these conditions, survived the market process, and gained the trust of billions of people. Gold and silver are difficult to counterfeit, a property which ensures they will always be accepted in commerce. It is precisely for this reason that gold and silver are anathema to governments. A supply of gold and silver that is limited in supply by nature cannot be inflated, and thus serves as a check on the growth of government. Without the ability to inflate the currency, governments find themselves constrained in their actions, unable to carry on wars of aggression or to appease their overtaxed citizens with bread and circuses.
At this country's founding, there was no government controlled national currency. While the Constitution established the Congressional power of minting coins, it was not until 1792 that the US Mint was formally established. In the meantime, Americans made do with foreign silver and gold coins. Even after the Mint's operations got underway, foreign coins continued to circulate within the United States, and did so for several decades.
On the desk in my office I have a sign that says: “Don't steal – the government hates competition.” Indeed, any power a government arrogates to itself, it is loathe to give back to the people. Just as we have gone from a constitutionally-instituted national defense consisting of a limited army and navy bolstered by militias and letters of marque and reprisal, we have moved from a system of competing currencies to a government-instituted banking cartel that monopolizes the issuance of currency. In order to reintroduce a system of competing currencies, there are three steps that must be taken to produce a legal climate favorable to competition.
The first step consists of eliminating legal tender laws. Article I Section 10 of the Constitution forbids the States from making anything but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts. States are not required to enact legal tender laws, but should they choose to, the only acceptable legal tender is gold and silver, the two precious metals that individuals throughout history and across cultures have used as currency. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that grants the Congress the power to enact legal tender laws. We, the Congress, have the power to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, but not to declare a legal tender. Yet, there is a section of US Code, 31 USC 5103, that purports to establish US coins and currency, including Federal Reserve notes, as legal tender.
Historically, legal tender laws have been used by governments to force their citizens to accept debased and devalued currency. Gresham's Law describes this phenomenon, which can be summed up in one phrase: bad money drives out good money. An emperor, a king, or a dictator might mint coins with half an ounce of gold and force merchants, under pain of death, to accept them as though they contained one ounce of gold. Each ounce of the king's gold could now be minted into two coins instead of one, so the king now had twice as much “money” to spend on building castles and raising armies. As these legally overvalued coins circulated, the coins containing the full ounce of gold would be pulled out of circulation and hoarded. We saw this same phenomenon happen in the mid-1960s when the US government began to mint subsidiary coinage out of copper and nickel rather than silver. The copper and nickel coins were legally overvalued, the silver coins undervalued in relation, and silver coins vanished from circulation.
These actions also give rise to the most pernicious effects of inflation. Most of the merchants and peasants who received this devalued currency felt the full effects of inflation, the rise in prices and the lowered standard of living, before they received any of the new currency. By the time they received the new currency, prices had long since doubled, and the new currency they received would give them no benefit.
In the absence of legal tender laws, Gresham's Law no longer holds. If people are free to reject debased currency, and instead demand sound money, sound money will gradually return to use in society. Merchants would have been free to reject the king's coin and accept only coins containing full metal weight.
The second step to reestablishing competing currencies is to eliminate laws that prohibit the operation of private mints. One private enterprise which attempted to popularize the use of precious metal coins was Liberty Services, the creators of the Liberty Dollar. Evidently the government felt threatened, as Liberty Dollars had all their precious metal coins seized by the FBI and Secret Service in November of 2007. Of course, not all of these coins were owned by Liberty Services, as many were held in trust as backing for silver and gold certificates which Liberty Services issued. None of this matters, of course, to the government, which hates competition. The responsibility to protect contracts is of no interest to the government.
The sections of US Code which Liberty Services is accused of violating are erroneously considered to be anti-counterfeiting statutes, when in fact their purpose was to shut down private mints that had been operating in California. California was awash in gold in the aftermath of the 1849 gold rush, yet had no US Mint to mint coinage. There was not enough foreign coinage circulating in California either, so private mints stepped into the breech to provide their own coins. As was to become the case in other industries during the Progressive era, the private mints were eventually accused of circulating debased (substandard) coinage, and with the supposed aim of providing government-sanctioned regulation and a government guarantee of purity, the 1864 Coinage Act was passed, which banned private mints from producing their own coins for circulation as currency.
The final step to ensuring competing currencies is to eliminate capital gains and sales taxes on gold and silver coins. Under current federal law, coins are considered collectibles, and are liable for capital gains taxes. Short-term capital gains rates are at income tax levels, up to 35 percent, while long-term capital gains taxes are assessed at the collectibles rate of 28 percent. Furthermore, these taxes actually tax monetary debasement. As the dollar weakens, the nominal dollar value of gold increases. The purchasing power of gold may remain relatively constant, but as the nominal dollar value increases, the federal government considers this an increase in wealth, and taxes accordingly. Thus, the more the dollar is debased, the more capital gains taxes must be paid on holdings of gold and other precious metals.
Just as pernicious are the sales and use taxes which are assessed on gold and silver at the state level in many states. Imagine having to pay sales tax at the bank every time you change a $10 bill for a roll of quarters to do laundry. Inflation is a pernicious tax on the value of money, but even the official numbers, which are massaged downwards, are only on the order of 4% per year. Sales taxes in many states can take away 8% or more on every single transaction in which consumers wish to convert their Federal Reserve Notes into gold or silver.
In conclusion, Madame Speaker, allowing for competing currencies will allow market participants to choose a currency that suits their needs, rather than the needs of the government. The prospect of American citizens turning away from the dollar towards alternate currencies will provide the necessary impetus to the US government to regain control of the dollar and halt its downward spiral. Restoring soundness to the dollar will remove the government's ability and incentive to inflate the currency, and keep us from launching unconstitutional wars that burden our economy to excess. With a sound currency, everyone is better off, not just those who control the monetary system. I urge my colleagues to consider the redevelopment of a system of competing currencies and cosponsor the Free Competition in Currency Act.
Call you Federal Representatives and Senators and ask them why the IRS needs weapons. This is scary. The US Marshals' Service is supposed to be the law enforcement agency of the justice department. If the IRS needs law enforcement they can call them they do not need their own police force.
The Idaho House currently has the Health Care Freedom Bill before them for debate and passage. The Virginia Senate, has passed a bill banning health care mandates. Thirty four other states are at this time debating legislation or constitutional amendments banning any type of mandatory health insurance. We are on the right side of this issue my friends, call your Senators and Representatives, especially if they are democrats and tell them to pass the Idaho Health Care Freedom Bill.
Believe it or not some people are saying that mandated health insurance is the purest expression of the free market we could have. Make sure your elected representatives understand the fallacy of this argument.
Socialists in congress and in the White House may be intent on forcing government health care on the people of America, but the states are no longer the door mats our despotic federal government has become accustomed to.
Fox News reports more than 2/3 of the 50 states are moving to protect citizens from federal health care mandates:
Lawmakers in 34 states now have filed or proposed amendments to their state constitutions or statutes rejecting health insurance mandates, according to the American Legislative Exchange Council, a nonprofit group that promotes limited government that is helping coordinate the efforts. Many of those proposals are targeted for the November ballot, assuring that health care remains a hot topic as hundreds of federal and state lawmakers face reelection.
Legislative committees in Idaho and Virginia endorsed their measures this past week. Supporters held a rally at the Pennsylvania Capitol. And hearings on the proposed constitutional amendments were held in Georgia and Missouri. The Missouri hearing drew overflow crowds the day after Obama urged federal lawmakers during his State of the Union address to keep pressing to pass a health care bill. The Nebraska Legislature plans a hearing on a measure this coming week.
Any sane person would realize there is something seriously wrong with a proposal when 68% of the states move to negate it!
The federal government is a creation of the sovereign states and exists to serve the states and the people; the states are not extensions of the federal government, put in place to implement federal edicts and take care of the “small stuff” the federal government couldn’t be bothered to deal with.
Some people don’t believe state efforts to assert their sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments will succeed, for they are used to the states standing meekly by as the federal government runs roughshod over them. But those days are over, Matilda! A corrupt congress may pass such unconstitutional laws, and a tyrannical federal court system may cover its eyes and claim it is legal, but if the sovereign states tell the federal government to stick it, then they’re left to find a way to enforce their despotic “laws.” The feds may find that much harder than they’ve become accustomed to; people are awake now.
South Dakota is definitely on the march for freedom. In the South Dakota Legislature right now, there are no less than three bills on the table to preserve the freedom of the people and the states from federal imposition of a government health care system... Continue Reading
