Census

The Constitution --- Plain and Simple

Census

Curtis W. Caine, MD

This column on the Constitution appears in the Medical Sentinel to remind us that it is the unConstitutional (and thus illegal) activities in medicine and all other facets of our lives that have trampled on and outlawed our God-endowed freedom and liberty.

Open Letter to George Will:

This is in response to your column in the Tuesday, June 16 issue of the Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi regarding the 2000 census. You correctly state that, according to the 1787 Constitution of the Union of these American States (as stipulated in Article I, Section 2, paragraph 3 --- and later, in Section 2 of the 1868 Fourteenth Amendment), the purpose of the enumeration every 10 years is to revise the allocation of the seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the States. Many years ago my State of Mississippi had seven seats. We now have five. Projections predict that the 2000 census will cause us to have only four. Two hundred and sixty million lawful citizens in our country divided by 435 (the number of seats set by law in 1910) equals approximately (by proportions set on November 15, 1941) one seat per 600,000. The president's desire to estimate (rather than accurately count) the 2000 census could predictably maneuver the reckoning to include illegal residents and unverifiable guesses of the number in areas of anarchy and lawlessness so dangerous that even the police will not venture. This would skew the tally in favor of "entitlement" recipient voters, and thus, votes he can depend on!

Does this sound far fetched? Not at all. Viz., several years prior to the last census the "overpopulation" scare mongers predicted the figures would reveal great increases in the population in America and that computer model extrapolations therefrom indicated that, therefore, drastic population control action (birth control, abortion, pregnancy licensing, etc.) was necessary immediately to assure a "sustainable" planet. Some respected "authorities" welcomed disease, plagues, natural disasters, and even advocated active elimination of hundreds of millions in America and world-wide "...possibly in a kindly manner," as proposed by socialist intellectual George Bernard Shaw. Euthanasia was an admitted probability. This is what the late Jacques Cousteau, the famous oceanographer, said when interviewed by a UNESCO journalist about overpopulation: "To stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day...It may be wrong to say it, but it would be just as wrong not to." But that is another story...

When the census had come and gone, the figures, to their horror and chagrin, showed only a very modest increase in the number of inhabitants, completely discrediting the doomsday prognosticators. Instead of graciously admitting the error of their thesis, the undaunted activists claimed their predictions were, in truth, correct but that the census had missed masses of people and was wrong! Therefore, they now advocate that estimating the number would come up with a more accurate figure. Hence the president's initiative.

It seems patently inconsistent, to me, that activists loudly shout that it is only reasonable that every individual person in America must be able to individually (democratically) vote to determine what goes on in the country, and the same activists do a 180 degree turn and just as loudly shout that it is unreasonable that those same individual voters be responsible for footing their individual proportion of the bill.

But there is a second reason (which you do not mention, Mr. Will) for an accurate census; and that deals with taxes. For 124 years prior to the 1913 Sixteenth (Personal Income Tax) Amendment there was no direct tax levied on each person in proportion to his income. As a matter of fact, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 4 forbade taxation of individuals' incomes.

Article I, Section 8, paragraph 1 provides: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect (monies)....to:

(1) pay (that is a direct order) the Debts...of the(se) United States (not of Japan, or Mexico, or Germany, or anything or anywhere or anybody else);

(2) provide for the common (i.e., common among the States) Defence...of the(se) United States (not of Japan, or Germany, or anywhere else); and

(3) provide for the general welfare (not a specific dole to any individual) of the(se) United States."

Article I, Section 9, paragraph 4 further provides that any direct tax must be levied evenly, equally per capita "in Proportion to the Census (not on or in proportion to the personal income of each individual) hereinbefore directed to be taken."

So, any short fall (deficit) that the "Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises" ordered in Article I, Section 1, paragraph 1 do not cover is to
be made up by each State in proportion to its fraction of the census. Therefore, the census must be
accurate. President Clinton's proposal to estimate the 2000 census is ultra vires. Obviously, the "estimate" would be a guess that could easily be manipulated for partisan political purposes.

Not incidentally, the drawing of State Congressional district boundaries was not delegated to the central government and, thus, was retained as a function to be exercised by each State. And we all know that the boundaries of Congressional districts are currently improperly gerrymandered by the U.S. "Justice" Department for political advantage. As pointed out in a previous column, the setting of voter requirements was also retained by the States; but has been in the main, also usurped by the federal government.(1)

The Constitutional directive is that any current short term obligation must be paid. There is to be no deficit and thus a nonexistent national debt, as stipulated in the Constitution in Article I, Section 9, paragraph 6 which reads: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."

Currently, personal income tax revenues almost pay just the interest on the admitted statutory debt of $4 1/2 trillion. Actually, the obligations of the federal government total $15 to $16 trillion!

What the Constitution orders is legal and mandatory. What it does not order is illegal and forbidden. Therefore, these United States do not need a flat tax, or a national sales tax, or personal income tax, or gift tax, or inheritance tax. These United States do desperately need a central government that simply obeys the Constitution. When it does, 80 percent of present expenditures and activities will cease. Then the income from authorized excises, imposts, and duties will be sufficient. There will be no necessity for an IRS. No income, estate, or gift tax. No Form 1040. Thousands of rules and regulations will be swept away. No tax attorneys. No withholding. One hundred percent of wages to take home and use as each individual chooses. No national debt. No interest on no debt. There would be only big people, running their own lives --- and little government, bound from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.

Then freedom, the American dream, will again prevail. Freedom to attempt to succeed. Freedom to fail. Lord, please hasten the day.

Respectfully,
Curtis W. Caine, MD
Brandon, MS

References

1. Caine CW. Voter requirements. Medical Sentinel 1998;3(5):188,191.

Dr. Caine is an anesthesiologist in Jackson, Mississippi, and a member of the editorial board of the Medical Sentinel.