Subject:Background and concept Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 15:07:44 -0600 From: Jim Davidson Dear Gene Karl, In late January ... the Broaddus Six began to discuss alternatives. What form of government would get my consent? ... Henry David Thoreau and Lysander Spooner are the two main sources of inspiration for my revision. I also took a look at the language in Texas Constitutions of 1836, 1845, 1876, and 2000. (I note, for Clark, that there is a Texas Constitution of 1869, the carpetbagger constitution, and one of 1876, the de facto constitution, but there is not one of 1879 as indicated on his site.) You might want to read Thoreau's seminal essay on "Civil Disobedience" on my server at http://www.houstonspacesociety.org/civil.html There are a number of essays by Spooner under the heading of "No Treason" and these can be accessed at various sites around the web. Further background is discussed in the section "History" and in the section "Grievances" on the site at http://www.TexasSovereignty.org/ Except for the contract and articles A and B of the constitution, which include some comments by David Lewis, and the grievances which includes extensive comments from Dan Hollis, most of the words are from me. I have only a modest amount of pride of authorship, and have tried to incorporate changes when they have been offerred. I look forward to getting more. These can be sent to our discussion list. If you'd like to subscribe to our list, you'll need to contact me for instructions. Or you can just send comments directly to me. I believe we should set a deadline of 15 May, roughly the anniversary of the Treaties of Velasco, for changes, and then start organizing the Committee to Advocate Texas Sovereignty, if we are going to go forward with this thing. Additional changes would then need to meet with the approval of the CATS. The concept? The concept is really very simple. There are two places for people to sign. Place one is at the end of the constitution, which I need to actually put there because I haven't made that revision yet. Anyone who wants this constitution and declaration of rights to be their form of government can sign there and pay one quarter ounce of silver (about $1.28 at current prices) and that constitutes ratification of that form of government for that person. Anyone who wants to fund government can sign the Contract for Sovereigns, which necessarily stipulates agreement to the constitution and declaration of rights. That is stated in the contract, follow the link from the Texas Sovereignty home page URL above. Those willing to fund government get, in exchange, certain things: the opportunity to vote, the opportunity to qualify before a jury to run for office, the opportunity to sell things to the government, again if qualified. I think these are pretty well spelled out in the contract. The Grievances and the Declaration of Rights stand alone. I am working on the specific grievance relating to the Mount Carmel Massacre 28 February to 19 April 1993, and I welcome assistance on researching the other grievances and building web pages for the site for each of them. The grievances state why it is necessary to form a new government. The Declaration of Rights includes text from the French Declaration of the Rights of Man which was largely written by Thomas Paine circa 1789. It also includes text from various Texas constitutions and the US Bill of Rights. It is not necessary for anyone to sign the Declaration of Rights because these rights exist, they stand alone, they are given by God, they are an inherent part of each human being on Earth, and they are inseparable from us. So, it is not necessary for anyone else to agree that you have these rights, you do, and that's all. The Constitution is lengthy. However, I feel it covers all the things that are needed to have an effective working government. Again, ratification of the constitution is handled one person at a time. Anyone who wants to sign the constitution and pay consideration to validate that signature as a contract has ratified the constitution for himself as an individual. I am not satisfied that it is possible or appropriate to delegate this authority to a convention or any other body. Certainly, it is not necessary. Each individual can make up their own mind, and each person can, under this approach, choose to sign or not sign. (Amendments require the written consent of all signatories, by the way.) ... Basically, the concept is simple: people should be governed by consent. In the case of the New Code of Government for Texas presented at the Texas Sovereignty URL indicated above, there can be no doubt that each person for whom the constitution applies has consented. There can be no doubt that the funding of government is also by consent, as their is no obligation to sign the Contract. There are no taxes allowed, only consideration for the Contract and for the constitution as a contract or voluntary contributions or other contractual forms of relationship for revenue with mutual agreement and consideration. Isn't it time we stopped pretending to have the consent of the governed? Certainly, the people of Texas have sufferred from the pretense of consent given to the regime which controls the United States. That regime has imposed fractional reserve banking, fiat money, checkpoints and roadblocks, inspections, warrantless searches, murder, mayhem, torture, and other outrages with the pretense of consent, with the pretense of majority rule. It is time, in my view, to stop pretending. Either people consent to the form of government, or they do not. If they consent, they can further involve themselves in funding government, or not. If we operate under the assumption that coercion, force, fraud, and brutality are not acceptable for anyone, individually or collectively, as a person or as a government, then we are headed, I think, in the right direction. And, if enough Texans come together on this approach, revise it to suit their tastes, and consent to it in writing and with consideration, we have a new thing: undeniable proof of consent. We don't have consent by a few dozen who sign the document, we have consent by all those who are governed by the document. In other words, we have what Spooner insisted was necessary back in 1870: consent in writing with the article of consent delivered to the consenting parties. One last thought: we can ratify this constitution very quietly, and very quickly. Once we have it ironed out a bit more, I'll post a snail address for people to use to send signed constitutions. When that's available, we can begin gathering signatures and consideration and it may be a very few months later we'll hold a convention to set up the Interim government. Nobody who isn't interested in Texas freedom needs to know, although we also aren't keeping this thing a secret. Well, that's a long briefing, but there it is. Regards, Jim