Cap and Trade Uncosititutional

Dear Senator:

I have heard both that you do support and that you are considering not supporting HR2454 ‘Cap and Trade’. I write today to encourage you to vote against this bill. I do not do so without consideration of the environment, we have a great responsibility to be wise stewards of the environment and to live sustainably. However, this bill is not written to any great effect for our environment, I have read various estimates but most agree that there would be less than a 1% change in our emissions.

Congressional Budget Office (CBO) May 7, 2009 testimony to the Senate Committee on Finance from Director Douglas W. Elmendorf about the Distribution of Revenues from a Cap-and-Trade Program for CO2 Emissions clearly states that the costs of this program would be borne by the American people and that the primary reason for this is to force people to change. “Such price increases would be essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program because they would be the most important mechanism through which businesses and households were encouraged to make investments and behavioral changes that reduced CO2 emissions.” Since scientists worldwide are far from reaching consensus on the topic of global warming, let alone it’s causes, I do not understand how government coercion of the people is justified. Further, there is no authority explicitly or implicitly granted in any document, law, or precedent to the federal or state governments, granting power to force the people to change in any way. I believe this to be just cause for anyone to reject this bill but there is further cause to vote against it.

The CBO has estimated the annual cost of this bill to be $147 per household. Others have estimated the cost to be between $1500-$3000 annually per household. In either case the cost is obviously not inclusive of all possible costs since the costs cannot be specifically enumerated at this point. Our economies both nationally and in the state of Missouri are weak. Investor and consumer confidence are shaky at best. The added variable cost of this bill is not likely to improve these facts, instead it is likely to further destabilize our already tenuous circumstances. If there is any real hope in government that we can recover from our current economic down turn voting for this bill would show intentions to the contrary.

One other major reason why this bill must be voted down: it is unconstitutional. Article 1 Section 8 paragraph 1 states “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;” this law does not comply with the requirement that it be ‘uniform throughout the United States.’ it has instead been intentionally written to penalize certain geographic areas, industries, and populations. The duties or consumption tax levied by this law are required by the Constitution to be uniform and if not uniform then unlawful.

Please consider these points. I encourage you to vote against HR2454 ‘Cap and Trade’.

Sincerely,

Mark Galbraith
Maryville, Missouri
660-254-0714

Missouri 10th Amendment Resolution

This is the text of a letter I send to our House Representative and Senator. I was asked to forward this to another Representative and HCR13 was born a few days later. I really hope that the State of Missouri will pass this 10th Amendment resolution this time. It's time for the federal government to be checked by the States.

"Sorry to be so persistent about this but it’s important to me.

HR294 is great and sends the right message to Washington about the ‘Freedom of Choice’ act; it even mentions the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, but it is not a statement addressing more than just the issue of abortion.

The part of HR 212 that made a clear statement about limited federal government and Missouri State sovereignty was not carried into HR294, and should be addressed separately. The Tenth Amendment is in my opinion a much larger issue than abortion, it states that powers not expressly granted to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved to the States. However, if the States continue to abdicate their powers and allow the federal government to assume those powers, as we have seen on an accelerated scale these last couple of months, there will come a time that the federal government supersedes the States authority in essence voiding that authority altogether.

We have seen this in the distribution of the ‘Stimulus’ funds as the federal government has made stipulations imposing it’s power on the States; we have seen this in the ‘Freedom of Choice’ act and the ‘Card Check’ act and in the recent issuance of (Executive orders) such as Presidential Determination No. 2009-15 of January 27, 2009 facilitating and paying for immigration from Gaza, the appointment of radical activists and lobbyists to executive cabinet positions—people who will do their best to push anti-gun, universal health care, pro-abortion, etc. laws through the House and Senate—that will dramatically reduce the right of the States to self govern and self regulate.

We have a Democrat and somewhat of a Republican (who in the last few months has seemed to have abandoned conservatism all together) in the US senate. They have, for whatever reason, not protected (nor have they promoted) the sovereignty of the State of Missouri at the federal level, they have instead participated in the quid pro quo compromise of principle and power to ‘get things done’, and by so doing have broken their oaths to uphold the Constitution and more especially the tenth amendment as for the last 17 years the executive and legislative branches of the federal government have chipped away at the rights reserved to the States.

I’m angry with federal (and some State) politicians who have been so caught up in getting things done that they don’t stop to hold up laws against the Constitution and ask, not if we should do it, but can we do it; does it stand up? Does it hold water? Does it meet the original intent? It’s time to stop laws from going out that don’t measure up to the principles meted out in the Constitution. The only way to do that is for the States to reassert their sovereignty and for representatives and senators at the federal level to represent that sovereignty and pull in the reigns. I believe that a House Resolution reminding the federal government of State sovereignty based on the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution is needed at this time.

Will you please work with others in the House and Senate to reintroduce a ‘Tenth Amendment’ resolution? I have attached a draft (based on Oklahoma HJR1003 and SJR10) that I hope will be useful to you. I am encouraging others to share their thoughts with you as well, hopefully you will hear from some of them.

Thank you for all you do and for your continuing efforts to make our State a better place."

There is a heavy burden of vigilance that rests on the shoulders of the people to guide their respective representatives by regular communication. If this guidance is not provided then the clamorous voices of special interests groups and lobbyists become their only gauge of the will of the people.

I am not content to let special interest groups and lobbyists, no matter how good their cause, represent me to my elected Representatives. I will make my own voice heard, and I will raise the call to good people everywhere: raise your own voice, make your self heard; e-mail, write, call, visit. When our elected officials listen to their inner voice, ours should be the voice that they hear above all others.

If we do not speak they will not hear. Be your own voice and be heard.