by Timothy Baldwin
The financial system our federal government created in 1913 and thereafter maintained has created nothing but iron chains around the hands, feet and necks of the states of America. Unfortunately, most Americans do not understand the unconstitutionality and dangers of this system (mostly because of a lot of brainwashing over the years). When politics begin to affect the wallet, however, many Americans all of a sudden become politically active and “righteously†indignant. This sadly reveals that principles of truth are not priority. But if a person even cares about America’s history, principles of freedom as accepted by our forefathers or the natural and revealed laws of God, he has to admit that one of the most fundamental elements of freedom is financial freedom. These fundamentals confirm the right of individuals to work in exchange for other items contracted for by the engaged parties, to reap all the benefits and rewards of his labor, skill and intellect without the unjust or unauthorized interference of anyone else, including government. Our Declaration of Independence categorizes this natural right as the “pursuit of happiness,†meaning property, which money certainly is.
Despite financial freedom being considered a natural right, our federal government has ignored this right and principle of freedom; and today, it controls virtually every aspect of money, starting with money’s very creation (i.e. printing) through the inaptly-named, Federal Reserve System (created in 1913 by Congress). But the idea of this system did not come from our forefathers. In fact, based upon the principles of individual freedom, self-government and limited government, our founders rejected the federal government’s power to print money by giving only this power to Congress in Article 1, Section 8: “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.†Moreover, States agreed (by ratification of the U.S. Constitution) that they would only be limited as follows relevant to money and currency: “No State shall…make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.†Since 1913, the federal government has been perpetually acting unconstitutionally; and today, States are forced to violate the U.S. Constitution and accept fiat money as tender in payments of debts.
Even a shallow scan of America’s history reveals that our founders and ratifiers considered the constitution to be worth nothing more than fire starter if Congress had the power to print money and create a fiat monetary system. Consider of a few of our founders’ position on the money system we have had since 1913 (citing from, George Bancroft, History of the United States of America: From the Discovery of the Continent [to 1789], Volume 6, [New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1890], 301–303) (Emphasis added):
“[George] Mason of Virginia had a MORTAL HATRED TO PAPER MONEY.â€
“[The ratification of the U.S. Constitution] is a favorable moment to shut and bar the door against paper money, which can in no case be necessary. THE POWER MAY DO HARM, NEVER GOOD. Give the government credit, and other resources will offer. “(Oliver Ellsworth)
“PAPER MONEY CAN NEVER SUCCEED WHILE ITS MISCHIEFS ARE REMEMBERED; and, as long as it can be resorted to, it will be a bar to other resources.†(James Wilson).
“Rather than give the power [to congress to emit bills] I WOULD REJECT THE WHOLE PLAN [of the Constitution].†(John Langdon)
“[Under the ratified version of the U.S. Constitution], THE PRETEXT FOR A PAPER CURRENCY, and particularly for making the bills a tender, either for public or private debts, WAS CUT OFF.†(James Madison)
“[Nathanial] Gorham favored STRIKING THE WORDS [in the Constitution, allowing Congress to “EMIT BILLSâ€] without a prohibition inserted in the document, feeling that if the words were to stand, this could lead to the issuance of paper money.â€
“Pierce Butler remarked that paper money was a legal tender in no other country in Europe, and he wanted to DISARM THE GOVERNMENT OF SUCH POWER.â€
“George Read stated that if the words [and emit bills] were not struck, IT WOULD BE AS ALARMING AS THE MARK OF THE BEAST IN REVELATION.â€
“This is the interpretation of the [Article 1, Section 8] clause…History cannot name a man who has gained enduring honor by causing the issue of paper money.†Ibid., 303. Contradicting these sound lessons and mandates of human history, the U.S. Constitution and natural law (meaning, the value of commercial exchange should have actual value, not pretend value), the federal government has for nearly 100 years operated under a fiat financial system, printing money out of thin air, being backed by nothing of substance, increasing the federal debt, causing inflation, decreasing the value of our contracted-for work, diminishing our future investments, and jeopardizing the lives of millions (just to name a few). Do you think that a country is living in freedom when this takes place?!
The very implementation and structure of the Federal Reserve System is corrupt, considering the most basic principles of a free society, as it puts the power of the fiat money market into the control of a few unelected and uncontrolled people. The danger of this system was recognized immediately by financial experts after its implementation. Consider what Professor John Holdsworth observes in 1914: “It is obvious that a board clothed with such powers can exercise an enormous influence either for good or ill upon the new system. Success or failure…will depend largely upon their ability, wisdom, and tact.†John Thom Holdsworth, Money and Banking, 6th Edition, (New York: Appleton, 1914), 353. Is the definition of “oligarchy†coming to mind?
The creation of our Constitutional Republic was to place the power of securing individual natural rights under the constraints of a fixed constitution into the hands of many who would be affected by its abuse: that is, the people and their agents! The federal system was entirely a check and balance upon all powers in the federal government: checks by the people directly, checks by the other branches of federal government, checks by time itself and checks by the state governments. Yet, the Federal Reserve System literally removes one of the most fundamental natural rights (property) from the control, oversight and power of the people and of their closest representatives (Congress and the State governments). America’s monetary system is without a doubt despicable, unnatural, fraudulent and dangerous.
So, what is our federal government going to do about it? What have they done since 1913? Nothing! I believe we can say with certainty they will continue their legacy. Sure, we know Congressman Ron Paul (and maybe a few others) has attempted to make a difference in this area (See, H.R. 4683, The Free Competition in Currency Act of 2007). God bless him for his lone-wolf efforts. However, even with a Republican-controlled federal government from 2000 to 2008, nothing has been done to bring the Federal Reserve into accountability and responsibility, much less to termination–all this after nearly 100 years of this corrupt system being woven into the fabric of our states and even the entire world. We can say with assurance that putting our hope in the federal government to control the monster it has created is misplaced. It is disgusting how the federal government usurps the delegations and trusts of its power, violates the principles and limitations of the constitution, does nothing to reverse the usurpations and expressly revert these powers back to the states and the people. Still, every year, they expect that we vote for them and look to Washington D.C. for the answers to our problems. What a racket of tyranny! Yet, most take the bait. I would not trust them with taking caring for my dog.
There is, however, an alternative solution–one that our founders expected in cases of federal usurpations: the STATES. What has to be concluded here is that since the federal government does not possess the power to create this fiat system, it of course has acted unconstitutionally since 1913, depriving individuals, the people and the states of the powers they retained under the ninth and tenth amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Being sovereign, the states have the power to do what their constitutions give them power to do in this regard. As a result, the States must take courage to use of their inherent sovereignty: they must be energized by the force of truth, the fire of freedom and the passion of the people. The state governments must recognize this: we, who demand justice, demand that our states retake powers that rightly belong to us, terminate powers that have wrongly been usurped by tyrants, and create within our borders a free and independent system of finance and commerce.
The States must recognize and proclaim once again that,
“Paper money has no hold, and from its very nature can acquire no hold, on the conscience or affections of the people. It impairs all certainty of possession, and taxes none so heavily as the class who earn their scant possession by daily labor. It injures the husbandman by a twofold diminution of the exchangeable value of his harvest. It is the favorite of those who seek gain without willingness to toil; it is the deadly foe of industry. No powerful political party ever permanently rested for support on the theory that it is wise and right. No statesman has been thought well of by his kind in a succeeding generation for having been its promoter.†Bancroft, History of the United States of America, 304.
Freedom for a Change
Tim Baldwin is an attorney who received his Juris Doctor degree from Cumberland School of Law at Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama. He is a former felony prosecutor for the Florida State Attorney’s Office and now owns his own private law practice. He is author of a soon-to-be-published new book, entitled FREEDOM FOR A CHANGE. Tim is also one of America’s foremost defenders of State sovereignty. See his website.
Copyright (c) 2010 Timothy Baldwin
Its actually worse then that, the Federal reserve was made to "smooth out" the economic credit market "freeing" it from the agricultural cycle production/demand cycle fluctuation.
The problem is the "credit" market is really spouse to represent the resource load market, and the seasonal agricultural cycle is one of the main resource production/investment cycles. (Determined by nature not man.)
Simply printing more dollars to lend out doesn't make more resources available. It simply make the resources that are available require more dollars in trade.(inflation).
So the Federal reserve was a cosmetic solution to the resource allocation problem with very serous economic redistribution consequences.
Let me explain:
When you devalue the currency the people who are effectively taxed are the ones who happen to hold the most in that currency at the time of the devaluation.
So when the Federal Reserve meant to "smooth out" the credit market from the seasonal agricultural investment/production cycle, they were in effect taxing a huge % of the farmers harvest, by devaluing the dollars they had just gotten in trade for their product.
The farmers(as well as thus the entire rural economy around them) got ripped off, and as a result did not have enough money to live on until the next harvest cycle. That of course requires them to utilized loans with interest just to keep them going, loans they can never repay as the same thing is just going to happen again next harvest cycle for the same reason.
Inevitably over the next 20-30 years we saw widespread forecloses on farms.
Large corporations instead took over and the family farm all but died.
All because of the effect of the Federal Reserve's ability to redistribute wealth, so that the urban/industrial areas did not have to sacrifice to pay for their food. They instead effectively ripped off the farms and stole a disproportionate share of it.
That of course hurts not only the farm but the entire support economy around the farm and in the area, basically the entire state.
That's what the centralized Fractional Reserve banking did, it enabled urban/industrial States like New York to Steal money on a gigantic scale from the southern and western rural states. Ultimately to the point where they owned everything.
Its really simple economic and it makes me Steaming mad when i just think about it.
The biggest failing of our civilization is the failure to understand the nature of the dollar(banknote)/credit in the supply/demand cycle.
Well-said – it's just another big government program outside the scope of their constitutionally-delegated powers. And – as usual, what they promise never happens.
End the Fed from the bottom up:
http://www.ConstitutionalTender.com/
Thanks to the Tenth Amendment Center for your support!
Thanks for stopping by, Bill! Here's to more states catching on to this movement and considering sovereignty over such policy!
Interesting idea, if I understand the listed Georgia bill right it seems to be laying the ground work necessary to enable the State of Georgia to Crash the Federal reserve.
As I layed out earlier in printable:
"I must say in reference to this law: § 411. Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption
Which says that the Federal reserve bank notes you have in your pocket are not money, and must be redeemed for actual "money".
As the same law says: "They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank. "
We could in theory crash the Federal reserve by demanding redemption of the inflationary Federal Reserve Banknotes for the presumably more finite "lawful money."
In effect: "A run on the Federal Reserve Bank".
"
Georgia has apparently defined money as the gold and Silver coins of the United States, and required her banks to deal directly with them.
In doing so Georgia is securing herself and her people who uses Georgia banks against inflation and economic consequences of the Federal Reserve, in the event of a major clammily.
More importantly thou she has also set foward the ground work in which to uses that law which i listed: § 411. Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption
To drain the federal reserve of its real non-redeemable money supply thus helping to bring about its collapse in time.
Its a brilliant strategy that should make Georgia, and the other states that do it very very rich, relative to the rest of the u.s. economy if they manage collapsing the Federal reserve.
The cost/risk is that this will increase the cost of banking in Georgia a bit, until such time of the Federal Reserves collapse. I'm also not sure their bill will go quite far enough.
On top of that Georgia's economic resources alone are almost certainly inadequate to crash the Federal Reserve, as there is almost certainly more then enough gold and silver to in to match Georgia's resources. I don't think the Feds have inflated that much.
It isn't just Georgia doing this, of course; this is nationwide. Dr. Edwin Vieira (a great scholar on the issue of sound money) helped assemble a template bill for a return to gold-backed currency, on a state-by-state basis.
I humbly suggest one correction to your post here, and that is that the Federal Reserve will eventually crash ITSELF. From what I gather of it, the Constitutional Tender Act will simply (though very importantly) set in place a viable alternative (if implemented in time), should the Federal Reserve Note fail (which it will, if the printing presses are not smashed into pieces, pronto). People ought to be free to choose between currencies if they deem one currency to be more likely to hold its value over a longer period of time than the current currency. Legal tender laws have served as unjust barriers to "competitive currencies." However, Gold and Silver remain the ONLY specified legal tenders for payment of debts by the states, as noted in the U.S. Constitution.
From what I understand, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was passed as ordinary legislation, right? Well how could it possibly usurp the powers granted by the Constitution to the Congress? The Constitution can only be changed by Amendment which requires a super majority to pass.
The Supreme Court has said over and over that an UNConstitutional law is no law at all:
“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void,”Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them,”Miranda vs, Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491
“An unconstitutional act is no law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of the enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.
“No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it” 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256
As far as I can tell there's no need to 'end the Fed' because creation of the Fed would have required a Constitutional Amendment.