Archive for the ‘U.S. Constitution’ Category

BTC – Janet Napolitano, former Governor of Arizona, has called the SB 1070 bill “bad for law enforcement”.  She now waits on the DOJ to vett the controversial new law for Constitutional compliance.

Many are outraged and exasperated over the current status of federal immigration.  However, some are yelling, “State’s rights!”  To help address the fine lines to balancing the 4th Amendment with the 10th Amendment is analyst, Rob Natelson, Constitutional Law professor for the 10th Amendment Center.

10th Amendment Center examines SB 1070 for Constitutional integrity

Sen. Carl Levin (D-Michigan) told Rumsfeld during a public hearing in 2003 that the Total Information Awareness program “not only raises serious privacy concerns [but] might also be illegal and possibly unconstitutional.”

“Suspicionless Surveillance” was developed by the Pentagon’s controversial Total Information Awareness department, led by Adm. John Poindexter, the former national security adviser, who secretly sold weapons to Middle Eastern terrorists in the 1980s during the Iran-Contra affair and was convicted of a felony for lying to Congress and destroying evidence. The convictions were later overturned on appeal.

Report Critical of NSA Program

The unclassified report prepared by inspectors general of five federal agencies said George W. Bush justified his warrantless wiretapping by relying on Justice Department attorney John Yoo’s theories of unlimited presidential wartime powers, and started the spying operation even before Yoo issued a formal opinion, a government investigation discovered.

Essentially, President Bush took it upon himself to ignore the clear requirement of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that all domestic intelligence-related electronic spying must have a warrant from a secret federal court, not just presidential approval. Illegal wiretapping is a felony under federal law. ::MORE HERE::

“If you are not a member of the Seneca Nation of Indians, fear not. The Saint Regis Indians, the Oneida Indian Nation of New York and the Haudenosaune (otherwise known as Onondaga, et al) are right in line (as well as every other federally recognized tribe). And guess what? You get to have your “Nation’s” logo on the card (maybe even your Indian name). No one will ever know you finally declared your subjugation to your oppressors. Hell, you won’t even have to show the card. It will transmit who and what you are from your pocket.

Ohnkwe Ohnwe, Of Native Pride
PA Senator Mike Folmer on why he’s sponsoring 
Senate Bill 621 or SB 621.

Every federal and state-elected official took an oath to uphold the U.S. and Pennsylvania constitutions. It is imperative those in public office start taking these oaths seriously, be cause each day that goes by, more and more of our rights and freedoms are being lost, and government’s appetite for collecting personal and private data continues to grow.

I believe the most egregious example of government overreaching into personal lives is the federal Real ID Act. Designed to protect Americans in post-9/11 society, Real ID would create a national identification card. Proponents of the act believe Americans should be stripped of essential liberties for the greater safety of the country.

The federal government says this plan will protect Americans from terror ists. I disagree. I believe it is a clear violation of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, redefining privacy as we know it, and creating a mountain of new bureaucracy and increasing fees and taxes — all without making us any safer.

That is why I have reintroduced legislation (Senate Bill 621) that would exempt Pennsylvania from compliance with this unfunded feder al mandate. Eleven states, including South Carolina, New Hampshire, Maine, Montana and Virginia, have already enacted similar statutes.

If Pennsylvania were to comply with REAL ID, in January 2010, driver’s licenses would become a standardized national identification card with a machine-readable zone containing valuable personal information. PennDOT would then be required to link into a massive na tional database, opening the door to the possibility of major security breaches.

In addition, transportation departments would retain digital scans of identification documents, including birth certificates and Social Security cards, for at least 10 years or seven years for a paper copy.

I understand the threat Pennsylvanians face on our own soil, but under REAL ID, that vulnerability is magnified times 50 and leaves us all exposed.

REAL ID also threatens privacy rights by empowering the Department of Homeland Security to collect biometric data, including fingerprints and eye scans, as well as placing Radio Frequency Identification chips in every American’s driver’s license. A proposal by State Sen. Shirley Kitchen, D-Philadelphia, Senate Bill 623, would prohibit government bodies from capturing or releasing biometric data without an individual’s approval or knowledge and prevent a slippery slope toward rights being stripped away.

Other requirements of REAL ID that take law-abiding citizens down a dangerous path are: what confidential data can be collected from driver’s licenses; where and how long it can be stored; and who is authorized to obtain, share, trade or sell that information.

With one swipe of a license, an establishment can collect your personal data and use it for marketing purposes. State Sen. John Wozniak’s, D-Clearfield, proposed legislation (Senate Bill 622) would restrict information that can be made available from driver’s licenses for marketing or other purposes beyond law enforcement.

If we don’t exempt ourselves from REAL ID by the end of 2009, we are in real danger. This act is a major violation of Americans’ right to privacy and another example of the federal government overstepping its boundaries with the states — all with an anticipated unfunded federal mandate cost of $11 billion to already financially strapped states.

The assault on our right to privacy must end. Together, this package of bills can slow the increased flow of data in our daily lives.

First, see it for yourself.

Gov. Perry Backs Resolution Affirming Texas’ Sovereignty Under 10th Amendment

HCR 50 Reiterates Texas’ Rights Over Powers Not Otherwise Granted to Federal Government
AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry today joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitutio


While HCR 50 is the idealogical new darling legislation of the 81st session, it has been gathering dust in the State Affairs office. No legislators were available for comment today at the Captiol due to Good Friday. There has bee no legislative action on HCR 50 since February, 23 2009; the date it was referred to the State Affairs committee. The show and tell we witnessed on Thursday is a heavy cloud. We can wait until Tuesday for any word on the rain.

There are 69 co-sponsors, 4 sponsors and the author, Rep. Brandon Creighton. Amid the approbation of 76 legislators is: the Vice Chair of the Calendars Committee, 6 co-sponsors on the Calendars committee, 5 State Affairs Committee members – 2 of which are also on the Calendar’s committee. With the level of collaborative and incestuous support – why hasn’t HCR 50 actually passed by now?

That is something you will have to ask your Texas Legislators.

To track HCR 50 visit:


The Federal Emergency Management Administration, a tragicomic disaster since Hurricane Katrina in August 2005 — and even before then — looks to be getting a facelift under the Obama administration, sources tell us.

First off, the likely plan is to break off the agency from the Department of Homeland Security, a move that would in itself help restore the pride FEMA folks felt when it was an independent agency.

BTC Comment:
Extracting FEMA from the Department of Homeland Security may mean the beginning of the end for the National Applications Office.  Again, you don’t need multi-million dollar spying sattellites creating dystopic enmity with terrified people fleeing from domestic disasters. I personally would love to see DHS go back to simply being the Department of Domestic Security.  It’s broke, so lets fix it.

By Renee Feltz
From the October 3, 2008 issue 

97-year-old Shirley Preiss has voted in every election since 1932, but cannot register to vote in Arizona because she lacks proof of her citizenship. She was born in Kentucky before the state issued birth certificates and says she’s never left the country, so she does not have a passport. Arizona is one of eight states that require voters to prove U.S. citizenship.
PHOENIX—While both presidential candidates avoid discussing immigration reform, Republican pundits are stirring up concern about non-citizens throwing the election.

“The evidence is indisputable that aliens, both legal and illegal, are registering and voting in federal, state, and local elections,” wrote Hans A. von Spakovsky in June in a widely circulated “legal memorandum” entitled “The Threat of Non-Citizen Voting.”

Von Spakovsky is a former Bush recess appointee to the U.S. Department of Justice, where as counsel to the assistant attorney general for civil rights, he specialized in voting and election issues. After the Senate blocked his reappointment citing his involvement in “efforts to politicize the Department and use the Voting Rights Section to disenfranchise voters, rather than enforce our nation’s civil rights laws,” he served as a member of the Federal Election Commission for two years.

Now with the Heritage Foundation, a leading right-wing think tank, von Spakovsky argues the “honor system” of signing a legally binding registration card fails to keep non-citizens from the polls, and suggests election officials should be allowed to access U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement databases “regarding voter eligibility based on citizenship.” He also wants all states to require anyone who registers to vote to provide proof of U.S. citizenship.

Citizenship is already a legal requirement to vote in the United States, but GOP scare tactics have led more than a dozen states to consider additional legislation to require documented proof of citizenship, and in many cases a Voter ID card, in order to vote.

Voter registration rates in Arizona, the one state with both types of laws, suggest these cumbersome requirements will further disenfranchise low-income citizens, people of color and the elderly, all of whom are more likely to vote Democratic.

Republicans first used outcry about undocumented immigration in the border state of Arizona to win support for a citizen initiative four years ago that requires voter registration applicants to document their citizenship with a birth certificate, a passport or naturalization papers.

“You had a confluence of two interests,” said Linda Brown, director of the Arizona Advocacy Network, when asked how backers of the initiative known as Proposition 200 overcame opposition from most of the public and the state’s elected officials in 2004.

The first force at work was the anti-illegal immigration movement. “These are the true believers,” Brown said. “Even though there is no documentation people are voting illegally, certainly not on purpose,” they will favor a crackdown on such behavior, she explained.

“Then you had the other group, the savvy political operatives,” Brown said. “They believe it is reasonable to deny law-abiding citizens the right to vote by shaving the rolls of people least likely to vote the way they want them to.”

When Proposition 200 passed there had been just 33 cases of documented voter fraud throughout the country between October 2002 and September 2005. Ten of the cases were acquitted or dismissed, and 19 of the 23 people prosecuted had registered to vote and voted using their real names — not the best method for getting away with fraud.

In fact, voting rights advocates say individuals trying to steal or cast an invalid ballot is less likely than being struck by lightning. The practice is even more rare among non-citizens.

“If you’re a non-citizen and you register or vote, there is a paper trail that connects you to that voting,” notes Justin Levitt, counsel to the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. “If you’re convicted, which is a straightforward thing, you can be fined up to $10,000 and, probably most serious, you can be deported. For the majority of people, those odds just don’t make sense.”

According to the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, at least 38,000 voter registration applications have been rejected in Arizona since Proposition 200 went into effect in 2005, largely because of failure to document citizenship.

Outreach groups say that when they conduct registration drives voters often are not carrying their birth certificate, passport or naturalization papers.

“I was trained to do this job back in Detroit and it was so easy to get people registered because all I needed was people’s name, address and the last four digits of their Social Security number and their signature,” said Teresa Castro, political director for Arizona’s ACORN chapter, a group that has been working to register low-income voters. “But here in Arizona it got more complicated because you have to ask people to give up all this information to us.”

According to a phone survey commissioned by the Brennan Center in 2006, 7 percent of Americans lack ready access to proof of their citizenship.

“After Proposition 200, I feel like something that is a right is treated more like a privilege you have to earn,” said Teresa Castro, political director for ACORN in Arizona.

Access to documents like birth certificates and passports can be especially costly and difficult for low-income and elderly voters, like 97-year-old Shirley Preiss, who moved to Arizona in 2007 to be with her son, Joe Nemnich.

“My mom was born August 17 in 1910, in Clinton, Kentucky. There was no birth certificate,” Nemnich said. “Can I get a delayed birth certificate? No, I can’t … everyone she knows is dead.”

Preiss cast a ballot for Franklin Roosevelt in 1932 and has voted in every election since. Her Social Security card and several state-issued ID cards are of no use. She says Prop 200 violates her constitutional rights. “I have a legal right,” Preiss said. “It says so right in the book.”

Republicans say the problems faced by voters such as Preiss are a small price to pay.

“Every vote cast by a non-citizen, whether an illegal alien or a resident alien legally in the country, dilutes or cancels the vote of a citizen and thus disenfranchises him or her,” said von Spakovsky in his Heritage Foundation memorandum.

While Arizona’s law is unique, that could soon change. The chair of Arizona’s Republican Party, Randy Pullen, said he has advised supporters of similar laws in Georgia, Oklahoma and Colorado.

“It’s almost like we’re incubators in terms of what works and what doesn’t work on this issue. I’ve been very pleased with how this worked out nationally,” Pullen said. “And I expect … this will become pretty much the standard for most states.” Which states? “Red states,” he said.

Bills to require voters to show documented proof of citizenship narrowly failed this year in a handful of states where the GOP controls the legislature, such as Missouri and Kansas.

Virginia enacted a law that allows the registrar to remove “all persons known by him not to be United States citizens” from voter rolls after sending them a notice requesting sworn statement of citizenship that requires a reply within 14 days or the application or registration will be cancelled.

Supporters of Indiana’s Voter ID law cited voter fraud by undocumented immigrants as a reason for the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the measure, which it did.

Eight states already require or request photo ID at the polls — Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Hawaii, Louisiana, Michigan and South Dakota; Kansas and Pennsylvania require photo ID for first-time voters. Meanwhile, anticipation of voter fraud has become so ingrained that recent news articles have encouraged voters in all states to bring photo ID with them to the polls “just in case.”

As Bush-appointee von Spakovsky argues, doing “anything less encourages contempt for the law and our election process.”

21st Century Voter Disenfranchisement: By the Numbers
By John Tarleton

While claiming to target immigrants who vote illegally, right-wing efforts to require proof of citizenship for voting could disenfranchise millions of U.S. citizens — primarily lowincome, African-American, elderly, female and college-age voters.

7: Percentage of voting-age Americans who lack ready access to citizenship documents (at least 13 million people).

12: Percentage of voting-age citizens with incomes less than $25,000 per year who lack ready access to citizenship documents.

66: Percentage of voting-age women with proof of citizenship who have a document with current legal name. At least 32 million women may have proof of citizenship documents that do not reflect their current name.

11: Percentage of voting-age U.S. citizens who lack valid, government-issued photo ID.

18: Percentage of elderly U.S. citizens who lack a valid, government-issued photo ID.

25: Percentage of voting-age African-Americans who do not have a valid, government-issue photo ID.

8: Percentage of voting-age whites who do not have valid, government issued photo ID.

15: Percentage of voting-age U.S. citizens earning less than $35,000 per year who do not have valid, government-issued photo ID.

10: Percentage of voting-age citizens whose photo ID does not have their current address and legal name.

18: Percentage of voting-age citizens age 18 to 24 who do not have photo ID with current address and name.

Source: Brennan Center for Justice,

Privacy and Civil Liberties May Swing Votes 
Letter from  BTC Editorial 
The Bush adminstration has earned a bad reputation with the American people for railroading civil liberties during his two terms in office. 
Bush says things like, ” The Constitution is just a piece of paper.”  
Please refer to any one of the following:  Guantanamo Bay, The Patriot Act, nullification of Posse Comitatus, Habeas Corpus, commuting Scooter Libby, abuse of “Executive Privelege”, use of rendition and torture on the taxpayer dime, threat and intimidation on irrelevant basis of Continuity of Government, FISA and our favorite new Big Brother- The Real ID Act of 2005. The Executive Branch has had tremendous cooperation from the U.S. Congress and the Senate in doing its savaging deeds of unconstitutionality.   Please also refer to 15 attempts to impeach this President on Constitutional basis.  
The Constitution is the only U.S. entitled document standing between the average American and fascism.  This is one of the most challenging times in the U.S. History for those who have rights but will have to fight fresh for them.
Since the Constitution is no small deal to most Americans, it has become, sadly enough, a key issue which candidate can actually uphold the Constitution. and most poli-bloggers will be watching the competitive race for the Presidential seat.   We need a President who has some American genome remaining that prizes the liberty of the common American, who won’t look the other way at injustice and spend billions of tax dollars on “hush-up” operations and prison facilities designed for dissenting U.S. citizens.   We need an someone with an allegiance to The United States of America; not the vastly declining U.S. dollar and a strategic oil hitch.  We need a President with some ownership of their identity as an American who wants their citizenship in this country to hold true what what the Constitution has in store and knows that they too and their children will inherit our fate.  No more shortsighted policies for the highest bidder.
The Center for Democracy and Technology created an Executive letter to oppose the state-to-federal mandate of Real ID’s.  and  many other active voices against Real ID ask that you adapt a version of this letter and send it to your Presidential Candidate of choice. It wouldn’t hurt to send it to President Bush either.  You may gauge their response to your letters and decide how to vote from there.
We look forward to the November elections.  May the best American win.
The Presidential Candidates on our radar is as follows: 
Please write in your findings to :  We love to hear from you.