- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 2 Hour
- Reading permission
Breakup of the USA - Possible - Hereis One Scenario
The following letter was written and sent to the State Governors Association of the United States, on behalf of the best interests of the people of the United States. That advocacy on their behalf has received no actual response. The letter was also sent to a specific Governor of a state in the American union of states, who will remain unnamed in this article. |
Yes, if the American federal government fails to respond to the states appropriately and in truly constitutional terms, analysts predicting a disolution of the union of the United States of America will eventually be proven correct. A union of states can only exist while its state members have the "general welfare" of their constituent populations cared for properly by the national government. When that government fails repeatedly and leaves the states short of means and ways to do the necessary the only real recourse of those states is to leave the union of the United States of America, declaring their separation and independence on the basis of ethical and moral constitutional grounds. At least that is one possible scenario as to how it could happen.
CONSTITUTION FAVORS STATE PROGRAMS - NOT CORPORATE BAILOUTS
Dear National Governors Association,
I am writing to warn the NGA of a crisis, of immense magnitude, that appears to have been overlooked in Washington. Washington is talking about corporate bailouts, but in fact most of the state governments are hard pressed to assure for the “general welfare” of what the constitutional preamble defines as being “we the people” of the United States.
What the corporate bailouts mean is that billions, perhaps trillions, will be directly and indirectly spent by the federal government on support for large private sector corporations. The belief is that there would be sufficient “trickle down” of economic value from those corporate bailouts to the people in various states within the union. That in itself is very unlikely, and certainly those multinational corporations would trickle down only a relatively lesser fraction into any particular state economy. Even less money for much needed state run programs.
What I would suggest is that the constitution of the United States of America necessitates a “trickle up” approach where money for state programs takes first precedence, and where the spending of state programs for the sake of the general welfare of the state’s people, and whatever the spending by individuals that are benefitting from those state programs, trickles upwards, in the buying of goods and services from the corporations. As it is it is the wrong way around.
First of all the federal government bailouts do not provide for the growing and increasingly despairing needs of sole proprietor, family owned, and small to medium enterprises. We know that retail will be brutalized in January and February. We know that “mom and pop” shops, family ventures, will be under an extreme of siege. We know that retail, service providers, and entrepreneurs, near to the local communities, and far more integral to their functioning, will be under an unimaginable strain and pressure as events of the economic crisis advance like a falling row of dominos. We know that state funds will be harder and harder pressed. Funds already in dire straits, in many places, including New Jersey and California, once considered “well off” compared to some other states. Instead of federal support for family, entrepreneur, the small enterprises that communities are significantly built from and around, and support for state programs, Washington continues to insist on emptying the strained Federal treasury to big corporate multinational enterprise, hoping for some trickle down magic to intervene to save “mom and pop” and to save the state programs that many in the nation increasingly depend upon. What is wrong with Washington that they cannot see the tragic flaw in this thinking ?
Add to that the increasing plight of farmers, and the pressures and strain upon agriculture.
It is not only retail, and service, that are in jeopardy, but the small to medium farmer is becoming an increasingly endangered species, forced to sacrifice doing it right, simply to survive, or giving it up entirely and selling out on the land. America cannot afford another “dust bowl” scenario.
This at a time when some areas have already suffered decades of neglect and failure to win adequate precedence in terms of Federal spending and Federal priorities. That too has reached near to crisis proportions, and the remedy becomes more and more expensive as that deterioration of the human condition, and provision for human needs and progress continues to fail to gain adequate attention from government.
I suggest that the constitution demands that the needs of the people, inclusive of the needs for state programs, must come first. Any corporate bailout, that ignores what must be legally precedent state run programs, would be constitutionally illegal. The government’s spending must be constitutionally constrained to what is of most and most immediate benefit for the “general welfare” of “we the people” or that government is itself acting illegitimately and illegally.
Housing, roads, education, schools, health care, ending poverty, social services, the maintaining of civil order and public safety, child care programs, electrical power generation, environmental issues, and a multitude of other real needs that the people have, must take precedence, under the constitution, so that the government of the United States of America can be seen, at home and abroad as truly being a government of “we the people” for the “general welfare” of “we the people”. Only that can prove exemplary to the world community. Anything less, is vile, unjust, unfair, and in fact I would contend illegal governance. Only when the “general welfare” of “we the people” is given legal precedence, and state and federal programs providing for real immediate and long term needs are fully and adequately supported, can governance claim true constitutional legitimacy. Thus you can see how decisions today are being watched by every nation in the world, and by every government, waiting to see what America will do. Everything depends on this, and it is already written into the very purpose, the preamble, of the constitution of the United States of America.
As governors of the states of the union, there is a special responsibility and duty to assure that the constitution is truly followed, and in accordance with its original intent.
Thank you for considering this matter, and for your continued actions on behalf of what is
right, just, fair and true, in response to the continued economic crisis and its continued mishandling by many in leadership.