In a few months, the American people will go to the voting booth to vote on the President and members of House and Senate.  Given that there are dozens of very serious issues that affect our lives greatly, and given that there are dozens of preferences within each issue, it is highly unlikely that one of two choices will match your preferences on all the issues.  In addition, you do not get to be governed by the person you choose if they do not win. 

The solution is that we restructure government so issues are spread out to different groups.  Moreover, in most cases, on most issues, the group you choose, will govern you.  The group your neighbor chooses, governs them.  You get to pick your group per major issue. 
The federal government’s main and really only responsibility should be foreign Policy.  That is very important and peoples should be able to concentrate their attention on that issue alone when deciding on federal elected office holders.  All other issues would be dealt with at the state level or within free enterprise.  See how I structure free enterprise to take over many current government functions at
When deciding President and members of congress, your attention should not be on regulations, health-care, k-12 education, family law, labor law, colleges, roads, taxes, monetary policy, welfare, economics, police, Social Security nor the other dozens of items the federal government should not be involved with. 
I firmly believe that no race of people are better in terms of DNA.  Every person of every race or gender has great and powerful inherent worth.  Every person is made in the image of God.  The big difference of the outcomes of the races when it comes to education, earnings, family life among others is ideas, philosophy, values and viewpoints. 
The philosophies of liberty and protection of rights have made America, an exception to the world.  While the four points below have certainly harmed the white populations as well the black populations, the black population has certainly suffered more.  The solution is to teach better ideas and values to replace the harmful ones.
Government currently plays a negative role by trying to ‘solve’ these problems by government control.  I truly believe that the ideas in Haley2024 The Movement will, over some time, solve these problems.  The largest problem and the ongoing cause of more problems is broken families.       
Oppressive Mentality
When stereotyping whites, police, businesses and government as oppressors, this group inculcates their children with the mentality of victim-hood and ‘not having a chance’. THAT OPPRESSED INCULCATION IS THE TRUE OPPRESSION.  
  A small child holds a sign saying ‘Don’t Shoot’ and sees their parents and neighbors holding others signs about police hunting them down to shoot them.  Over the years, they are fully convinced that cops are the enemy, that WANTS to gun them down, so when they do something foolish, as all kids do, and encounter the police, they decide to fight for their lives.  They will often end up dead or in prison for what started as a minor mistake.
Government Education
Government is spending about $900 billion on education (all three levels).  That is about $8,000 per household per year for life.  This spending gives government very heavy control of education.  This obviously means the parents have less control.  Often government schools are failing or just teaching a world view that is hostile to that of the parents.  
Parents, students and the schools lack the freedom to do things better or switch to another school that is getting better results.  There are many reasons why government schools fail and yet stay open.  In free enterprise, failing schools go out of business and properly empowered parents choose better schools.  Yes, current government education policies harms families of all races, however inner city black families are injured the most. 
BLOG: •The role of prices are highly valuable to achieve the proper levels of goods and services. Prices are also the best way to distribute the goods and services.
Individuals or organizations helping people out is a great thing to do.  Government doing so does much more harm than help.  The structure of that help is very important.  It is hard work and takes Godly wisdom to truly help bring people to independence.  Government’s hard and fast rules of when to give help does great harm as people put themselves in that position of need, to get benefits.  
Government welfare has resulted in a greater rate if fatherless households.  In the black communities, the rate of broken families has reached high levels.  While fatherless homes always harm children, it is amplified when large neighborhoods have very little examples of healthy marriages and father figures.  Government welfare encourages broken families and groups them together creating great harm.   
Cheapening Life
Unfortunately, there are many people that talk about alive human babies as an ‘IT’.  People get desensitized to the fact that lives are sacred and extremely valuable. When life is less valuable to you, you do not find it important to sacrifice for others in their time of need.  
This manifest itself in violence and not caring for others.  The high respect for life is the most important thread in the fabric of society.  The long list of leaders and supports of Planned Parenthood has a very racist past and thus located the majority of their ‘clinics’ in black neighborhoods.  It is highly unfortunate that they have succeed in killing and devaluing human life in inner city black populations.        
Self-Government means that people take care of themselves.  We only turn over to government a very few things that only government can do.  Haley2024 shows many ways that many current government functions can and should be free enterprise endeavors.  The more government does for the people, the less self-governance they have.  
The more government provides for a person; the more government has control over that person.  The greater control government has over a person, the greater the potential for oppression.   While I list the four large issues, lets understand that there are many others such as high tax rates, regulations and other attempts of government’s ‘help’ and protection.    
Where do Rights come from?
God is the simple and correct answer, however for the non-believer and even the believer, let’s go deeper.  Everyone has a solemn unspoken and unwritten agreement that, I do not harm you and you do not harm me.  So everyone has a right not to be harmed and comes from this agreement.  
 Laws emerge from trial and error and the society comes to have an understanding of a just punishment for a harm (crime).  Government codifies some of these with legislation and others are just enforced by the people themselves.  People enforcing includes ‘shunning’ or other social exclusion techniques that can be very effective in bringing people in line with societal norms.  
Rights, here are described as something that is just protected, meaning government does not infringe (do harm) and also are involved in punishing perpetrators that harm others as described in legislation.  Unfortunately, our language also uses the same word ‘rights’ as ‘owed to people’, as in someone or the government has an obligation to provide goods or services to people as opposed to just protecting them from harm. 
If one’s rights stop when they start infringing on others rights, than the word ‘rights’ should not describe government providing goods.  If someone has to work and do labor to ensure you have something, their right to their own labor and property are infringed.  This type of ‘rights’ should be labeled as ‘entitlements’ or ‘government obligations’.   
I do not need to write much here as this is a very simple case of free enterprise verses protectionist policy.  I fall clearly in the free enterprise camp and Certificate of need laws are anti-consumer and has never proven to meet the goals of their proponents.  They fear adequate capital, both human and monetary will not flow into an area if they cannot keep out competition.  That unfounded fear is used as a way to bully city councils to give special treatment.  It is amazing how often those being protected show their appreciation with major donations to campaigns  .

Civil means without a criminal conviction.  Asset forfeiture means the government taking (stealing) assets.  This could be cash, cars, houses, boats or any other assets.  This is clearly wrong.  
Many people have done great research on this injustice, unfortunately this has not been fixed.  Major reforms are  needed to protect people’s property.  While crimes need to be punished, we need to abide by Fourth Amendment.  Nothing should be taken without a conviction.  

While the ACA (AKA: Obama-Care) is highly damaging in many ways, the King v Burwell 6/28/2015 created many new problems. 
First, the old problems, the ACA totally destroys the very important role of prices in the medical and insurance markets. The ACA profoundly increases the number and severity of regulations around health care.  Every regulation are laws that restrict business models and the ACA is constantly ruling almost every health insurance policy people want illegal. The regulators are forcing or highly influencing buyers and sellers to agree to contacts that are less desirable then they have had in the past.  To many, the contracts allowed are so undesirable, people choose to go without.  
This decision went a long way in removing limitations on the executive branch from taking power away from the legislative branch.  Chevron Deference gives the executive branch power to interpret the legislation to the executives liking, however within limitations of reasonableness of the language of the law.  In King V Burwell, Roberts increases the executive power to overlook the clear unambiguous language of the law and ‘create law’ within the limitations of whether it is reasonable to the purpose of the law.    
This is not just boring legal opinion stuff that never affects people.  This has major effects of taxing and benefits within the ACA that takes and give big money through the tax system.   However, with Obama’s history of going way beyond his power (because the other two branches fail to try to stop him), we have high potential of Obama changing many laws and just claiming his ‘new way’ will accomplish the purpose of the law more efficiently. 
These decision creates other major concerns of over-reach of liberals in the executive branch. 
 In the EPA, there has been clear language holding back liberals from shutting done free enterprise and replacing with heavy government control, which is their solution to many issues.  This decision empowers the EPA to ignore the law and just make things up if they claim it would help the environment. 
In the tax laws, is the IRS empowered to change rates, limit deductions, stop exemptions, expand their scope, increase tax welfare or make a host of other changes if they just claim they are furthering the purpose of the law.  
The list is endless and very troubling.
There are a rash of law suits regarding people refusing service to willing buyers of goods or services.  Bakers, florists, caterers, farm owners (venue), among others people are being targeted in lawsuits for refusing service to a same sex weddings.  This clearly puts anti-discrimination laws in direct conflict with the constitutional protection of freedom of association.  
Pornography is legal and there are willing producers that would love to go into actress agencies and pick young actresses and purchase their services.  With the exact same logic as caterers refusing services when they object to the content around their services of a gay marriage, likewise many actresses would object to the content surrounding performing in a porn movie.  
Just as customers are free to discriminate on what services they purchase and who they purchase it from, so should businesses offering services.  Free enterprise means both sides must agree on the contract or sale.   Just as there does not need to be a genuine religious belief in order to deny services to a gay wedding, there should likewise be of no need for a heart-felt religious reason for an actress to refuse to do porn.  An atheist should have all the rights as a true believer.      
When liberals find freedom and liberty obstructing their goals of controlling citizens in order to ‘protect them’, they often violate standing law, statutory or constitutional.  For example, laws requiring city police to turn over illegal aliens to ICE is regularly not done because the president ‘stated’ it was optional. The word ‘shall’ was used clearly meaning must.  
There are people that want all illegals turned over to ICE and too often their solutions is to pass another law.  These new law replicating the existing law has to overcome another vote and a veto to become law.  If the new bill does not successfully become law, the executive branch is morally empowered to not only ignore that current law, but expand the same tactic on other laws.  
This is not only used in the negative, but in the positive.  While the executive often ignores properly enacted laws, they also goes far beyond the law and implement programs or procedures not authorized by law.  There are many instances where the EPA or the ACA (Obama-care) among many others agencies create “laws’ that was not authorized by legislation.  The KING V. BURWELL (U.S. SUP. CT.) 
Too often legislators try to pass laws to ‘stop’ them.  They are creating a system where the executive does what they want until the legislature passes a law and overcome a veto to stop those in the executive verses the constitution way of the legislature creating the law and executive executing the laws passed.  
Much of the ‘Convention of the states’ (COS) movement is doing this with the constitution.  They see the Supreme Court not protecting the constitution, as is their duty, when congress or the executive infringes on rights clearly in the constitution or creates ‘rights’ clearly not considered during the ratification of the Constitution or Amendment such as gay marriage or abortion. 
They, the COS leaders see the congress acquiring power beyond the enumerated powers such as social security, welfare, education and regulations and think that they need to pass an amendment to the constitution to clarify what the constitution clearly states.  If the 10th amendment was not in the constitution, it would be the perfect new amendment to clarify the limited nature of the federal government’s scope of power and authority.  However it is in the constitution. 
Given the entrenched nature of decades of infringements with little pushback from the states or the legislature, much less the judiciary, the COS is needed, however it must be very carefully done.  See my page: Fighting Federal Control

Big organizations absolutely need the ability to observe issues and correct them quickly and government is clearly not good at this.  Government is often a monopoly which compounds the problem by not allowing new innovated business models to emerge and compete for the business.  This is not a reason to give more latitude and leeway to the regulatory bureaucracy of the executive department but reason to turn over these services to the free enterprise system.  Please see Competitive Regulatory Agencies.  
This is not a call ‘never’ to pass these laws but to do so only after exhausting all judicial remedies and using the power of the executive when ‘We’, whom favor limited government, are in the executive.

Other current concerns are liberal interpretations and implementation of anti-discrimination laws when we have a very powerful freedom of association rights clearly stated in the constitution.  
The KING V. BURWELL (U.S. SUP. CT.) (2015) case clearly shows judicial incompetence and unwillingness to protect the constitutional principal of  the separation of powers.  While the court has upheld the ACA twice in major decisions, the ACA violates the constitution in dozens of other very major ways.



Ricki Pepin© - July 2015
Since the Supreme Court rendered its irrelevant and irreverent opinion approving homosexual marriage, the mainstream media has been gleefully declaring that it is now “the law of the land.”  Is it?  Several “conservative” organizations are calling for political action:  “Call your Congressman and get a Constitutional Amendment passed that defends/defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.”  Should you?


Though their sentiments may be sincere, this is NOT the right way to approach this Unconstitutional/criminal act on the part of five Supreme Court justices.  If Americans want to restore our Constitutional, republican form of government, we the people need to do so within the boundaries of the Constitution, not within “conservativism.”

What is the difference, you may ask.  What would Constitutional action look like?

  • The Supreme Court does not make law.  Article I, Section 1 clearly states that all legislative authority rests with Congress.
  • Congress, who does have the authority to make law, has no authority over marriage.  It is not within their 18 enumerated powers in Article I, Section 8.
  • Any marriage regulations/laws (e.g. bigamy, polygamy, incest, etc.) are the State government’s jurisdiction.  See Amendments 9 & 10.
  • Many states have passed Defense of Marriage Acts - DOMA – their citizens voting to define marriage as being a union between one man and one woman.  The federal government has no authority to overrule State governments and their citizens in this regard.  Once again, see Amendments 9 & 10.
  • Lastly, but actually primarily, no one…repeat - NO ONE has the authority to overrule the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s Godthe foundation for all law in America as stated in the Declaration of Independence.
Marriage between one man and one woman was established by God as both natural and scientific law.  No man can overrule this law any more that they could overrule the law of gravity.  Our founders referred to any such attempts as “pretended legislation.”  Check out grievances 13 & 19 of the Declaration of Independence

Sir Thomas More, during his trial for treason for refusal to acknowledge Henry VIII as head of the Roman Catholic Church in England, expressed this principle well:

        “Some men say the earth is flat.  Some men say the earth is round.  But if

        it is flat, could Parliament make it round?  And if it is round, could the

        King’s command flatten it?”

Sir William Blackstone, renowned English jurist who played a leading role in forming the basis of law in America said it even more succinctly:

“…This law of nature dictated by God himself is…superior in obligation to any other.  It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times:  no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this.” [emphasis added]

Simply stated, man cannot alter God’s created order – the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God -  by “pretended legislation” or bogus, arrogant court decrees.  

 It is time for Constitutional action!  To seek a Constitutional amendment is a “conservative” idea and validates the federal government’s counterfeit claims to have authority over marriage.  Bad idea!  To invoke State sovereignty to rein in lawless federal mandates is both appropriate and Constitutional.

What if all the State representatives whose citizens have voted for DOMA would properly represent those citizens by initiating Nullification resolutions or legislation, letting the feds know their States have no intention of obeying an Unconstitutional, therefore illegal, federal mandate.  Five individuals have no authority to overrule the will of the people.  Five individuals have no authority to overrule the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.  The Supreme Court is not the Supreme Being.

What if other State representatives followed the lead of Alabama whose Senate just passed SB-377, ending State-issued marriage licenses?  This changes marriages to contracts that are filed with Probate Judges to constitute a legal record.  This eliminates both State and federal law, a best case scenario as individual citizens should not be required to ask permission (get a license) from any government official before they marry.  Marriage is a highly personal matter between individuals and families. Removing  civil government involvement also means there can be no lawsuits or court cases filed regarding marriage because no law is broken if anyone chooses NOT to perform a marriage ceremony, or chooses NOT to participate in any other way in this wedding (providing flowers, cake, etc.).

What if every patriotic American contacted their State Representatives to share this information, demanding immediate action on their part to slap down this Unconstitutional usurpation?  Haven’t law-abiding Americans’ rights been trampled long enough?  We the people have the power and authority to overturn this IF we will exercise it.  Who will you obey?  The Supreme Court or the Supreme Being?  Isn’t it time to push back?

Something to think about.

Learn more about your Constitution with Ricki Pepin and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.

Ricki Pepin© - July 2015

On the Gay marriage ruling on June 26th 2015, the Supreme Court did not find the state laws on marriage unconstitutional and strike them down, they changed the law.  I do not know why experts are not referencing this, however if the they believe the laws are unconstitutional, the Supreme Court should have struck down the marriage laws (meaning the laws are null and void).  
They should clearly state the reasons why the laws are unconstitutional and allow the state legislatures to pass new laws.  If the law is unconstitutional the S.C. only remedy is to to strike the law so that there is no marriage law and no one can legally get married.  The state of Virginia NEVER passed a law authorizing same sex marriage licenses to be issued, the Supreme Court is not authorized by the US Constitution to force that change by writing law.  They can only strike the law and declare if you pass a marriage law you cannot discern by gender, then the state legislature decides how to create or not create marriage laws within those new guidelines.   A grand father clause would be a very big issue, I will not address that at this time.  
As a general rule and within reason, the court could strike down a portion of a law opposed to the entire law.  Normally good legislation is written with these clauses in them called non-severability clauses.  A legislator has to determine if he wants to pass a law and has to look at it in its entirety.  If a part of a law is missing, it could totally change whether or not it was passed or supported.  Legislators would often want the entire law voided if any piece is missing because in their view it was vital.  In this marriage law, it is overwhelming clear that when the law was passed, marriage was between one man and one women.  It is almost certain that those legislators would not have passed the law if marriage was redefined to include gay unions.      
Drilling U.S. Oil Is Pro- Environment
Oil is constantly seeping out of the ocean floor at rates we current do not know.  Oil is very old ‘dead stuff’ from thousands of years ago.  There is similar stuff that currently coats the bottom of the ocean from recent ‘dead stuff’.   Oil is made from organic material under pressure for thousands of years. It is natural for it to make its way back to the bottom of the ocean and has always been part of the water make up. 
At different times, depending on many factors such as plate tectonics, different amount of oil mixes with the water.  The ideal amount cannot be determined, however I do believe in not increasing how much mixes with the water because too much in one spot can be very detrimental.
I believe that technology derived over the last 70 years and greatly since 2010 Deep water Horizon issue has made drilling very safe.   We have to get our oil somewhere and America simply has the highest standards for safety.  The less we get from our on shores, the greater amounts will be needed from countries with lower safety standards, thus creating greater risks. 
On top of greater risks of drilling, there is added risk of shipping the oil to our shores.  The Exxon Valdez oil spill was from an oil tanker and did damage in Prince William Sound when it ran ashore and oil spilled oil.  only two large Oil spills in about 70 years against thousands of oil rigs and tanker trips is a testimony of our safety. 
In 2015 we have better standard than ever before and always increasing our knowledge on better standards.  Since the time the world began using oil in large amounts about 100 years ago, the economic benefits of oil has allowed the world to have far greater environmental standards and the resources to clean many polluted areas.  Studies have overwhelming showed those countries using the greatest amount of oil has the cleanest environments and best able to handle natural climate variations. 
Drilling For Oil Is Pro-Economic Growth
  Quite simply oil is a commodity that is in demand worldwide.  There is a certain amount of labor needed to collect and transport the oil.  Where ever the oil is collected, the jobs will be created.  Greater economic growth always pulls people out poverty.
A simple supply and demand analysis will show how labor rates will rises when supply of jobs rise, bringing economic prosperity and opportunity to the areas that collect the oil.  Again Oil is demanded across the globe, if we have some in our area, it makes sense to bring the jobs and cleaner environment that comes with greater prosperity to our area.   
Energy from drilling transforms work like this to a far better work with a much better standard of life.
Drilling US oil is Pro-US Security
Many places that have oil around the world are hostile to their neighbors and to America.  Quite simply the more we in America collect from our own territory, the less is demanded from hostile countries. 
The greater amount of energy that is produced overall, the lower the overall cost of oil, simple supply and demand.  Many countries had hostilities in their own countries when oil prices spiked up in 2009-2012.  These hostilities are never good for America for many reasons that are too numerous to go through here.  Two major benefits deriving from peaceful countries is that they make better trading partners and have less violent extremism in their countries.    

    Bill Haley

    Bill Haley started Haley2024 in an effort to do his part to return government power to the people.  


    September 2016
    October 2015
    September 2015
    July 2015
    February 2015
    December 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    April 2014
    February 2014