94-1944

The Court is asked, for the purpose of a presentment to the people and therefrom a referendum and vote:

Does the citizen OWN an inherent and inalienable RIGHT to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable FAILURES of government officials such as; the current national debt, improperly regulated "saving and loan associations, OUTRIGHT THEFT from the children of this nation and world by producing debts and consuming resources, they the children WILL pay for, the current medical monopoly, and so on!

The QUESTION then becomes, Should Constitutional protection encompass the taxpayer, LIMITING the TOTAL possible percentage of taxation from any/all sources on the individual and his/her income from legitimate sources. This question becomes: IS THE GOVERNMENT OR THE PEOPLE MORE TRUSTWORTHY AND CAPABLE?

DOES THAT INHERENT AND INALIENABLE RIGHT, allow the people, by majority vote, to set prescribed reasonable limits, to which government officials (when WAR, has not been firmly declared) MUST adhere or be impeached and penalized. The question is YES OR NO!

Does the interpretation of Chief Justice Marshall in McCulloch V. Maryland 4 wheat 316, 4 L. Ed 579 (1819) in the words:

LET THE END BE LEGITIMATE: (conforming to recognized principles or accepted rules and standards) Meaning the government shall adhere to the common limits established as SELLABLE COLLATERAL before printing its own loan, making the people debtors, AND SO ON!

LET IT BE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE CONSTITUTION: IS there ANY justifiable cause, apart from fully declared war, forbidding taxpayer protection?

AND ALL THE MEANS APPROPRIATE: DOES the right of the people to vote upon these issues EXIST, within the legal framework of a Redress of grievances?

WHICH ARE PLAINLY ADAPTED TO THAT END: The peaceful exercise of the Democratic form of government (of the people, by the people, and for the people) within the context of one person/one vote according to need, IS THE AMERICAN WAY? The question is YES OR NO!

WHICH ARE NOT PROHIBITED: There is NO direct or indirect statement of prohibition within the Constitutional documents of these RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE, except for, the first amendment Redress of Grievances, which specifically allows and invites change, AS DESIRED. (within the limits of what's FAIR, to all the people).

BUT WHICH CONSIST WITH THE LETTER AND SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION, ARE CONSTITUTIONAL: The spirit of freedom and control of the government, BY THE PEOPLE, are one , within ALL Constitutional Documents, This is the "RIGHT" giving us the American form of government: AGAIN, the people shall decide by vote, what is within their best interest, BUT they shall remember individual freedom as a member of society shall NOT be tampered with!