Independence Caucus is radical?

Over the past few weeks I have read with interest letters to the editor in the Herald Journal, which have expressed absolute nonsense and were riddled with inflammatory comments toward the Independence Caucus. Statements such as outside special interest group, radical, extremist, right-wing group, an outside cabal that wants to give orders to its zealot adherents. For those who don’t know, the Independence Caucus started in Utah’s third district by a few guys who wanted to help Jason Chaffetz win against an incumbent, Chris Cannon. They did some research and found that almost 80% of his donations came from out of state. They also found out that nearly 100% of his earmarks went to his donors. Cannon was bought and paid for. Jason Chaffetz was in no financial position to compete with the fat campaign funds of an incumbent but 1000 volunteers from his district helped him beat Cannon, an incredible feat. The situation with Cannon is not unique, it is actually now the norm of how politics and money works in Washington regardless of party affiliation. See for yourself by watching video: http://www.ourcaucus.com/Article2-1.html

Independence Caucus has no money, it is made up of individuals who want to hold our politicians accountable to us the voters, not the big money and to adhere to the supreme law of the land. The supreme law of the land is the Constitution which protects the people from tyranny by putting limitations on the Government. ICaucus vets or interviews potential candidates (a novel idea, a job interview!!) with questions, if the result is 70% or more positive in answering these questions then Icaucus may choose to support the candidate’s campaign with tons of local help. Now to make sure they were honest in answering the questions and that once elected they don’t start dancing to a different tune the consequence is that the elected official will lose the support and ICaucus will campaign against them and support a more qualified candidate to run against them. There is nothing cabalistic about this, it’s common sense. May I venture to say that those who oppose the constitution being applied in local politics, don’t understand how it protects the individual and their community.

Let me explain how the Constitution protects the local government and individuals from the Federal Government with the following example. The Federal Government since the passing of UN Agenda 21 in 1992 has been trying to move local communities to implement Sustainable Development policies. Sustainable Development is about the redistribution of resources and putting restriction on our economy, private property and the effect of humans on the environment. Private organizations are using federal policies and grants to force county commissioners and city councils to impose Sustainable Development in local communities. There are over 500 cities in the US that are currently enacting Sustainable Development policies http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=1387®ion=NA and are members of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) - Local Governments for Sustainability. Two cities in Utah are members - Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County. Sustainable Development dictates how communities are to be restructured and requires the violation of property rights with no reasonable compensation, so it is even more insidious than Eminent Domain rulings recently passed by the Supreme Court. The Federal Government has found ways to by-pass the Constitution by attaching strings to its grant money. According to an article in the American Thinker dated Oct 28, 2009 called, UN Agenda 21: Coming to a Neighborhood Near You, it says, “The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal and state agencies may attempt to deny grant money to states and cities that do not adopt smart growth plans.”

The Constitution says we have inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which means the right to own property and to keep the fruit of our labors. We own those, not the government. The government is to serve and protect our rights not mother earth’s. If you fear outside influence in your community then you need the protection of the Constitution and local politicians that understand the proper role of the Government, Federal, State and Local and the Constitution’s limitations and protections. Independence Caucus is not the outsider and the Constitution is not irrelevant to local politics.

Michele Alder - North Logan City

This story is inappropriate and should be flagged for moderation. Please choose from one of the following options:

You have indicated this comment should be removed.

Close

The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .

Bruce says ... on Tuesday, Apr 6 at 3:57 AM

"life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" = the right to own property??? A much better interpretation might be that it is a right to available, affordable healthcare. After all, without health there is no life, and "life" is first on the list.

40712217
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Savant Noir says ... on Wednesday, Nov 4 at 11:44 PM

“It is not true that the function of law is to regulate our lives. The function of the Constitutional rule of law is to protect the free exercise of our lives."

31617234
Inappropriate? Alert Us!

Add a comment

Name:

Comment: 250 Characters Left

Cache Valley Daily - News and Information for Cache Valley | Cache Valley News | Logan, UT News and its affiliated companies are not responsible for the content of comments posted or for anything arising out of use of the above comments or other interaction among the users. We reserve the right to screen, refuse to post, remove or edit user-generated content at any time and for any or no reason in our absolute and sole discretion without prior notice, although we have no duty to do so or to monitor any Public Forum.