Napolitano & TX Gov. Perry on Federalism

They cover a lot of ground, from border security to TSA security.

Judge Napolitano On The 17th Amendment

[I]t was the death knell of the idea that the federal government is a coming together of independent, sovereign, states. The 17th Amendment meant that the states no longer had a place at the federal table along with the popularly-elected house of representatives and the President elected by the electoral college.

Judge Napolitano At Mises

This is just too good to not post. Judge Napolitano teaches Constitutional Law at Mises University:

Judge Napolitano Poll

I can't embed it, so you'll just have to go here to take it, but here are the questions:

What would you most like to see repealed?

The 16th Amendment to the Constitution, which permits the federal government to impose a tax on personal incomes.

The 17th Amendment to the Constitution, which provides for the popular election of senators, instead of their designation by state governments.

The Legal Tender Laws, which permit the federal government to print all the money it wants.

The 1973 War Powers Act, which permits the President to wage war against any country for 180 days without congressional authorization.

Decisions, decisions. But I think the 17th Amendment is the one most in need of repeal.

The Tyranny Of Accountability

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air links to an NPR piece (via Instapundit) decrying the fact that politicians are being held accountable by their constitutents. Ed notes:

When the founders created Congress, they had two separate constituencies in mind. For the House, they wanted Representatives who would be accountable to the people, while for the Senate they wanted members accountable to the state legislatures that were the natural check on federal power. (Later, the 17th Amendment made Senators accountable to the general public instead.) They formed this body in answer to the tyranny of distant nobility and politicians with no accountability whatsoever to those whom they would rule. A representative government, they concluded, would be the antidote of tyranny.

...

In any case, accountability is not tyranny; it’s the exact opposite of tyranny.

Consider this Washington Examiner column making the case that a policy-making court needs to be have the same kind of accountability that a legislature does.

There are two kinds of government: an accountable government or an unaccountable one. Nobody wants an unaccountable government (noboy intelligent, anyways), so the only question is how the government is to be held accountable. The original Constitutional framework provided that the states would hold the Senate accountable while the people held the House accountable. The election of the President was regulated through the electoral college to prevent populist democracy, while judges were monitored through the Presidency, the Senate, and the possibility of impeachment by the House.

Utopian visionaries lament that they are not allowed to force their social engineering programs on people. If only they were allowed to force people to obey without the threat of accountability! They could create heaven on earth!

Thomas Friedman recently said, "One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages." But the rule of law requires that government be held accountable. This is how Judge Napolitano reacted to the idea that the justice requires making government unaccountable:



Accountability is the foundation of the rule of law. If we tear down the laws in our quest to punish the devil, then what laws will there be to protect us?



Those who support big government oppose the repeal of the 17th Amendment because they don't want lawmakers held accountable. It's easier for people to hold their state and local governments accountable, but national politicians are loyal only to their party and to their special interests.

Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano

Judge Napolitano's Freedom Watch has recently debuted on television. The Patriot's Network has the show in full, but here's a short clip from the second show.



You can watch the first show on Youtube here, and you can watch the second show on The Patriot's Network.

Sunday Break: What Is A Libertarian? with John Stossel

John Stossel invites Judge Napolitano on his show to answer the question "What is a Libertarian?"

Justice Stevens Announces Retirement

The original Constitutional design of the Senate helped to limit the ability of politicians to place their party before their duty. State legislatures could oversee their representatives far better than the electorate, and they ensured that their senators would prevent as much as possible the centralization of power in Washington. Confirmation processes were less partisan and less prone to political grandstanding because they were concerned with the nominees' actual record rather than scoring political points. They also wanted to make sure that any appointees at least understood that the federal government was limited.

The 17th Amendment changed all that. Now the Senate is full of grandstanding politicians who care more about their party than anything. That won't change regardless of what party is in power. The only way to change that is to repeal the 17th Amendment.

Judge Napolitano on Holy Thursday

Judge Napolitano's The Constitution & Freedom (Complete)

This is a great program by Andrew Napolitano. He explains the history of the Constitution, and includes how the 17th Amendment removed the impediment to centralization of power.

Good stuff!

Judge Napolitano On The Tea Party

Judge Napolitano: The Role of States

Part 5 of "The Constitution and Freedom":



As Judge Napolitano notes, the senate as originally designed was the structural protection of the Tenth Amendment and the safeguard of federalism. When the Senate's role was altered by the 17th Amendment, it stopped protecting people from the destructive and corruptive centralization of power that has created the federal leviathan that threatens us today.

Hat tip: Tenth Amendment Center

Judge Napolitano's "The Constitution & Freedom: The Legislature"

Great explanation by Judge Napolitano:



Hat tip: Minnesota Chris

Interview with Rand Paul

By Judge Napolitano:



I love that he's beating both the Democrat candidate and the Republican Senate Committee's candidate in the polls already.

Rand Paul for Senate

Restoring American Federalism

Judge Napolitano talks with Kevin Gutzman and Thomas Woods on what can be done to restore Constitutional rule:

Judge Napolitano: Kiss Your Freedom Goodbye

If this healthcare bill becomes law:

Congress recognizes no limits on its power. It doesn't care about the Constitution, it doesn't care about your inalienable rights. If this health care bill becomes law, America, life as you have known it, freedom as you have exercised it, and privacy as you have enjoyed it will cease to be.

...

In the Constitution, the Founders built in checks and balances. If the Congress got out of hand, the states would restrain it. If the states stole liberty or property, the Congress would cure it. If the president tried to become a king, the courts would prevent it.

In the next few weeks, I will be giving a public class on Constitutional Law here on the Fox News Channel, on the Fox Business Network, on Foxnews.com, and on Fox Nation. In anticipation of that, many of you have asked: What can we do now about the loss of freedom? For starters, we can vote the bums out of their cushy federal offices! We can persuade our state governments to defy the Feds in areas like health care—where the Constitution gives the Feds zero authority. We can petition our state legislatures to threaten to amend the Constitution to abolish the income tax, return the selection of U.S. senators to state legislatures, and nullify all the laws the Congress has written that are not based in the Constitution.

One thing we can’t do is just sit back and take it.

Emphasis mine.

That's as much as I could fairly quote, but I recommend reading the whole thing. The Judge does a great job communicating positive steps that we the people can take to fight such infringements on our freedom.

Since the 17th Amendment was enacted, the States cannot check the legislature, and the Senate cannot check the President's judicial appointments. And with the Senate's compliance in the President's judicial appointments, the judiciary cannot be trusted to check the President either. The Senate played a vital role in protecting and defending the Constitution. The only way to restore the Senate to its Constitutional role is to repeal the 17th Amendment.

Stossel and Schiff: Change Is Easy; Progress Is Hard

John Stossel:

Yesterday the AP reported that productivity gains may be "bad for workers". More productivity is BAD for workers? Seriously?

What nonsense. Reporters once said automation would kill jobs. Then they say computers would kill jobs. They did take jobs from secretaries. But total employment kept rising.

The AP reporter said "as long as companies can get their workers to produce more, they have little reason to hire."

When workers are more productive, profit margins rise. That gives companies even MORE reason to hire.

...

From 1993 to to 2002, 309 million jobs were lost. I'd say that was a terrible thing, except during the same period 327 million jobs were created. A net gain of 18 million jobs. That's creative destruction.

The mindset that higher productivity will cost people jobs has led to foolish attacks on progress.

Progress happens when the government stays out of the way. The government's change just makes things worse.

Hat tip: Rixshep,and thanks to therightscoop for the vid.

The Criminalization of Speech

Moynihan on Napolitano

Michael Moynihan discusses the rapidly expanding federal government with Judge Napolitano:



The government has been expanding ever since the 17th Amendment allowed power to be centralized in the federal body. It's past time to repeal it.

Hat tip: Liberty Pen

Napolitano on Your World with Cavuto