Real Iowa

If you’ve read my previous posts, you may think that I am against any change to the Constitution, whatsoever.  Actually, I’m only against changes that are either against the original intent of the founders, or that are made outside of the means of the amendment process (i.e. unconstitutional laws and judicial activism).

Here are some areas where I believe the Constitution ought to be changed:

1. Repeal the 17th Amendment.  The founders wisely intended that the U.S. Senate be first and foremost the voice of the States in the federal government.  For that reason, prior to the 17th Amendment, Senators were chosen by the state legislatures to represent their interests in Washington.  Direct election of Senators flies in the face of the founders’ intent, as well as the very purpose for having a bicameral Congress.  It weakens the standing of the United States as a federation of free and sovereign States, and helps to reduce the states to mere administrative regions of the national government
2. Repeal the 16th Amendment.  The founders intent was that the federal government derive its subsistence primarily from the states (in proportion to their population), as well as from duties on imports.  It was a good plan, and successfully maintained the federal government at a reasonably small level.  Today, thanks to the direct taxation on the citizens of the various states, the federal government has grown deadly obese.  We can trim of fat as much as we want in a given session of Congress, but while the source excess nutrients remains the problem will recur.  As in other cases of moribund obesity, radical surgery is required to limit the intake of food – repealing the income tax is the operation the government needs to enable the permanent reduction of bureaucratic girth.
3. Enshrine the sanctity of life.  In my article on Declaration principles, I discussed the fact that rights exist because they are granted by the Creator, not because government grants those rights or deprives us of them.  The right to life is one such – but in this era when the public has been deluded by decades of judicial legislation and Congressional collusion, it has become necessary to clarify the fundamental protections by an amendment as follows:  “Recognizing that life is the gift of the Creator, and the ending of life His prerogative alone, the term ‘person’ as used in the fourteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall apply from the time of conception until natural death.”
4. Restrain the federal government from usurping the role of religion.  Marriage is not an institution of the federal government (nor of the states), but of God.  Therefore the federal government does not have the power or authority to alter or abolish the institution or the term.  Further, the institution of marriage predates the institution of government by many years, and is a more necessary pillar of society.  In that spirit, I offer the following amendment:  “The institution of marriage, being outside and independent of government, the federal government of the United States of America shall not recognize in any law or regulation any definition of marriage except that between one natural man and one natural woman, nor shall it recognize any relationship that seeks to confer the benefits of marriage by a different name.”

Let’s clear something up:  The Second Amendment is not about having firearms for hunting, nor for self-defense – though these are both legitimate uses of our right to keep and bear arms.

When the founders adopted the Bill of Rights, they had just been through a long struggle against what had been their recognized government.  King George and the British Parliament began with unpopular taxes.  They continued with the dismantling of the colonies’ self-rule.  Eventually this tyrannical government in a far-off capitol marched its armies on Lexington and Concord to confiscate the American stores of powder, shot, and weapons.
(more…)

By the grace of God, I am an independent fundamental Baptist, saved by the shed blood of Jesus Christ.

I’m sure you wonder why I state that so boldly on what is essentially a political website.  The answer is that being a Christian, and an outspoken one, is entirely compatible with entry into any arena in American civic life.

You see, there is a fundamentally Baptist doctrine firmly embedded in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  We call it the “Doctrine of Soul Liberty.”  Most Americans call it “freedom of religion.”
(more…)

Welcome to Real Iowa in the Second District!

This site exists  to encourage discussion about the principles and positions that ought to be held by the next U.S. Representative that we send to Washington.  I’ve published a few articles to get started, so please browse and feel free to submit comments if you have something to add.

Let’s cut to the chase:  Iowa’s 2nd Congressional District needs to trade in our Congressman for one who understands both the people of the district and the Constitution of the United States of America.  Representative Loebsack, as he has proven, does neither.

The present inhabitant of our seat in Congress not only supports unconstitutional legislation, he actually believes that we don’t mind.  Check out this audio clip, taken at a town hall meeting in West Burlington on August 15, 2009.

It’s time we band together to let Congressman Loebsack know that real Iowans in his district still care about the Constitution.  He needs to find out that we still care about the rule of law in our state and nation.  He needs to understand that we consider him to be in violation of his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

We need to send the message loud and clear that he will not be allowed to take a seat in Congress as our Representative after the 2010 elections.  And we must make certain that no other person with beliefs so repugnant to Constitutional America will ever occupy that seat again.

This site is devoted to returning Iowa’s 2nd District to representation by a Real Iowan that respects our Constitution – and will uphold it.  We need a Representative that will go to Washington, D.C. for us, but won’t let Washington get into him.

The posts on this site will detail my vision of the policies that a Real Iowan ought to pursue, and the convictions that an American Patriot ought to hold.  Explore the pages here and see if you agree.  Then together, perhaps we can find the right person to put into this office of trust.