The Equalizer Amendment dramatically reduces federal government intrusiveness in
three ways. First, it effectively ends all unconstitutional activities of the federal
government, and that includes essentially all of its most intrusive activites (see
“What is Unconstitutional?”). To see how the amendment accomplishes this, see “Disobedience
of the Constitution.” Second, the amendment prevents the federal government from
playing favorites, engaging in crony capitalism, providing subsidies to selected
industries, interfering selectively with trade, etc. For a description of how this
is accomplished see “Over-Regulation (Health, Finance, Energy, Etc.).” Third, the
amendment subjects the federal government to all of the legislation to which private
enterprise is subject. Once the various departments are forced to comply with onerous
intrusions such as Sarbanes-Oxley and the income tax code, the federal government
itself will cry out for reform, and we are likely to see dramatic reductions in intrusiveness.
Federal control of drugs, including abused drugs and pharmaceuticals, is unconstitutional.
It is an outgrowth of the protection racket on one hand and crony capitalism on the
other. Either way, it has served to make many a federal official feel important while
enhancing the anti-competitive positions of both legal and illegal sources of pharmacologically
The Equalizer Amendment ends the wasteful War on Drugs by putting drug decisions
back in the hands of the states and the people. It does so by making unconstitutional
federal legislation extinct and/or unenforceable. See “Disobedience of the Constitution”
to find out how the amendment accomplishes this aim.
The third clause in the Equalizer Amendment is, “No federal law or regulation shall
discriminate against or in favor of a private entity or citizen or a group of such
entities or citizens on the basis of race, religion, gender, ethnicity, industry
type, perceived importance, contributions of money or favors, lobbying activities,
or domestic location.” This clause prevents the federal government from treating
one citizen, company, or industry differently from any other. Slapping tariffs on
imports or exports is not allowed unless the same tariff is applied to EVERY import
or export. Of course, such a restriction keeps politicians from favoring one citizen,
company, or industry over another and thereby removes most of the fun from the politician’s
standpoint. Moreover, the damage to trade that an across-the board tariff would cause
is so great that such a measure is unlikely to be considered. Other forms of trade
interference are likewise made much less attractive. Unable to play favorites and
to get favors, bribes, and campaign contributions in return, politicians will lose
interest in diddling with trade, and the economic advantages of free trade will prevail.
People are beginning to become aware of the furtively-controlled monopoly power of
the Federal Reserve System. For a very interesting expose of the Fed see Kirk MacKenzie’s
book on Money at http://www.silentnomorepublications.com/Money/Home.html. With most
people in debt through mortgages or otherwise, the Fed has a stranglehold on our
economy. Unfortunately, it has attained a status that makes it neither a government
entity nor a private entity. It refuses to comply with Freedom of Information requests,
since it claims not to be a government institution, and it refuses to be audited
as required of private corporations by the Securities and Exchange Commission. It
appears to have a strong influence on Congress, since attempts to pass legislation
requiring an audit of its finances have been voted down.
The Equalizer Amendment addresses this problem with the following clause: “Any department
or entity that Congress creates shall be treated as a government department or entity,
unless the department or entity is made subject to all laws applicable to private
entities.” Thus, the Fed, which was created by an act of Congress, must become either
a government department or a private entity. Either way, as a result of the first
clause of the Equalizer Amendment, the Fed will be subject to Security and Exchange
Commission reporting requirements and any other local, state, and federal requirements
governing private enterprises. Once the facts come out, there will be a major push
to remove the monopoly status of the Fed and to introduce more solidly based currencies
that are not subject to manipulation by elitist powers.
Confiscation of property or property rights by the federal government is a violation
of the Fourth Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not
be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.” No federal power to take property or property rights
from law abiding citizens was ever ratified.
The Equalizer Amendment gives citizens the ability to sue the federal government
in local, state, or federal courts with the same ease as that with which the federal
government can sue a private-sector corporation. Any unconstitutional attempt by
the federal government to seize private or state property or property rights can
result in fines to the government and/or imprisonment of the responsible federal
official, in the same way that illegal activities of a private corporation can result
in fines or imprisonment of the responsible officer within the corporation.
The freedom of citizens to enter into contractual agreements with each other of their
own free will with the various risks assigned to the parties in an agreed-upon fashion
no longer exists in the U. S., much to the demise of our economy. A person cannot
buy a lower-cost truck with a side-mounted gas tank, even if he/she is willing to
accept the risk of fire or explosion in case of an accident, and a person cannot
buy a new car without air bags even if he/she is willing to accept the greater risk
of injuries in an accident in exchange for the reduced cost and reduced risk of accidental
airbag deployment. Also, a person is unable to benefit from a 50% reduction in cost
of a surgery in exchange for accepting the full risk of possible accidents or complications.
Why? Because, no matter what the contract says, the government can rewrite it, saying,
after the outcome is known, that the acceptance of risk by the injured party is not
really part of the contract. The result: prices for cars and medical care are much
higher than they need be. Everyone ends up with a one-size-fits-all deal, and lawyers
end up with lots of their cash.
In fact, this impairment of contracts by STATE OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT is unconstitutional.
Quoth the Constitution: “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation;
grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any
Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder,
ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title
of Nobility.” Impairing contracts is not among the enumerated powers of the federal
government, and it is not allowed as a power of the states.
The Equalizer Amendment, which makes it easy to sue the federal government for unconstitutional
acts (see “Disobedience of the Constitution”) also makes it easy to sue the federal
government for not upholding the Constitution if the federal government neglects
to enforce state compliance with the Constitution.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage