The following reforms are introduced, many for the first time, in 'Defending Conservatism.' Joshua Zambrano has published research papers since January 2009 that include reforms now championed by both sides of the aisle, including a return of U.S. troops to guard the borders, trade restrictions on low minimum wage countries such as China, judicial term limits, an insurance-less universal healthcare system to reduce the Budget, trustbusting, and a return to public works programs.
Other solutions such as tax breaks for companies that hire more U.S. workers to combat automation and trust-busting to break up large corporations to protect market competition and small business have been formally presented in research papers since 2010. Although controversial at the time, they have been adopted in recent years by prominent figures in both political parties, including Donald Trump, Elizabeth Warren, and Pete Buttigieg.
- For more detailed legislation on judicial reform, see Judicial Reform Bill.
The entire judiciary, with the exception of the Supreme Court, is based around a series of judiciary acts passed by Congress. The U.S. Constitution, as seen from Article III, merely necessitates the institution of a Supreme Court. How many justices are on the Supreme Court is not stated by the Constitution, and the Supreme Court is given only limited power to hear cases constitutionally. Congress passed numerous judiciary acts throughout history changing the structure and scope of the courts, including the number of Supreme Court Justices.
Modern Judiciary ActEdit
- For a list of judiciary acts, see judiciary acts.
A modern judiciary act is sorely needed to protect the 1st Amendment rights to life and religious freedom by restraining court jurisdiction, as the judiciary has begun the decline to tyranny which Thomas Jefferson predicted when he warned "That to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy which at once destroys all religious liberty because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own." A modern judiciary act should be created to implement broad reforms to the judicial system in the same way that numerous judiciary acts have done so in the past.
This would be entirely consistent with Article III of the U.S. Constitution which delegates to Congress structuring of the court system, and with Article VI which mandates that judges uphold laws passed by Congress. The President himself is likewise responsible for upholding the laws passed by Congress, and appointing judges he knew would obstruct Congressional laws would violate his own oath of office (Article II, Sec. 3).
Article III clearly states, from the beginning, that the judicial power is subject to Congressional determination, and further states that Congress has the right to specify what the punishments for specific crimes should be, as well as where trial jurisdiction should lie. Not only does Congress have complete authority to institute lower courts at will, but even the Supreme Court can be regulated, since Congress can determine where Supreme Court trials are held and what the punishment for crimes such as treason should be.
Congress' Authority Over the CourtsEdit
All Legislative Power Vested in CongressEdit
All legislative, i.e. law-making authority, is vested in Congress, Constitutionally. Judges are not supposed to make brand new law apart from statutory authority (laws passed by Congress) in the same way that Presidential executive orders are unconstitutional if they do not have statutory basis. Needless to say also, all powers specified in Art. I, Sec. 8 are exclusive to Congress and not to be usurped by the Courts. If the Courts were to be given the powers under Art. I, Sec. 8 then it would make no sense to specify them as the domain of Congress without mentioning the Courts whatsoever.
|“||Art. I, Sec. 1: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
Art. I, Sec. 8: "The Congress shall have Power... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Judges Are Sworn to Uphold Laws Passed by CongressEdit
All judges, including those of the Supreme Court, are sworn to uphold the laws passed by Congress. Any judges which overturn laws passed by Congress, as Sotomayor, Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kennedy did in Obergefell v. Hodges by declaring the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional have violated their sworn oaths under Art. VI of the U.S. Constitution and should be impeached for treason. The current penalty for treason is either death or at least 5 years imprisonment and a fine of at least $100,000.
|“||Art. VI: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."||”|
Congress Has Power Over Lower CourtsEdit
All lower courts, including district and appellate courts, only exist because Congress created them through prior judiciary acts (e.g. the Judiciary Act of 1789, which instituted district and appellate courts). Congress has the full authority to create or remove them and determine their jurisdiction.
|“||Art. III, Sec. 1: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish."
Art. I, Sec. 8: "The Congress shall have Power... To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;"
Congress Can Determine Court LocationsEdit
Congress has the authority to determine Supreme Court locations, where judges shall meet at. Since the Supreme Court specifically handles cases between two or more states (Art. III, Sec. 2) this is a declaration that Congress has the right to determine where the Supreme Court shall meet.
|“||Art. III, Sec. 2: "...but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed."||”|
Congress Can Determine Court JurisdictionEdit
Congress can determine what the Supreme Court and lower courts can rule on, to extend their authority from the narrow scope specified in Art. III, Sec. 2. Congress can also determine whether the Courts have additional authority over inferior officers. As such, Congress can determine Court jurisdiction.
|“||Art. III, Sec. 2: "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."
Art. II, Sec. 2: "Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."
Congress previously restricted Court jurisdiction with the 11th Amendment:
|“||11th Amendment: "The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State."||”|
Congress Can Determine Court DecisionsEdit
Congress has the authority to mandate what the penalties for specific crimes are, removing the ability from the Supreme Court to arbitrarily determine penalties.
|“||Art. III, Sec. 3: "The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
Art. I, Sec. 8: "The Congress shall have Power... To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;"
Congress Can Remove Corrupted OfficialsEdit
Congress has the sole authority to impeach corrupted government officials, not the Courts:
|“||Art. I, Sec. 3: "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present. Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."
Art. I, Sec. 2: "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."
Art. I, Sec. 3: "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present. Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."
Restricting Court JurisdictionEdit
The single most important reform needed from a modern judiciary act is restriction of court jurisdiction, mandating that the courts be accountable to laws passed by Congress (as the Constitution says they should be in Art. VI). Without that reform, the Supreme Court and lower courts will continue to declare laws passed by Congress (e.g. the Defense of Marriage Act) are unconstitutional, that Presidential Cabinet appointments (e.g. Matthew Whitaker) are unconstitutional, and that executive orders are unconstitutional (e.g. the travel ban).
This would also have the effect of instantly eliminating cases of judicial fiat which made brand new law apart from Congress, in violation of Art. I, Sec. 1 (all legislative power is vested in Congress) and Art. VI (judges sworn to uphold laws passed by Congress) including Roe v. Wade and Obergefell v. Hodges, thus eliminating the Court's activism in legislating abortion and gay marriage into law. Since Congress has the authority to declare the punishment for treason (Art. III, Sec. 3) and create inferior courts (which is why district and appellate courts exist) per Art. III, Sec. 1 and Art. I, Sec. 8 it can logically mandate Court jurisdiction.
No Judicial ReviewEdit
All legislative, law-making authority and powers are vested in the legislative branch according to Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. The President, whose responsibility it is to appoint Justices of the Supreme Court, is required to take care that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed per Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. As such, those he appoints must likewise be expected to uphold the laws passed by Congress, or the President by appointing those who would violate them would himself be violating his own oath of office. Judges are explicitly commanded to uphold all laws passed by Congress under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution.
That Congress has power over the Judiciary, to regulate it, not the Judiciary to regulate Congress, is further evident from the Constitution’s delegation of control to Congress in defining the Judiciary’s appellate jurisdiction (Art. III, Sec. 2), provision of a lengthy list of powers to Congress which are never provided to the Judiciary (Art. I, Sec. 8), delegation of authority to Congress in constituting all courts below the Supreme Court (Art. I, Sec. 8), allowance of the Senate to authorize the appointment of Supreme Court Justices (Art. II, Sec. 2), delegation of the power to impeach Supreme Court Justices to Congress (Art. I, Sections 2 and 3), and authorization of Congress to define trial locations of interstate crimes such as those presided over by the Supreme Court. (Art. III, Sec. 2) If anything, powers not delegated to Congress (e.g. Art. I, Sec. 8) are reserved to the states or the people, not to the Courts. (10th Amendment)
That the Supreme Court has overstepped its constitutional bounds in tyrannically opposing the democratic will of the American people is evident from Obergefell v. Hodges when the Supreme Court overturned the ballot referendum-based laws of 30 states that had been voted upon by the American people. As such, the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction should be restricted from declaring any laws passed by Congress unconstitutional, and only those laws passed by state legislatures which directly contradict by the strictest letter of the law that which is in the Constitution or laws passed by Congress should be declared unconstitutional.
Judicial Term Limits in Lieu of Impeaching Unconstitutional JudgesEdit
Such a judiciary act should implement term limits on federal judges and Supreme Court Justices, requiring them to be reappointed by the President every 8 years in order to retain their positions. This would remove many liberal justices who have been unconstitutionally opposing the will of the American people. It makes no sense for Presidents to have term limits but not Federal Judges, and for members of Congress to have to run for re-election, when Presidents and members of Congress are democratically elected. As such, Federal Judges should have to be reappointed every 8 years by the President in order to retain office, otherwise they should be automatically removed from office. It is not that important for Senators and Representatives to have term limits, but it is very important for Judges to have term limits requiring their reappointment by both the President and Senate to ensure they do not act unconstitutionally.
Thirty states passed laws via ballot referendum defining marriage as between a man and a woman. In other words, the peoples of those 30 states (including the most populous states of California and Texas) all voted against gay marriage. In spite of that, a few liberal judges overturned the will of the people in direct opposition to the principles of democracy at the heart of the U.S. Constitution. The gay rights movement constitutes the greatest attack on U.S. democracy since the Civil War when the Democrat South rebelled to protect the institution of slavery.
Judges who have voted for gay marriage and against voter-approved ballot referendums (per Obergefell v. Hodges) should be impeached and removed whenever possible at both the federal and state levels, given their opposition to the principle of democracy fundamental to the U.S. Constitution. However, since impeachment requires 67 votes in the U.S. Senate, use of term limits for judges is the best way to remove the many unconstitutional judges who have been opposing democracy until such time as impeachment becomes an alternative.
Enumerating Judicial RightsEdit
A modern judiciary act should also specifically enumerate what fundamental Creator-given rights exist (e.g. to life, religious freedom, bear arms, trial by jury, a speedy public trial in criminal cases, a fair trial, and fair imprisonment).
Re-emphasis on Trial by JuryEdit
While the right to trial by jury is emphasized in the U.S. Constitution per the 5th, 6th, and 7th Amendments; Article III, Sec. 2 of the Constitution; and Article 15 of James Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments; there is no right to a trial by judge. Furthermore, jury decisions are not to be reexamined except according to common law requirements, per the 7th Amendment, whereas no such restriction is placed on decisions by either judges or even the Supreme Court.
|“||"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.'
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."
No Jury InstructionEdit
Juries should not be instructed on a case by case basis according to judicial mandate; although Congress may authorize certain information sheets or booklets for juror use in specific types of trials giving them information about existing law.
Replacement of Appellate courtsEdit
As such, appellate courts should be removed so that jury decisions become absolute, save in cases that specifically fall under Supreme Court Jurisdiction per Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. According to the 7th Amendment, jury decisions should not be re-examined except according to the common law (which likely involved exceptions such as major evidence arising after trial with jurors regretting their votes). The buildings themselves can be transitioned into additional circuit courts for use by jury trials.
National Juror PoolEdit
A national pool of prospective jurors should be maintained, with no one guilty of felonies or dishonesty, including false witness or misuse of the public trust, eligible to be a juror; consistent with Article VIII of the Province of Pennsylvania’s 1682 Laws Agreed Upon in England, the document upon which the Articles of Confederation and U.S. Constitution were based.
No Disqualifying Jurors or Judges Based on PartialityEdit
It is ridiculous to disqualify jurors from having preconceived beliefs about a side’s innocence or guilt in the cases of national trials like Casey Anthony’s (where numerous jurors were disqualified just because they already had drawn conclusions that she was guilty-resulting in only dishonest jurors being selected who were willing to lie and claim they had no preconceived thoughts about the trial).
Impartiality should mean selecting jurors of pure reputation, with no history of lying or dishonesty (especially perjury), not having the courts act as thought police who silence the accused from publicly speaking while trying to quiet the whole nation from discussing the case, and excluding jurors who have already thought about how the case should develop. Liberal idiocy and corruption has run amok in the judiciary, and needs to be stopped.
Similarly, judges and other judicial officials should not be barred from expressing their personal beliefs on politics or other matters. Everyone has opinions. Impartiality does not mean a lack of opinion, but a willingness to fairly examine both sides of a case and do what is right, regardless of one's personal feelings on the issues involved. Everyone has opinions, and only the dishonest will claim they can be impartial in the sense of not having opinions. Furthermore, since power will be transferred from judges to juries, there will no longer be the same need for judges to be as impartial.
The Constitutional right to a trial by jury cannot be exercised if there are onerous fees preventing those who want to exercise such a right from doing so. In the state of Washington, one must pay a substantial fee in order to simply exercise one's constitutional right to a trial by jury. There should no be fee for simply exercising one's constitutional right to a trial by jury, and the state of Washington is clearly violating the U.S. Constitution.
Retrial of Past Cases Not Decided by JuriesEdit
All cases decided by plea bargaining or other means should be eligible for retrial with permission from either the District Attorney, Governor, or President of the United States.
Prohibiting Plea BargainingEdit
Plea bargaining should be prohibited. It encourages those pleading guilty to lie, forfeiting their Constitutional rights to a public trial by jury and due process. Because the accused can be indefinitely held for months or years awaiting trial, they can ultimately be forced by corrupt prosecutors and police into pleading guilty so that they can be released. They can be held for years awaiting trial, never proven guilty, and ultimately be forced to plead guilty to something they never did. Plea bargaining is a form of coercion and manipulation which has played a major role in the false convictions of 164 people on Death Row who spent a combined total of 1,887 years on Death Row before being exonerated.
Prohibiting Lengthy Imprisonment Before TrialEdit
Those who don't get speedy public trials within a set time frame (perhaps 72 hours) should be freed, consistent with the 6th Amendment.
Remove Immunity for Public OfficialsEdit
The doctrine of immunity has been expanded far beyond what the U.S. Constitution intended. According to Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution, Congressmen are to be privileged from arrest while in Congress save in cases of treason, felony, and breach of the peace:
|“||They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.||”|
However, this perfectly reasonable measure, intended to prevent Congress from being unduly disturbed during session save in cases of severe crimes, led to the unConstitutional doctrine of Judicial Immunity. Under Judicial Immunity, judges and other public officials cannot be held accountable for actions committed in the course of their official duties. It has been used to defend judges who order people imprisoned without any rational basis, and police or prosecutors who pervert justice. The doctrine of Judicial Immunity is unconstitutional and a perversion of the U.S. Constitution's intent; it should be removed.
Public officials should be more accountable, not less, and with greater power should come greater responsibility, not less. The doctrine of qualified immunity shields law enforcement officials from their actions, even when those actions involve clear violation of civil rights accorded by the U.S. Constitution and its amendments, per Anderson v. Creighton, Zieper v. Metzinger, Pearson v. Callahan, Filarsky v. Delia, and Mitchell v. Forsyth. Furthermore, a limited privilege from arrest granted to Congressmen during the partaking of their Congressional duties under Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution cannot be extrapolated as wholesale immunity for the actions of public officials, or even as protection for the otherwise unlawful actions of Congressmen.
Article I, Section 6 simply protects Congressman from arrest at certain times, namely while going about their Congressional duties (excepting cases of felonies, treason, and breach of the peace)—not the actions they take during those times, for which they can logically be arrested afterwards. Nor does the Speech and Debate Clause provide protection for a Congressman’s actions, only for their words, to ensure free debate. Therefore, qualified immunity should be prohibited as unconstitutional in the interests of protecting American’s civil rights under the U.S. Constitution from governmental tyranny.
Penalties for Judicial CorruptionEdit
Justice should not be sold or denied, per the 5th Article of the Province of Pennsylvania’s 1682 Laws Agreed Upon in England, and a right to due process of law without which none may be deprived of life, liberty, or property is evinced from the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, any witnesses or prosecutors convicted of willful falsehood for their court testimony should be subject to the same penalties they had sought against those testified against, required to make double satisfaction to those they testified against, dismissed from all offices of trust, and permanently prevented from holding public office or testifying in court, consistent with the 12th and 26th Articles of the Province of Pennsylvania’s 1682 Laws Agreed Upon in England.
Removing Onerous FeesEdit
Onerous court fees should be removed (e.g. filing fees, public defender fees, fees for jail/prison stays/probation, fees for parole supervision/electronic monitoring devices/arrest warrants, fees for healthcare/medication/court administration/prosecution/court-ordered drug and alcohol abuse treatment, fees for testing of one's DNA samples, or fees for modernization of court computers). The courts ought to be fully funded by the U.S. Treasury or state funds.
|“||"Though debtors’ prisons were eliminated in the United States almost two centuries ago, a modern-day version exists in the dizzyingly complex system of fines and fees levied against people as they move through the court system. Offenders are charged for everything from DNA samples to electronic monitoring devices, jury trials and even room and board while imprisoned. The fees can add up to thousands of dollars, and those who fail to pay are routinely jailed... The practice 'punishes people simply for being poor and brings little to no benefit to the government or the general public,' the report notes. 'This system places severe, long-lasting burdens on persons living in poverty.'"
-Deborah Bach, University of Washington
No Incarceration for Inability to Pay Misdemeanor/Infraction FeesEdit
The poor should not be imprisoned in jail/prison for an inability to pay fines or fees stemming from misdemeanors or infractions, although those who have committed felonies may be imprisoned for such inability, consistent with Article 24 of the Province of Pennsylvania’s 1682 Laws Agreed Upon in England.
No Revoking Driver License for Inability to Pay Misdemeanor/Infraction FeesEdit
Revoking one’s driver’s license for an inability to pay misdemeanor fines/fees, which is necessary to finding work so that fines and fees can be paid off, is counter-productive to achieving the goal of working off debts owed while disproportionately targeting the poor, and should therefore be prohibited.
Outlaw Judicial Gag OrdersEdit
Judicial gag orders, as applied in the case of Roger Stone, hold serious potential for arbitrary abuse by biased judges, and should be outlawed as a serious threat to freedom of speech. Judicial gag orders are used to prevent public accountability and knowledge of judicial actions; fostering tyranny and corruption.
The book Stone was ready to publish had already been announced before the judicial gag order. Attempting to suppress it after the fact is corrupt and dishonest. The judge initially defended the gag order by saying this is a criminal proceeding, not a PR campaign, and that she has to protect the right to a fair trial and protect the rights of lawyers and witnesses. However, Stone’s critics are not affected by the gag order, and can continue to badmouth him (as NBC constantly does). As a major conservative voice, silencing Stone is destroying the right to a fair trial in the court of public opinion.
What is to stop the courts from suing all the major conservative commentators in the United States and having tyrannical judges issue gag orders to punish them for criticizing such abuse of power? This will be the next step. This is in essence a violation of the First Amendment in multiple ways, by abridging both freedom of speech and of the press:
|“||"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The official judicial excuse for gag orders, by the way, that they need to protect the 6th Amendment “right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed,” is of course hogwash. They want to emphasize the word “impartial” and ignore the word “public.” Gag orders however are intended to prevent trials from being public and keep the accused from being heard publicly, in violation of the Sixth Amendment.
It is of course impossible, in the case of trials dealing with national figures and issues, to maintain the perfect impartiality the courts claim they can impose.
Public Court ProceedingsEdit
The proceedings of all courts should be public. Public records should be kept and made available online to the public. Televised video may be recorded, e.g. via C-Span, of all court proceedings, and broadcast to ensure transparency.
Equal Treatment for Pro SeEdit
There should be no discriminatory treatment towards those who represent themselves in court, or who choose to have their friends or acquaintances represent them in court. No law should be instituted restricting the right of self-representation in court, or requiring educational qualifications to represent another in court, consistent with Article 6 of the Province of Pennsylvania’s 1682 Laws Agreed Upon in England.
- See also District of Columbia
The District of Columbia should be federalized and taken back under federal control as was historically the case prior to the 1973 District of Columbia Home Rule Act. Given the widespread corruption which has been transpiring in D.C., the mayor and heads of transit, police, shelters, etc. should be federally appointed, either by the President or by Congress. Since elections were instituted in D.C., the Democrats have taken control of the District and are misusing federal funds while creating record levels of homelessness. Shelters intended for the homeless are being used instead to house Democrat protesters even as the rest of the District's poor are abused in an attempt to force them out of the region.
Residential Voting RightsEdit
Nonetheless, D.C. residents should have a right to vote for members of Congress. This could be achieved by allowing them to hold dual state citizenship, meaning they could be considered residents of Virginia, Maryland, or whichever second state they hold the closest ties to for purposes of selecting Representatives or Senators. Otherwise they are being disenfranchised from their Constitutional right to representation.
Mandated Sale of LandEdit
The rich are hoarding land across the country so that 90% of Americans live on just 18% of the land, in violation of the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act. This is due in part to onerous zoning laws and HOAs/POAs which prevent all but the wealthy from purchasing land, even as counties require new construction be done by a few private contractors who give kickbacks to the counties. To resolve the problem, I recommend that landowners with more than 100 acres should be required to sell a single acre of their undeveloped land to anyone who does not own land for $1,000 an acre, and all landowners with more than 1,000 acres should be required to sell a single acre of undeveloped land to any person who does not have land for $500 an acre; ‘undeveloped’ being defined as land which lacks building improvements.
Standardized Zoning Laws, Regulation of HOAs/POAsEdit
HOAs and POAs should be banned from creating requirements that keep out prospective new residents, and Congress should take control of the situation by standardizing zoning laws (including building requirements) nationwide.
Federalized Rest AreasEdit
States which have mismanaged federal rest areas along highways by preventing overnight rest there, should have said rest areas federalized, taken under federal jurisdiction, to prevent further mismanagement. It is ridiculous that federal funds are given to states for highway rest areas, but the states then disallow use of the rest areas for their intended purpose-resting, and instead use the money to advertise state tourist attractions. This is a misuse of federal funds, and states that have been abusing such funding should lose control of rest areas to the federal government, so that truck drivers and others have a place to sleep at federally-funded rest areas.
Seven Years of Uncontested Possession Guarantees LandEdit
Seven years of quiet possession should give an unquestionable right to land consistent with the 16th Article of the Province of Pennsylvania’s 1682 Laws Agreed Upon in England.
All lands should be liable to pay debts per the 14th Article of the Laws Agreed Upon in England, and in cases of felonies to make satisfaction to wronged parties of twice the value, per the 24th Article of the Province of Pennsylvania’s 1682 Laws Agreed Upon in England.
All wills in writing attested to by at least two witnesses should be of equal force concerning the bequeathment of property consistent with the 25th Article of the Province of Pennsylvania’s 1682 Laws Agreed Upon in England. In the case of felons such as traitors and murderers, one third of the estate will go to the next of kin to the victim, and the remainder to the next of kin to the criminal.
No Property Tax On 1st AcreEdit
There should be no property tax on the first acre of land owned, so that people may have a reasonable amount of land on which to live without being taxed for it. This concept is based on the Bible, which prohibits charging the poor interest per Exodus 22:25-27; Leviticus 25:35-37; and Deuteronomy 23:19-20.
- For prospective legislation, see U.S. Budget Proposal
Reforming the budget requires addressing entitlements, as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid alone combine for over 50% of the U.S. Budget. There are two potentially good alternatives for reforming the current system while reducing costs and expanding coverage.
My newest recommendation for reforming healthcare is simpler and based more upon the free market. I recommend simplifying Health Savings Accounts (originally a Republican idea) and using them in conjunction with Direct Primary Care or Fee-for-Service arrangements. In essence, the Federal Reserve should simply provide HSAs to everyone based on a flat formula which determines accrued benefits based on age lived, so that banks are removed as the middleman from the process (which only drives up costs). Furthermore, the funds should be available for use not only in conventional hospitals but for Direct Primary Care or Fee-For-Service arrangements.
With Direct Primary Care, clinics are paid a flat monthly cost to provide all healthcare needed for a patient in a given month, thus motivating doctors to keep their patients healthy while minimizing their expenses and improving their healthcare experience, typically reducing health costs by 75% or more. Not only is cost reduced but wait times are substantially shortened. With Fee-For-Service, clinics are charged based upon the service needed and, because the expensive insurance industry is removed as a middleman, considerable cost savings can be realized. Needless to say, HSAs hold potential to provide a free market solution in reducing health costs if used with alternatives that avoid the insurance industry such as those mentioned.
My original 2009 bill proposed a block grant system to replace the current Medicare/Medicaid/Obamacare system in which government would fund hospitals to provide universal healthcare directly rather than through the expensive and unnecessary middleman, the insurance industry, to reduce costs substantially. Furthermore, voting by patients in hospital lobby voting machines or online about their healthcare experiences would allow better rated hospitals to receive more funds and stay in the system, so that hospitals will compete to provide better quality, lower-costing healthcare. In addressing tort reform, I have proposed sharing of liability by hospitals in medical lawsuits based on the number of hours worked by doctors the week of malpractice incidents, as well as requiring the losing party in medical lawsuits to pay up to $1,000 of the other side's legal fees as a deterrent against frivolous lawsuits.
However, I now prefer the HSA concept because it is simpler, less bureaucratic, and requires less oversight mechanisms and cost.
To better protect doctors from overwork, which leads to malpractice lawsuits, thereby driving up the cost of healthcare coverage, doctors found guilty of malpractice should have their court expenses shared by the hospital for which they worked based on hours worked the week of the malpractice incident. If they worked at least 60 hours the week of the incident, the hospital should cover 5% of the malpractice court costs, and an additional 5% for each additional 5 hours worked during the week of the incident.
Losing Parties in Medical Lawsuits Pay Other Party's Court Costs Up to $5,000Edit
As a deterrent against frivolous lawsuits, losing parties in medical lawsuits should be required to pay the other party's legal fees, up to a maximum of $5,000.
Work Hour RestrictionsEdit
Doctors and residents should be restricted to 16-hour shifts, and anyone found guilty of coercing them to work longer hours subject to a $10,000 to $100,000 fine and up to one year in prison.
The U.S. should have never gotten into the retirement business with Social Security to begin with by intruding unnecessarily into the industry, creating a massive government monopoly that has bankrupted the U.S. in the process. Because Americans are living almost 20 years longer than when Social Security was passed in 1965, the cost of Social Security, like Medicare, is skyrocketing, as the U.S. government pays for decades more benefits than the program was designed to sustain.
With that being said, millions of Americans have spent their lifetimes paying into the program and are nonetheless owed the benefits they paid for.
Privatization should be the ultimate goal-once the U.S. has funds to privatize, of course. While increasing the age to receive benefits may ultimately prove inevitable, given how much funds (funds the U.S. with its exploding debt crisis does not have) would be required, all possibilities to privatize should first be exhausted.
Border Security Via Returning TroopsEdit
Military should be returned from overseas to guard the borders, so that money paid them will be spent here in the U.S. instead of overseas, while also reducing direct war costs (which comprise the bulk of military spending).
Homosexuals should be kept out of the armed forces and taxpayers should not have to fund their sex change operations so they can avoid combat roles, as has been occurring.
The current welfare system should be reformed. Billions of dollars are wasted under the existing SSI program, as millions of able-bodied adults dishonestly lie about being mentally or even physically disabled, putting on acting performances to pretend they are schizophrenic e.g., so they can use the SSI checks to enable their recklessly irresponsible drug and alcohol habits (which the most rudimentary of examinations will show is the major source of spending for SSI money). SSI should be ended, and replaced with alternative programs that genuinely help poor people become self-sufficient. The $59 billion spent on SSI in 2017 could be used to create jobs through public works programs or paying returning veterans to guard the borders.
One possible alternative to SSI would be public works programs such as those used by Franklin D. Roosevelt, in which millions were employed to perform conservation, dig ditches, clean up and repair public buildings and bridges, teach seminars, etc. Given how automation is resulting in fewer workers worldwide, the job market is becoming more dependent on government itself to create jobs for the poor.
No Group Showers, Provision for CouplesEdit
Group showers should be outlawed in prisons, homeless shelters, and schools to prevent sexual immorality, while allowance should be made for housing of couples in such institutions to stop the government's attack on the nuclear family.
Welfare programs should be work-contingent (i.e. public works based), so that programs are self-supporting as much as possible, similar to those used by FDR. As the Apostle Paul states in 2 Thessalonians 3:10, if someone refuses to work they should not eat. Furthermore, public works programs should be labor intensive to create jobs as effectively as possible per dollar spent.
In crafting a public works program that hires as many workers as possible per dollar spent, it is key that the program spend maximally on workers and less on extraneous costs such as administration, supplies, equipment, and buildings.
As seen from a 2007 report by the University of Massachusetts’ Institute for Policy Studies (Pollin and Garrett-Peltier) the following numbers of jobs and total wages/benefits were created in each government sector per $1 billion of federal spending:
- Tax Cuts for Personal Consumption: 10, 779 jobs, $504.6 million total wages
- Defense: 8,555 jobs, $564.5 million total wages
- Construction/Infrastructure: 12,804 jobs, $693.7 million total wages
- Health Care: 12,883 jobs, $730.1 million total wages
- Mass Transit: 19,795 jobs, $880.1 million
- Education: 17,687 jobs, $1,309.3 million
As Garrett and Peltier conclude,
|“||“How can spending on education generate both higher average wages as well as more new jobs per $1 billion in spending? The answer is straightforward. For one thing, the high average wage reflects the fact that a large proportion of people in the sector operate with relatively high credentials and skills, and their incomes reflect this. In addition, education is a relatively labor-intensive industry. This means that, compared with the other industries we are examining, for every $1 billion in new spending in education, proportionally more money is spent on hiring new people into the industry and relatively less is spent on supplies, equipment, buildings.”||”|
Democrat Corruption in the StimulusEdit
Obama's Stimulus and related Democratic spending was designed to enrich a few corrupt Democrats, not create jobs for working Americans. In the words of the Wall Street Journal, the Stimulus was "a 40-year wish list... that manages to spend money on just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years. We've looked it over, and even we can't quite believe it. There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons."
Simplistic, Temporary, Preserve Private SectorEdit
More bureaucracy breeds corruption in government. As such, it is key that any public works program be kept minimal, temporary, and allow competition from the private sector. The goal of a public works program is to jump start hiring in the economy and get people employed so they can then start small businesses to boost innovation and competition. A long-term bureaucratic public works system is a form of government monopoly that reduces overall employment, stifles competition, and wastes taxpayer dollars. Such a system should be kept simplistic with fewer layers of bureaucracy. The goal is to produce short-term hiring until the private sector returns to full strength.
Most panhandlers are likely druggies working for drug cartels to get their fix. As such, a nationwide law should be passed allowing police departments to stop each panhandler once and test them for drugs. If they fail the test, they should be subject to jail time, following which they can be retested again if panhandling. This is necessary to stop organized crime.
Individual Income Tax SimplificationEdit
The individual income tax should be simplified, following a study to determine what 10-15 questions best determine overall wealth, with all other questions then eliminated.
Corporate Income Tax Breaks for Companies Who HireEdit
The corporate income tax should be simplified so that all tax breaks are eliminated aside from a tax break to companies who hire more U.S. workers in relation to company earnings. This would combat the effects of automation and encourage employers to hire maximally.
The tax system is overly bureaucratic. Essentially the government is taking money from businesses and individuals, then giving it right back in the form of refunds based on tax breaks. In the process, unnecessary expense is caused for the U.S. government, which has to oversee all of this unnecessary bureaucracy to shuffle money back and forth. Why not just remove virtually all tax breaks, tax businesses at the rate they would be taxed if there were no tax breaks, so that the same revenue results from each tax bracket, and eliminate the unnecessary bureaucracy?
An overly complex tax code just makes things harder for small businesses, which can't afford the same tax preparation services. The tax code could be easily simplified by figuring out how much money each tax bracket should bring in, removing all the tax breaks, and having the tax code tax companies the same percentages with all tax breaks removed. Having companies list the value of all depreciated equipment, for example, is unnecessary and overly bureaucratic. All tax breaks should be tossed out, with the exception of a tax break that rewards companies who hire more U.S. workers in relation to company earnings, to incentivize maximal U.S. hiring.
All of the tax breaks just allow more dishonest companies to avoid paying their fair share; in particular General Electric, which received a $3.2 billion refund from the IRS in 2010. According to a report by the Institute for Policy Studies, 25 of the 100 highest-paid CEOs in 2010 received more compensation that year than their companies paid in taxes. Companies are able to dodge taxes through offshore tax havens, green energy tax breaks, etc. The U.S. loses nearly $200 billion each year from corporate tax avoidance. The corporations which successfully dodge taxes then place more burden on other businesses to shoulder more of the tax burden, and on the U.S. government and its taxpayers, which are facing an ever-growing debt crisis.
A simpler, less bureaucratic, less complex tax code will reduce expense for the U.S. government, make things simpler and fairer for both small and big businesses, and allow for better transparency and oversight of America's taxation process so that money is not unduly wasted or lost.
Prohibiting Taxes on Interstate CommerceEdit
All taxes on interstate commerce should be prohibited except those necessary to support the state inspection process per Article 1, Sec. 9.
Fire Obama IRS HoldoversEdit
All previous workers in the IRS from the Obama era should be fired, given the IRS' widespread corruption during that time period.
IRS Explanations for Auditing/DelaysEdit
The IRS should be required to issue explanations from now on for why tax returns or tax-exempt status is delayed. The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution requires a speedy public trial for the accused, yet the IRS can audit taxpayers without any trial process.
Interest Prohibition for Poverty LineEdit
There should be a prohibition on charging the poor interest, with poor defined as those below the poverty line, consistent with Biblical teachings in Exodus 22:25-27; Leviticus 25:35-37; and Deuteronomy 23:19-20.
National Voucher SystemEdit
Voucher funding on a per-student basis should be allocated fairly from a national fund, so that students from richer neighborhoods do not benefit more than those from poor neighborhoods.
Prohibition on Taxation of Interstate StudentsEdit
Furthermore, taxation of interstate students should be prohibited, as the widespread current practice of taxing out-of-state students three times the tuition of in-state students directly violates Article 4, Sec. 2 of the U.S. Constitution.
Objective Accreditation StandardsEdit
Accreditation standards for schools and universities should be relaxed and based objectively on standardized test results to ensure religious institutions are no longer discriminated against, as has been occurring.
Caps on CEO Pay, Tuition RatesEdit
Tuition costs have skyrocketed far above expected inflation rates, as have compensation for school staff and textbook costs. Universities have no oversight restricting how much they charge students for tuition, textbooks, parking, etc. As such, universities can simply hike tuition rates as high as possible to steal as much of student grant and loan funding as possible, force them to buy textbooks authored by professors at the university or who give kickbacks to it, and create onerous parking regulations that steal even more money through ridiculous fees. Millions of students who have their federal loan money, which they will have to repay, are then forced onto food stamps, into soup kitchens, and required to rely on public welfare, all so they can get the education which society requires for a decent job.
There is no way around it, short of somehow redoing the entire system from scratch. Congress will need to intervene to provide oversight of the education industry to prevent unscrupulous university CEOs from stealing taxpayer funds by hiking student expenses exponentially.
Replace the Scientific MethodEdit
Although the scientific method is an objective approach to evaluating theories, it allows for selective bias when choosing what theories to consider in the first place. I propose alternative adoption of abductive logic programming, where all alternative possibilities are separated into two divergent categories and then evaluated against one another with the process steadily repeated until the correct solution is arrived at.
The scientific method results in numerous scientists all choosing their preferred hypotheses and then writing papers arguing for why their beliefs are right, without ever systematically evaluating all possible alternatives against one another in an efficient way. Abductive logic programming can do just that, so that machine learning through Artificial Intelligence is increasingly able to solve complex problems with 100% certainty.
In political science, we use dummy variables, or essentially narrow analyses into binary paths to exclude variables by evaluating their probability against all other alternatives. Naturally, such categorization goes more quickly if the categories can be more evenly split so that when one alternative is ruled out, more options are excluded.
Return to D.A.R.E.Edit
The D.A.R.E. program should be returned to public schools. At a time when 70,000 Americans are dying each year from drug overdose, an emphasis on clean, healthy living is important. Following several controversial studies that claimed D.A.R.E. was ineffective, it has been largely dropped from U.S. school curriculums. In just the last 10 years, drug overdose death rates have skyrocketed, even as states have increasingly legalized drugs like Marijuana (a gateway drug that leads to other, more dangerous drug use). The new D.A.R.E. program appears more effective, and it is time to return to education that counteracts drug use.
The entire U.S. election system should be remodeled to replace primary elections with an "Open Primary" election where all candidates run against one another, with the two top vote-getters running against one another in a final, general election.
To encourage transparency, voters could voluntarily make their votes public, and then be eligible to elect party leadership. Party leaders, such as those in the GOP and DNC, should be elected by voters who have made votes public every four years.
Presidents, Senators, and Representatives should all be subject to 16-year term limits (although a Representative after 16 years could then run for Senate or President, allowing for a total of 48 years in office at the Congressional or Presidential level).
This would allow Presidents to serve longer terms while forcing long-serving Senators to transition to Representatives. It doesn't really make sense for Presidents to have term limits but not members of Congress.
Voting Age to 16 for Military/Property OwnersEdit
The voting age should be reduced to 16 for members of the military and property owners. It makes no sense that someone can serve in the military to die for their country at age 16, drive a vehicle that can kill others at age 16, work in dangerous jobs like construction or coal mining at age 16, own property at age 16 (although one can't sell it until age 18), and get married with parental consent in most states at age 16, but yet not be able to vote until age 18.
The reality is that there is no one-age-fits-all level of maturity. There are people who are more mature at age 12 than others are at age 90. If age brought wisdom, then Hugh Hefner would have been extremely mature. Especially for those who serve in the military or own property, the voting age should be changed to 16.
Voter Fraud PreventionEdit
Mexico requires holographic voter IDs with thumbprints be shown in order to vote, yet here in the U.S. we have not yet caught up to the electoral advances of Mexico. It makes no sense that voters do not have to show I.D. to vote when many states require that one show I.D. to buy liquor. Oversight mechanisms can be added to stop absentee ballot fraud, which is how a lot of voter fraud is done. An automated system crosschecking registration data against a national database to make sure voters aren't deceased and Social Security Numbers match up would stop dead voters and those with invalid SSNs from being registered (that alone would stop thousands of fake voter registrations).
Penalties for FraudEdit
Those who engage in voter fraud (e.g. Hudson Hallum) should permanently lose their right to vote and run for office. Mandated penalties should be at least as harsh as those for U.S. Census Bureau employees who disclose Personally Identifiable Information ($5,000 fine and 5 years in prison).
Poll-watching needs to be enforced to prevent fraud. In 2008, Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer bragged about how he got fellow Democrat Jon Tester (U.S. Senator) elected in 2006 by using the police to stop poll workers from monitoring elections in a Native American district.
Roe v. Wade and other contentious issues should be put to the ballot so that voters can decide via nationwide ballot referendums. However, it is imperative that voter fraud reforms be made first before direct democracy is pursued. Particularly in corrupt Democrat states like California which resist government oversight of their elections, there is too much risk of voter fraud altering national results. Therefore, replacing the electoral college with a popular vote system must wait until voter fraud reforms such as eVerify are implemented.
No Residential Address RequirementEdit
New laws have stopped those without a residential address from voting, which unconstitutionally discriminates against Native Americans, the poor, and those who are traveling. Such unconstitutional practices should be stopped through federal legislation.
Embargoes Against Low Minimum Wage CountriesEdit
Trade embargoes should be used against low-minimum wage countries (those with minimum wages below $4.00/hour in international dollars) with whom the U.S. has over $1 billion in annual imports, to stop countries like China from parasiting off the U.S. to empower communist, fascist dictatorships. The nature of a global free market results in the U.S.' higher minimum wage working against it, as global megacorps send jobs overseas to low minimum wage countries where labor is cheaper. The largest expense for such companies is typically payroll, so the easiest way to increase profits, meet stockholder expectations, and free up money for CEO salaries is to reduce worker pay. On the other hand, a company which refuses to outsource runs the risk that their competitors will do so, so that they will be at a competitive disadvantage.
The global free market results in a race to the bottom, driving down worker wages worldwide and rewarding immoral Communist countries such as China which use low minimum wages to attract foreign investment capital. The U.S. is running a $300 billion annual trade deficit with China every year, and the goods made in China are made by workers paid 1/10th that of their U.S. counterparts. Unrestricted free trade harms the U.S., harms workers worldwide resulting in lower wages everywhere, harms democracy, and results in a global income disparity as the rich get ever richer and the poor get poorer.
To avoid impacting 3rd-world countries, such a policy could affect only those countries which have over a set annual level of imports (e.g. $8 billion annually). Thus, many 3rd-world countries would not be affected or examined, only those with a substantial amount of imports.
Free Trade With Decent Minimum Wage CountriesEdit
Completely free trade should be pursued with countries that have decent minimum wages above $4.00/hour. This results in a simplistic, un-bureaucratic trade system where either the U.S. trades with a country or it doesn't. There are not thousands of tariffs on different goods. If a country has a substantial amount of imports to the U.S. and a low minimum wage, then we don't trade with that country. This would only affect two dozen countries or so out of the roughly 200 countries worldwide; and result in perfectly free trade with our democratic allies such as those in Europe, Israel, Taiwan, Japan, Canada, Mexico, etc. Countries with which we would stop trading include China.
Overpass Tunnels for Animal MigrationEdit
Overpasses are designed with tunnels for vehicles to pass below. A simple design change, adding another neighboring tunnel as a trail for animals to cross, would reduce animal and driver fatalities so that they would be able to safely cross highways without endangering themselves or motorists. It should not add much additional cost but would produce a number of positive benefits.
Hurricane Weather ModificationEdit
The U.S. government has been capable of modifying the weather since the 1960s per Operation Popeye and Project Stormfury. Although the U.S. afterwards officially halted experiments into weather warfare per the Environmental Modification Convention signed at Geneva in 1977 the accords only applied to use of weather modification for purposes of war-not domestic use.
As such, cloud seeding is still used today to alter the weather; and has recently been discovered to have application in created supercharged snowstorms. Ten states currently have cloud seeding programs. The NOAA has maintained a database of all federal government weather modification projects since 1972.
Given the increasing intensity and commonality of major hurricanes, cloud seeding and other weather modification techniques should increasingly be attempted to weaken hurricanes before they make land contact.
Screen Building Requirements for Wind Turbines/Solar PlantsEdit
The U.S. has in recent years subsidized the wind and solar industries with billions of dollars, yet both industries kill thousands of endangered birds each year, to the extent that they were given a pass from the Endangered Species Act by the Obama Administration. As such, I propose that the industries be required to live up to their environmentally-friendly claims by passing requirements that large-scale wind and solar operations be surrounded by screening to prevent the wholesale slaughter of endangered birds like the Bald Eagle. If the green energy activists care so much about nature they should not mind a little more expense to protect endangered birds, right?
Ban the Use of Palm OilEdit
The global increase in palm oil usage is directly related to the cutting down of the rainforests. Although the Global Warming fearmongering is overblown, sensible protections of the rainforests and algae that provide much of Earth's oxygen make all the sense in the world. As such, the U.S. should ban the use of palm oil. It is commonly used in cosmetics, as a transfat-free food additive, and as a green energy biofuel. There are readily available alternatives to palm oil that are less likely to negatively impact one of the most precious resources our planet has, our rainforests. Palm oil-related destruction of the rainforests is a serious enough concern that the EU just banned government subsidies for the palm oil biofuel industry.
Solar Street LightsEdit
To protect against power outages, future light poles should be solar. This will not only protect against potential power supply dangers, but create long-term cost savings in approximately six to seven years.
Nationwide Firebreak SystemEdit
Particularly in more rural, forested areas of the country that are prone to massive forest fires (e.g. Idaho, Washington, etc.) a national system of firebreaks should be implemented. Strips of land free of flammable material should be maintained to ensure that, if a major fire breaks out, its spread will be limited by the firebreaks.
Satellite-Based Early Warning Forest Fire SystemEdit
A forest fire early-warning system based on satellite technology utilizing the National Alert System should be implemented. Such a system has already been invented by UC Berkeley scientists. Dubbed FUEGO (Fire Urgency Estimator in Geosynchronous Orbit), it could potentially be expanded to alert the nation about other potential national emergencies as well, including floods, hurricanes, or nuclear attacks.
Cover Crop RotationEdit
To improve long-term soil quality, prevent sinkholes, and minimize dust storms and tornadoes federally-subsidized farmers should be required to rotate their crops every seven years with cover crops that improve soil quality and crop fertility. A lack of cover crops played a role in the Dust Bowl, and was a key reason the nation underwent a food shortage with the cost of food spiking.
"April 27, 1935: Congress declares soil erosion "a national menace" in an act establishing the Soil Conservation Service in the Department of Agriculture (formerly the Soil Erosion Service in the U.S. Department of Interior). Under the direction of Hugh H. Bennett, the SCS developed extensive conservation programs that retained topsoil and prevented irreparable damage to the land. Farming techniques such as strip cropping, terracing, crop rotation, contour plowing, and cover crops were advocated. Farmers were paid to practice soil-conserving farming techniques."
FEMA Virtual NetworkEdit
To ensure comprehensive communication and coordination between key stakeholders in an emergency scenario, a virtual network should be setup between the major public and private sector stakeholders in each county and the NBEOC, NRCC, and RRCC through FEMA.
- See also Immigration
Return Troops to Guard the BordersEdit
A wall along the southern border is imperative as a defense against the drug smuggling, weapons trafficking, sex trafficking, and terrorist infiltration that's been occurring. I have been continuously calling for a return of U.S. troops to guard the borders as a way to simultaneously reduce government spending and improve employment since 2009 in my research papers.
However, it should be accompanied by sensible reforms in our immigration process, as well as eVerify to prevent voter fraud.
Mexican Repatriation ApologyEdit
The U.S. should issue an apology for the Mexican Repatriation, and the illegal deportation of up to 2 million U.S. citizens of Hispanic heritage during the Great Depression
Remittances, immigrants sending billions of U. S. dollars overseas to other countries, is a serious problem that costs the U.S. billions of dollars each year. In 2017 alone, $148.5 billion was sent overseas in the form of remittances. This should really be taxed, and could be used to fund a border wall.
Citizenship for Military VeteransEdit
One would think military veterans would automatically become U.S. citizens but hundreds of veterans have been deported, including Daniel Torres (U.S. Marines), Marco Antonio Chavez (U.S. Marines), Hector Barajas-Varela (Paratrooper), Erasmo Apodaca, and Miguel Perez (U.S. Army).
Citizenship for Native AmericansEdit
Another commonsense reform would be to allow those who can provide evidence of ancestry from U.S. Native American tribes (e.g. genealogical or genetic testing) to become U.S. citizens. A possible test would be 1/16th blood quantum, a common standard for joining Native American tribes, although 1/8th or 1/4 are possible alternatives as well.
Most hispanics are a combination of Native Americans and Spanish conquistadors so many may have the same ancestry as those on reservations. Because Mexico owned the states of Texas, California, New Mexico, Arizona, Oklahoma, Nevada, and Wyoming prior to the Mexican-American War, there will be overlap between many Mexicans and U. S. Native American tribes, so they could reasonably apply for status due to their Native American ancestry on a case-by-case basis. Some hispanic families have lived on their land in U.S. states before the land even belonged to the United States.
Exempt Violent Criminals from Sanctuary City ProtectionsEdit
Congress should pass a law exempting violent criminals such as rapists and murderers from sanctuary city protections. State legislation in sanctuary states like Washington has thus far proven insufficient to protect American citizens, and ICE has given seven major examples. Congress has the authority to federally legislate in ways that provide for the "common defence and general welfare" of the United States under Art. 1, Sec. 8 of the U.S. Constitution, and it is certainly in the best interests of the general population that violent criminals are not walking free to harm innocent people.
English Language Requirements, No Merit-Based SystemEdit
Stricter language requirements should be implemented, however 'merit-based' immigration should be avoided; the poor should have an equal right to come to the United States per the inscription on the Statue of Liberty: 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free...'
White House ReformEdit
- See also Mueller Investigation
Restructure the Executive BranchEdit
The Executive Branch should be restructured as was done during Jimmy Carter's presidency, and the unconstitutional position of special prosecutor eliminated, since its legislative authority expired when the 1978 Ethics in Government Act was not renewed in 1999.
Revoke Obama, Arpaio PardonsEdit
The Obama administration's pardons should be revoked, along with Donald Trump's pardon of Joe Arpaio (a corrupt official who had innocent people framed with bomb parts).
CEO Pay Restrictions at Publicly Traded CompaniesEdit
CEO pay at publicly traded companies should be capped in relation to company earnings, given how CEO pay has skyrocketed far above historical norms of 20:1 to 50:1, to today's level of around 300:1. At privately traded companies the CEO has built their business using their own money, incurring the start-up costs and risks; they should be able to pay themselves what they want with their own money. However, a publicly traded Fortune 500 company can hire on a CEO who then appoints a Board of Directors who will pay him whatever he wants with stockholder funds, drives the company into bankruptcy, hikes his own pay, and gives himself a 'golden parachute' of expensive retirement benefits just to leave the company (which has been happening consistently).
So what would this look like specifically? On average, CEOs should be paid perhaps 50 times the pay of the average worker (a historically sensible level) with companies at higher-earning companies paying their CEOs more (perhaps 120:1), and those at lower-earning companies paying their CEOs less (perhaps 10:1). How to set the gradations to appropriately reward better-performing CEOs for their company performance is debatable, a range of 10:1 to 150:1 based on company earnings could also work, so long as the average ends up no more than 50:1. As of 2017, the National Average Wage Index is $50,321.89. Thus, the average compensation for a publicly traded company's CEO in 2017 at historical levels should have been 50 times this, or $2.516 million. Instead, they received on average $18.9 million.
For example, a CEO at a publicly traded company whose company earnings are above $100 billion annually would be paid perhaps 120 times the pay of an average worker ($6.04 million), a CEO whose company earnings are average would be paid 50:1, and a CEO whose company earnings are very low would be paid 10:1 ($0.50 million). There would then be intermediate tiers between these extremes. The goal is to stop CEOs who under-perform from paying themselves far more than historical norms by reducing worker pay, so that workers get a reasonable share of company earnings.
Legislation already exists to break up companies that become too big. Monopolization runs counter to laws passed by Congress such as the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 1914 Clayton Antitrust Act, and 1887 Interstate Commerce Act. Past Republican Presidents such as Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Benjamin Harrison, and Grover Cleveland all opposed monopolization in favor of protecting small businesses and market competition.
Socialism and oligarchies created by anarchic capitalism are two sides of the same coin. On the one hand, socialism is essentially a big government monopoly. Oligarchies created by anarchic capitalism are likewise monopolies. In both cases, the nature of monopolization produces less employment, fewer businesses, less innovation, higher prices, and wasted economic resources.
Ultimately, monopolization of land or wealth, as with business, endangers the market and overall prosperity. If all the wealth is concentrated in the hands of an ever diminishing few than the best and brightest cannot contribute to the economy, and small businesses which should grow to bring new products and ideas are prevented from ever starting. Competition is what makes the free market work, which is why monopolization is so dangerous. When there are more businesses competing, there will be more employment, more prosperity, and more innovation.
For that reason, government should intervene to prevent mergers that result in too much takeover by a single corporation of a market or markets. However, enforcement of antitrust law has been left largely to the eye of the beholder due to a lack of objective, concrete definitions on what constitutes a monopoly that requires trustbusting. Congress should act to better define what constitutes a trust, to avoid partiality in enforcement.
An excellent example of a government-enforced monopoly is Bowker, the only publishing agency approved by the U.S. government to sell ISBNs and their associated barcodes. Every independent book author and publishing company is required to pay $150 for a single ISBN and barcode that can only be used with a single book publisher and book edition.
Talk about subverting freedom of the press. Bowker is free to charge ridiculous prices for a digital service that every single author is required to have. The absurd prices force independent authors to risk their publishing rights through ISBN reselling companies who list their own information when purchasing the ISBNs. The need for trustbusting is especially obvious in the publishing industry.
Prohibit Unpaid InternshipsEdit
Unpaid interns are, for all intents and purposes, unpaid slaves whose right to a minimum wage are being violated. Furthermore, the practice of unpaid internships serves to devalue worker wages and bargaining power while creating a broader income disparity. There is no reason for businesses to hire workers when they can get free interns for no cost. As such, unpaid internships should be prohibited.
Prohibit Sex Offender LandlordsEdit
Sex-offenders convicted of felonies should not be allowed to be landlords, for obvious reasons. They can prey upon vulnerable tenants.
Temp Agency Percentage CapsEdit
Temp agencies can take large percentages of employee pay, 50% or more, reducing decent-paying jobs to minimum wage jobs and driving down overall employee pay, while incurring minimal expense. Employees lack negotiation power due to their poverty levels. As such, some reasonable cap should be placed on what percentage of money temp agencies can take from an employee, perhaps 20%.
Foreign Policy ReformEdit
Work With FatahEdit
Hamas is a worldwide-recognized terrorist organization, and it is questionable whether peace can be reached so long as they are in power. Fatah on the other hand may be more easily reasoned with. Peace accords were being reached between Israel and Fatah prior to Yasser Arafat's untimely death.
Redraw Territorial BoundariesEdit
Palestinian terrorists are too close to Israel's capital of Jerusalem right now and as such are able to constantly fire rockets at it. It would be like having Al Qaida camped just outside Washington D.C. It's not a good situation.
Territorial boundaries should simply be redrawn so both sides have the same amount of land to ensure a buffer zone between Israel and Palestine, particularly the Jerusalem area. Right now Palestinian territory is all split up and surrounds Jerusalem. Just relocate the Palestinian territory elsewhere so they are all in one place away from Jerusalem.
Israel could make some efforts to build goodwill in the process like ensuring some decent housing for Palestinians at their new location, adequate water treatment and food facilities/farms, education facilities, etc. A few good-faith efforts by Israel during the relocation process could go a long way towards mending bridges between the two communities.
Statehood for U.S. TerritoriesEdit
The U.S. should provide statehood to long-held U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and Guam. There should be no taxation without representation, no use and control of the land without giving the people on that land fair representation. The original U.S. colonists fought the Revolutionary War against England, per the Declaration of Independence, precisely because it wanted to tax and control them without giving them a right to representation. The U.S. cannot fairly do the same thing now to smaller countries as England once did to us.
Equal Benefits for Union and Non-Union EmployeesEdit
Unions should not be able to negotiate special perks that apply only to union employees. This is a form of workplace discrimination. In 2014, union workers averaged $970 a week compared to $763 for non-union employees, meaning they were paid 27% more than non-union employees. Furthermore, this 27% gap has consistently existed since 2001 per Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
Any benefits negotiated should apply equally to all employees at a workplace, not just to union employees; or union employees are given special treatment. Such preferential treatment for union employees flies in the face of equal pay laws, and could ultimately justify giving certain groups or even races special workplace privileges if they are over-represented in unions.
Right to WorkEdit
Employees should not be forced to fund unions, particularly since unions overwhelmingly donate Democrat with union dues, and generally don't give workers a say in how their money is spent politically. Unions donate Democrat historically, and donated 86% Democrat in 2018. Public-sector unions donate 90% Democrat historically and donated 87% Democrat historically. Furthermore, unions donate more money than any other political industry, over $174 million in 2018 alone.
Given the vast amounts of money being accumulated by unions, and the degree to which Democrats are using it to alter the political landscape, employees should not be forced to fund unions with money that will be given straight to the Democratic Party without their permission.
Union Voting on Campaign DonationsEdit
Union employees should be required to vote on whether union funds can be donated to politicians or political organizations. Right now unions can extract whatever union dues they want, in some states from non-union members, and then write blank checks to the Democratic Party without giving union members a say in the matter, or even informing them that their funds are being used to support the DNC.
Public Sector Union RestrictionsEdit
Public sector unions get paid far more than private sector union workers, because as government employees the government tends to give them whatever they want and pass the costs on to taxpayers. As such, there should be more restrictions on public sector unions than for private sector unions when it comes to, e.g. collective bargaining.
Equal Finance/Disclosure Laws as BusinessEdit
Unions should be held to the same standards in terms of campaign finance and reporting of funds that businesses are held to. Congress should pass a law mandating equal treatment of both unions and businesses when it comes to reporting requirements.
Whistleblower Protection LawsEdit
The cases of Julian Assange and Bradley Manning illustrate the need for enforcement of whistleblower protection laws. When serious government corruption is exposed, per WikiLeaks' revealing of Hillary Clinton's emails showing she colluded with CNN's Donna Brazile to steal the debate questions, whistleblowing is an act of patriotism.
Ban Illegal Activity Video GamesEdit
Violence in Games Not the ProblemEdit
Studies repeatedly show there is no link between violence and video games. This is likely because for every video game that promotes violence to promote immorality, there are probably at least as many video games promoting violence to promote morality. Depictions of violence in video games no more produce immoral behavior than one's participation in sports or the military.
Banning Games that Promote Illegal ImmoralityEdit
Video games that encourage modern-day illegal immorality should be banned. Examples include:
- Grand Theft Auto: Promotes bank robbery, prostitution, auto theft, etc.
- Jailbreak Roblox: Promotes all types of criminal behavior including bank robbery, auto theft, murder, etc.
- Standoff: Previously called Active Shooter, it simulates school shootings. Needless to say, it makes no sense to allow such a game while attempting to reduce school shootings.
Ban Movies that Glorify MassacresEdit
Movies that glorify massacres should also be banned, including the Texas Chainsaw Massacre / Leatherface films. Many of those prosecuted by Britain's Obscene Publications Act or listed on the Section 3 Video Nasties list should probably be banned for inciting violence against the public.
Distinguishing Between Terrorism and WarfareEdit
For political science purposes, a terrorist is distinguished from a guerilla in that a terrorist attacks the civilian populace/general public to spread terror, whereas a guerilla only attacks military and government targets. Thus, a distinction can be drawn between bannable movies that emphasize massacring civilians, and acceptable movies that depict violence through military warfare (e.g. Rambo). Although Rambo does show military violence against civilians, it depicts this as unacceptable, something to be opposed and fought against. By contrast, movies like Texas Chainsaw Massacre glorify and emphasize needless violence against civilians; and lack such a military element.
I have already introduced a number of my proposed solutions in legislative formats:
Legislation with multiple reforms to the judiciary including institution of 8-year term limits for federal judges including Supreme Court Justices unless federally reappointed, removing appellate courts and making jury decisions absolute, freeing those imprisoned who don't get speedy trials within 72 hours, removal of onerous fees with courts fully funded by the U.S. Treasury or state funds (e.g. filing fees, fees for jail/prison stays/probation or parole supervision/electronic monitoring devices/arrest warrants, healthcare/medication/court administration/prosecution/court-ordered drug and alcohol abuse treatment), limited jurisdiction of the courts, prohibition of plea bargaining, and the removal of qualified immunity.
A budget proposal designed to create tens of millions of jobs while reducing the long-term annual budget by hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Specifically would stop trade with low minimum wage countries like China and Mexico, restructure/simplify the tax code to reward companies that hire more U.S. workers in relation to company earnings, cut military procurement spending by having troops guard borders instead of being overseas, etc.
- NOTE-The following is now obsolete, given that I am instead recommending the use of Health Savings Accounts (see Simplified HSAs)
A minimalistic universal health care system covering basic care while leaving the private sector intact to cover more advanced niche care. Reduces costs by replacing the current Medicare/Medicaid/Obamacare system using a grant system to make hospitals provide health care directly rather than through the insurance industry while implementing voting machines in hospital lobbies so patients can vote on their experience with higher rated hospitals receiving more funding and staying in the system, thus imitating the free market. Antitrust legislation such as the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act should be enforced against immoral business such as Walmart. The current antitrust exemption to banks allowed as the result of a conflict between the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 should be removed. The government small business loan program should be improved through a randomized lottery pool.
- Zambrano, J. (2009, January). "Economic Solutions." ResearchGate.
- Zambrano, J. (2010, October 27). "The Zambrano Report." RePEc.
Zambrano, J. (2013, October). "An Analysis of the U.S. Budget and Job Market with Proposed Solutions." pp. 11-12. ResearchGate.
Zambrano, J. (2015, October). "2014 U.S. Budget Proposal." ResearchGate.
- "Congress and the Courts: Landmark Legislation." Federal Judicial Center.
- Legal Information Institute (2019). "18 U.S. Code § 2381.Treason." Cornell University.
- "Marriage and Family on the Ballot." Ballotpedia.
- "The Bill of Rights: A Transcription." National Archives.
- Penn, William (1682, May 5). "Frame of Government of Pennsylvania." Lillian Goldman Law Library. Yale University. The Avalon Project.
- Banfield, A. & Hopper, J. (2011, May 16). "Casey Anthony Trial: Jury Selection Continues." ABC News.
- "The Innocence List." Death Penalty Information Center.
- Bach, D. (2015, December 4). "UW Project Focuses on Fines and Fees that Create 'Prisoners of Debt.'" University of Washington News.
- Polantz, K. (2019, March 4). "Roger Stone's Lawyers Seek to Move Past Judge's Gag Order Concerns." CNN.
- Brokaw, S. (2019, March 2). "Gag Order: Judge Asks Roger Stone to Explain Book Release." UPI.
- Johnson, C. (2019, February 1). "Political Consultant Roger Stone Makes Uncharacteristically Silent Court Appearance." NPR.
- Farhi, I. (2017, October 24). "When Silence Isn’t Golden: How Gag Orders Can Evade First Amendment Protections." Yale Law School, Media Freedom & Information Access Clinic.
- Pianin, Eric & Boak, Josh (2013, October 7). "New Evidence that Disability Fraud Costs Billions." Fiscal Times.
- Pollin, R. & Garrett-Peltier, H. (2007, October). “The U.S. Employment Effects of Military and Domestic Spending Priorities.” pg. 5. Institute for Policy Studies. Political Economy Research Institute. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
- (2009, January 28). “A 40-Year Wish List.” The Wall Street Journal.
- Kocieniewski, D. 2011, March 24). "G.E.'s Strategies Let It Avoid Taxes Altogether." New York Times.
- Anderson, S. et. al. (2011, August 31). “Executive Excess, 2011: The Massive CEO Rewards for Tax Dodging.” Institute for Policy Studies.
- McCarthy, N. (2017, March 23). "Tax Avoidance Costs The U.S. Nearly $200 Billion Every Year." Washington Post.
- Hedegaard, H.; Minino, A.M.; & Warner, M. (2018, November). "Drug Overdose Deaths in the United States, 1999–2017." NCHS, CDC.
- Nordrum, A. (2014, September 10). "The New D.A.R.E. Program: This One Works." Scientific American.
- Selby, W.G. (2015, August 26). "Sid Miller Says Voters in Mexico Must Have a Tamper-Proof Photo ID with Hologram, Thumbprint-True." PolitiFact.
- Johnson, K. (2008, September 11). "Montana Officials Chastise Governor Over Boasts in Speech to Lawyers’ Group." New York Times.
- Contreras, R. (2018, November 1). "AP Explains: How the Native American Vote Evolved." Associated Press.
- Office of the Historian (1967, January 13). "274. Memorandum From the Deputy Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (Kohler) to Secretary of State Rusk 1." U.S. Department of State.
Hurricane Research Division (2014). "Project Stormfury." National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration.
- Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation (1977, May 18). "Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques." U.S. Department of State.
- Chen, A. (2018, January 22). "Does Cloud Seeding Really Work? An Experiment Above Idaho Suggests Humans Can Turbocharge Snowfall." Science Magazine.
- Quinton, S. (2018, February 20). "Why ‘Cloud Seeding’ is Increasingly Attractive to the Thirsty West." Pew Trusts.
- NOAA Central Library (2019). "Weather Modification Project Reports." National Oceanic & Atmosperhic Administration.
- Flows, Capital (2013, July 16). "Angry Birds? No, But Obama's Wind Energy Subsidies Have Them Very Frightened. Forbes.
Sahagun, L. (2016,September 2). "This Mojave Desert Solar Plant Kills 6,000 Birds Each Year. Here's Why That Won't Change Any Time Soon." Los Angeles Times.
Ernst, Douglas (2016, December 14). "Obama Admin Regulation Allows Wind Turbines to Kill Up to 4,200 Bald Eagles Per Company. Washington Times.
- EarthTalk (2019). "Is Harvesting Palm Oil Destroying the Rainforests?" Scientific American.
- Hinrichsen, N. (2016, April 28). "Commercially Available Alternatives to Palm Oil." Lipid Technology 28(3-4): 65–67. doi: 10.1002/lite.201600018
- Keating, D. (2019, March 4). "EU Labels Biofuel From Palm Oil As Unsustainable, Bans Subsidies." Forbes.
- Allery, T.A. (2018, August). “Solar Street Lighting: Using Renewable Energy for the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa.” Department of Energy.
- Geography Department (2018, July 2). "Early Warning Fire Detection Satellite Proposed by Berkeley Scientists." University of California, Santa Barbara.
- National Resources Conservation Service New York (2019). "Cover Crops-Keeping Soil in Place While Providing Other Benefits.” USDA.
- Nelson, C. (2014). "About the Dust Bowl." University of Illinois.
- World Bank (2019, April 3). "Remittance Flows Worldwide in 2017." Pew Research Center.
- Binkowski, B. (2018, April 13). “Does the United States Deport Military Veterans? True.” Snopes.org.
Sanchez, T. (2016, April 23). “A Mexican Immigrant Here Illegally Just Became a U.S. Citizen, Thanks to His U.S. Military Service.” Los Angeles Times.
Phillips, K. (2018, March 31). “A Deported Veteran Has Been Granted U.S. Citizenship, After 14 Years of Living in Mexico.” Washington Post.
Waldrop, T. (2018, March 26). “U.S. Army Veteran Who Served Two Tours in Afghanistan Has Been Deported to Mexico.” CNN.
Chavez, N. (2017, April 16). “CA Governor’s Pardon Could Help 3 Deported Veterans Return to the U.S.” CNN.
- Chow, K. (2018, February 9). "So What Exactly Is 'Blood Quantum'?" NPR.
N.a. (2018, January 8). "How Much Percentage of Native American Do You Have To Be To Enroll With a Tribe." PowWows.com.
- Gonzalez-Barrera, A. (2015, July 10). "‘Mestizo’ and ‘Mulatto’: Mixed-Race Identities Among U.S. Hispanics." Pew Research Center.
- Lotha, Young, Wallenfeldt, et. al. (2018, November 28). "Mexican-American War." Encyclopedia Britannica.
- Capital Flows (2017, April 11). "Mexicans Didn't Immigrate To America -- We've Always Been Here." Forbes.
- Buckby, J. (2019, June 26). "ICE Releases Chilling List of Rapists and Murderers Protected by Sanctuary Laws." Western Journal.
- Mishel, Lawrence & Scheider, Jessica (2017, July 20). "CEO Pay Remains High Relative to the Pay of Typical Workers and High-Wage Earners." Economic Policy Institute.
- Collins, Chuck; Shih, Kevin; Pizzigati, Sam; Anderson, Sarah (2010). "Executive Excess 2010: CEO Pay and the Great Recession." Institute for Policy Studies.
Collins, Chuck; Pizzigati, Sam; Anderson, Sarah; Klinger, Scott (2011). "Executive Excess 2011: The Massive CEO Rewards for Tax Dodging." Institute for Policy Studies.
Collins, Chuck; Cavanaugh, John; Pizzigati, Sam; Anderson, Sarah (2009). "Executive Excess 2009: America's Bailout Barons." Institute for Policy Studies.
Anderson, Sarah; Cavanaugh, John; Pizzigati, Sam (2008). "Executive Excess 2008: How Average Taxpayers Subsidize Runaway Pay." Institute for Policy Studies.
- "National Average Wage Index." Social Security Administration."
- Mishel, L. & Schieder, J. (2018, August 16). "CEO Compensation Surged in 2017." Economic Policy Institute.
- Luhby, T. (2015, February 24). "Want a Raise? Join a Union." CNN Business.
- Long, G.I. (2013, April). "Differences Between Union and Non-Union Compensation, 2001-2011." Bureau of Labor Statistics.
- Rodriguez, R. (2018, September 28). "Pros and Cons of Right to Work." The Balance SMB.
- Sunlight Foundation (2019). "Labor: Long-Term Contribution Trends." OpenSecrets.
- Sunlight Foundation (2019)." Public-Sector Unions: Long-Term Contribution Trends." OpenSecrets.
- DiSalvo, D. (2010, Fall). "The Trouble with Public Sector Unions." National Affairs.
- Associated Press (2019, August 8). "No Link Between Video Games and Violence, Studies Say." FOX News.
- Hollingshead, I. (2005, October 14). "Whatever Happened to the 'Video Nasties' Row?" The Guardian.
Halen, A. (2019, May 20). "List of Video Nasties -- The Nasty Films They Didn't Want You To Say." HorrorNews.Net.