American Reset: Book Three

by Mark Goodwin

  -Samuel Adams

  Paul Randall opened the door for his guests early Monday morning. Texas Governor Larry Jacobs and General Allen Jefferson attended the Coalition meeting at Paul Randall’s ranch in person. They both arrived at 7:30, well before the meeting was to begin. They joined Paul at the breakfast table where Kimberly was setting out an early morning feast.

  Larry asked, “Where is Sonny?”

  Paul replied, “He’s double-checking all of the connections and going over the security program.”

  Jefferson joked, “You better be paying Sonny well. If I ever hear that he’s looking for new opportunities, I’d be tempted to let him name his price.”

  Paul said, “I couldn’t do it without him. Besides being a great advisor and assistant, he’s one of my best friends.”

  Kimberly put the biscuits on the table and sat down with the men to eat. “Does anyone need more coffee?” she started to get back up.

  Paul stopped her. “Eat your breakfast, I’ll get up and get the coffee.”

  Paul went to retrieve the coffee. When he returned, Sonny had joined the table. Paul filled Sonny’s cup and topped off everyone else’s.

  Kimberly asked, “Paul, are you concerned that the leftist lawmakers within the Coalition States are going to take issue with our direction?”

  Paul answered, “That thought has crossed my mind. A lot of the federal level senators and congressmen stayed in D.C. Most of them have completely forgotten about their states. Howe has reassigned many of them as high-level DHS officers. The rumor is that he’s promised them some sort of magistrate positions over their own states after he wins the war. I suspect the state-level representatives on the left are expecting a similar reward for their loyalty. I doubt we’ll hear much from any of them. They’ll want to keep their distance to prove to Howe that they had no part in the secession.”

  Jefferson asked, “Larry, did you reach out to the state-level Democrats in Texas?”

  Larry answered, “I did, but it was like Paul said. None of them responded to me. And to my knowledge, all but three of Texas’s federal lawmakers stayed in D.C.”

  Sonny added, “And we won’t have to worry about most of the neo-cons, either. They either stayed in D.C. to suck up to Howe like Juan Marcos of California or they’ve been disappeared by the administration.”

  The men finished their breakfast, then retired to Paul Randall’s subterranean bunker which had a huge conference room the men had nicknamed the War Room.

  The connections were established and Randall began the conference. “Gentlemen, thank you all for taking time to attend the conference today. I would like to express special appreciation to Pastor John Robinson. He is joining us via teleconference from Governor Goldwater’s residence in Idaho.”

  Pastor John said, “Thank you, Senator Randall. I am truly honored and humbled by your invitation.”

  Randall continued, “Men, I’ll go over my notes for your consideration as expeditiously as possible. After that, we’ll allot a brief period for each governor to address any personal concerns or issues from their state legislatures. We’ll take a one-hour break for lunch, then we’ll finish the day. Let’s remember to keep the discussions on topic. We don’t want to get bogged down in the details today. Remember, this is just a glorified brainstorming session and not a constitutional convention. We’ll take the topics from today back to our state legislatures for their consideration. Then, we’ll come back and debate each topic in detail for as long as it takes to come up with solid proposals for the states to vote on.

  “I’ve already spoken with many of you about adding words or language to amendments and possibly stripping some amendments completely. Article Five of the Constitution tells us that we may propose new amendments through a two-thirds vote from both houses and ratify them through the approval of three-fourths of the state legislatures. There is no process described for changing language. We may need to pass an amendment to allow us to do this, or as in the case of the Twenty-First Amendment which repealed prohibition, we’ll simply pass a new amendment to repeal or replace the amendment in question.

  “While we are the legitimate government of the United States and the other states are actually those in rebellion to the Constitution, I would appreciate it if some of you historians and legal scholars would consider a formal declaration that will enumerate the states of the Coalition. I think that will help to solidify the legality of the actions we take here over the next several weeks.

  “I suppose one of the issues that has been nearest and dearest to my heart throughout my time in Washington, and is the primary injustice that motivated me to get involved in politics in the first place is abortion. I don’t think we can claim to have a free society when we do not protect the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for every American. I think most of you have heard my father’s account of his experience in med school. He witnessed an aborted fetus being stuck in a bucket. The baby was crying and fighting for life. The physician and staff performing the abortion simply ignored the crying until it stopped. While the left may argue that life doesn’t begin at conception, they are never able to give a hard and fast time when life begins. Since they cannot pinpoint when life begins, they can’t say for certain that life doesn’t begin at conception. I think it is our duty to establish a personhood law that bestows citizenship and all the rights of a US citizen on the unborn human at conception.”

  Mickey Abrams interjected, “Don’t you think that could open the door for would-be immigrants to conceive children while on vacation in the US for the purpose of gaining citizenship?”

  Randall said, “That may be possible, Mickey, but right now, we are in the middle of a civil war and an economic collapse. There are more people fleeing the US to Canada and even Mexico than trying to sneak in. The days of folks flocking to the states because it’s the land of opportunity are far behind us. While I hope to regain those days, if they do return, they will be in the distant future. Besides, if people want to immigrate to America or the Coalition, it will be because they want the opportunity to work in a free market system and contribute. Without the welfare state, there will be no more people coming here for a free ride.”

  Kentucky Governor Harvey Simmons said, “I’m all for letting people come to America who want to work hard, but even hard workers bring their culture and religion which often don’t coexist well with ours. The next thing you know, they outnumber us and they start writing the rules to fit their culture.”

  Randall sat silent for a moment. He finally said, “You’re right, Harvey. We’re going to have to decide how open we want our borders to be. We’re going to have to figure out if we want a picket fence or a twenty-foot wall. I guess this will be a discussion we’ll have to examine in-depth over the course of several days or maybe even weeks.

  “To go back to the point I touched on earlier, I think welfare is something we can all agree on. I would like to have a specific statement prohibiting the Federal government from being involved in welfare at any level. My recommendation would be for the individual states to have similar language on their books, but that will be up to the individual state. Before the government got involved in welfare, the church and individual communities did a fine job of taking care of the less fortunate. They had compassion on the needy, but no tolerance for freeloaders. When the government stepped in, we made a mess of it all.”

  Most everyone made a small gesture acknowledging their agreement on the subject of a ban on federal welfare programs.

  Randall continued, “Along those same lines, I think we can say the same for socialized medicine, socialized retirement programs and federal education programs.”

  North Carolina Governor Ronald Taylor said, “I would agree with banning federal agencies from being involved in education, but I don’t know about that at the state level. I think schools could be a public good that everyone can benefit from. I rather like not living around a bunch of idiots.”

  Samuel Richards of Te
nnessee jumped in. “I think private corporations, churches and even community groups could provide a better school system than state governments. Government schools have done a better job of churning out idiots than if they’d been left in their natural state. At least the ignorant child is a blank slate who can be taught. The products of the public education systems often have to be stripped of all the nonsense they get through Common Core before they can be taught anything of value. It is worse than ignorance.”

  Randall said, “The education debate is a healthy disagreement. I know I made a recommendation for states to ban government welfare programs, but in the end, it will be up to the individual state. Let’s keep in mind that we’re not here to dictate to the states. Our purpose is only to place strict limitations on the size and scope of the Federal Government. When it comes to education and roads, what may work for North Dakota may not work for South Dakota. I think our founding fathers, especially the anti-federalists who we’ll be looking to for guidance through this process, intended for each state to be its own individual experiment in freedom.

  “Another thing I think we can all agree on is banning a central bank. We just witnessed a tectonic failure from allowing a private central bank to manipulate interest rates and the money supply. The Federal Reserve was the institution that enabled all of the bad behavior of the Federal Government. Everything from an overstretched military to insane levels of welfare spending which enslaves and buys votes from the poor was facilitated by this evil beast.”

  Wyoming Governor Jacob Schmidt asked, “And what about Federal debt? Should we ban borrowing?”

  South Carolina’s Governor Hayden said, “If we don’t outright ban a national debt, we should at least restrict it to a manageable level. We should also enumerate the types of things that could be purchased through debt. In my personal life, I had no problem taking on debt for an asset that produced income or some other benefit such as shelter, but I never took on consumer debt to go out to eat or go on vacation.”

  “Good point,” Randall acknowledged.

  Sonny Foster spoke. “Paul, you wanted me to remind you about the amendments to the Constitution.”

  Randall said, “Yes, thanks, Sonny. I think we should look at each individual amendment and determine if it stays or if we need to throw it out or revise it. We have a divine opportunity, men. I pray our nation will never have to go through this again. Let’s do this right. Let’s start with the first ten. Does anyone have any issues with the Bill of Rights?”

  Montana Governor Mark Shea spoke. “I don’t think any of us would disagree that the Bill of Rights should be left intact. My only issue with the Bill of Rights is that the language doesn’t go far enough. Many of those same principles that were listed in the Articles of Confederation had much more evident language of the intentions. I would support additional language that would clarify and safeguard those rights. We may also need to consider a separate piece of legislation that declares attempts to circumvent those rights as treason. I think a noose makes a fine deterrent against tampering with the Bill of Rights.

  “The Second Amendment is a perfect example. I don’t know how it could be made any clearer. It reads, ‘A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ What else can you add to that to tell lawmakers not to infringe on the rights of the citizen? I think the only thing you can do is put teeth to it by imposing swift and harsh punishments. I’m sure if Senator Dena Fitch thought her life would be in jeopardy, she’d never have considered her legislation that sought to nullify the Second Amendment. Since there were no consequences, she and many like her have had nothing to lose.

  “I would recommend a blanket bill that would cover the entire Bill of Rights. That would put the fear of man, if not the fear of God into lawmakers who sought to trample on the Second, Fourth or any other amendment in the Bill of Rights. If these enemies of freedom thought their neck was the one that might be stretched out, we would have never seen the Patriot Act, the 2012 NDAA Indefinite Detention Clause, Prism or many of the other gross violations that have been pushed through because Congress and the executive branch have had no consequences for their treasonous behavior. That does not represent the rule of law nor the society our forefathers fought and died for.”

  Applause broke out amongst everyone attending the conference. When the clapping finally began to die down, Randall said, “It sounds like everyone is in agreement with you, Mark. I’d like to appoint you to put together a committee that will draft a bill to safeguard our Bill of Rights through swift punishments for lawmakers who seek to violate the first ten amendments through legislation. I’m not sure how I feel about capital punishment at the federal level. Life-long prison sentences may be an adequate deterrent. I think capital punishment should be up to the individual states for their own laws, but I have some reservations at the federal level. I think this might be a good issue for us to hear from Pastor Robinson.”

  John Robinson said, “Thank you, Senator. Capital punishment is biblical. In the Old Testament, the book of Leviticus lays out several crimes which are punishable by death. On the other hand, in the New Testament, we see Jesus grant mercy to the woman caught in adultery. I think there were other things going on in that story. The Pharisees who were asking Jesus if they should stone the woman were trying to get him in trouble with the Roman authorities which did not permit the Jews to execute anyone. I suppose, from a biblical standpoint, you could take either side. I think for crimes like murder and rape, execution makes a good disincentive for the criminal. I suppose you could argue the same for treason.

  “It is certainly something that should be very well spelled out in the law. We should remember, we even had proponents of freedom like Glenn Beck calling for the execution of Julian Assange many years ago. I’ll admit the work done by WikiLeaks was a grey area between letting the people of the United States know the atrocities being committed by their own government and releasing government secrets. Many conservative pundits and lawmakers called for the execution of Edward Snowden even though he was the only one willing to stand up and tell America about their Fourth Amendment violations. On the contrary, National Intelligence Director James Clapper lied about the same subject, under oath, which is obviously a crime, yet faced no charges whatsoever.

  “Another issue is that the courts favor the rich. If one has the means, like OJ Simpson, he is unlikely to be convicted even if he did commit the crime. On the other hand, a poor man who did nothing wrong can easily be convicted by an overzealous district attorney looking to make a name for himself. It’s a double-edged sword. And it’s a question that I can’t give you a quick, easy answer for.”

  Paul Randall said, “You’ve certainly given us some things to consider while coming up with the penalties for treason. Thank you, Pastor.”

  Robinson added, “If I may add one other thing.”

  “Absolutely, go right ahead,” Randall replied.

  John Robinson stated, “I’d like to read some comments written regarding the First Amendment and the Constitution written in 1833 by Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story.

  ‘Probably at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.’

  “By failing to include such language and assuming all subsequent generations would see America as a Christian nation, our founders left a crack for the enemies of God to work their black magic against our heritage. The leftists, atheists and non-Christians have fought everything from prayer and Bibles in school to disallowing nativity scenes in public spaces and gov
ernment buildings. I think now that we are all Christians…”

  Mickey Abrams of North Dakota interjected, “And Jews.”

  Robinson continued, “I apologize, Governor Abrams and Governor Goldwater. And Jews.”

  Terry Goldwater of Idaho said, “I’m a Messianic Jew, Pastor. I am a Christian. But please continue.”

  Robinson said, “Since we are all Christians and Jews, perhaps we should try to find a means of including Justice Story’s description of our founders’ intentions into the First Amendment. Something that states that the government ought to encourage Christianity, which finds its roots in Judaism.”

  Abrams spoke out. “I’m not particularly comfortable with that. My people have had some pretty hard times throughout the ages. Any language I would support would have to expressly include Judaism. This is the problem with bringing clergy into the legislative process. I appreciate that many of our founders were Christians, but I think the First Amendment is fine just the way it is. Once we go down that path, then some Evangelicals don’t consider Mormons or even Catholics as Christians.”

  Randall nodded. “Mickey, could you support language that stayed very vague, but stated that the state encouraged the worship of Jehovah? That pretty much covers us all but keeps the atheists from telling us we can’t have a nativity scene.”

  Mickey Abrams said, “Or a menorah. I could support that.”

  Larry Jacobs added, “I like that idea. There has been a lot of fear that the First Amendment would be used as a back door for radical Muslim groups to try to institute Sharia law in their states or municipalities. I don’t have any problem with other folks worshiping whoever they want, but I’ll tell you that there is no Muslim country on Earth where Christians are free to worship and proselytize and Muslims are free to convert. I don’t want to sound phobic, but that fact is evidence that it’s something we have to safeguard against.”