On the Primary Election Process

People often say that, in a democracy, decisions are made by a majority of the people.  Of course, that is not true.  Decisions are made by a majority of those who make themselves heard and who vote - a very different thing.  - Walter H. Judd

A citizen of America will cross the ocean to fight for democracy, but won't cross the street to vote in a national election.  - Bill Vaughan

As you very well may know, the "primary" election process is underway for the Republican party*, beginning with the Iowa Caucus last week. If you have watched more than 30 seconds of national media coverage, you know that the candidates polling at 1% or higher nationally have been undergoing a long series of debates and those candidates have been working their way around the "key" states over the past couple of months in attempt to woo voters to their campaign. For example, in preparation for the Iowa Caucus, Rick Santorum campaigned in all 99 counties of Iowa which arguably catapulted him into a second place finish (by 8 votes). This fight for the nomination will continue throughout mid-summer; however, it is likely that by the end of January there will be a clear frontrunner in the election. How? Well the way the schedule of primaries and caucuses is laid out, the candidate will be voted upon in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida all by the end of January. Historically, these states (and the combination thereof) let the rest of the country know who really has a dog in this fight. Let's look at some historic results to get a better idea. 

Iowa: The Iowa Caucus has been the first stop on the election train since 1972, and its role on the national stage has only gained greater momentum - a role that Iowans take very seriously. The first place finisher for the Democrats in Iowa (when there hasn't been a Democratic President running unopposed) has gone on to be the actual Democratic nominee 5 out of the last 9 times. Twice, with Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama, the first place finisher in Iowa has gone on to become President (however, a guy named Bill Clinton finished 3rd in Iowa in 1992 with only 3% of the votes). Likewise, Iowans have "chosen" the Republican nominee 3 out of 6 times (when there wasn't a Republican President running unopposed) and twice, with Gerald Ford and George W. Bush, the first place finisher in Iowa has gone on to become President. Since 1972, no candidate has finished worse than 3rd place in the Iowa and gone on to win the Democratic or Republican nomination. Just for fun here are the results from the Iowa Caucus in 2008 and 2012: 

(Eventual nominee: Barack Obama)

(Eventual nominee: John McCain) 

(2012)

New Hampshire: The New Hampshire primary will take place on January 10th (look for the New Hampshire debate TONIGHT at 9 pm ET on ABC) and has taken place every 4 years since 1952. The New Hampshire primary is the first primary (after all Iowa is a caucus) and therefore receives massive media attention, but the voters of New Hampshire are not historically known for choosing a candidate. That being said, after New Hampshire if the candidates have not had a decent (4th place or better) showing in either New Hampshire or Iowa, it is likely that they will then drop out of the race before reaching South Carolina. 

South Carolina: The South Carolina primary takes place this year on January 21st and is has taken place since 1980. In 2008, the South Carolina primary solidified itself as "First in the South", designed to throw a curve ball in the candidates gaining momentum in Iowa and New Hampshire. Unlike Iowa and New Hampshire, the Republican candidate who wins South Carolina has gone on to win the Republican nomination in every election since 1980. The first place Democratic candidate (when there wasn't a Democratic President running unopposed) has gone on to win the nomination 3 out of 5 times. Needless to say, when the Republican candidates start heading south next week they are going to be serious about winning over the voters of South Carolina (myself included). 

Florida: The Florida primary will take place on January 31st, this year moving up by over a month (which caused some serious election scheduling chaos earlier this fall) to become one of the lead states in the primary election process. Florida, in the general election, is considered one of a few major swing states  and it's role on the national election stage has always been prominent. You may remember the infamous "recount" of 2000, when the votes were so close between Al Gore and George W. Bush that the results were dragged out for weeks with George W. Bush eventually being the declared winner of Florida. By the time candidates leave Florida, a Republican frontrunner or two will most likely be carved out. 

Time out - I need to tell you briefly about the different election processes held in each state. 

Open Primary: Voters may vote in the primary election regardless of their registered voter affiliation - meaning Democrats can vote in the Republican primary and vice versa. Obviously, the disadvantage to this process is that Republican voters may intentionally try to sabotage a Democratic election by voting for the most unlikely candidate, for example. However, this process works well for those who consider themselves "Independent" and may not want to be confined to one party or another. Otherwise the primary is a pretty typical voting scenario - voter shows up to a designated voting location, casts their vote for a particular candidate, and gets a shiny new sticker to wear around town.

Closed Primary: Voters receive ballots based on their registered political affiliation - Democrats receive Democratic ballots, Republicans receive Republican ballots, and so forth. 

Semi-Closed Primary: Voters receive ballots according to their political affiliation unless they are registered Independents, in which case they will receive a ballot of their choosing. 

(To see which kind of primary election your state has please click HERE.) 

Caucus: A caucus is essentially a meeting between voters of the same party, voting in the same precinct. At the caucus, voters discuss the candidates and place their votes. The main difference between a caucus and a primary is that voters publicly discuss candidates and try to persuade other voters before casting a vote whereas in a primary this process is considered a more private matter. Since Democrats and Republicans caucuses have slight differences in the way they are held, I've attached a video that makes it much easier to understand: the caucus explained.

Ok, we're back. 

The primary process will continue, state by state until later this summer. March 6, 2012 has been scheduled as "Super Tuesday" where 10 different states hold election on the same day. So where does this big surge of election coverage leave the other remaining states? Unfortunately, by the time our candidates see the Utah primary on June 26th, they will likely have already made the backdrop for the Republican National Convention if you know what I'm saying. I didn't make the rules ok? I'm just relaying the facts. This election year, the Republican nominee will then go on to run against Obama and potentially a candidate running as an Independent (whether this happens or not is yet to be determined). The general election is kicked off in late summer with the Republican National Convention the week of August 27, 2012 and the Democratic National Convention the week of September 3, 2012. By this time, both candidates will have named their Vice Presidential candidate (Obama is certainly allowed to choose a new VP should he see fit) and will come prepared with hour long speeches to bash the other party get us pumped up about America. Pretty standard, right? 

This democratic process is sacred to voters in America. The fact that we will spend months deciding on "our guy" through debates, town hall meetings, campaign rallies, and the like is something for which we should all be grateful. Take time today to compare and review the candidates, check the time and place of the election in your state, and perhaps most importantly, make sure you are registered to vote! 

Join the Club,

Chelsea

*Although both Republicans and Democrats go through this process, I will be focusing on the Republican party in this post due to the fact the Democrats have the incumbent president who will, without a doubt, be the Democratic party's nominee for the 2012 General Election. 

Source: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/events.phtml?s=c, http://www.uiowa.edu/election/history/index.html, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/how-often-does-iowa-get-it-right-in-the-us-presidential-race/article2289753/, http://www.270towin.com/states/, http://www.fairvote.org/congressional-and-presidential-primaries-open-closed-semi-closed-and-top-two#.Twh3bSNWqqo

On the Legislative Branch

It is the duty of the President to propose and it is the privilege of the Congress to dispose. – Franklin D. Roosevelt 
I have wondered at times what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through the US Congress. – Ronald Reagan 

When I think about topics for this blog, I try to remember that most people reading may not know the basics of how our government operates. I know that many people may avoid reading or watching the news because they just don’t know where to start and what it all means. Well, in order to help with some of that, I have decided to go Government 101 on all of you today and talk about how bills are passed in Congress. Snooze right? Well, hopefully not. Hopefully you will see that this is one of the most important processes our government has in place. Because of this process, we are able to avoid any form of government monopoly through a series of checks and balances. It is also important to remember that a President’s reputation in office can have a whole lot to do with his Congress. Without a doubt, Presidents throughout history have been labeled as heroes or failures based on the hidden performances of their Congress. Let’s take a look at this process and why it matters to you.

First of all, you may remember that the Senate is made up of 100 members, two from each state, which are voted on by members of the state as a whole. The House of Representatives is made up of 435 members, each representing specific districts within each state. The number of House members each state acquires during an election period is based on population numbers (i.e California has 53 representatives while Tennessee has only 9). Senate members are theoretically supposed to make legislative decisions with their entire country in mind, while House members note how decisions will impact their local district. This is why the House of Representatives typically examine and pass laws in a shorter period of time than the Senate, and why the Senate is known for voting down a law that was easily pushed through the House. House members are elected every two years, therefore they are always on the campaign trail and are in a better position to keep a close relationship with the voters in their home district. Senators, however, are elected every six years (which rotates by seat so that not all Senate members are voted out/in at the same time) and are in a better position to make long-term decisions that would impact the direction of the country as a whole. Members must be 25 years old to run for the House of Representatives and 30 years old to run for the Senate.

Ok, stick with me while we take a quick look at how bills are passed.

1. A bill can be submitted or proposed to Congress by individual members, group members, by the states, or by the President himself. Bills can begin the process in either house (meaning the House of Representatives or the Senate) of Congress, but bills proposing raising revenue must begin in the House of Representatives. 
2. Each house of Congress is divided into committees based on specialties that represent key issues such as Armed Forces, Intelligence, and Finance, and can be further divided into more specific categories relating to each key issue from there. Each member of the House or Senate serves on multiple committees, and are often chairmen of multiple committees according to their specific area of expertise. If a bill is proposed that falls into one of these sub-categories, then the sub-committee proceeds to testify on the bill and determine whether the bill is necessary. If the sub-committee determines that it is necessary then it will be pushed to the full committee, then the full committee will vote on it. If it is determined that the bill not go to the full committee, then the bill dies and is not pushed further along through the process of having the entire House (aka the Committee of the Whole) vote on it. 
3. If it is presented to the entire house of Congress, the bill is read aloud, debated upon, possibly amended, and then voted on by each member. In order for this type of official business to take place, there must be a majority of house members present, which is known as a quorum. Then, for example, if a bill is passed in the Senate, it will be sent on to the House for a vote. If at this point, the House decides to amend parts of the bill, then it will be sent back to the Senate for another vote. This is one of many reasons why it can take months to push a bill through Congress.
4. If a bill passes both houses of Congress with a majority vote, (51 in the Senate and 218 in the House) the bill is passed along to the President and he can sign it into law or veto the bill. If the bill is vetoed (rejected) by the President it is sent back to Congress for more adjustments. 
5. If the bill is voted on by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate it can pass into law without the approval of the President. If the President takes no action and ten business days pass, the bill becomes a law without the President’s signature; however, if Congress has adjourned before those ten days are up, the bill fails to become a law (this is known as a pocket veto). 

(I don't know about you, but I'm exhausted just reading about it.)

Currently, our legislative branch is distributed as follows:

Senate Leaders: 

• President of the Senate: Joe Biden (the Vice President always operates in this position) 
• Majority Leader: Harry Reid (D-NV) 
• Minority Leader: Mitch McConnell (R-KY) 

House Leaders:

• Speaker of the House: John Boehner (R-OH) (voted on by the whole of the House of Representatives)  
• Majority Leader: Eric Cantor (R-VA)
• Minority Leader: Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) 

As you can see, by the nature of how bills are passed in this country, political parties gain serious advantage when they can control one or both houses of Congress. It is not uncommon for a Democratic President to have a Republican Congress and vice versa which can cause confusion when political praises or criticisms get thrown about during a president’s term in office. Also, such as in the case in 2010, it is Congressional elections are often a benchmark used to analyze voters approval ratings for the President. If you are a serious voter (and you should be) it is important to know who your Senators and Representatives are locally. Just like the President represents our country to the rest of the world, your Senators and Representatives represent you and your neighbors up in Washington. If you don't like what they stand for or how they vote, which is public record, it is your job to contact them and let them know and/or vote them out as soon as possible. Also, you can keep up with bills being proposed in Congress HERE. Alright, I did my part, you do yours.

Join the club,

Chelsea



*For those that don't know, "GOP" stands for Grand Old Party and is a colloquial name for the Republican Party.

Source: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_law.html http://artandhistory.house.gov/house_history/partydiv.aspx http://www.congresslink.org/print_basics_lawsmade.htm http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/2010_elections_senate_map_final_results.html

On Term Limits

"Elections, especially of representatives and counselors, should be annual … These great men … should be [chosen] once a year …This will teach them the great political virtues of humility, patience, and moderation, without which every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey." - John Adams

Amendment XXII: No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once…

Before this amendment there was no law preventing those elected for the office of the President from running for more than two terms. Actually, it was only a matter of custom to have limited terms as president, dating all the way back to the election of 1800. It was before that election that George Washington announced that he would not be running for a third term, humbly stepping down even though he was still widely popular and would have likely been re-elected. People have long discussed what a pivotal move this was in the setting up what we now know as “term limits”. As you may know, the only president of the United States to serve longer than eight years in office was Franklin D. Roosevelt (serving a total of 12 years from 1933-1945, elected for four terms). Long before FDR, citizens had feared the idea of America ever turning into a monarchy (see: why we left England), but it was his break from the original custom that caused Congress to move into action and limit the number of terms the President may serve.  In 1951, the 22^nd amendment to the Constitution was ratified.

As far as the U.S. Congress goes, we do not officially have any laws for term limits on the books. To date, there are almost 100 congressmen to have served in the U.S Senate or House of Representatives for more than 36 years - the longest serving congressmen being Robert Byrd, who served for just over 57 years. Fun fact: Robert Byrd was elected into office months before Queen Elizabeth’s coronation in 1953 (dude was in office for a long time) and only left congress after he died of natural causes at age 92.

I’m not out to pick on Robert Byrd in particular, and I do acknowledge that serving in the U.S. Congress is likely the result of following a life-long passion and desire to serve your country through public office. Indeed, it is a noble thing to do and I do not discredit that. There are many who believe that if someone is electable and willing to run for office, it should be their right to do so. Well, maybe it is, and maybe they’re right.

However, let’s take a step back and look at this from another point of view shall we? For one, being elected for any public office when you are the incumbent (meaning you presently hold that office, such as Obama right now), you have many advantages just by default that will make you “electable”. Let’s take a look at a local example. Here in good ol’ Charleston, SC we have had the same mayor since 1975. He has served nine terms and half of the town’s streets and buildings are named after him. Has he done a good job as mayor? Sure he has, but do you think that the candidates who have run against him throughout the years have even had a shot at winning that office? For one Mr. Joe Riley has quite a well-known name in this town and as a mayor for over 35 years he has built some pretty good local connections. Not to mention, he probably does quite a few speaking engagements around town where he gets to know the locals and do a little fundraising to boot. You get what I’m saying - If a regular old Charlestonian shows up to vote with the choice between Joe Riley and John Doe, who do you think they’re going to pick? Unless the city is under water, they’re probably going with the incumbent. Chances are you can think of an elected official in your local or state governments where this same concept applies.

Let’s look at some arguments for term limits:

• Some argue that any politician that is eligible for re-election tends to allow this to play a large role in the way they perform as a elected official, operating to get more votes, rather than focusing on current issues.
• Limited terms would force competition, fresh thinking, and new ideas across the board. 
• Drives out career politicians – leveling the playing field among all congressmen.
• Encourages more voter participation in elections at the local, state, and federal levels.

Arguments against term limits:

• This is a democracy; if the people’s majority vote for someone, that someone deserves the position.
• It could possibly lead to potentially a less experienced and knowledgeable Congress as a whole.
• It would get rid of good, well-meaning politicians (wait, does that exist?) along with the “bad”.
• There is already high turnover in Congress.

Say what you want about the first three, but here are the re-election statistics for congress since 1964:

 

As you can see, a large percentage of incumbent congressmen are being re-elected for long periods of time.  However, as it stands right now, 15 states have voted to place term limits on their state legislatures (anywhere from 6-12 years), 37 states have voted to place term limits on their Governor and other elected officials, and 9 of the 10 largest cities in America have placed term limits on their city council and/or mayor.  So why isn’t this issue being brought to the national scale? For one, this would involve the passing of new amendments for constitutions at the state and federal level – which alone is a long and arduous process. Also, and perhaps most importantly, our elected officials are the ones who write and pass bills into law. Why would they vote to eliminate their own jobs? The very idea of this ever happening may be quite a long shot. However, Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) is proposing an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would allow for 3 terms in the House and 2 terms in the Senate. If you are interested in finding out more about the amendment, please click HERE.

For some of you, this may be a topic you have never really considered before; however, for others I know that this is likely a topic you feel very passionately about, regardless of which side of the argument you land on. Do you believe that having a lack of term limits in Congress contributes to failures in government or do you feel that placing term limits on Congress is unconstitutional and it should remain that way? Please feel free to leave me comments or questions on this topic. 

Join the club,

Chelsea

Source: http://www.termlimits.org/, http://www.opensecrets.org/bigpicture/reelect.php, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1994/08/bg994nbsp-term-limitsnbsp-the-only-way

On the "Super-Committee"

If you haven’t been paying attention over the past few months, the words “super-committee” might sound like something out of a comic book. In reality the super-committee is a select group of our Congress that is about to have a major impact on the future of your tax dollars, and perhaps on a larger scale, the future of this country. This committee was selected only days after Congress voted to “raise the debt ceiling” to avoid the possibility of default back in August (arguably to prevent a greater financial crisis). As you may remember, we have some serious debt in this country, and as of TODAY we will pass the $15 trillion mark (which is roughly 100% of our annual Gross Domestic Product).

FYI: Foreign countries own $4.6 trillion of our national debt, with China owning the largest percentage.

Yikes.

Well, due to this crisis (and yes, it is a crisis) it was determined that a select group of men and women in Congress would specifically be tasked to find a way to reduce our federal budget by $1.5 trillion over the next ten years. This will be done with either budget cuts or tax increases, but likely a combination of both. The super-committee is made up of six senators and six representatives, split right down the middle between Democrats and Republicans. The house and senate majority and minority leaders (John Boehner, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Mitch McConnell) carefully selected each member, and if you don’t think there is political gain involved in this selection, well, you’re just a little too trusting of our politicians. Here is a list of these committee members:

From the House of Representatives:

• Jim Clyburn (SC-D): Assistant Democratic Leader in the House of Representatives
• Chris Van Hollen (MD-R): Ranking member on the House Budget Committee
• Xavier Becerra (CA-D): Democratic Caucus Vice-Chairman in the House
• Jeb Hensarling (TX-R): Republican Conference Chairman in the House of Representatives
• Dave Camp (MI-R): Chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means
• Fred Upton (MI-R): Chairman of the House Committee on Energy & Commerce

From the Senate:

• Patty Murray (WA-D): Chairperson of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs
• John Kerry (MA-D): Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
• Max Baucus (MT-D): Chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance
• John Kyl (AZ-R): Senate Minority Whip
• Pat Toomey (PA-R): Member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus
• Rob Portman (OH-R): Member of the Congressional Serbian American Caucus

FYI: Jim Clyburn is the only African American, Patty Murray is the only female, Michigan is the only state represented more than once, all three Democratic Senate members are senior senators, while all three of the Republican Senate members are junior Senators, none of the Senate members are up for re-election in 2012

Each party’s super-committee members, as expected, are pretty unwilling to compromise on key issues. Imagine two groups with huge opposition towards each other’s viewpoints coming to an agreement, not easy right? After all, sticking by your party’s platform means a heck of a lot during an election year. The Republicans stand by not wanting to raise taxes or slash defense spending, while the Democrats refuse to make cuts on entitlement programs with the biggest cuts for Medicare and smaller cuts affecting Medicaid, food stamps and Social Security.

The super-committee has until November 23 to come to an agreement. If they do come to an agreement, Congress will then vote on the plan by December 23. Congress will not be allowed to make filibusters or any amendments to the bill. If they fail to reach an agreement or fail to have the plan approved by Congress and President Obama, we will be looking at $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts taking affect in 2013 (perfectly timed to take place two months after the election – standard political move). If automatic cuts take affect, one half of $1.2 trillion will come from defense spending and the other half will come from social programs (this comes out to approximately $54.7 billion from each per year until 2021). This was designed to force each party to come to an agreement so as to not risk major cuts in their own favored programs.

Possible outcomes:

1. The super-committee does not come to an agreement. This leads to automatic $1.2 trillion in cuts, half from defense spending, and half from social programs. A lack of agreement by the super-committee would lead to further loss in confidence of our government by the American people, not to mention world markets. It is possible that a lack of agreement could lead to a downgrading in the credit rating of the United States (this is a huge deal).
2. The super-committee comes to an agreement, with each party making major compromises. This would mean the Republicans would likely agree to raise tax rates, while the Democrats would agree to huge cuts in entitlement programs. This compromise could either meet the $1.5 trillion exactly, or surge past it to make even bigger budget cuts. This would likely lead to a surge in American confidence as well as world markets (hate to break it to you, but most are thinking this is an unlikely scenario).
3. The super-committee agrees to make some cuts, perhaps more like $500 billion, both parties refusing to give up on major party platforms, but compromising on “lesser” issues. This would lead to fewer automatic cuts, but again would likely cause Americans to lose confidence in our political process.

Let's face it, that’s a lot more number crunching than you were hoping to do today, but I felt compelled to let each of you know what is happening this week. It is important to understand that we’re not in a place to be making small cuts; we need BIG changes to our budget in order to start putting a dent in our debt situation. Hopefully in reading this you realize that even in the best case scenario of cutting $1.5 trillion from our budget over 10 years, is simply not enough with a current deficit of $15 trillion. If we want to hold onto our belief that we are the leaders of the free world, we need to start acting like it. Here’s hoping our Congress will step up to the plate our behalf. By next Wednesday, we will know whether or not the super-committee was able to come to an agreement. Hold on to your hats people, it’s about to get [even more] tense around here.

Join the club,

Chelsea

Source: http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-orlando/all-12-super-committee-members-have-been-chosen-so-who-are-they, https://www.wealthmanagementinsights.com/userdocs/pubs/QMU_The_Super_Committee_11_14_11_IFS_FINAL_TAGGED.pdf, http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3557

On The Bill of Rights

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” – Preamble to the Constitution of the United States

"[A] bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse." -- Thomas Jefferson December 20, 1787 

Chances are, if you passed your third grade social studies class, you know that the Bill of Rights constitutes the first ten amendments added to the U.S. Constitution. If you had to, you could probably name 3-4 off the top of your head and the rest might be a little fuzzy. You may or may not have realized that these amendments were not included in the original document. The Constitution was drafted in 1787 (no, not 1776) and was written in collaboration by 55 representatives from each of the 13 colonies.

In order for each of the states to agree to ratify the Constitution, a few adjustments were made. Thus far, the document had only stated what the Federal Government was allowed to do, and our good ol’ representatives realized we citizens needed a bit of individual self-protection. In 1789, the First Federal Congress proposed twelve amendments to the Constitution, the first two of which were not ratified. It took over four years for the document to be finalized – Federalists believed the document was unnecessary, while Anti-Federalists feared that without it, we would end up with too strong a centralized government*. After all, many of the reasons we separated ourselves from England are related to an overreach of government. There are currently 27 amendments to our Constitution; let’s look at the first ten amendments in layman’s terms in order to better understand the foundation of our individual liberties.

Amendment I: 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.

• Freedom of speech is protected except in the case of “hate speech” (expressing hatred of a specific group based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation etc which is likely to provoke violence) and most cases of slander.
• The government doesn’t have the right to establish an official religion (can you say Church of England?), prohibit the practice of any religion, or interfere with religion unless it deprives citizens of life, liberty, or property.
• The press is protected except in cases of libel (aka slander) and in cases where national security has been or could have been compromised.
• Citizens are always allowed to petition the Federal Government on any issue, without exception.
• Peaceful assembly (aka protest) is protected, but acts of violence or public disruptions are not.

Amendment II: 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.

• Typically this is understood to mean that each individual has the right to own guns, which cannot be regulated by the Federal Government without due process of law.
• Some argue that this is specifically related to the rights of state militias rather than individual rights.

Amendment III: No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

• Citizens are not required to provide room and board to troops on their own private property.

Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

• The government cannot conduct unreasonable search and seizure of our homes, bodies, or property without a valid search and/or arrest warrant and probable cause (good reason).

Amendment V: 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 offense 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.

• Citizens cannot be denied life, liberty, or property without trial in the court of law.
• Every citizen charged with a felony must be indicted by a Grand Jury before being tried for the crime, with exception to crimes committed by military members while on active duty (these are tried in a court system specific to military-related crimes).
• Citizens cannot be forced to testify against themselves, often known as “pleading the fifth”
• No person can be tried for the same crime twice when they have already been found not guilty for that crime.
• Your private property cannot be taken from you for public use, unless you are provided compensation and justification for that property.

Amendment VI: 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 defense.

• All citizens are given a speedy trial by jury (which is to be selected in a way that reduces bias)
• Those charged with a crime have the right to confront and cross examine those who bear witness against them
• All citizens have a right to receive legal counsel (regardless of whether they can afford it or not)

Amendment VII: 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 reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

• Those involved in federal civil lawsuits involving more than twenty dollars are to be given trial by jury.

Amendment VIII: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

• Prohibits excessive bail and/or fines for the accused
• Guarantees fair punishment and prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment” (which is why the death penalty is always heavily under debate)

Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

• Meaning that rights that are not specifically mentioned by the Constitution do exist, and that citizens can violate rights that are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

• Powers and liberties not specifically given to the Federal Government are reserved for the states or the people.

I am aware that reading through legal jargon can be confusing, tedious, and well, down-right boring. In addition, I think we can all agree that there are some of these laws that feel a little outdated - quartered any soldiers lately? Probably not, go ahead and thank our troops for fighting our battles overseas instead of in your back yard. However, if we do not make it a point to understand the foundations of our personal liberties, it can be incredibly difficult to determine where we stand on issues in politics today.

Thanks for sticking with me on this topic. I hope that you will remember that the founders of this country literally fought for these individual rights and deliberated them for years with your well-being in mind. It is because of these laws that we are not forced to believe in a God chosen by the government; we are allowed to protest the government, at any level, without risking death; and men and women tried in the United States are given a fair trial, rather than being plucked up by the government and hanged for alleged crimes. I know these examples may seem irrational and harsh, but tell it to the citizens of England who, centuries ago, were hanged for high treason or killed based on their religious beliefs. Or better yet, tell it to the millions of people around the world who are living in fear of their government and the powers at be. Without the groundwork laid by our forefathers, we may have ended up in similar circumstances. Pay respect to their work by at least acknowledging the purpose of these laws and how they have protected you even today.

Join the club,

Chelsea

*While I don’t want to make direct comparisons, it can be said that the Federalist party was more closely aligned to the modern day Democratic party, favoring a strong central government, while the Anti-Federalists were more closely aligned with modern day Republicans, siding in favor or states’ rights. 

Source: http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/billofrights.html, http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_prisoners-rights_drug-law-reform_immigrants-rights/bill-rights-brief-history, http://www.usconstitution.net/constquick.html

On Veterans

Veteran’s Day was made official at the end of World War I when hostilities ceased on the eleventh day, of the eleventh hour, of the eleventh month in 1918. The following year President Woodrow Wilson declared November 11^th as the first Armistice Day and made this statement:

"To us in America, the reflections of Armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country’s service and with gratitude for the victory, both because of the thing from which it has freed us and because of the opportunity it has given America to show her sympathy with peace and justice in the councils of the nations…"

Since then, Americans like you and me have stopped on this day to recognize the military service of those who have gone before us and for those who continue to serve, in order to honor their sacrifice. I am grateful for Veteran’s Day in that it tends to bring pause to those who don’t often consider our brothers and sisters in uniform and hope that occasions such as this will continue to raise our awareness. As I write this, there are approximately 22 million American veterans living in communities across this great nation. For me, I have a legacy of military service in my family, and it is likely that you have a family member or friend who has served in our nation’s military. This country has a proud history of military service and I hope you agree with me that we cannot ever do enough to thank them for the sacrifices they have made in the name of freedom and democracy.

Sadly, our veterans often face a difficult road when returning home from combat. The National Coalition for Homeless Veterans estimates that one-third (107,000 est.) of the entire adult homeless population are veterans, having served as far back as WWII and as recently as Iraq and Afghanistan. Often homelessness is due to lack of affordable housing and health care or as a result of psychological issues that have gone untreated. Although health care benefits are offered to veterans through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), over 40% of veterans say they don’t receive the benefits they need because they aren’t aware of the benefits offered and 60% because they don’t have a service-related disability. It is estimated that Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in returning veterans may be as high as 50% and that those with PTSD are six times more likely to commit suicide. I was startled to discover that it is estimated that a veteran attempts suicide every 80 minutes, and that approximately 18 veterans commit suicide everyday.

I am sure you agree our veterans need our help. Below I have listed three non-government related charitable organizations that support our military servicemen and their families. If you are interested in a comprehensive list, please click HERE.

Fisher House Foundation was established in 1990 and is an organization that supports military members across all branches and their families. Specifically, the Fisher House Program donates “comfort homes” that allow family members to remain close by loved ones (such as in the case of major injury or unexpected illness). There are 54 Fisher Houses in the US and Germany. This organization has served more than 142,000 families since its inception with no cost to the family members. In addition to this cause, the Fisher House Foundation sponsors causes such as scholarships for military children. 

The Wounded Warrior Project was established in 2003 and supports injured servicemen to help themselves and each other through services designed to meet their immediate needs. This includes outdoor rehabilitation; professional services such as counseling; recreational activities that foster independence; higher education programs; occupational training; and peer mentoring, just to name a few. 

The USO was established in 1941 with a core mission to “lift the spirits of America’s troops and their families”. The organization supports over ten major projects including supporting families of fallen soldiers, language courses for those stationed overseas, meal delivery to remote bases, care package delivery, workshops for children with deployed family members, free phone cards for servicemen overseas to call home, and many more.  The USO is located in 160 locations in 27 states and 14 countries. In addition, hundreds of entertainers travel each year to entertain the troops via the USO. 

*I do not wish to endorse these organizations specifically; I am just more familiar with these through personal volunteering experiences.

Thank you for taking time today to stop and remember those who have served on the front lines for our freedom. I challenge you to take action in reaching out to this community in whatever way you see fit. Whether it is through a donation, volunteering, or continuing to raise awareness, I hope that you will feel compelled to help.

For those who have served, I cannot thank you enough for what you have done for this country. May you know an outpouring of support and gratitude from every American. Thank you.

Join the club,

Chelsea

Source: http://www.nchv.org/background.cfm#questions,  http://www.va.gov/VETDATA/, http://www.vva.org/veteran/0210/ptsd.html, http://www.va.gov/VETDATA/docs/QuickFacts/Surveys-slideshow.pdf