Constitution

How I Intend To Serve The People Of Michigan

  • I will vote only within the guidelines of the U.S. Constitution and Michigan Constitution as my oath states.
  • I will vote in favor of preserving Liberty, not restricting it by government intervention. Our government has been consistently usurping our rights by violating the Constitution and the Rule of Law. We all must take a stand for Liberty.
  • I will vote in favor free market principles, I will not choose winners and losers. For example, the government shouldn’t be in the business of giving “tax incentives” or grants to some businesses and not other businesses based on who the government feels is deserving of the incentives or grants. That should be up to the free market to decide, not the government.
  • I will not vote in favor of increasing taxes for anyone, I will vote in favor of reducing taxes for everyone. Taxes only prop up the large government that continues to interfere with our daily lives and spend us into oblivion. If the government can’t afford to stay large with tax cuts, then the government can learn to live within their means. Shed debt and find ways to save money by removing wasteful spending like the rest of us.
  • If adequate time is not given to read a bill, I will vote it down. Some bills are introduced literally seconds before it is voted on. Besides, if a bill is that good, people wouldn’t mind if you took the time to read it rather than rush it through the legislative process.

Chad Dewey Signs Americans for Tax Reform “Taxpayer Protection Pledge”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 22, 2012

Chad Dewey Signs Americans for Tax Reform “Taxpayer Protection Pledge”

BAY CITY, Michigan – Chad Dewey announced this week that he signed the ATR pledge to “oppose and vote against any and all efforts to increase taxes”.

“In addition to not increasing taxes, I will also work to lower and eliminate taxes. This includes reducing the personal income tax to zero and eliminating the Michigan corporate income tax.” says Dewey. “The people of Michigan earn their paychecks and should keep their hard earned money rather than have it wasted by their government due to pressure from special interests.”

Dewey explains, “Michigan is a very heavily taxed state and could learn quite a bit from South Dakota and Wyoming; two states that enjoy some of the lowest unemployment rates in the nation and they don’t have a personal income tax or business tax. When you get the burden of the government off the shoulders of people and business, the free market will flourish and it is then you will see prosperity.”

Chad Dewey, the Republican candidate for Michigan’s 96th House district, has also pledged to vote only within the guidelines of the U.S. and Michigan Constitutions, vote in favor of preserving personal Liberties, and vote in favor of free market principles.

###

Chad Dewey is a pro-Liberty, Conservative Constitutionalist candidate for the Michigan State House, 96th District. Learn more about Chad Dewey at his web site http://chaddewey.org and Facebook campaign page http://facebook.com/ChadMDewey.


No more “Immediate Effect” abuse!

The Michigan Constitution requires passed legislation to be held for 90 days before taking effect. This period is to allow those who will be affected by the legislation to prepare or attempt to have the law repealed. However, in emergency situations, the law can take effect immediately if the law passes with 2/3 majority.

So far Michigan lawmakers have abused this by using immediate effect clause even though it wasn’t passed by 2/3 vote. Many are blaming Republicans, and rightfully so – they are abusing it…but so have Democrats. My problem is this – when the Michigan Constitution was drafted, the authors didn’t want legislation to pass through on a whim as that could provide an abusive government. Yet here we have lawmakers on BOTH sides of the aisle abusing immediate effect.

“What’s the big deal?” some have asked. Well how about allowing the state to get rid of the people WE elected into our local offices through the emergency manger law and take over our local governments? That leaves the door wide open for abuse. That is a big deal.

“Perhaps the bills are really important!” some have said. If they’re that good and important, why wouldn’t you want to “show off” those bills to people by allowing them to read and learn about them? Politicians grandstand all the time when they think they’re doing a “good thing”, so give the bill 90 days to take effect and show everyone what you’re doing.

Do you know what happens when we rush legislation? Things like the USA PATRIOT Act, Obamacare, and the NDAA of 2011 get passed via knee-jerk reaction and our rights are slowly chipped away. None of us should want this type of government.


Increasing taxes is NOT the answer

For those who have not heard about Michigan Senate Bill 919, it is essentially a very large and unnecessary tax increase on all drivers:

Introduced by Sen. Roger Kahn (R) on January 26, 2012, to increase the state vehicle registration tax by 67 percent. The tax is levied based on the weight of commercial trucks, and on the “list price” of cars. (For example, the annual tax on a car with a $20,000 list price would go from $103 to $172.). The weight-based levy on trucks would increase by 25 percent. This would extract approximately $500 million more from motorists each year. The bill would distribute a greater proportion of the increased road funding to heavily-traveled “commercial corridor” roads rather than less-traveled rural roads. This is part of Gov. Rick Snyder’s road and transit tax proposal.

While big government establishment candidates are fine with continuing the spending, raising taxes in any way is not what’s good for the overall financial well being of the people of Michigan. Here’s a novel idea to create a surplus of cash – how about cutting state government? How about looking at duplicate programs, unnecessary regulations, and tax subsidies that would save the state a considerable amount of money? This bill represents the wrong type of thinking in Lansing and is exactly what I would fight against if elected.

  • “No” if it is not permitted by the U.S. Constitution and Michigan Constitution.
  • “No” to tax increases.
  • “No” to bills that don’t follow free market principles.

My endorsement for the Michigan U.S. Senate race – Scotty Boman

It appears that there are now around 7 candidates in the spotlight for the 2012 U.S. Senate election for Michigan. More may enter the race, but there is one particular candidate that I feel everyone should focus on as I strongly agree with his stance on shrinking the size of government, free market principles, and strictly adhering to the Constitution – Scotty Boman. Please check out his web site to learn more about how he intends to help restore America at http://boman12.org and his Facebook campaign page.


What is with this shifting of blame?

People who support Obama and his administration commonly tell people that “why weren’t people outraged 10 years ago when we attacked Afghanistan?”. This is a way that Obama supporters tend to justify Obama’s illegal attack on Libya. Sorry, but two wrongs don’t make a right. Yes, I was outraged 10 years ago too. Especially after the USA PATRIOT Act was voted in as Law due to a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11. It was drafted by Joe Biden in 1997, but wasn’t called the USA PATRIOT Act at the time. People seem to forget that bit of information.

A bit of history for those who support Obama’s attack on Libya – the last true formal declaration of war was our entrance into WWII (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States#Formal). Afghanistan did not meet the criteria of a formal declaration of war. Neither did Iraq. Neither does Libya or Pakistan.

Speaking of the Constitution, when does Obama plan to adhere to his Oath as President:

“Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”” (Article 2, Section 1)

If he followed the Constitution, he would need to have many people arrested for counterfeiting – the Federal Reserve and all of it’s members:

“To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States” (Article 1, Section 8 )

He also needs to be arrested and charged with high treason and impeached because he has served an entity other than the United States while performing his duties as the President of the United States (source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/NATLObama-to-Chair-UN-Security-Council-58022432.html) (Article 2, Section 4) (Article 1, Section 9)

When will this madness end? January 20th, 2013.


Extraordinary Rendition

For those that aren’t familiar with extraordinary rendition, please make yourself aware of what it is and not only how unconstitutional it is, but how downright evil it is. The first line describing extraordinary rendition on Wikipedia describes it quite well:

Extraordinary rendition and irregular rendition describe the abduction and extrajudicial transfer of a person from one nation to another. “Torture by proxy” is used by some critics to describe situations in which the United States has transferred suspected terrorists to countries known to practice torture.

I don’t know about you, but putting a black bag over someone’s head, kidnapping them, and shipping them off to another country to be tortured in the name of preventing terrorism is completely disgusting. That’s right, forget about that pesky 4th Amendment, forget about a warrant being signed, forget about the fact that you may have been an American citizen minding your own business – if you don’t give up your Constitutional rights, the terrorists win!

Hogwash.

And if you think for a moment that this couldn’t happen to you or rarely happens, think again. Since 2001, the United States has captured an estimated 3,000 people and transported them around the world for this type of brutal “interrogation” to “combat terrorism”.

So when did this brutal tactic become a policy? Most would think right after 9/11 and it was signed as an executive order by George Bush. You would be wrong. The CIA was granted permission to use extraordinary rendition by a presidential directive signed in 1995 by Bill Clinton. Bush, of course, used extraordinary rendition often to “fight terrorism”. Obama had the chance to shut down this type of behavior immediately after taking office. Instead, Obama actively allowed extraordinary rendition to continue even though one of his promises was to cease extraordinary rendition. To be quite frank – I don’t care who has decided to allow it. IT IS ILLEGAL AND IMMORAL AND NEEDS TO BE STOPPED!


Attack on Libya an impeachable offense

At least Obama and Biden used to think that way when Bush was President (see quote and video below). The President of the United States is in violation of the War Powers Act of 1973. He must report, in writing, to the Speaker of the House and the President Pro-Tempore of the Senate. This has not been done. He has also violated the act in such that “…The President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by authorization of Congress or if the United States is already under attack or serious threat.”

There is no American interests involved. U.S. Forces have not been attacked. The United States has not been attacked. This is an impeachable breach of U.S. Law. It doesn’t matter what the U.N. says in regards to U.S. Law as we are a sovereign nation not subordinate to the will or threats of others with the exceptions of treaties such as NATO. However, NATO was not attacked. This is an internal Libyan problem.

Barack Obama: “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” – Senator Barack Obama, 2007

Joe Biden: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dRFJ6CF2Mw

I guess their previous statements and their current actions would make them hypocrites.

Comments Off more...

Upholding the Constitution

In another Facebook debate, one former serviceman stated he was not in favor of S.B. 1070 in Arizona and proceeded to bash others in the discussion with personal attacks and had no real substance to add to the debate. While I do agree that immigration reform is necessary (the Federal government isn’t doing it’s job), I think this law is not written correctly – specifically because it favors REAL ID. I did have a couple of comments and one question for this person. Please keep in mind that I am not bashing people in the armed forces, but this particular person is one of the “bad apples” that tend to make others sharing his history in the service “look bad”. What a shame.

Please show me where SB1070 is at all Constitutional by either the U.S. Constitution or the AZ Constitution. If you cannot show me, you are not supporting, nor defending the Constitution.

Specifically – Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3. Other Amendments such as the 2nd, 9th, and 10th also defend Arizona’s right to protect their borders since the Federal government has not done their job. However, while most of the bill is Constitutional, others are not, so I could not vote in favor of the bill as written.

When you took the U.S. Armed Forces Oath of Enlistment, you swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I’m unsure of where you fought, but we haven’t had a Constitutional formal declaration of war since World War II. In doing so, you are not supporting, nor defending, the Constitution.

Please show me where any huge piece of legislation like the USA PATRIOT Act, Bank Bailouts, PPACA, or the proposed Cap and Trade (or whatever they’re calling it this week) Act is allowed by the U.S. Constitution. If you cannot show me, you are not supporting, nor defending the Constitution.

Barack Obama has technically committed high treason per the Constitution (Article I, Section 9) by serving as the Chair for the U.N. Security Council. If you are not calling for his impeachment and imprisonment, you are not supporting, nor defending the Constitution.

When, exactly, do you intend to follow the Federal law requiring you to uphold this oath?

Why wouldn’t you continue to support and defend the Constitution regardless of whether you’re active duty or not? It is also our obligation as citizens of the United States to support and defend the Constitution just as those in the armed forces have. I am a single father, work full time, and actively support and defend the Constitution whenever I possibly can. Short answer – yes, I think you, and every other U.S. Citizen should, without pause, defend and support the Constitution throughout your entire life. Easier said than done sometimes, but if we don’t, who will? Our elected officials? Well, most haven’t done so lately, that’s for sure.

What I’m trying to get at is that if the legislation (even a portion of it) is unconstitutional, there is no way of honestly defending the piece of legislation as a whole. It must be voted down. Contacting your representatives (U.S. Senators, U.S. Congressmen, Governer, State Legislators, etc) honestly doesn’t take much effort and it’s the best way you can defend the Constitution – make your voice heard. They’re supposed to work for YOU. Even if you oppose legislation that is popular (or even if you just plain like it), but it is unconstitutional, it really is your duty (and my duty) to actively oppose it.

It can be really hard to actively oppose legislation that is widely popular. I have been catching all sorts of grief for opposing the USA PATRIOT Act since day 1. However, I can’t just sit idly by and allow it to go unchallenged. It’s no different with any other piece of legislation I hear about.


A glance at this week’s bills – 6/28/2010 to 7/2/2010

The number of bills that were introduced this week – 228. That’s a typical number of bills introduced each week in the House and Senate. That’s almost 12,000 bills per year. What a waste of taxpayer dollars to vote on some unconstitutional, wasteful, and downright unnecessary bills.

Before getting into the “real” bills, I’m finding the “recognition” of sports a bit ridiculous. Once again, here are some bills regarding sports that are very unnecessary:

H.RES.1480 : Commending the University of Southern California Trojan men’s tennis team for its victory in the 2010 National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Men’s Tennis Championship.

H.RES.1486 : Expressing support for designation of June 11, 2011, as “National Minority Golf Awareness Day”.

H.RES.1491 : Congratulating the University of South Carolina Gamecocks on winning the 2010 NCAA Division I College World Series.

Now on to the bills.

H.RES.1497 : Condemning the inclusion of inflammatory and inaccurate content in Iranian textbooks that is aimed at indoctrinating and radicalizing students with anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic, and anti-Western sentiment and at restricting the rights of women. Is it really our place to impose our beliefs on other countries? We have the 1st Amendment here in the United States and we should not concern ourselves with the actions of other countries. We have our own inaccurate textbooks that indoctrinate and radicalize students in our own schools, which our Federal government allows and funds, but apparently this doesn’t seem to be an issue, so why should a foreign entity doing the same be an issue? Vote: NO

H.R.5622 : Stop Outsourcing and Create American Jobs Act of 2010. To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the identification of corporate tax haven countries and increased penalties for tax evasion practices in haven countries that ship United States jobs overseas, and for other purposes. While this bill may sound like it has good intentions, I have a more direct approach at helping to prevent corporations from outsourcing jobs and sending their money to other countries to protect them from unfair taxation. Stop taxing corporations and people to death. This bill does nothing more than attempt to tax corporations and people who are smart enough to send their money to a country that doesn’t tax them nearly as much as the United States does. In fact, if we lowered our taxation rates, we would likely see the reverse effect – overseas corporations and people would send their money to us. Vote: NO

H.R.5671 : To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to create a demonstration project to fund additional secondary school counselors in troubled title I schools to reduce the dropout rate. This bill gives incentive to counselors that lower the dropout rate. If you think about that for a moment, you’ll see that it’s ripe for abuse just as “No Child Left Behind”. It creates an incentive to either pass students without giving them a proper educational experience or it allows for the lowering of standards to “level the playing field”. First off, I don’t believe the Federal government should be a part of schools that are funded locally through local and state taxes. The Department of Education should be abolished, in addition to No Child Left Behind. Vote: NO

H.R.5667 : To provide for the conduct of a study on the effectiveness of firearms microstamping technology and an evaluation of its effectiveness as a law enforcement tool. This is yet another overbearing micromanagement technique to be used against the citizens of the United States who own a gun. The bill provides funding for researching a new technology that will drive up the price of ammunition and/or guns as it will require microstamping each piece of ammunition. Vote: NO

H.R.5649 : Digital Goods and Services Tax Fairness Act of 2010. To promote neutrality, simplicity, and fairness in the taxation of digital goods and digital services. This is nothing more than looking for new ways to tax United States citizens for purchases or services rendered over the internet. We’re taxed enough, thanks. Vote: NO

H.R.5632 : Consumer Fuels Choice Act of 2010. To improve choices for consumers for fuel, and for other purposes. This bill allows tax rebates, in addition to substantial taxpayer-funded financial grants, for producers of E85 related fuel producers. This is wealth redistribution from taxpayers to businesses. This works against free market principles by creating a product that currently has little demand whether it is profitable or not. What’s worse is that they’re attempting to use a significant amount of taxpayer dollars to fund it. If there is a real demand for E85, private companies will see the demand and produce it if they find it is profitable. Vote: NO

H.R.5633 : Consumer Vehicle Choice Act of 2010. To improve choices for consumers for vehicles, and for other purposes. Just like the Consumer Fuels Choice Act (also written by the same person), this bill works against free market principles. It requires manufacturers to have their new vehicles fitted to accept two different fuels (gas/E85 for example). The bill requires 50% of all vehicles to have this ability by 2012 and that percentage increases to 90% in 2013. Let the free market decide which forms of alternative energy are the most viable, not government. Vote: NO

H.R.5640 : National Rape Kit Database Act. To establish a National Rape Kit Database. While this act does not allow the entry of personally identifiable information into the database (yet), there is no need for a national rape kit database as the information gathered is collected and given to local law enforcement agencies. This bill would require State and local law enforcement agencies to participate. Vote: NO

H.R.5609 : To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit any registered lobbyist whose clients include foreign governments which are found to be sponsors of international terrorism from making contributions and other campaign-related disbursements in elections for public office. This is likely the most difficult bill I have come across this week. There is no definition of “sponsors of international terrorism”, so could that include the United States? Personally, I don’t believe ANY foreign entity should be allowed to contribute to ANY United States election as it is a conflict of interest. I also don’t believe any Political Action Committee (PAC) should be able to contribute either as they tend to be a funnel for corporate campaign contributions. This bill is very vague and poorly worded, which leaves a lot of loopholes open. Good intention, bad execution. Vote: NO


  • "To me, to be a conservative means to conserve the good parts of America and to conserve our Constitution." - Ron Paul

    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

    ‎"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Ron Paul

    "I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and more for themselves. I want them to have the rewards of their own industry. This is the chief meaning of freedom." - Calvin Coolidge

    "1913 wasn't a very good year. 1913 gave us the income tax, the 16th amendment and the IRS." - Ron Paul

  • Categories

  • Paid for by the Committee To Elect Chad Dewey, 5044 Seven Mile, Bay City, MI 48706