[EL] "We the People" as "CEO"

Sat May 12 10:26:04 PDT 2012

Effectively, Paul is saying that the only way we can be free is to have the unlimited power to bind ourselves and our fellow-citizens. That is contrary to the natural law principles embodied in the Declaration. The Declaration argues that the power of the government is limited by "unalienable rights," and that government  is "instituted" by the "consent of the governed" not to create unlimited power over those who are governed but to "secure" those unalienable rights, including, but apparently not limited to,  "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." When government interferes with those rights, then "it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish it" and to institute a new one.

Paul's Hobbesian notion of the sovereign is not the concept of the sovereign that underlies our institutions.

Mark S. Scarberry
Professor of Law
Pepperdine Univ. School of Law

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 9:56 AM
To: jon.roland at constitution.org
Cc: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] "We the People" as "CEO"

It's a little strange to see a libertarian conceive of such a limiting idea as Jon Roland's below, where the constitution is a mere set of "bylaws" that effectively handcuff or limit not just the government but the people themselves as voters delegating to their representatives 100% of the legitimate power possessed by the government.  How do voters transfer this power and legitimacy in normal elections without any connection to sovereign power?

Most provisions of the Constitution require government/state action before they come into play and are not binding on the private sector (anti-slavery being one counter-example).  But apparently Jon Roland would interpret all of the constitution's election provisions as binding on "We the People" - the entire "private sector" as it were.

I don't think that weaponizing the Constitution and turning its power against We the People is a liberty-respecting idea.   All the people can do is vote, and specifically in order to be a FREE PEOPLE, they have to be, well, FREE.  The rest of the year, when not voting, we are all mere subjects of the law and obliged to obey it just like any citizen in a dictatorship.  It is only in voting that we can be truly free as a people.

Paul Lehto, J.D.
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Jon Roland <jon.roland at constitution.org<mailto:jon.roland at constitution.org>> wrote:
The people are only sovereign in elections for delegates to constitutional conventions (including state legislatures sitting as such) or in constitutional adoption or amendment referenda. Elections of officials to an office (or removal from one) are not, strictly speaking, exercises of sovereignty, which must always operate through a constitution. They are just selecting someone to do a job within a constitutional framework. Elections of officials do not directly amend constitutions, nor ratify the actions of officials as constitutional.

The people stand as shareholders, not as a CEO. The by-laws are the constitution.

On 05/11/2012 04:03 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
unless you contest that We the People are sovereign in elections

-- Jon

----------------------------------------------------------

Constitution Society               http://constitution.org

2900 W Anderson Ln C-200-322           twitter.com/lex_rex<http://twitter.com/lex_rex>

Austin, TX 78757 512/299-5001<tel:512%2F299-5001>  jon.roland at constitution.org<mailto:jon.roland at constitution.org>

----------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

--
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com<mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com>
906-204-4026 (cell)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120512/a2c806bf/attachment.html>