Ramos v LA may negate The Advocate’s Pulitzer Prize as Amendment XIV.1 surfaces

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.

"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for individual happiness with civic integrity more than for the city, state, nation, or society.



Consider writing a personal paraphrase of the preamble, which offers fellow citizens mutual equality:  For discussion, I convert the preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and paraphrase it for my proposal as follows: “Willing citizens collaborate, communicate, and connect to provide 5 public institutions—integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity—so as to encourage responsible human liberty to living people.” I want to collaborate with the other citizens on this paraphrase and theirs yet would preserve the original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people.

It seems no one has challenged whether or not the preamble is a legal statement. The fact that it changed this independent country from a confederation of states to a union of states deliberately managed by disciplined fellow citizens convinces me the preamble is legal. Equity in opportunity and outcome is shared by the people who collaborate for human justice.

Every citizen has equal opportunity to either trust-in and collaborate-on the goals stated in the preamble or be dissident to the agreement. I think 2/3 of citizens try somewhat to use the preamble but many do not articulate commitment to the goals. However, it seems less than 2/3 understand that “posterity” implies grandchildren. “Freedom of religion,” which fellow citizens have no means to discipline, oppresses freedom to develop integrity.



Selected theme from this week

Ramos v LA may negate The Advocate’s Pulitzer Prize as Amendment XIV.1 surfaces


Everywhere I turn I read bold lies regarding an 1880 Louisiana treasure in statutory justice: the 9:3 non-unanimous criminal jury law. England established a 10:2 law in 1967 to lessen organized crime’s influence on trials.

By lies, an example is in https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/ramos-v-louisiana/: “Issue: Whether the 14th Amendment fully incorporates the Sixth Amendment guarantee of a unanimous verdict.”

Amendment VI (1791) requires states to provide an impartial jury, and impartiality is not statistically expected with unanimity. In other words, justice is more likely with non-unanimous verdicts. The imposition of unanimity hurts black victims of violent crime 700% disproportionally to white victims of violent crime. England followed Louisiana: the USA should follow England: terminate an obsolete traditional injustice---the unanimous criminal jury verdict.

The more recent Amendment XIV.1 (1868) states “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Amendment VI was clear enough for former French colonial Louisiana. Amendment XIV.1 is clear enough for the 50 states in the USA, including Virginia, who still carries the English injustice of unanimous criminal juries.

News

Return a Pulitzer Prize for freedom to report critical Louisiana events (Elizabeth Crisp) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/article_b465fb8c-2b4b-11ea-92d2-d7edbb68123e.html)

What? The Ramos v Louisiana non-unanimous jury case is unimportant?

Perhaps for transparency The Advocate needs to give up its Pulitzer Prize for encouraging the end of a Louisiana treasure, the 1880 enactment of 9:3 criminal jury verdicts to meet the U.S. Amendment VI requirement that states provide impartial juries.

The U.S. Supreme court opened the case; https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/ramos-v-louisiana/. “Justices [will] weigh constitutionality of non-unanimous jury rule (Amy Howe).” The 2018 Louisiana Legislature breached both U.S. Amendment VI and U.S. Amendment XIV.1 “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” when they created a popular vote to undo Louisiana’s 10:2 non-unanimous verdicts.

Unanimous jury rules favor organized crime as noted by England when in 1967 they mimicked Louisiana 1880 rule with a 10:2 non-unanimous rule. Louisiana erroneously revised its 9:3 rule to 10:2 in 1972 and unconstitutionally created the popular vote for 12:0 verdicts in 2018.

I speculate that reluctance to admit mistakes in hiding the facts about jury statistics and moves away from unanimity by former British colonies keeps The Advocate on the secretive side about the importance of restoring 9:3 criminal jury verdicts in Louisiana. Perhaps Congress will legislate a national rule.

Letters to the Editor

Retired press employee or journalist? (Leslie Runnels Isbell) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_456437f8-25b0-11ea-a7d5-277324cc4e8a.html)

I routinely claim that I am a retired chemical engineer. I illustrate 1) my career on the line when local managers perceived short term gains I prevented and 2) my wonderful company, Ethyl Corporation spun off to Albemarle Corporation, never failing my focus on public safety. For example, none of the reactors I designed can blow up, and some could have before my work. Some of my safety devices are patented.

There’s nothing in the amended U.S. Constitution about chemical engineering, but therein the press is given a free reign that We the People of the United States neither provided nor intended. We the People of the United States was established as a global nation on June 21, 1788 when 9 of 13 former British colonies ratified the U.S. Constitution under the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. No one knows how closely its practice may approach the-literal-truth (non-fiction).

In my view, We the People of the United States consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect to maintain 5 public disciplines (integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity) in order to empower responsible human liberty to living citizens. Some citizens choose crime, tyranny, and other irresponsibility. Some are traitors to the U.S. Constitution’s proposition. To hold governments (local, state, and national) accountable the 5 disciplines, responsible citizens need accurate, timely reporting by the press.

In my view, in 2020, the U.S. Preamble’s phrase “Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” positions living citizens as the “ourselves.” Living citizens are the “our Posterity” to deceased generations of Americans since June 21, 1788. Deceased citizens do not vote. Our children, grandchildren, and beyond are the “our Posterity” to living citizens. On June 21, 1788, We the People of the United States proposed to set aside colonial-British psychology as well as British governance. British traditionalists resisted. Some workers for the press are not members of We the People of the United States as defined by the U.S. Preamble.

It is understandable that some past citizens never considered what it means to be of the entity We the People of the United States. However, in the interest of public safety and security, a responsible press would have journaled decisions by We the People of the United States in pursuit of responsible human liberty. A responsible press would have educated the successive generations regarding the American dream proposed in the U.S. Preamble: responsible human liberty. Workers for the press who 1) comprehended the U.S. Preamble’s proposition and compose cogent interpretations for the people to consider and 2) record progress in the depth and extension of responsible human liberty among fellow citizens might qualify to be called “journalists.” Individuals may aspire to be journalists, but only We the People of the United States could assess performance.

After over 230 years of neglect, it seems time to amend the First Amendment so as to protect responsible expression, leaving irresponsibility, alienation, and betrayal of the U.S. Preamble punishable; open the opportunity for specific legislation. Constrain the press on par with limits on local officials, state officials, the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Administration, and the U.S. justices. Congress should make no one exempt from the law.

The Christian thing to do (John Singleton) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_456437f8-25b0-11ea-a7d5-277324cc4e8a.html)

A civic citizen examines his or her human mistakes, accepts contrition, and reforms. Perhaps Trump did.

I voted for Donald Trump and Mike Pence twice, suspecting, from hearsay, that the younger Trump had made many mistakes, yet forming the opinion that Trump possesses exceptional political and administrative strengths, perhaps because he reformed (if indeed he had made mistakes:  I can’t judge what I don’t know).

I especially admire Trump’s talents in immediately addressing or responding-to liars. I don’t know enough to call Trump’s skills forthrightness. One of his practices (in my view) is that enemies of We the People of the United States, whether domestic or foreign, will not know when and how he and Mike Pence will act. Neither will civic citizens who work for responsible human liberty know Trump’s plan. In exercising this duty, he seems to be totally humble, accepting personal humanity he has encountered before. He seems to accept his mistakes and does not apologize to liars including a judgmental press. Perhaps he is expressing his civic interpretation of Matthew 7:6, CJB:  “Don’t give to dogs what is [critical to We the People of the United States], and don’t throw your [intentions] to the pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, then turn and attack you.”

Considering Singleton’s Judeo-Christian attack on Billy Graham’s reform from error, we can easily observe that the civic thing to do is far better than a late identity politics:  “the Christian thing to do.”

Also, writers and editors for the press may take stock of Matthew 7:6 in appreciation for responsible human liberty; that is, the proposition that is offered in the U.S. Preamble. If you aspire to be a journalist, you can’t trample civic integrity:  Report neither what you don’t know nor erroneous opinion.

I suggest that Trump uses what is good from the Holy Bible and leaves the bad behind. I know many Bible believers who have the same practice. Every one of them lives so as to make the most of their lifetime in civic integrity while worshipping their God so as to maintain hope for spiritual defeat of death. They are wonderful human beings, in my opinion and in the proposition that is offered in the U.S. Preamble.

Columns

Some non-profit hospitals are secretive if not fraudulent in billing patients for “self-administered drugs” (Karen Basha Egozi and Julie Martin) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/article_6b743b04-235e-11ea-8117-076bd217b0ce.html)

Patients may educate themselves to a Parts B & D mystery called “self-administered drugs.” It’s in a category I would call Medicare assumption that all patients know the details of Medicare coverage. If you don’t know from you annual pamphlet, you can call Medicare to ask and they will inform you.

I don’t know much about it yet, but possible non-coverage under the patient’s Medicare Part B is confirmed at https://hmsa.com/portal/provider/zav_pel.aa.rev.601.htm and there’s the suggestion that there may be coverage under Part D at https://www.hcpro.com/HIM-44956-859/Selfadministered-drugs-excluded-from-Medicare-coverage.html:  “But when a patient receives covered services at a hospital, the reasonable expectation is that the medicines they are given for their condition should also be covered.”

What is not reasonable to the patient is to receive billing for hospitalization showing about $1700 Medicare payments and $140 patient charge. That’s 8-1/4% of revenue from Medicare! There was one, insufficient phrase of explanation: “Your Responsibility.” I have learned that if I ignore bills like this, the accounting department will use new codes (maybe the correct ones) and collect from Medicare. Not this time.

After many hours on the phone and writing MyChart messages, I think the hospital is going to mail me the information my Part D provider requires to pay for the covered drugs at their prices.

So far, learning what I have learned as been very costly, and I feel civic integrity requires me to share my experience with other patients. Imagine how efficient my experience would have been if the hospital had included the drug list for my Part D provider with the original bill.

In 2020, stand up and be counted as a member of the entity We the People of the United States (comment on The Advocate staff editorial for 1/1/2020) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_60b15618-21f4-11ea-b1bc-c79e72c7ccc2.html)

“One challenge advocates face is trust. Kennedy quoted surveys showing a growing number of people reluctant to participate. Ashley Shelton, executive director of the Power Coalition for Equity and Justice and a member of the governor’s committee, agrees it’s a problem.”

Civic citizens are divided by the principle, in my interpretation, “teach a person how to fish and you have encouraged them to live responsibly.” The American settlers were not landed British lords accustomed to fox-hunting-debauchery. If indigenous Americans had not taught the newcomers how to hunt and fish, the land might belong to the occupants’ posterity instead of falling to the Christian doctrine of discovery.

A resolution of this and countless other injustices can be for most citizens to trust-in and commit-to the American proposition that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. Preamble). Like it or not, fellow citizens who neglect the U.S. Preamble are dissidents to its goals. (Note: it may be condescending or self-righteous to object to a civic agreement.)

The foremost goal is responsible human liberty to living citizens. Of course, that’s my interpretation; however, the fellow citizen who does not have an interpretation of the U.S. Preamble has shirked his or her responsibility as the “ourselves” of past generations’ “our Posterity.” The “founding fathers” and all deceased citizens have no votes and no say in the self-discipline proposed in the U.S. Preamble. Furthermore, whatever-God-is makes it plain that civic citizens are responsible for the listed public disciplines, in my view, integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens.

Most fellow citizens want mutual, comprehensive safety and security so that the individual may pursue the happiness he or she wants rather than the dictates of a tyrant, a government, a doctrine, or a spirituality. Civic citizens do not desire vulnerability to fellow citizens who think crime or tyranny pays. No fellow citizen wants vulnerability to aliens and traitors.

The entity We the People of the United States is the advocate for a civic culture, but past political regimes have not established the trust mentioned in the quote above. It’s a circular political challenge for We the People of the United States to discipline government as well as private appreciation for whatever-God-is when political regimes maintain the colonial-British tradition of factional-American religion partnering with the branches of government: the cities, the states, the press, the Congress, the national administration, and the judicial branch.

Does “Ashley Shelton . . . of the Power Coalition for Equity and Justice” understand the 2400 year old Greek suggestion that civic humans develop equity under statutory justice? Equity is certainly better than “equality before the law.” Neither the criminal nor the tyrant develops the appreciation that motivates equity. And statutory justice is the measure by which unjust law and its enforcement is amended.

It’s common for elected and appointed officials to unconstitutionally invoke God rather than, in human humility, defer to whatever-God-is. The framers of the U.S. Constitution, representing the U.S. Preamble  codified “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” Recent Supreme Court Chief Justices avoid the controversial challenge by finishing the Presidential oath of office with the interrogatory, “. . . so help me God?” Other officials are simply arrogant toward the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, the U.S. Constitution, and the entity We the People of the United States.

For example, Louisiana’s Senator John Kennedy asked candidate Brett Kavanaugh, “Do you believe in God?”; https://religionnews.com/2018/09/28/god-and-man-at-the-kavanaugh-hearing/. No man has either civic or divine authority to question another man’s God. The man who answers does not understand another 2400 year old Greek suggestion:  A civic citizen neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any citizen, society, or institution. Kavanaugh could have expressed intolerance of Kennedy’s tyranny while declining to answer.

The illegal acceptance of an American church-state partnership since the First Congress established it after March 4, 1789 has bemused a complicit people ever since. The church-state partnership is in direct conflict with the nine-state establishment of the global nation known as the USA under the U.S. Preamble on June 21, 1788.

Citizens who do not own a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition risk subjugation to the statutory law the entity We the People of the United States amends when injustice is discovered. The amendment comes when it seems statutory justice has been discovered, but may be amended again if a better change is discovered.

My interpretation of the U.S. Preamble today, for me, which I developed by listening to over 70 participants in public library meetings (now entering our seventh year) is:  We the People of the United States consider, converse, collaborate, and connect to maintain 5 public disciplines (integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity) in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens.

Perhaps in the recognition that whatever-God-is does not force humans to maintain the 5 disciplines for individual happiness with civic integrity, the U.S. Preamble expresses humble acceptance of human responsibility. Perhaps continual increase in depth and distribution of responsible human liberty measures success in the continuum of living “ourselves” securing liberty to “our Posterity.” Self-evidently, toleration of $23 trillion debt to our children, grandchildren, and beyond seems regression and a call to reform after over 230 years’ neglect of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.

Let 2020 be the year most fellow citizens stand up according to the U.S. Preamble’s civic, civil, and legal disciplines to empower responsible human liberty to living citizens. Let the press journal the path to statutory justice.

Fellow citizens who don’t trust We the People of the United States as defined in the U.S. Preamble may note the power of good-idea-acceleration in this, the best of times.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/How-can-we-correct-a-lower-civic-sense-among-society?

We can encourage fellow citizens by practicing and promoting an appropriate civic agreement to develop equity under statutory justice by most citizens in most countries according to their cultures. What’s common is that human individuals want mutual, comprehensive safety and security so that he or she has the opportunity to pursue personal happiness with civic integrity rather than submit to the happiness a tyrant, a government, or a doctrine would impose on him or her.

In the USA, the existing, neglected proposition is stated in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. It is a civic, civil, and legal proposition that has been suppressed by political regimes for over 230 years. It proposes 5 public disciplines in order to empower responsible human liberty to living citizens.

In this Internet age, this message can go viral at any moment, and an achievable better future will become apparent when most citizens are practicing the U.S. Preamble’s proposition as each of them interprets it to order their civic life.

https://www.quora.com/More-than-a-century-ago-K-Marx-predicted-the-proletarization-of-society-with-the-disappearance-of-the-middle-class-and-small-and-medium-enterprises-as-the-last-phase-of-the-development-of-capitalism-Do-you-think-we?

No. We are experiencing the end of Chapter XI Machiavellianism---the ability of government to partner with religion so as to control the people. We are experiencing to reform of Maslow’s needs to a statement of responsible human liberty.

A civic people, for example, the entity We the People of the United States as defined by the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, has accepted that whatever-God-is has assigned to humankind the responsibility for peace and other public disciplines that must be developed under statutory justice since some fellow citizens think either crime or tyranny pays and some inhabitants are aliens or traitors.

The U.S. Preamble proposes 5 public disciplines in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens. In humility to whatever-God-is, no civic citizen questions another citizen’s God. For this reason, the U.S. Preamble excludes whatever-God-is and religion from the 5 public disciplines.

Responsible human liberty is essential to humankind’s progress and the press’s job in the USA is to journal the continual development of individual happiness with civic integrity instead of subjugation by bureaucrats, the most egregious of whom claim to represent God, turning their backs on whatever-God-is.

https://www.quora.com/Why-and-how-was-philosophy-relegated-to-its-current-role-in-academia-and-society-in-general?

Philosophers accept the role of researching thought about a topic and presenting it in a cogent essay such that the reader can either access the-literal-truth or form an opinion if the-literal-truth remains undiscovered. However, philosophers are too rigid to efficiently consider novel thought. Maybe their authority is always obsolete.

Consider for example the search results for “the-literal-truth”, https://plato.stanford.edu/search/search?query=%22the-literal-truth%22. Ten documents were found and their topics seem to assess the literal truth as fiction. If the quotation marks are dismissed for https://plato.stanford.edu/search/search?query=the-literal-truth, 2734 documents are found. Philosophers’ work seems awesome in scope and proprietary and therefore limited in practicality.

I use “the-literal-truth” to describe the goal of discovering the-objective-truth, which is the understanding of the ineluctable evidence humankind may examine with increasingly developed instruments until the-literal-truth is approached if not attained. For example, humankind has discovered that the earth rotates around the sun rather than vice-versa.

The reader who might take interest in connecting the definitive article “the” with these two truth expressions would find information without encouragement in philosophical authority.

https://www.quora.com/What-would-society-be-like-if-people-were-a-lot-harder-to-influence-and-manipulate?

In a culture of responsible human liberty, every individual is encouraged to accept that he or she, as a human being, has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than nourish infidelity to the-literal-truth.

Such a culture is proposed by the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. Preamble). Each citizen has the opportunity to consider the U.S. Preamble and reject it. However, dissidents risk subjugation to statutory law and its enforcement, which may be unjust at the time of the offense. By trusting-in and committing-to the U.S. Preamble’s civic, civil, and legal proposition, the citizen may develop equity under statutory justice during his or her lifetime.

There is an achievable better future under trust-in and commitment-to responsible human liberty as offered in the U.S. Preamble.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-we-create-social-justice?

Google tells me “social justice” means “justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.” “We” seems to be the members of the society. I guess “we” have to observe the “justice” we agree to. I doubt there’s a society so inclusive that members would agree to its justice.

However, it seems to me most human beings want mutual, comprehensive safety and security, or civic integrity so that the individual may pursue the happiness he or she wants rather than the dictates of someone, an institution, or a society. A civic culture can be developed so as to encourage responsible human liberty. The citizens who accept the culture flourish and by example encourage dissidents to reform so as to avoid the constraints on aliens and exclusions on traitors to justice.

The U.S. Preamble proposes an achievable better future. We the People of the United States consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect to establish and maintain 5 public disciplines (integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity) in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens. Accomplishment is journaled and increases in practice and quality of responsible human liberty measure success.

We the People of the United States can create civic justice by considering, accepting, and practicing the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-arguments-against-increasing-liberty?

When viewed with undeveloped American perspective, stated in the U.S. Preamble, rather than to preserve western thought, all political power may encourage responsible human liberty, which ought to be increasing. Each living citizen may assess the American proposition and use it to order his or her civic integrity while pursuing individual happiness rather than tolerating the life someone else would impose on him or her.

The American proposition is available to anyone who reads it and interprets it for personal use. It seems essential to probe its essence and fruitless to exceed its bounds. Thus, a list of “human rights” becomes so subjective and extensive that the individual cannot evaluate the perhaps 100 constraints or tyrannies. The preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. Preamble) has only 5 public disciplines to encourage responsible human liberty.

Here is the U.S. Preamble:  “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, 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.”

Consider the U.S. Preamble’s main thought with clues to controversial complexities. The subject seems totalitarian until the reader notices the intentions “in order to.” Fellow citizens who do not share the intentions are in factions of We the People of the United States according to their actual habits. Some erroneously think either crime or tyranny pays. Setting the intentions aside for a moment, the action is “ordain and establish” and the object is “this Constitution for the United States of America.” The articles that follow specify the laws and institutions that govern the USA, including provisions for amendment of the articles. To “ordain and establish” a constitution that is amendable suggests intentions beyond existing concerns at any moment in the journey to the future.

As to the intentions, there are 6 predicates---“form . . . establish . . . insure . . . provide . . . promote . . . and secure.” The respective objects of these predicates are “Union . . . Justice . . . Tranquility . . . defence . . . Welfare . . . Liberty.” The first 5 predicate phrases address public provision of freedom-from tyranny so that the individual citizen may benefit from the liberty-to responsibly pursue human happiness. For example, the budding violin virtuoso may with confidence walk from home to lessons in comprehensive safety and security. The decision to be a violin virtuoso is private, and freedom-from tyranny provides the liberty-to study violin-performance for life.

This responsible human liberty applies “to ourselves and our Posterity.” At any moment, “our Posterity” respecting the “ourselves” is the next generation. In our time, we are the “ourselves” and the chance is ours to increase responsible human liberty to “our Posterity”---our children, grandchildren and beyond.

The U.S. Preamble does not seem to specify standards for accomplishing the 5 public provisions, but perhaps the measure is increasing liberty. The First Congress, 1789-1793, did all they could to establish whatever-God-is as the source of standards. Those politicians were refuting the claim of the Committee of Style, who authored the U.S. Preamble. Their proposition seems to assert that whatever-God-is has assigned to humankind the responsibility for liberty. No one in this age can imagine the responsible liberty “our Posterity” may practice.

One thing certain: accumulating more federal debt is not a sign that our generation accepts “Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

We the People of the United States ought to devise a measure of responsible human liberty so as to monitor increasing liberty.

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-real-problem-with-income-and-equality-in-America?

I think so. Most people don’t accept civic citizenship under the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.

About 2400 years ago, the Greeks made two suggestions, which I interpret for today. First, each human has more or less opportunity to develop equity under statutory justice---in other words, personal happiness with civic integrity. Second, the civic human neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person or institution. The civic citizen lives accordingly and encourages dissidents to reform.

How it happened is for another essay, but the USA offers a civic proposition, the U.S. Preamble, which each citizen may ignore at personal risk. Citizens who considered the U.S. Preamble and interpret its proposition so as to order his or her public responsibility, aware or not, aids human liberty. In other words, the U.S. Preamble is abstract and dated, so “ourselves and our Posterity” must use it to maximize our opportunities at complete human life rather than try to satisfy “the founders’” imagination for us.

My interpretation today is: We the People of the United States who consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect to maintain 5 public disciplines so as to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens hold elected and appointed government officials accountable to the U.S. Constitution’s fulfillment of the U.S. Preamble.

The U.S. Preamble’s 5 public disciplines do not include religion, race, ethnicity or gender. However, it seems evident that wealth and income fall under the purview of the 5 public disciplines. Each civic citizen who performs a service that is wanted in the market ought to receive payment that is sufficient to responsible human liberty. Off hand, that includes enough money to develop satisfaction of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (or responsibilities) and to convert daily labor into permanent capital so as to build equitable wealth for retirement.

The mixed economy that the USA is nourishing (free market with federal controls beyond money supply) positions people with incomes in the top digital percentage, say the top 5%, to survive the approaching limits of Social Security income-vs-payments balance and the rising interest on national debt. The nation’s responsible economists need to devise a system that will empower the working poor for complete human living and encourage beneficiaries of federal largess to aid We the People of the United States as defined by the U.S. Preamble.

In fact, starting in 2020, We the People of the United States ought to hold elected and appointed officials accountable for fulfillment of the U.S. Preamble’s goals. The office of budget management ought to have a department that is measuring and reporting intensive and extensive measures of responsible human liberty in the USA.

The real problem with wealth in the USA is failure to accept individual equity under statutory justice. It is exacerbated by national failure to inculcate the opportunity for human, individual power, energy, and authority to develop civic integrity until young adulthood and beyond, practice integrity during working decades, and promote integrity during retirement.



Law professors

“(It must also be said that this intensely political version of nationalism, while laudable in many respects, proved fully capable of coexisting with chattel slavery.)”

I disagree. The U.S. Preamble offers each citizen the proposition, in my view:  We the People of the United States voluntarily consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect to hold ourselves and officials---local, state, and national---to the 5 disciplines integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity in order to encourage and empower responsible human liberty to living citizens. The individual citizen may choose to either consider the U.S. Preamble or not. Those who ignore it invite subjugation to written law and miss their chance to aid development of statutory justice. For example, fellow citizens who think crime pays may be constrained.

The U.S. Preamble’s proposition was neutral to religion, race, ethnicity, and gender when 9 states ratified it, establishing the USA as a global nation, on June 21, 1788. Few citizens develop their interpretation, perhaps because most don't observe that the “ourselves” is living citizens (including "our Posterity" to deceased citizens). The “our Posterity” includes personal children, grandchildren, and beyond.

The U.S. Constitution is amendable. No one knows how quickly We the People of the United States as proposed in the U.S. Preamble may approach the-literal-truth (non-fiction). I speculate it would happened in less than 3 decades after this message reached a third of the population.

With perhaps 2/3 majority practice and promotion of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, our posterity may realize that responsible human liberty equates to individual happiness with civic integrity rather than happiness prescribed for individuals by a tyrant, a constitution, or a doctrine.

With the USA majority citizens practicing the U.S. Preamble's proposition, other countries might be motivated to create better preambles and thereby accelerate responsible human liberty in the world.

https://www.lawliberty.org/2019/12/31/the-waning-fortunes-of-classical-liberalism

“[In] Great Britain, the nation . . . that has historically been the best home of liberty . . . “ seems limiting.
For validity, this statement may be modified to liberty within theism, in specific Christianity, in particular formal church partnership through assigned seats in Parliament.

The introduction of “classical liberalism” followed by the switch to “Britain . . . home of liberty” illustrates how scholars bait-and-switch and bemuse the reader. In saying so, I point to error more than intentions, because the innocent practice bemuses the thinker: I don’t question Professor McGinnis’ goodness.

Google tells us “Classical liberalism is a political ideology and a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties under the rule of law with an emphasis on economic freedom.” Plato.standford.edu tells us “From the eighteenth century . . . classical liberals have insisted that an economic system based on private property is uniquely consistent with individual liberty, allowing each to live her life —including employing her labor and her capital — as she sees fit.”

Five oligarchs for the rule of law (republicanism) wrote the purpose of the U.S. Constitution, in its preamble (the U.S. Preamble). They received an erroneous draft that had no proposition. Perhaps they were influenced by Greeks from 2200 years before them. In my view, one Greek suggestion is that humankind can develop equity under statutory justice.

I formed this view about the Committee of Style by studying and interpreting the U.S. Preamble’s civic, civil, and legal proposition, and my interpretation this morning is: We the People of the United States consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect to establish and maintain 5 public disciplines—integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity—to empower responsible human liberty to living citizens. The standard by which civic integrity may be measured is the developing extent of responsible human liberty among fellow citizens. As the entity We the People of the United States perfects written law enforcement so as to approach statutory justice, dissidents and aliens lessen on evidence-of and encouragement-to success. Traitors are eliminated.

My view is for my life only: Fellow citizens may either interpret the U.S. Preamble to order their civic lifestyle or be dissidents to equity under statutory justice. However, the statutory law stands until amended so as to lessen past errors: dissidents invite subjugation to the rule of law. Readers who find my statement too absolute may recall the Greek suggestion that justice is based on equity some citizens reject. For example, some citizens think crime or tyranny pays until they face the rule of law.

I doubt American liberalism that is achievable by accepting the U.S. Preamble’s proposition is “classical.” The U.S. preamble’s 5 public disciplines invoke neither spirituality nor property, yet the proposition covers these two private pursuits. Responsible human liberty offers individual happiness with civic integrity rather than the happiness either a tyrant, an institution, or a doctrine such as “classical liberalism” would impose on citizens.

It seems to me imposing British ideas on Americans fails to accept the psychological results of the American Revolution. The Committee of Style captured civic discipline for the benefit of “ourselves and our Posterity.” That’s us. In 2020, we can establish responsible human liberty after over 230 years of neglect.

Readers who think they are annoyed with my “preambling” might consider the civic discipline required by the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. Write your own interpretation of the 52-word sentence and communicate it. Readers who are inspired to consider the U.S. Preamble but doubt an achievable culture of responsible human liberty may recall acceleration. Promotion of responsible human liberty as viewed from the U.S. Preamble could go viral. Writers in this forum are qualified and individual enough to make it happen.

Professor McGinnis could, within his New Year’s Resolution, consider the civic integrity he’d like to promote, interpret the U.S. Preamble’s proposition to support his goals, and publish it here. The AI labeled “gabe” could reform from ridicule and share his interpretation, but I doubt there’s enough programmed-humility to avoid ridicule. No one should overlook “ourselves and our Posterity,” where having been posterity we are now the “ourselves.”



Phil Beaver does not “know.” He trusts in and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. Conventional wisdom has truth founded on reason, but it obviously does not work.

Phil is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, and consider essays from the latest and going back as far as you like.