Delegate Wm. H. Ramsey (NE) – Journal of Continental Congress 2009
From Facebook
Over the past year and a half I watched the once-great economy of the United States begin to crumble before my eyes. I had finally reached a point in my life where I was ready to pursue the American dream in earnest. I had recently gotten married and wanted to buy the house I had been renting for over four years. The timing was all wrong though and it became apparent that the calamity was no small speed bump for the economy. Like so many other Americans I began to search for answers and my research led me to the conclusion that the ills affecting our economy were systemic and gargantuan. I hearkened back to vows and values instilled in me as a U.S. Marine and made the choice to take on the leviathan so that my children and future generations might be spared the suffering that comes from economic collapse. Continental Congress 2009 would prove to be the first concerted effort in our American velvet revolution.
Since childhood I have had an interest in history and government. Over the years I meandered left and right in search of a political formula that truly provides justice for all but the continual disappointment dealt by politicians left me with a sense of apathy. Dr. Ron Paul, however, in his historic campaign for President in 2008, cured me of my apathy. He spoke of the Constitution as the foundation for government power, that it was there to limit the government’s power, not to allow it unlimited reach. I already knew this but like so many others was disheartened. We were conditioned to the continuous growth and emerging corruption in the upper reaches of the government. Ron Paul was consistent in his message. The success of his campaign inspired me to become a political activist.
In the first few months of 2009 I was up to my eyeballs in research. I had a bachelor’s degree with a concentration in Political Science, but I had much to learn and much to catch up on. Most of my research was done on the Internet. At some point I discovered We the People Foundation and signed on to receive their newsletter. Continental Congress 2009 was created from this foundation, and naturally I was interested. I volunteered to attend as a delegate, pending election. The organization in my state was very poor and I never heard from anyone within Nebraska concerning Continental Congress. I actually lost track of the group altogether amidst my numerous other projects.
Finally, a message came back saying I was approved as a nominee. At that point I withdrew my nomination because I had not yet campaigned, raised funds, or made arrangements to attend the 12-day event. Soon after, Judith Whitmore, Chief of Staff, called me to ask to reconsider. I did, realizing that it was well worth the time. I would find a way to make it. The election consisted of notarized mail-in ballots, so it was highly inconvenient for supporters to vote. The short time line and a shortage of funds prevented the process from being well publicized. Nonetheless, I was elected as the “1st Delegate” from Nebraska. I pledged to do my best to represent the people of Nebraska whether they were supportive of the liberty movement or not.
Acclimating myself to Continental Congress 2009 was a culture shock similar to Marine Corps boot camp which I experienced years earlier. I didn’t know the other 110+ delegates nor any of the staff. I soon found out that we were all bound by our common goal. We became fast friends. Many of us had a sense that the nature of the event made it possible that we would never come home, I might never see my wife and kids again. It seemed a great risk, and we, the delegates, will forever live with the memory of that collective dread, yet also with the positive feeling that God was present and protective.
My experience over the past year showed that the liberty movement was generally initiated by libertarians, but soon adopted by overwhelming numbers of conservatives. A case in point is the “tea parties”. Libertarians would consider overseas wars of choice an integral part of the unjustifiable big government welfare-warfare state – and would protest the war along with the taxes that pay for wars. Conservatives seem to be less likely to speak out against the wars, perhaps out of respect for military service. Similarly, I had observed some trends within the liberty-conservative movement that I found to be distasteful, particularly, what I felt was overemphasis on the issue of Barack Obama’s birth certificate and anti-immigrant sentiments. I also felt that it important to oppose any calls for violence (none were made). If I had an agenda going into Continental Congress, it was to keep the outcome of Continental Congress palatable to as many Americans as possible and to adhere to peaceful libertarian principles.
The first two days were chaotic due to the size of the body. Most discussion was brought forth in the “Committee of the Whole,” an informal gathering of the Congress. Many hours were wasted trying to hammer out better procedures than the general agenda provided. Robert’s Rules were used. While being effective in sorting out where we were in the proceedings, they were also time-consuming. I believe processes like Robert’s Rules are a natural part of government – a necessary inefficiency, just like government itself.
On the first night, Schaeffer Cox of Alaska called for the formation of a caucus within the larger group. The “People’s Action Caucus” would focus on the civic actions that the Congress would recommend to the people. Its mission statement was “Arming the People with recommendations for local action that are not contingent upon government cooperation so they can exercise their inherent right to be free.” The group tackled the issues of the following day: 2nd Amendment and the Money Clause. Cox split the group into two units and I quickly volunteered to work on the money sub-committee. I was chosen as the chair for the night. With the help of Jeanne Golrick (MA), J.D. Shultis (SD), Rick Humboldt (NH), and a few others, we were able to come out with a short, clear statement to offer the people a nudge in the right direction to escape from unwarranted monetary control over their lives. We wrote the statement short and without too much specificity, because it would have to be up to activists in the localities to do the real work. The next morning, our money civic action was quickly passed on the floor. I believe it set the tone for much of the work of the rest of the days because it became clear that small groups could focus on issues and turn out effective resolutions that might have otherwise used up several hours on the floor. Sub-committees were soon created to tackle each of the issues.
Schaeffer Cox, John Bush (TX), and Catherine Bleish (MO) were youngsters in their twenties who were all extremely gifted and highly charismatic. They and I, along with Kevin Patrick (WV), Ryan McCain (LA), and a few others, soon formed our own little social group, the “Liberty Kids”. It was very interesting to see that factions formed, even in a body with so short a life-span and so focused in purpose. The Founding Fathers warned about factions, or parties, but we had quickly developed them. Most of our differences were not based on ideology, though. It was more a case of target audience saleability. The older, more traditional conservative delegates simply had different constituencies.
I had focused most of my research in the months leading up to Continental Congress on the money issue and foreign policy. I found lectures on other topics very informative. Experts spoke to us about the Constitutionality of current government policies and related the cases to Mr. Schulz’ petitions for redress. It would have been nice to hear opposing points-of-view on each of the subjects so that the delegates could make more educated decisions. The time crunch made that impossible, however.
Despite my reservations, some of the less palatable issues were taken up. Article II Eligibility was lectured on, discussed, and debated. Two separate resolutions were brought forth, one that focused on candidates’ eligibility and one that focused on President Obama’s eligibility. The first resolution was pretty straightforward and I supported it, but the second one would only marginalize our work, in my opinion. The Faithfully Execute Clause was also brought forth. It involved the lack of enforcement of laws by the executive branch of the government. In particular, the petition for redress called into question the lack of enforcement on our Southern border. It is a very complicated situation, though, being intertwined with prohibition laws, free-trade agreements, and human rights. The unfortunate side effect of the whole issue is the casting of immigrants, particularly Mexicans, in a negative light. It is my opinion that we should move beyond the so-called “immigration problem” per se, and instead attack the root issues of prohibition and not-so-free trade fiascoes.
The Fourteenth Amendment was also brought forth as a resolution. It was not on the original agenda because it had not been petitioned by Mr. Schulz, but a handful of delegates asked to have it considered. It was sent to a sub-committee and later brought before the floor for discussion, but was eventually tabled until a later Congress. The issue is very complicated and I had never even heard of it in terms of Constitutionality before. The small group that took it to committee were dedicated on pushing it through. Fortunately, it was denied; unfortunately, we lost a couple good delegates because it was denied.
The second-to-last day brought us to the most important work – the civic actions. I was on the Civic Action Committee which I felt went hand-in-hand with the People’s Action Caucus. It was my understanding that the whole purpose of Continental Congress was to give suggestions to the people to be able to escape from the encroaching tyranny. The committee broke into three groups. The first group, headed by William Reil (PA), wanted nothing other than to push for the Sheriff Program. The second group was focused on compiling the various civic actions already devised in other committees into one list. The third group was led by Stan Jones (MT) though the bulk of the plan was created by John Bush. I was in the third group. Bush’s “Tiered Approach” would set increasingly aggressive, coordinated actions to be conducted by signatories of the Articles of Freedom, all based on numerical milestones of signatures to date. Sadly, when the civic actions reached the floor, the Congress was overcome with FEAR. The language of the Tiered Approach was toned down several times. Reil tried over-and-over to block anything but his Sheriff Program. Discussion got more and more heated to the point that we had to go into “executive session” to block out the media.
We resumed the debate on the final day, and the fear again overtook the discussion. All the civic actions were finally scrapped for a very vague and short statement that was substitute-amended by Mr. Schulz. Que sera, sera. I was disappointed that we dropped the strong, concrete actions introduced by Mr. Bush. Yet in the context of the overall document, Mr. Schulz’ civic action would be easier for people to commit to.
Continental Congress 2009 was about to come to a close, and I was mostly satisfied with the outcome of our work. The documents we wrote were very solid and had the potential to become timeless. We ran through the closing ceremony once and then had a few minutes to spare before the final ceremony. A few minor resolutions were introduced for rubber-stamping – ok, no problem. Then Ronald Mann (ID) introduced the Divine Providence Resolution and pushed it through with no debate, no opportunity to bring amendments, and despite the fact that it was defeated earlier after being attached to another resolution it sailed through. I was immediately and absolutely shocked! The intent was good, but the language and lack of debate were totally contrary to the rest of the work we had done, and it was a clear violation of my understanding of the separation of Church and State. I simply couldn’t agree with the part that directed the government to call for a day of fasting and prayer. I had never fasted up to that point in my life, how dare I expect to have the government call for such a thing?
Continental Congress ended but the debate rages on. The final version of the Articles of Freedom is not released yet. It is my hope that the Divine Providence Resolution be trimmed down and set aside as an appendix rather than as part of the signatory pledge and civic action. It is my hope that somehow the birth certificate resolution be lost in the shuffle and left out. It is my hope that our work will impact the country in a positive way rather than divide us and marginalize the Patriots. I believe the work will inspire millions either way. Regardless, I will always be a patriot in defense of liberty and in defiance of tyranny, so help me, God.
William H. Ramsey
Omaha, Nebraska
December 1, 2009
Related posts:
Sign up to receive all new posts delivered daily to your inbox.
Items 3, 4, and 5, were contradictory to the DOI and Constitution, and were removed by Judith and Bob.
While some might say that it went beyond a stylistic change, I agree that it had to go, and did not require a vote to do so because the Congress had already agreed early on that anything that was found to be included in the AoF that conflicted with the DOI or Constitution was null and void already.
Even President Gonzales, a VERY religious man agreed those three items violated the spirit of the Constitution in regard to the separation of church and state, even though those words never actually appear anywhere in either document.
Jeff Lewis
1st Delegate, North Carolina
Vice-Chairman, Admin Committee
Chairman, Bylaws Committee
Third Continental Congress
2009 Session (CC2009)