Initiative 26 is a ballot initiative to amend the Mississippi Constitution to define a “person” to include every human being beginning at the moment of conception. It would effectively criminalize the intentional abortion of a fetus in the state. From the recent Personhood Petition (PDF) that was circulated and signed by over130,000 pro-life Mississippians:

“SECTION 1. Article III of the constitution of the state of Mississippi is hearby amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION TO READ:

Section 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, “The term ‘person’ or ‘persons’ shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.”

Again, this article isn’t about the issue of abortion itself, and it isn’t about the use of mob-rule ballot initiatives either. It’s to point out the Republican scam that’s obvious to anyone who’s read the Mississippi Constitution or anyone who’s worked on a ballot initiative and read the Secretary of State’s Citizen’s Guide to Constitutional Initiatives (PDF).

From the Mississippi Constitution, Section 273:

(1) Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed by the Legislature or by initiative of the people.
(5) The initiative process shall not be used:
(a) For the proposal, modification or repeal of any portion of the Bill of Rights of this Constitution; (again, Article 3 is the Bill of Rights)

From page 5 of the Secretary of State’s Citizen’s Guide to Constitutional Initiatives:

The initiative process cannot be used for any of the following:
1. To modify the Bill of Rights.

So on one hand, you have the Mississippi Constitution strictly forbidding ballot initiatives that would change the Bill of Rights. On the other hand, the Personhood Amendment states it’s intention is to amend the Bill of Rights by proposing a new section, Section 33. It’s as if the initiative was designed to fail.

However, Constitutional amendments via the state legislature can modify or propose an addition to the Bill of Rights:

(1) Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed by the Legislature or by initiative of the people.

(2) Whenever two-thirds (2/3) of each house of the Legislature, which two-thirds (2/3) shall consist of not less than a majority of the members elected to each house, shall deem any change, alteration or amendment necessary to this Constitution, such proposed amendment, change or alteration shall be read and passed by two-thirds (2/3) vote of each house, as herein provided; public notice shall then be given by the Secretary of State at least thirty (30) days preceding an election, at which the qualified electors shall vote directly for or against such change, alteration or amendment

I find it really hard to believe that all of the Republican “leaders” who represent various districts throughout Mississippi haven’t read the Constitution they take an oath to defend (actually, I can believe it). So why are so many so-called conservative leaders going along with the scam? Why aren’t any of the so-called conservative “leaders” speaking out about the unquestionably constitutional method of doing what they actually tell their conservative supporters they intend to do?

Who really knows for sure? Politicians tend to have all sorts of crooked motives to do some of the things they do. My guess is that it’s for a couple reasons: 1) Republicans don’t want to ruffle each others feathers – especially Phil Bryant’s; and 2) to gin up fights among voters because it’s the big fights over hot-button conservative issues that drive conservatives in droves to the polls to vote for Republicans. After all, what in the world would politicians do if we didn’t bicker with one another? How would manipulators and do-gooders ever get elected under the banner of limited government? How would politicians ever justify stealing from one person and giving it to another if we didn’t raise a ruckus?

The fact is that if so-called conservative “leaders” wanted a Constitutional amendment that bans abortion in Mississippi, they could have it. Even Democrat Billy McCoy says he supports the Personhood amendment. See, every year a legislator or two will introduce an anti-abortion bill that would amend the MS Constitution and do exactly what Initiative 26 is trying to do. Again, the Mississippi Constitution says the legislative process is the only legal way to change the Bill of Rights.

The biggest obstacle to the several anti-abortion constitutional amendments in Mississippi has been Lt Governor Phil Bryant, who’s pro-life position has been questioned in the past, who made a noble speech on the steps of the Secretary of State’s office (at 5min 30sec) when the signatures were delivered, and who apparently makes deals with the Lord when he prays for higher public office:

When I decided to seek office, I had a simple prayer. Lord, I want to do something very special. … I’d like to end abortion in Mississippi. That’s what I want to do! … And I said, Lord if you’ll send me there, if you’ll let me reach that office, then I’m gonna do all that I can to stop this horrible sin that has blighted America. One day I hope generations will look back and say, “how could we have done such a thing? Where were the people, where were the churches, where were the Christians, where were the leaders that allowed us to destroy the next generation?” .. Now I will assure you, I believe it in my heart the Lord has led us here for this purpose. When this is on the ballot in Nov 2011, you’re gonna see an overwhelming vote. Now they say, ‘oh you guys just wanna get it out because it’s gonna help you and your campaign!’ That’s the silliest thing I’ve ever heard of!”

But The Truth Is

Every time an anti-abortion Constitutional amendment is introduced in the legislature it dies in the Senate Constitution committee because the Chairman single-handedly kills it. Who is the Chairman of the Senate Constitution committee? Bennie Turner, a  socialist Democrat. How did Bennie Turner, a socialist Democrat, become Chairman of such an important committee? Senate Chairs are appointed by the Lt Governor. So it’s limited-government conservative Republican, Phil Bryant, that appointed a socialist Democrat to be the person who single-handedly controls which Constitutional amendments are allowed to come out of the committee and which ones never see the light of day… just like limited-government conservative Republican, Amy Tuck, appointed socialist Democrat Hob Bryan when she was Lt Governor.

Republicans Had The Opportunity To End Abortion

Republicans have had the opportunity to end abortion in Mississippi. One opportunity was in 2011 when Republican Senator, Lee Yancey, introduced SB2743.

SB2743 Summary: AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 41-41-33, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO DECLARE LEGISLATIVE INTENT RELATIVE TO THE TERMINATION OF THE LIFE OF AN UNBORN CHILD AND THE PROTECTION OF THE HEALTH AND RIGHTS OF WOMEN; TO PROHIBIT ABORTIONS IN THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI EXCEPT IN CERTAIN CASES; TO AMEND SECTION 41-41-39, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO PRESCRIBE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THIS ACT; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.

This bill never came out of the Senate Judiciary A committee. Did the Democrats kill this bill? No. Again, Senate committees are created by the Lt Governor – Republican Phil Bryant. In fact, Republicans held a 10-4 majority in the Judiciary A committee with Republican Joey Fillingane as Chairman. So why did SB2743 never get a full vote by the entire Republican-controlled Senate? That’s a good question pro-lifers should be asking as they head to the polls in droves to elect these same people to office in November. After all, this is the bill pro-lifers have been asking for to end the practice of abortion in Mississippi.

Two other major examples of constitutional amendments that have died in the Senate Constitution committee are the eminent domain reform amendment and the amendment that would have nullified the individual mandate in Obamacare. This sort of hidden roadblock that politicians create throughout the legislative process is another reason why big government legislators get away with sounding like limited government legislators. They can sponsor and vote for all sorts of bills that would limit or reduce the size and scope of government without any risk of it actually passing and actually limiting their role in your life. They rely on their constituents not knowing the details of the “law-making” process.

So, when these so-called conservative leaders tell you, “we’ve tried to pass these things, but the Democrats killed it. But I support your ballot initiatives! We (ya’ll) gotta fight it to win it and God Bless the great people of Mississippi!”, what they’re really saying is, “All of the conservatives come out and vote in November to support these initiatives and vote for me, the conservative guy, while you’re at it. Even tho I’ll appoint another socialist Democrat to block certain issues that need to be saved to generate support for Republicans in future elections, and even though the initiatives could be found unconstitutional, but I know you haven’t read the Mississippi Constitution because all you do is take direction from us leaders without thinking. And I know you’ll vote for me for no other reason except  you wanna beat my Democrat opponent. So I’m just gonna act like I’m working for you, but I’m really just working for me and my special interest buddies. I’m just gonna act like I’m beating back the size and scope of government, but I’m really expanding the government, spending more of your money, and sinking you and future generations further into debt.”

Yep, it’s all a charade to make it look like they’re doing what they say they’re doing. It’s a game of duck-duck-goose and all folks do is run around in circles when one of these so-called conservative Republicans tag them on the head. And Democrats are in on these games too because they know that Democrats and Republicans will ultimately give each other what they want in the “spirit of bi-partisanship”. All one side has to do is ask for more initially, then “compromise” to satisfy their constituents while leaving enough on the table to keep everyone fighting the next time around, and on and on it goes.

I know a lot of good people spent a lot of time (and even their own money) to gather signatures for the Personhood petition while the scammers rallied them on. And again, no matter where you stand on the abortion issue and the use of mob-rule ballot initiatives, you ought to be disgusted by the ongoing scams by Republican and Democrat “leaders”.

So-called limited government Republicans and their nanny-state cohorts have ensured that those days are long gone in America and in Mississippi. Now job creators and job seekers have to use e-verify (PDF), a federal database containing the information of people who are eligible to work in the US. Although, I’m not exactly sure how forcing job seekers and job creators to submit and verify their personal and employment record into a federal database falls under the guise of limited government conservatism.

But really, …really, it’s not all that different from the good ol’ days, I suppose, and the Federal database will most likely have all the information on you anyway.

All an employer will have to do is verify the photo of the employee, enter the form I-9 (PDF) data into the e-verify database correctly so that it matches up with the Social Security and/or the Homeland Security databases, and watch out for the tentative non-confirmations (TNC). Employers will learn about TNC’s in the USCIS e-verify seminar they’ll attend so they can determine who is and isn’t “authorized” to work in the US.

Shoot-heck, TNC’s can happen for all kind’s of reasons employers will learn about. The employment seekers could be using a name that doesn’t match up with the Social Security and/or Homeland Security databases, or the government could have made an error somewhere on your record, or the employment seeker might just have a weird name. But if any of this happens, the government wants employers to know that potential employees have rights, under the threat of fines and penalties against the employer of course.

A Simple Tentative Non-Confirmation Scenario:

“Will I be fired?” Not yet employment seeker. Let’s go over the government’s TNC notice they sent us for you. Then you can either contest the TNC or not. If you choose not to contest it then yes, you’ll have to take a hike so I can move on to the next employment seeker. If you choose to contest it, then I’ll print you out a referral letter for you to do something or’nother within 8 days of receiving your TNC notice. Then it depends on whether it was an SSA or a DHS TNC. You’ll have to contact whichever one issued the TNC notice – probably so you can give them all the information they need to update your “information”. If it’s a SSA TNC notice, you’ll have to go to the SSA field office. If it’s a DHS TNC notice, you’ll have to call the toll free phone number.

And I’ll keep checking for any updates on your TNC status in the e-verify database until this issue is resolved cause I can’t legally hire you, fire you, train you, put you on administrative leave, or anything else until the database says so. E-verify will let me know if you’re authorized to work for me or not. Oh don’t worry, I only run a business here so I can wait on filling this job opening and training a new employee until the database either authorizes you or denies you. And really, I have plenty of free time to help you with all of this limited government Republican do-gooder job creation and illegal immigration policing stuff. Hang on while I put my customers on hold while we sort this out… mmmKay job seeker? And whatever happens, just remember that the way I use E-verify opens me up for a lawsuit, by you.

All sarcasm aside, job creators own the job openings they create just as they own the equipment their business relies on. Asking the State and Federal governments to regulate the voluntary relationships of private businesses and private job seekers is a perversion of private property rights and the right earn a living. It’s not a limited government position. E-verify ought to be abolished.

Specifically, 60% said they would consider voting for an independent or third-party candidate, 20% said they might consider, 17% said they would not consider, and 3% said they did not know whether they would consider voting for an Independent or third-party presidential candidate.

To be clear, considering and voting are two separate things. Nevertheless, the high percentage tells us something about the current political climate. It means that individuals are willing to at least consider candidates who do not necessarily fit the cookie-cutter molds of Democrats and Republicans and suggests that the electorate is receptive to unconventional candidates.

More from Freedom Watch with Andrew Napolitano:

More about Reason-Rupe Polling results and methodology:

• Texas requires computer repair technicians to get a private investigator’s license, which could require a degree in criminal justice or three-year apprenticeship.
• New Jersey told yoga teachers and martial arts instructors two years ago that they had to get a state license or face fines of up to $50,000.
• In Washington, D.C., unlicensed tour guides can be punished for historical chitchat for up to 90 days in jail.
• In Florida, officials threatened an interior designer with a $25,000 fine if she didn’t complete a six-year apprenticeship and pass a test required to be recognized as a legal practitioner of that profession.
• Under Louisiana law, it is a crime for anyone but a licensed funeral director to sell “funeral merchandise.” To sell caskets legally, the monks say they would have to “abandon their calling for one full year to apprentice at a licensed funeral home, learn unnecessary skills and take a funeral industry test.” They would also have to convert their monastery into a “funeral establishment” by, among other things, installing equipment for embalming human remains.

Why do you ask the government for permission to do what you’re perfectly capable of doing without the government’s permission? When will Americans stop giving up their freedom to do business in their community in exchange for a government-issued license?

Speakers will include: Doug French, “Money is Work”; Mark Thornton, “The Tale of Two Invisible Hands”; Jeffrey Tucker, “Capitalism is Life Itself”; Matthew McCaffrey, “How Do People Make Economic Decisions?”; Xavier Mera, “Economics in France”; and Lucia Manzi, “Economics in Italy”

The LvMI is the center of the Austrian School of economics and libertarian political and social theory. Learn more about LvMI.

Mises Event Info
What: Economics in One Lesson, A Seminar for High School Students
Where: Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, Al
When: Saturday, April 29, 8:30am – 12:30pm
Cost: Free for High School students and their chaperones

Registration: Deadline to register is April 22. Contact Kristy Holmes, call 334.321.2100 or 800.636.4737, or click here to register.

About this event from Mises:

It provides an excellent introduction to the whole field of economics and why it matters to study history and society and the ups and downs of civilization itself. Without a knowledge of economics, we are left without a critical tool for understanding vast amounts of the social sciences.

The high-school years are the perfect time to introduce economic logic as a discipline. But too often, economics is presented as if it has nothing to do with real life. In fact, it is important to every area of life, as this seminar will show.

Come join us to discover the theory and application of such critical concepts in economics as exchange, opportunity cost, the division of labor, entrepreneurship, and inflation.

Be sure to share this event with your friends on facebook!

Hazlitt wrote Economics in One Lesson, his seminal text on free market economics, in 1946, bringing his ideas and those of the so-called Austrian School to the American scene. His work has influenced the likes of economist Ludwig von Mises, novelist and essayist Ayn Rand, and 2008 Libertarian Party Presidential nominee and congressman, Ron Paul. Hazlitt has been cited as one of the most influential literary critics and economic writers of his time.

A simple, straightforward analysis of economic fallacies that are so prevalent they have almost become a new orthodoxy.

“I strongly recommend that every American acquire some basic knowledge of economics, monetary policy, and the intersection of politics with the economy. No formal classroom is required; a desire to read and learn will suffice. There are countless important books to consider, but the following are an excellent starting point: The Law by Frédéric Bastiat; Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt; What has Government Done to our Money? by Murray Rothbard; The Road to Serfdom by Friedrich Hayek; and Economics for Real People by Gene Callahan.

If you simply read and comprehend these relatively short texts, you will know far more than most educated people about economics and government. You certainly will develop a far greater understanding of how supposedly benevolent government policies destroy prosperity. If you care about the future of this country, arm yourself with knowledge and fight back against economic ignorance. We disregard economics and history at our own peril.”

—Ron Paul, Senator from Texas

Click here to purchase “Economics in One Lesson” by Henry Hazlitt

Today, however, cities are widely viewed as centers for crime, homelessness, drug wars, business failure, impoverishment, transit gridlock, illiteracy, pollution, unemployment, and other social ills. In many cities, government increasingly dominates life, consuming vast resources to cater to special-interest groups.

This book reveals how the process of providing local public goods through the dynamism of freely competitive, market-based entrepreneurship is unmatched in renewing communities and strengthening the bonds of civil society.

Click here to purchase “The Voluntary City: Choice, Community, and Civil Society” by David Boaz

WASHINGTON – While Republicans and Democrats battle in Wisconsin over a bill to reduce the collective bargaining power of state employee unions as a means of balancing their budget, Libertarian Party Chair Mark Hinkle points out that the problem lies with government control of activities it has no business running.

Hinkle comments, “Libertarians are neither pro-union nor anti-union. We believe that the right of association and freedom of contract allows any group of people to choose to bargain collectively rather than individually. Naturally, we oppose violence and threats of such, but unions per se can play a major role in a free society. The problem is that the battle between the Wisconsin state government and state employees isn’t even remotely a free market.

“Government monopolizes many services that could and should be provided in the voluntary sector by profit-making and/or non-profit organizations. This also gives them a ‘monopsony’ as virtually the only potential employer for workers in these fields. Once someone has trained to be a teacher or prison guard, they are essentially at the mercy of government for their employment in that field. Blaming them for wanting collective bargaining representation would be comparable to siding with the Polish government against the union Solidarity headed by Lech Walesa that freed Poland in 1989 from Soviet rule. The problem is with the employer: the government.”

Hinkle considers the education budget to be the best example of a solution only Libertarians have offered:

Read more from the LP.org…

Because of violence and other abuses on minorities by state and local government’s around the country (mostly in the south) the Voting Rights Act of 1965 required these states, including Mississippi, to have their redistricting maps get a final stamp of approval by the US Justice Department, among other provisions.

The federal government’s selective oversight over Mississippi’s redistricting nearly 50 years later “offends” Lt Gov Phil Bryant. From MSBusiness.com:

“We’ve got a Justice Department, we’ve got people in Washington, D.C., saying, ‘We’re going to look over your shoulder and tell you where every line is supposed to be, where every dot is supposed to be,’” Bryant told dozens of Republican women at the Capitol. “So the Obama Justice Department’s going to tell us how we ought to be doing things in Mississippi?”

“That happened in 1965, and I’m offended by the fact that the federal government does not trust members of this Legislature to draw these lines,” Bryant said.

Bryant said people shouldn’t expect the law to be repealed anytime soon.

Lt Gov Phil Bryant has every right to be offended that the federal government picks and chooses how it treats some states and localities over others. I’m offended too. But Bryant cleverly words his speech to infer that the USDOJ’s oversight on Mississippi’s redistricting is a product of the Obama administration – no doubt an attempt to rally support behind his campaign to be Governor.

But who’s really to blame for this federal oversight nearly 50 years later? The fact is, every so often the Voting Rights Act of 1965 comes up for renewal – most recently in 2006 – when George Bush was President and Republicans held a majority in the House and Senate. Seems to me like 2006 would’ve been a pretty good time to rid Mississippi of the federal oversight that supposedly offends Phil Bryant.

Unfortunately, Phil Bryant’s own Republican colleagues in Washington DC don’t “trust members of the MS Legislature to draw these lines” – in Bryant’s own words. The fact is that when the Voting Rights Act of 1965 came up for renewal in 2006, 192 out of 230 House Republicans and 52 out of 54 Senate Republicans voted in favor reauthorizing it before George Bush signed it into law. This include both of Mississippi’s Republican US Senators and both of Mississippi’s Republican US Congressmen:

Senate
Yea – Thad Cochran, MS [R]
Yea – Trent Lott, MS [R]

House
Aye – Roger Wicker, MS [R]
Aye – Bennie Thompson, MS [D]
Aye – Charles Pickering, MS [R]
Aye – Gene Taylor, MS [D]

In fact, the bill to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was sponsored by a Republican and co-sponsored by 27 other Republicans, including Republicans from states and localities that were under the federal government’s oversight.

According to Section 4, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 also extended federal oversight over Mississippi for another 15 years. That would be July 27, 2021 – after the 2020 census and after another round of redistricting:

Extends: (1) the time for reconsideration of federal oversight of jurisdictions which once used suspended voting tests or devices until 15 years after the enactment of this Act; and (2) related requirements for such jurisdictions until 25 years after the enactment of this Act.

If you think Mississippi’s Republican leaders really mean what they say and say what they mean, and if you think they really want to limit the federal government’s intrusion into Mississippi, you’re wrong (see the federally-funded SLDS too). We can’t continue to shovel the federal government out of the state with one hand while shoveling the federal government back in to the state with the other.